So got this flyer today attached to a different product.
What say you out there?
AHRS also.

https://iflygps.com/shop-t136/skyguardtwx-vision-pro-plus-ads-b-transceiver.aspx

Seems like a "wait and see" approach is in order. They've been talking about getting this "certified" for a while now, but when you read further down the page, it says "Plan to meet FAA 2020 ADS-B OUT requirement once TSO-C154c certification has been completed." Further still down the page it says "Currently under FAA authorization testing." Sounds to me like they still don't have the certification, or they haven't met the requirements for approval via equivalent performance that some experimental ADS-B Out solutions are claiming.

I heard the FAA spokesperson at OSH 2015 comment specifically on this product, stating that the FAA will "NEVER" sign off on a portable solution for ADS-B Out because of the requirement to be tied to your ICAO identifier (hex and/or binary number assigned to your airplane and transmitted as part of the ADS-B Out reporting). It came up again at OSH 2016, and the statement was pretty similar, but left a tiny sliver of hope that if it were "permanently installed" it might be considered legal at some point, provided they complied with the other requirments...

Not sure what the final outcome will be, but I'm not spending the money until they can point to an FAA approval of some kind, and I get it verified by someone at FAA. Sure it's less expensive than some other solutions out there, but they are not exactly giving them away...

$900 bucks for a stratus or a garmin to run your Ipad with synthetic vision that has AHRS. with the 500 rebate, would make this pretty easy to buy??
Just if it will comply is all??

The Skyguard has been "undergoing FAA approval testing" for eons now. If they had any hope of convincing the FAA to allow it, it would be a fait accompli by now. I'd say, don't waste your money on the maybe. Go for something that is already approved.

Cary

So it is approved for experimental and and LSA, why would I spend 1000 more?

That's kind of the point. Right now, it's "approved" for experimentals because there is nothing to prevent you from using it. But it doesn't meet the 2020 mandate, and when that rolls around, you will have to be compliant, which the FAA guys have said rules out "portable" devices. So why spend money on something that they have yet to show has any hope of becoming certified / approved?

M6RV6 wrote:So it is approved for experimental and and LSA, why would I spend 1000 more?

I think Skyguard's literature is really misleading. Although to the best of my knowledge, the FAA isn't yet enforcing non-compliant installations, they are keeping track of them. It's pretty easy--the information that is transmitted by the ADS-B Out system shows the airplane's mode code and tail number, and tracks everywhere it goes.

When I first had my ADS-B Out installation done, I didn't know that it wasn't compliant. But it wasn't--it failed to show "ground" when I was on the ground and instead showed airborne. The email I received from the FAA in response to my request for an operational check made it pretty clear that I needed to get it into compliance, sooner than later. So that's been done.

Here's what the reg says:
§ 23.1301 Function and installation.

Each item of installed equipment must—

(a) Be of a kind and design appropriate to its intended function.

(b) Be labeled as to its identification, function, or operating limitations, or any applicable combination of these factors; and

(c) Be installed according to limitations specified for that equipment.

[Amdt. 23-20, 42 FR 36968, July 18, 1977, as amended by Amdt. 23-62, 76 FR 75760, Dec. 2, 2011]

You and others may wish to argue the point that a portable is not "installed". But I have no doubt that operators using non-compliant ADS-B Out solutions will find themselves at odds with the FAA at some point down the road. Fighting them on the issue is a great way to spend lots of money, probably a lot more than doing a proper installation would cost. So to me it just doesn't make sense to rely on the self-serving advertising of a manufacturer which appears to disagree with the FAA's interpretation of its applicable regs.

Cary

I think this is same issue with the whole complete IFR compliant and LEGAL package with Engine monitor, AutoPilot and ADS-b out for less than 14K in my experimental, Where that will just hardly buy a good engine monitor in a Certified aircraft!
It will cost me more to put just a used 430 in my 310, than it will to put a complete system in my Experimental turbine powered Superduper Taildragger???

M6RV6,

I feel your pain. I'm a new pilot with on old type certificated aircraft and would like to get it IFR and ADS-B certified. The cost and complexity to get and keep a TC aircraft compliant makes my head spin . I really wished I had been able to afford an EAB for this reason but couldn't find one to fit our mission and budget. This complexity, cost and innovation stifling regulation is what is killing GA. Until we get a culture change at the fed, it will always be that way.