Cary wrote:In the wet blanket department, a lot of folks got burned during the argument between the FAA and NavWorx, because they installed early after the NavWorx box was approved, and then all of a sudden, it was disapproved and prohibited from being used. So based on that, if I were in the market for an ADS-B Out solution today (I'm not--I equipped several years ago), I'd hesitate to latch onto the uaVionix wingtip and tail solutions quite yet. Once they've been in the field for awhile, there's less likelihood that certification will be withdrawn, but if it were me, I wouldn't want to take the chance quite yet.

Cary

There is a HUGE difference: Yes, the "standard" changed slightly - but NavWorx had the same notice about that change as Garmin, Appareo, L3, and uAvionix did: Zero. The difference was how they responded to the change. Rather than making the required changes to their equipment, they lied to us (consumers) and to the FAA about the GPS chip they were using, stating that it met the standards when even the manufacturer of the GPS chip made no such claims. And when they achieved sufficient mass of installations in the field, so that the GPS error rates were obvious to the FAA, and were called on it and asked to "demonstrate" how their units complied with the rules, they stonewalled the FAA, continued to lie about it, and eventually folded their tent and abandoned their customers. It's a sad story that could have (and should have) ended completely differently if they had stepped up and done the right thing.

uAvionix, on the other hand, went through the entire TSO approval process for their SkyBeacon (wingtip) device, and received that approval just before AirVenture. There isn't even an STC required - it's TSO'ed equipment! They are taking the same route (full TSO approval) for their TailBeacon as well, though it's not yet completed, it's well on it's way through the FAA process. uAvionix is not exactly a "David" at war with the Garmin Goliath. They are a HUGE company in the drone field, and have done a TON of work with the military and FAA before they ever set foot in the ADS-B arena.

(I've got no relationship with uAvionix – I'm not even a customer of theirs. I'm a very satisfied Appareo ESG user, myself. But I admire what they've done, and if I had not needed to replace my ancient, failing Mode-C transponder, the TailBeacon would have been on my short list of alternatives.)

"if I had not needed to replace my ancient, failing Mode-C transponder, the TailBeacon would have been on my short list of alternatives.)"

The only problem with this is the SkyBeacon and TailBeacon both require a functioning Mode-C transponder (it "echos" the supplemental data to the mode-c queries). The Uavionix Echo ESX replaces the legacy transponder. Oddly, they removed the Echo ESX option from the website recently.

DeltaRomeo wrote:"if I had not needed to replace my ancient, failing Mode-C transponder, the TailBeacon would have been on my short list of alternatives.)"

The only problem with this is the SkyBeacon and TailBeacon both require a functioning Mode-C transponder (it "echos" the supplemental data to the mode-c queries). The Uavionix Echo ESX replaces the legacy transponder. Oddly, they removed the Echo ESX option from the website recently.

Yep. As I said, IF my existing Mode-C transponder had not been almost 50 years old, and had ATC not advised me on numerous occasions that my altitude squawk had been lost, and had the bench-check not shown the cavity tube was likely failing, THEN I could have used that existing transponder with the uAvionix TailBeacon or SkyBeacon. Those would have been on my short list.

But since my Mode-C transponder DID need to be replaced anyway, it was less expensive to go with the 1090 ES solution (Appareo Stratus ESG or the Garmin GTX-335 – same $$ for either option) than it would have been to replace the non-ADS-B transponder AND add a 978 UAT device for ADS-B OUT support.