OgieOglethorpe
Member
- Joined
- Nov 11, 2021
- Messages
- 66
It is approved....if it already had electric trim.I believe he was referring to FAA approval rather than capability.
It is approved....if it already had electric trim.I believe he was referring to FAA approval rather than capability.
Physically? Yes. Legally? No.Did you not have electric trim previously? I thought if your plane had electric trim of any flavor, the Dynon AP could drive it?
Yeah, no, sorry you lost me there. It's more than 5 YEARS after the promised autotrim, and I still have no autotrim. You don't get to pass that off to the FAA. They are slow, but not that slow.Its painful to hear the frustration from so many. 3 companies with autopilots making snail slow progress if that. They've each had the same results. I still defend dynon. Thye have little traction with the ones who hold the authority. I'm still waiting (3 years in Nov) for what should have been a no brainer approval from the FAA. Just a small example of a broken system.
They might be. I deal the Aeromedical side of the house. I have had student pilots wait for over a year and a half for OKC review of deferrals for childhood conditions long resolved. Only recently has enough pressure been put on them to fix the problem. In December, in response to congressional pressure, the deputy federal air surgeon announced they were going to institute a new policy of denying all AME deferred medicals and just let the denied airman candidates re-apply with a list of documents they want. Fortunately, they nearly immediately changed their minds as the ramification of having a denial was broad and devastating. Their reasoning? Congress measured the time to issue on special issuances, but didn't on denials, in essence moving a reported quality measure to an unreported quality measure. This would remove the lengthy review process from scrutiny, but would a.) increase their overall workload, b.) increase the workload and expense for the AMEs and c.) immediately ground pilots who were flying on BMed/LSA or current FAA Medical Certs being renewed.Yeah, no, sorry you lost me there. It's more than 5 YEARS after the promised autotrim, and I still have no autotrim. You don't get to pass that off to the FAA. They are slow, but not that slow.
I hear what you're saying - but I don't see Garmin having the same problem pushing new hardware through FAA approval. Something doesn't add up here.They might be. I deal the Aeromedical side of the house. I have had student pilots wait for over a year and a half for OKC review of deferrals for childhood conditions long resolved. Only recently has enough pressure been put on them to fix the problem. In December, in response to congressional pressure, the deputy federal air surgeon announced they were going to institute a new policy of denying all AME deferred medicals and just let the denied airman candidates re-apply with a list of documents they want. Fortunately, they nearly immediately changed their minds as the ramification of having a denial was broad and devastating. Their reasoning? Congress measured the time to issue on special issuances, but didn't on denials, in essence moving a reported quality measure to an unreported quality measure. This would remove the lengthy review process from scrutiny, but would a.) increase their overall workload, b.) increase the workload and expense for the AMEs and c.) immediately ground pilots who were flying on BMed/LSA or current FAA Medical Certs being renewed.
Why is this relevant to the Dynon autopilot situation? Because, if the same thought processes are pervasive in other divisions of the FAA, the responsible ACO for Dynon autopilots could well be taking extraordinary time and Dynon's customers are fewer than all of us who are dealing with medical certification. The real question is, how can the non Part 23 crowd convince the FAA it has to do better in this area? It probably affects much more than the Dynon autopilot issues, I suspect.