If you are retrofitting your already glass panel to support a stormscope system, do you research before hand on what your display and processor are. Find the Part Numbers and software levels and make sure they are capable of supporting what you are looking for. Had a customer buy an L3 stormscope for his Cessna 421 and was not happy that his panel could not support it. His equipment was too old to support it.
Timothy wrote:
The cost delta is large
Timothy wrote:
the goto seller
Timothy you seem to write in a language that may not be understood by many, myself anyway. It is probably my age that means I have missed out on keeping up with this “new speak” but I mention this because I just do wonder how many readers are like me and dont really understand but dont like to ask. It is a bit like the acronyms that seem to have crept into every day life.
Sorry, you are quite right, you get used to using these shorthand expressions at work then they sort of slip through.
Delta is a quicker way of saying “difference between” and “goto” means the person or organisation that is the standard and most approved by the bulk of people.
Timothy really no need for apologies, I was just trying to express in a light hearted way there may be many of us who simply do not understand and thank you for the explanation
FF
newspeak plusdifficult for oldpersons. language slowdevelop decadewise until oldpersons nonregognise.
With apologies to George Orwell.
And of course for some English isn’t their first language.
I normally fix up confusing or meaningless thread titles but in this case I had no idea what it was about.
I don’t believe English competence is a factor in most cases where stuff needs correcting 
People should become aware that if they want a good response they should set out their question clearly. That applies to all of life, not just forums.
and if there’s an STC or not .
If there is an STC then there is no discussion…. you install IAW the STC, the IA signs the 337, and it is sent off to Oklahoma and the job is done!
you install IAW the STC, the IA signs the 337
Suitably ironic in context (SIIC)
If it helps, Timothy – one of my Aerostar friends got a FSDO to sign off a 337 for installation of EVS in his plane. So even there’s no STC, in FAA’s new effort to promote safety enhancing equipment, you stand a pretty good chance to get it installed legally. It’s the same with AoA meters – very few of them have STC’s, but they’re always accepted.
That, Adam, sounds like a Major Alteration done as a Field Approval.
These are difficult to do for a European based aircraft. Basically you have to find someone in the USA who is willing to draw it up and sit down with his FSDO inspector and get it approved, and this obviously has to be done with the FAA inspector not inspecting the aircraft.
The AFMS is an extra complication and likely has to go to an ACO so that the max number of FAA people get a chance to amend your application
I have done this process twice and am working on the 3rd. The first two were done by very kind people who donated a lot of their time. One was an FAA inspector! But it is getting quite difficult now. The US guy doing it for me is saying he will drop out of the business because the FAA has ramped up the field approval hassle factor by several times. I am paying him an agreed $1k and he reckons he cannot make money doing these anymore. Presumably knowing a “good” inspector still helps as always, however
European based shops have in recent years used the DER 8110 route which doesn’t involve FAA approval but generally costs a lot more money. Somebody has to draw up the 8110 design package – either the avionics shop over here, or the DER. Interestingly I was told by one shop that the resulting design data can be used to obtain an EASA STC 
