Jump to content

S3flyer

Members
  • Content count

    808
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

About S3flyer

  • Rank
    Pilot Member
  • Birthday July 1

Profile Information

  • Location
    Dallas, TX
  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

11,403 profile views
  1. S3flyer

    Airplane Taxes

    Texas! No income tax and no personal property tax. No state aircraft registration fees, either.
  2. IMHO. From a flying perspective: * You can fly more types of aircraft if you're flying under SP * No material difference if you're flying under BasicMed or 3rd Class medical If you only really fly your own LSA (like me), then this probably won't impact you at all. You might be able to increase MTOW at some point but this may not make a difference to you given the age of your plane puts it before the porking up period of S-LSA. Also, your plane is well down the depreciation curve so I would not expect your resale value to take much of hit either.
  3. Note that Pelton said the airplane could have 4 seats but did not state you could fill them. It could be that an SP will be able to fly a 4-seater aircraft but only carry one passenger (think Recreation Pilot limitations). In a way this makes sense as BasicMed would allow for more passengers. Just my opinion.
  4. S3flyer

    Garmin files suit against uAvionix

    I dunno. I'm probably the only one in this thread that doesn't view this as David vs. Goliath where David is good guy for the sole reason he's smaller. Garmin is defending their patent which existed considerably before uAvionix was founded. This may be genuine or could very well be litigation intended to stop or slow a competitor. There is no way for any of us to know. The courts must feel there is merit to the case as it's not been thrown out. Also, there could very well be a recognition that uAvionix has a reasonable chance of success since the injunction has not been granted. uAvionix is not a mom-n-pop organization. They've received at least $10M in VC funding from a couple substantial funds. They will have the means to defend themselves.
  5. S3flyer

    adsb

    Installation differences. You'll need to install 2 new antennae with the Skyguard while the GDL-82 will reuse the existing transponder antenna (both will need a GPS antenna). I'd guess this would make the installation costs for the Skyguard a bit more than the Garmin.
  6. S3flyer

    Garmin files suit against uAvionix

    Mike -- fantastic analysis. thanks! Andy, dang it, you beat me to the keyboard on the EoP ☹️ And this is where I have a different POV on the term 'transmission'. I believe Garmin will try to establish that receiving transponder information over a powerline is just a different transport mechanism and, hence, would be included in their patent. Convincing a jury of this will be anybody's guess.
  7. S3flyer

    Garmin files suit against uAvionix

    The Garmin patent doesn't look like it would apply here -- my summary of their summary omitted a key term: "Techniques are described that allow information to be acquired by an ADS-B system of an aircraft.....". Ground stations appear to be excluded.
  8. S3flyer

    FAA Action Against Sensenich

    I did. The FAA revoked the repair station certificate which has nothing to do with the manufacturing side. They also stated specifically: "The company’s two other maintenance facilities that it operates elsewhere in the country are not affected by this Emergency Order of Revocation.". IMHO This only affects those who use or would want to use that specific repair station.
  9. S3flyer

    FAA Action Against Sensenich

    But this is only for the one shop, albeit a Sensenich owned shop and a quick google search found several other shops that can overhaul a Sensenich prop -- wood and metal. The Sensenich site itself references 24 authorized service centers for metal props.
  10. S3flyer

    Garmin files suit against uAvionix

    Looks like uAvionix is claiming that receiving transponder information over electrical power lines keeps it clear of Garmin's patent. Garmin's patent, though, is more focused on the process of using information from a transponder and including this information in an ADS-B data stream -- not the actually acquisition technology. Their patent has examples of how this works but they are clear that data may be acquired using other methods to implement the Garmin invention. It'll be interesting to following the case
  11. S3flyer

    Garmin files suit against uAvionix

    I don't think so. Amongst other things you can patent a technology process which is what this patent looks like. From the US Patent office (bold added by me):
  12. S3flyer

    Garmin files suit against uAvionix

    The actual language is: I don't know how a dual entry system could be used without having a few seconds of conflicting information. This addition was one reason why the gen 1 Skyguard ADS-B out became a boat anchor on 1/1/2020. 'Prior Art' could benefit uAvionics if they can prove the auto squawk was in use or common practice before December 2009. I think they will have trouble since the ADS-B AC 20-165 was first issued in May 2010. Another interesting point in the lawsuit is that Garmin is asking for a jury trial. This is rarely done in technology IP cases since technology may be too complex for the average citizen to fully grasp. Garmin must feel the infringement is easy to demonstrate.
  13. S3flyer

    Garmin files suit against uAvionix

    Not an option -- the draft ADS-B standard allowed for dual entry but the final rule requires single entry. Hence the race for auto squawk. Also, we can bemoan that Garmin was able to patent a specific use of transponder output but the fact is things like that ARE patentable and it looks like Garmin beat everyone else to the punch. It also looks like Garmin and uAvionix held discussions where they may have learned of the usage and agreed to 'design' around the patent. Garmin claims the before and after designs were identical. If true, uAvionix has to go back to the drawing board or license the auto squawk technology/process. Given that damages are occurring and are likely to accelerate (from a Garmin perspective) it would not surprise me if the temporary injunction against uAvionix is issued relatively quickly.
  14. S3flyer

    Tantalizing new engines

    38% increase in engine cost but only 3% increase in total airplane cost assuming $345K for a new Tecnam P2010. Benefits are unknown other than what Roger hypothesized. Given Rotax's track record, I'm sure we could count on at least 100lbs in increased useful load which could tip the scales for some.
  15. S3flyer

    Tantalizing new engines

    I dunno. If we're talking new Part 23 aircraft then an extra $10K is a very small percent increase. Also, this amounts to around $65/month if you assume a 2000hr over 15 year TBO.
×