My Highly Desired Features - Wish List for Dynon

[PilotMelch]

I've seen other post their wish list items for Dynon, so I thought I'd post mine. Dynon, you guys are great. Hope you'll consider these thoughts (if you aren't already ;-))

1. Integrated GPS Navigator for IFR work (that is Dynon and not Garmin'$ or Avidyne'$$) - Yes, yes, I know this is a highly requested item. So here's my vote. Honestly, I'd buy two (2) of them tomorrow if you had it available (for two planes).

2. HSI feature/option to align with track/route vs. the heading of the plane. The Garmin'$ have done this for years, as do just about everyone else. There are so many good ways to implement it that make it much more useful than the traditional HSI heading. Garmin's G3X implementation is honestly very good. It still shows mag heading (in the Hdg window, just like Dynon), and even displays the plane icon in the middle of the HSI as it is oriented to its heading. But the HSI needle and route segment indicator are aligned with the actual track. VERY NICE, especially for IFR flight, but really for everyone. I fly both my dual Dynon HDX's and Garmin's. I much prefer the Dynon's except for this one lacking feature. I've asked your guys about this at shows (Osh and SNF), but have never really received a good response. It seems to get dismissed waaaaaay too quickly. IMHO it is a glaring oversight in what should be standard in a PFD and has no good reason to continue to emulate the legacy steam gauge world.

3. XM weather (and perhaps audio) on Dynon, without Garmin'$. I am not privy to the reasons for the seemingly exclusive arrangement Garmin has with SiriusXM and why only their hardware can receive XM weather, but I suspect SiriusXM is limiting their market here by doing so. Yes, I understand we have ADSB weather and traffic, and it's great. But when I have both going (ADSB and XM weather), it is incredibly great. XM weather is generally more up to date, available even when on the ground, and covers the whole US, which makes it easier to see weather trends, and weather that may be headed in my way on longer flights and in faster aircraft. Some may poo poo XM weather in a world with ADSB weather, but I'd suggest many of those folks haven't really experienced the benefits of XM weather over, or in addition to, ADSB weather either. There's a reason most of Garmin's XM receivers (under panel-mounted AND portable) are both ADSB and XM receivers together. Garmin figured it out that this is a good thing some want (like me). Dynon, please listen and see this is a "thing" and a viable market if it were available in a Dynon-equipped cockpit.

4. Integrated NAV/COMM, preferably GPS, VOR, and ILS with Comm functions. But if I can't get this, how about just an IFR-capable GPS Navigator (#1 on my list here) with the HSI track orientation option (#2 on my list here)?

 

[cbretana]

Add a large horizontal glide slope deviation indicator to the HSI, so it looks like a regular CDI, instead of the little glide slope bar thing on the right edge.

 

[DBRV10]

I would rather they do not develop an IFR GPS and stay in business, rather than risk it. I like the notion of it, but the task is way more than many understand, myself included.

 

[kellym]

I would rather they do not develop an IFR GPS and stay in business, rather than risk it. I like the notion of it, but the task is way more than many understand, myself included.

Second that. It took both Garmin and Avidyne a few YEARS to get FAA approval of IFR WAAS GPS navigator, with much bigger resources than I think Dynon has. Nothing terribly wrong with how GTN or Avidyne units integrate.

 

[PilotMelch]

Well, if you're suggesting that Dynon shouldn't attempt the creation of some TSO'd avionic equipment because you think it is risky, even though that task and its associated risk you state you don't actually understand, aren't you suggesting they shouldn't have created what they have already created?

I'm wondering why you think creating a TSO'd GPS navigation system is too much for them after all they have done thus far, against the Garmin machine and now the FAA certified beast?

Do you not agree that Dynon has already taken on substantial risk in creating what they have now. They began doing that a long time ago when they decided to create their first products, and have continued to do so all the way into investing into and bringing to market what they offer now. They have also already taken on the FAA machine when they ventured into the certified world after building experience, credibility, and capital while creating excellent equipment for experimental and then light sport aircraft. They were successful because they took on the risk and used their brainpower to power through the challenges. And that has been good for us, their customers.

I'd also suggest Garmin created their experimental/light sport equipment in response to Dynon (and others) that proved it could be done for a lot less cost, and have more capability. If Dynon (and again others too) had not taken on the risk and forged ahead, you'd be looking at a much costlier, and likely less functional Garmin install at this point.

But other avionics manufacturers, very much smaller than what Dynon is now, have already created successful TSO'd WAAS GPS navigators. Why do you not think Dynon is up to the challenge if they do the market research, assess the risk, and assess the challenge, capital and time needed, etc. You may not have an idea of what it will take, but I suspect they very well do.

Garmin and Avidyne are good products, but they are spendy and aren't fully integrated with Dynon. For the most integration possible, you need to purchase an ARINC interface or use the new Advanced Control Unit for power and data integration, which includes the ARINC interface because they communicate on a different network protocol. ARINC only relays some of that information. And, this still leaves you with a different style of user interface to learn and remember, and an additional database subscription and update process, a different wiring harness, etc.

I would expect a fully integrated unit to not just have the Dynon logo, but have the Dynon look and feel, have all the functionality interfacing with the Garmin's and Avidyne units have now, along with using the same database, and user interface. Perhaps they can even be headless with control through the HDX like some other smaller company navigators already do.

All of that said, I have a sneaking hunch that Dynon won't go it alone on a Navigator. They are buds with Avidyne for reasons only they know, and I suspect will do something with them instead of from scratch and against them. That makes a ton of sense to me, from many angles.

I'm not sure what will come of it in the future, and their lips are sealed at the moment. But that is my prediction.

Finally, they have to do something. In this world, in the free market where all the great things we have came from, you are either moving forward or you're going backward. There is no standing still. Or as I heard it once put, you're either scratching your way up the hill or tumbling down it. I think Dynon gets that given all the progress they've made up the hill thus far.

 

[gtae07]

But other avionics manufacturers, very much smaller than what Dynon is now, have already created successful TSO'd WAAS GPS navigators. Why do you not think Dynon is up to the challenge if they do the market research, assess the risk, and assess the challenge, capital and time needed, etc. You may not have an idea of what it will take, but I suspect they very well do.

There are two questions, as you point out. "Can we do this?" (do we have the money and capability) and "Should we do this?" (is this the best use of our money?) which involves not only market research, but also consideration of alternative uses for that money that would bring better returns.

I honestly don't know if it would be worth the effort for them to do it. I have no doubt that they could eventually pull it off, given sufficient funds. But consider the market--a standalone unit will compete with existing products from two other manufacturers. If they want anything more than a tiny, tiny sales volume, they'll have to generate STCs or some other form of approval to put them on certified planes. In the end, they'll be making a product very similar to their competitors at a similar price (because I doubt they'd be able to recover their investment if they charged much less).

Making a solution that's integrated into Skyview would really limit their potential sales. As nice as it would be for us to have that capability built in and not have to use a separate standalone box, the market for that is tiny even within the small market that is light airplane avionics (being limited to those buying/using Skyview and not already equipped with a standalone unit).

In short, though I'm sure Dynon has considered it in the past, and probably dusts off and updates the study on occasion, I suspect that they have consistently decided to invest in developing and producing other products with with more likely and/or higher returns.

 

[DBRV10]

But other avionics manufacturers, very much smaller than what Dynon is now, have already created successful TSO'd WAAS GPS navigators.

I am curious who these are. I only see Garmin, Avidyne and Bendix-King and BK dropped theirs for badged IFD's. Smaller GPS 'data' providers for the low cost ADS-B products are nowhere the same as a certified Navigator.

I would love the answer to be "New product launches from Dynon" and it had a world beating GTN replacement. But I doubt that is a sensible use of capital etc.

I do know what the CEO and the owner have said to me in the past, and that could change at any moment, may have already. But I am not holding my breath.

 

[Rhino]

This could all change as Dynon gets more STCs and increases market share by expanding the amount of installs out there. The more installed HDXs there are out there, the greater the potential marketability and chances to recoup development/certification costs. But I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for that to happen anytime soon. It'll take a lot of installs to make that happen. Probably the more likely outcome in the interim is that the existing GPS manufacturers see that increased customer base, and increase their own marketability by making their autopilots interface better with Dynon products. But again, it'll still take a significant number of installs to prompt that to happen as well. Only time will tell when the various factors come together to make this feasible. I just wouldn't count on it happening very soon. That gives you two advantages. First, you won't be habitually disappointed waiting for it to come out, and it doesn't. Second, if it does come out, you'll be even happier at the pleasant surprise. Win, win.

 

[Jim_H]

Wish list? Just for fun, voice commands similar to Siri or Alexa.
SkyView, go to nearest;
SkyView, cancel go to; etc.
Useful for touch screens in turbulence??

Voice on checklists. No need to read a checklist. Just call it up.
SkyView-landing checklist-activate.

 

[Rhino]

And the fun part would be turning it off.

 

[Colin Pazdzior]

No direct Dynon experience, as we weren't able to purchase in Canada when we were looking to last year, but I've been keeping an eye on this... My votes (mostly for the certified world), for what they're worth:

-reasonable third party autopilot support, or drastically increased STC pace for new models for the Dynon autopilot

-updated third party traffic support - ARINC, Capstone, some method to get traffic from a TAS receiver like an NGT-9000D+ or GTS 8xx into the system (ADS-B traffic too, if using non-Dynon receiver)

-STC revised to allow for standby instruments without specifying the D10a - or whatever is replacing it... Ie, require standby attitude, pitot/static, etc, without calling out just one model to satisfy this

-XM weather capability would be good too

-this one sort of goes along with the third party traffic support thing - these days, many of those third party TAS receivers would be an NGT-9000D+...which is also a 1090ES diversity transponder.... For non-US markets, enhancing 1090ES transponder offering with a diversity model would be good - if not doing it, then it'd be nice to add integration / control for models like the NGT-9000...and again, would be good to be able to get TAS traffic into the system