On the aircraft spruce site, in Q&A section of the air gizmos iPad mini mount I found such a statement:
Can the Air Gizmos iPad Mini Panel Dock be installed in type certified aircraft for non-IFR operations?
Yes. The Airgizmos panel dock can be installed in certified aircraft. Hardwire connections are not approved, only the cigarette adapter can be used for charging
Unfortunately air gizmos do not have a panel mount for a normal iPad and on the other hand I don’t know if the above mentioned statement by the aircraft spruce would be of any value when dealing with EASA
The statement “The Airgizmos panel dock can be installed in certified aircraft. Hardwire connections are not approved, only the cigarette adapter can be used for charging” is an empty one really – a bit like saying “this 100% organic shampoo doesn’t contain any arsenic” when actually no shampoo contains arsenic anyway 
You can fix anything in a plane if it is temporary and plugged into the cigar lighter. The problem with that is that the result is usually a mess.
Jesse’s post is interesting. Clearly there are ways to do this correctly.
Regarding my FAA related statement, I think what you (Jesse) are doing is the same thing as the corresponding process under the FAA system which is to show that the proposed installation will work and not affect the aircraft negatively.
However the only route I know of in the FAA system would be to generate a DER 8110 package for the mount and possibly for the GPS too. The former would be easy – maybe as you say you destroy one unit – but the latter would be much more work.
And DERs are expensive. I have never used one myself but have heard of figures ranging from $300 per signed page (everything having been prepared by the avionics shop) to $10k I was quoted for drawing up some wiring diagrams for a Sandel EHSI. Here in the UK a typical DER 8110 is charged to the client at £2k although the avionics shop does the design work.
One can understand why people do these mounts themselves…
However I would not use a cigar lighter connector. They are of rubbish quality and the connection is unreliable. I would get a good quality connector installed (via a CB as usual). I like the circular milspec ones (Amphenol etc).
Robin_253 wrote:
Can the Air Gizmos iPad Mini Panel Dock be installed in type certified aircraft for non-IFR operations?
Yes. The Airgizmos panel dock can be installed in certified aircraft. Hardwire connections are not approved, only the cigarette adapter can be used for charging
It is a strange assumption. You can get al lot of things certified. We have done a lot for special / specific operations. It is not as simple as drawing a sketch or write installed in accordance with CS-STAN.
You must have a design, which can meet the certification specifications for the particulair aircraft. Even if you don’t use a DOA or minor change, just use the CS-STAN route for those specific listed items, you should have a design, showing compliance with the certification specifications. You can not install a GPS and just write, installed GPS in accordance with CS-STAN.
The Airgizmo dock approvals I have done are including wiring and the design was acceptable to EASA.
Peter wrote:
However the only route I know of in the FAA system would be to generate a DER 8110 package for the mount and possibly for the GPS too. The former would be easy – maybe as you say you destroy one unit – but the latter would be much more work.
Destroying a unit can be quite a lot more work, and more expensive. Typically you don’t want to install any equipment which has been used to compliance testing. These units are sometimes driven into limits, and the product may (or may not) age due to this. Clearly you’r not installing a burned mounting. Similair is true for units that have be climate tested, have had vibration testing, or have had electrical tested. Especially ESD testing can be harsh.
The first interesting point would be has this manufacturer tested anything? (specifically vibration and shock testing would be interesting, e.g. does it hold the poduct), how does the product behave in fire) for example.
I contacted the aircraft spruce customer service and asked what are the bases of their claim that the air gizmos iPad mini panel can be installed in a certified airplane. Here is the answer:
Because the mount is constructed of soley plastic there is no need for TSO approval. We have had customers install these mounts in certified aircraft with no problems. Again it is for portable use only so no hardwire connections will be approved.
It seems to me, that the logic behind their reasoning is the following: if you do something illegal a hundred times then it becomes a common practice. But unfortunately it doesn’t become legal.
Peter wrote:
You can fix anything in a plane if it is temporary and plugged into the cigar lighter. The problem with that is that the result is usually a mess.
That’s exactly what I want to avoid. But taking into account the circumstances it’s difficult to find a cost effective and elegant solution. Maybe a 3M adhesive?
IMHO the biggest mess is the electrical connection, so if you can get a proper connector installed (with a CB as usual) near the GPS location, that is a good start.
It is also relatively discreet so unlikely to cause problems.
To be fair, some people do crazy stuff. I have seen a plane where I am based with a Garmin 695 in the yoke, and if you did the full and free control check, the 695 would hit one of the knobs on the HSI. The owner couldn’t care less; he said you never move the yoke that far when flying. And many such installations (GPS in the yoke) obstruct the view of some of the instruments. One US DER told me of many right bodges e.g. an oil pressure gauge installation where the rear connector shell would hit a part of the heater control lever mechanism so the heater temperature could be be adjusted past halfway. So it’s one thing to discuss this among sensible people but not everybody is sensible!
Because the mount is constructed of soley plastic there is no need for TSO approval.
That’s nonsense
So much of GA is a case of: in the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is King. But one would expect Spruce to get some half smart people – after all, in the USA the regulatory scene is pretty well known, especially for anyone who spends more than 5 mins a day on some of their forums.
Robin_253 wrote:
Because the mount is constructed of soley plastic there is no need for TSO approval.
That person didn’t know what they are talking about. A TSO approval is to certify a piece of equipment to a minimum performance standard. For some equipment there is no TSO. Then you can have a non TSO product which still meets some specifications according a different standard. A TSO is ONE way, and not the ONLY way to certify some equipment.
An TSO approval is not an installation approval, it is an equipment approval. In most cases you would still need a seperate installation approval. In this installation approval, you can tick many boxes, if a product holds an TSO approval. If it doesn’t hold a TSO approval, you would might need to show compliance to some specifications, which are otherwise part of the TSO.
Robin_253 wrote:
Because the mount is constructed of soley plastic there is no need for TSO approval.
From the plastic point of view, what kind of plastic is being used. Does it support combustion? Does it drip hot plastic? If it would be (almost?) impossible to get this approved.
Other points would be, does it hold the device under vibration, and does it hold the device during a crash?
Just some very basic points which need to be looked at.
I am looking looking for a non-permanent way to mount an iPad mini in the cockpit of my plane. I have a vertical and almost empty space in the middle of the instrument panel. It is a sheet of metal and gets a fair bit of vibration. Based on reviews found everywhere I am sure that I will go for a RAM mount, but not in the exact type.
For attaching to the instrument panel, I could either use a single suction cup, a double suction cup or an adhesive cup. Is the single suction cup strong enough for this application? The double one is much more expensive and I would only use an adhesive connection if there were no other option.
For holding the iPad, I could choose between the X-Grip (flexible, but ugly), a custom-fit case for the iPad Mini (best looking of all, but covers half of the back of the device, which may be a problem with overheating), the Tab-Tite or the Tab-Lock. Does anyone have personal experience with either? I am especially concerned about the security of the tablet and overheating due to the lack of ventillation.
In between the too I would use a short arm to have some flexibility in the mounting.
Also, I would like to add a cup holder, an essentially comfort feature missing from almost all cockpits that I have seen. Has anyone here used the RAM cup holder? It looks impressive. Of course it would require another mount, but I am not sure where to put that.
I use the custom holder for an iPad mini and have never had a problem with overheating. A single suction cup should be fine – assuming you are not into aerobatics
Every installation varies, but FWIW I found the double suction cup mount to be less reliable than the single suction cup – which has never come loose in my application.
The further the arm is cantilevered, the higher the loads on the suction cup. So you might consider that. I would also consider a ball mount bolted to the panel someplace inconspicuous. The need for an iPad or similar in the cockpit is probably not going away.
