Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

GNS530W or not

You can hardly blame people for that if the regulator does not make transparent the reasoning behind decisions that cost people lots of money. I understand that you cannot disclose specifics about these units, but a general answer might be useful.

I wonder what would happen if someone made a FOI request on every decision to ask for the quantitative backup behind decisions…

Biggin Hill

In China, a bag of rice has fallen over. This and the Raptor story are entertaining, but have little relevance to the dual GNS certification.

One can certainly argue that the redundancy gain by installing a second GNS is not as high as one could naively assume, but it’s pretty unlikely that a dual installation would be less reliable than a single installation.

More specifically:

  • Had the GNS a similar date calculation bug (date calculation is humongously complex, so not entirely surprising), both would have crashed at roughly the same time, similar to a single installation
  • Military certification is different from civilian certification

Your HIRF innuendo doesn’t help either, by that standard you couldn’t install / modify / repair any avionics.

Last Edited by tomjnx at 17 Jun 00:03
LSZK, Switzerland

Update:
Got the quote for the installation; the only affordable way to go, if I want a dual 530/430 installation under EASA regs, is to upgrade the 430 to WAAS.
Now that made me thinking about the options….

Best regards

Frank

EDFM

I can’t speak for your flying, but a 530W/430W combination is a great fit for touring, especially IFR, but also VFR.

EGKB Biggin Hill

I would think their are alternative using excisting approvals which are issues before this nonsense.

EASA always told me it is due to “user unfriendly GUI” when the KX-155 for example would make more sense. Anyway, they seem to tell different people different stories. I don’t see a common failure mode which is unique to a dual GNS installation.

In this case, I would even dare to say that a non WAAS and a WAAS unit provide more safety, as they run different software, where on a dual installation, with everything the same, the same software could potentially give the same errors.

All other issues would be equally for any other dual installation.

NCYankee wrote:

I am sorry, but I can’t understand why two GNS units would less safe than one.

I Agree. And a second a set would add safety as you have a backup, before you have to squawk lost comms as third backup instead of second.

JP-Avionics
EHMZ

Avionik Straubing @ EDMS will install a 430 and a 530W, AFAIK.
Send eMail to [email protected] (English is fine)

Maybe we read different threads, or we read this one differently, or with differing accuracy; but I think it was with Straubing that the OP inquired. And why would a German want to write to a German company in English anyway…

Last Edited by Rwy20 at 18 Jun 16:56

I think it was with Straubing that the OP inquired.

It was indeed

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

Quote ist from Avionik Straubing…
For now it is unclear if they checked the possibility of a WAAS-nonWAAS-combination properly – I´m trying to clarify that.
And of course we´re discussing in German…..;-)

Best regards

Frank

EDFM

Peter wrote:

I suggest sending him a PM.

Done

Best regards

Frank

EDFM
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top