IFD540 Certification Status

This is going to be close. Oshkosh 2014 starts the 28th. I can't stand the suspense. Will it be certified or not?

I guess It's time to call the radio shop and start pissing him off instead of Steve. On another note, anyone interested in a slightly broken in Garmin 430W? Sorry, no tray.

Tim,

(17 July 2014 IFD540 Certification Update)

The DO-200A audit is complete.   We picked up two documentation findings that will be addressed by tomorrow and into the FAA's hands no later than Monday 21 July.   They know the exact documentation changes being made and agree that they fully address the two findings.

Finally an alternative to Garmin?

Great news! I have several empty racks waiting to be filled.... Bring it on!

Outstanding!!!!!!

Fantastic!  Congratulations

Congratulations to the Avidyne Team!

how did we do today? any issues? any preliminary feedback?

brou0040 wrote: oskrypuch wrote: Well, because Avidyne will be adopting Capstone format for the inputs, then as soon as that is implemented, most solutions (even non-Avidyne) should work. Garmin is a big exception, it has adopted a proprietary format, you have to have all Garmin for it to work. * Orest   As far as I can <FONT color=#000000>tell, Capstone only applies to the ADS-B in format, I have yet to see any answers to my question about Avidyne providing GPS data in the standard ADS-B format for other devices such as the NavWorx <FONT size=2 face=Arial>ADS600-B.  I'd hate to get forced into having to install an AXP340 in order to use the IFD as a GPS source then have to get a receiver to receive ads-b in, and yet another device to display.[/COLOR][/COLOR] <FONT size=2 face=Arial>[/COLOR]  <FONT size=2 face=Arial>Avidyne has mentioned they will have additional ADS-B solutions, but haven't released any information yet.  If the end product isn't going to support my needs at a cost I will pay, I'd like to know that prior to installing my 540.[/COLOR]

I was curious about this myself. I have a NAVWorx 600b box available which I wanted to see if I could use it to provide ADSB traffic along with TCAS in a Cirrus while also giving me ADSB weather to the EX5000 MFD.   The answer is no.   Even though Navworx supports capstone interface for traffic and weather, the avidyne rep I spoke to said that there is no support on the EX5000 MFD (yet).   So, that is the situation. Seems the best you might be able to do do is to get traffic over ARINC to the MFD but weather is no go. Best option may just be to a portable for weather.

Is weather a factor for the FAA testing this week?

Orest is correct and David's report is news to me so I'll check with Sales - those shipping logistics are a Sales Op.

Yes we have been Red Label for a while, company flight test is done, and we've turned in all our paperwork to the FAA and they've issued TIA.   We're in wait mode looking forward to the week of 14 July which is when the FAA is conducting their TIA flight testing and their DO-200A audit.  We spoke to the FAA folks yesterday confirming their travel plans on Monday the 14th.   More production boxes have piled up in the factory ready for shipping in the meantime.  For better or worse, I've got nothing else to report until those activities are behind us.

Reportedly Avidyne started their initial production run last week, and this week the month 1 & month 2 folks are to be expecting a call from sales to finalize the shipping arrangements.

Edited by oskrypuch - 04 Jul 2014 at 3:24pm

oskrypuch wrote: Well, because Avidyne will be adopting Capstone format for the inputs, then as soon as that is implemented, most solutions (even non-Avidyne) should work. Garmin is a big exception, it has adopted a proprietary format, you have to have all Garmin for it to work. * Orest

Edited by brou0040 - 30 Jun 2014 at 12:24pm

Well, because Avidyne will be adopting Capstone format for the inputs, then as soon as that is implemented, most solutions (even non-Avidyne) should work.

Yes, it did.  I don't remember the exact count but it was about 8.  And we made a number of Pilot Guide and Install Manual mods based on pilot program input.

Jared heads up Sales at Avidyne.  The logistics of notifying owners and shipping boxes is a Sales Op so that's all his.

Ed, 

So, last promise I saw was june.  Now it is latter half of July and certainly bu OSH. 

So, this means another promised deadline missed but spun as "progress".

We've been coordinating the end-game tightly with the FAA.  They are driving hard to meet a pre-Osh cert.   We'll already pulled the trigger on the first production lot. We expect to be shipping certified units less than 24 hours after getting STC/TSO (and yes, the FAA has agreed to the AML list and process so it will be an AML STC).

With you experience with past products, how long do you think it will take the FAA to compile the data, issue their findings and give you approval on the TSO and STC?  do you already have approval for the AML?

(24 June 2014 Certification Update)

brou0040 wrote: To Avijake's credit, being open with us is the only reason I haven't pulled my deposit, I have seen zero updates outside of this forum for the money I put down years ago.

I agree.

Jake has kept me in the game.

If the updates were just the mindlesss notices "New (Delayed) Release Date", I would have bailed some time ago.

But that said, all patience has limits...

I absolutely agree Oshkosh is an amazingly low-risk place.  America at it's finest.  But think of it a different way:  Could you really enjoy Oshkosh carrying around a box worth about $17K? (Not your cost; what it would cost to replace.)   What if you got distracted and left it somewhere?  Dropped it?  It got hit by a tow vehicle, or someone (non-aviator) broke in to your car at the dorm and took it...?

Me?  Don't want to do that.  Don't want to THINK about that while I'm at Oshkosh.  I want to be soaking up everything else.  Please, just ship it!  (But soon, mind you...)

Also - as to the FAA scheduling kerfluffle: Steve was forthright from the beginning with respect to the FAA component of the schedule, and his certification criteria published in this forum were clearly (and described as) the things within Avidyne's control.  Furthermore, the material presented in this forum would indicate that Avidyne has been very proactive in managing those risks outside of their control.

It would be good if our Federal Goverment could *OPENLY* be compelled (or incentivized) to make commitments for which they are accountable; unfortunately, they cannot, beyond the Polls, and in this particular circumstance Avidyne (and those of use who have committed to a purchase) must bear the burden.  To place blame on Avidyne (or even the stuckees at the FAA) is misguided, and demonstrates ignorance of the regulatory and legislative processes in the US.  If Avidyne is to be faulted, is it for being so open with us?  Is that a fault?

Just saying...

Jon