question for Dynon about autopilots moving forward

[OgieOglethorpe]

I believe he was referring to FAA approval rather than capability.

It is approved....if it already had electric trim.

 

[Rhino]

Not approved on the 172, unless I missed something.

 

[OgieOglethorpe]

When the Baron ap was announced. They also announced "ELECTRIC TRIM CONTROL WITH AUTOPILOT AUTO-TRIM NOW APPROVED FOR ALL AUTOPILOT-EQUIPPED AIRCRAFT"

Now, they did leave out the 172 in listing models. But the 172 would be part of "all autopilot equipped aircraft".... Also, if you go to the 172 specific ap page you see "Trim control features including Autopilot Auto-Trim require the installation of the SV-AP-TRIMAMP and SV-AP-PANEL. The aircraft must also have an electric trim system installed via original equipment, an existing STC, or other certification means. The SkyView STC is not grounds for installation of a trim motor."

So stc doesn't allow you to add a trim motor. But if you previously had an electric trim motor, the Dynon will control it.

Beechcraft Baron 58 and 58A is Now Certified with Autopilot

and Autopilot Auto-Trim Now Available for Most AP equipped Aircraft SKYVIEW HDX + AUTOPILOT NOW FAA APPROVED FOR BEECH BARON BE58 AND BE58A We are excited to let you know that Dynon has just received

myemail.constantcontact.com

 

[Rhino]

Interesting. Thanks. Maybe he indeed doesn't have the trim motors.

 

[airguy]

Did you not have electric trim previously? I thought if your plane had electric trim of any flavor, the Dynon AP could drive it?

Physically? Yes. Legally? No.

The trim motors have always been there, but it's the STC for it that is lacking. I'm perfectly aware what the Dynon marketing says - but marketing and reality are not the same when it comes to the autotrim functionality.

It needs the Trimamp module and it will work perfectly fine - but the FAA wanted them to run through an STC for each particular model before issuing it, Dynon said "Nope, that's too much work, screw it" and there we sit. The result being you can get the full Dynon STC for the screens and everything that comes with them, including full autopilot functionality - EXCEPT the autotrim. No soup for you.

 

[M20Driver]

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.

 

[airguy]

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.

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.

 

[greentips]

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.

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.

 

[airguy]

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.

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.

 

[greentips]

I agree. I can speculate why, but I won't. There are folks who say the same about airframe manufacturers' approvals.

 

[VIFlyer]

Dynon is a business, and as such I would love nothing more than to see them succeed and thrive, with robust products and support. Sadly, this is not the case, nor do they seem to be correcting course to make it so.

Promises were made to myself and a good number of others at the time we bought our systems and invested heavily in doing so—we didn’t choose to ignore anything—and while Dynon has learned not to make public promises, neither do they communicate. The cautioning statements you allude to only came well after and as a result of the failed promises that were made to myself and others—Michael said as much in 2022. Besides, you are ignoring the very familiar sentiment that is again expressed here, the fact that people are losing faith while continually waiting and hoping for progress or communication that doesn’t come.

VIFlyer is wondering if Dynon “suspended or quit trying” voicing the sentiment that “I think a lot of us would like to know.”

The Mooney J and K were approved years ago now, but baluta432 wonders if there are “plans to certify [an] autopilot for the Mooney M20F, E, C?” But of course there is no information, no lip-service to the notion.

Ckpena says he is “beginning to feel forgotten” while after “a few approvals… the rest of us wait in the abyss.” And he has been waiting and asking for over 8 years, and still nothing from Dynon.

Airguy is “still waiting for the PROMISED auto-trim functionality on the 172R/S… 5 years after installation.”

For myself, I have been waiting 6 years for the AP approval, three years since they last told me they were committed to it, but since then only silence. There are a number of other instances people in my same situation, whom I personally know. This is not isolated or limited to one or two individuals.

Clearly the main problem is NOT the FAA, as was pointed out by Michael from Dynon himself in that 2022 discussion. It is easy to point the finger at the FAA, the easy answer when you don’t know anything, yet after all of these years it is clear the FAA is not the main problem in making progress with these model approvals.

Despite that discussion in 2022 (which was an addendum to one from 2021). There has been zero Dynon follow up or communication with those of us in AP limbo since, let alone any additional public information on the progress or future of the Bonanza series. After investing huge $$$$ with Dynon, and the expense, time, and work of a full panel upgrade, do you think I am going to let it go? Dynon certainly hasn’t offered to give me a refund, or make any accommodation. They kept my money. So I feel perfectly entitled to continue to call them out, though I realize I am more likely to die or lose my medical before the AP ever gets approved. If I could afford to rip out all the Dynon and replace it with a full Garmin panel, I would, in a heartbeat.

Whatever Dynon is or is not doing with AP certified approvals, their approach and strategy is a failure, which needs to be addressed and overhauled. Maybe they need new management, maybe new ownership, otherwise their business model seems like slow death.

My original post was to express my frustration of waiting over 5 years with zero news about possible certification for my "type". Constantspeed does a much better job of explaining that frustration that many of us feel. I had originally hoped for an answer from Dynon... Dynon is a business first and foremost therefore it is in there best interests to communicate with their customer base... I LOVE my Dynon panel and promote it wherever I go. When I purchased it there was not a warning that the A/P may never materialize. We all realize that the FAA is a dinosaur agency that is difficult to work with but the move to have Trio take over certain models feels like Dynon is throwing there corporate hands up and saying we give up....Dynon, reach out to your customer base we will help you in any way possible to succeed. Your customers love your products and in reading these posts they are a lot smarter collectively than any one person. The strongest person/coporation is the one that knows when to ask for help. Dynon please reply