Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
coppercity

Skyview updates from FD

Recommended Posts

Attention:

 

Flight Design CTLS SkyView Owners:

 

Dynon has done a great job expanding the capabilities of the SkyView system. With that expansion comes updating of the software and more importantly, firmware updates. In use on experimental aircraft an owner can choose and use any firmware change they want, not so on Special Light Sport Aircraft like the CTLS and CTLSi.

 

Firmware updates from Dynon usually change the configuration and function of the primary displays to make them more flexible and user friendly, however those changes may not always be compatible with the LSA regulations. Any new firmware loaded onto a CTLS or CTLSi that is operated as a SLSA , must be tested and be under control of Flight Design.

 

Flight Design specific Skyveiw firmware for the CTLS (i) must only be loaded from our website and not directly from Dynon. In the next few days Flight Design will release a tested and approved version 6.2. This has most of the same functionality as Dynon's 7.0 version and has the proper testing and certification. Flight Design will then provide all the necessary documentation and supplements to your POH to maintain your regulatory compliance.

 

You should still utilize Dynon's free map, obstacle, and aviation data base updates from their site. This restriction only applies to the firmware.

 

We will send out a notification to all registered owners when version 6.2 is available on our web page for downloading."

Sincerely,

 

Dave Armando

 

Director of Maintenance

Flight Design USA

(860) 963-7272

www.flightdesignusa.com

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

\

 

 

 

WHY DONT YOU TELL FD TO GET THEIR BUTTS IN GEAR AND FIX THE FIRMWARE FOR THE EGT PROBLEM....WE CTLSI OWNERS ARE WAITING.

 

I would guess that it is a Rotax fix and out of Flight Design's hands.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The fix came in today.  I emailed FD East and they said an SI just came out after extensive testing and it does require a pretty major firmware upgrade in the ECU of the 912i.  Am scheduling that upgrade with Lone Mountain right now.

 

The problem came up in 2012 and FD has taken a long time to do their own testing.

 

Like I said The ECU would be Rotax and not Flight Design.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Fix is from Rotax, but Flight Design would not allow the upgrade until they tested it.  The SB came out two years ago.

 

The engine was not even in service 2 years ago.

Just saw your other post. The SB was issued last month.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In S-LSA, the liability of all components on the aircraft falls on the AC manufacturer first. Since everyone is so damn sue-happy right now, it doesn't surprise me that they are extra defensive about releasing upgrades.

 

For that matter, the current class I am having (Reciprocating Engine Maintenance 1), one of the issues we went over is why engines are so insanely expensive, and why there are so few engine manufacturers: liability liability liability. My instructor recalls that 30 years ago, the aftermarket for aircraft engines was trailing off, and he remembers the old guard telling him that in the golden age of aviation, the aftermarket was strong and you could find a part and an STC for anything. But, because of lawsuit after lawsuit, it's dead now. I don't think it will be fuel costs that kill aviation first, I think it will be when companies are tired of being sued at every turn and they all leave the market.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Tom,

 

You are correct. 

 

FD has been in favor of this update since the beginning and has provided most of the feed back and data to Rotax to expedite this release.  We had hoped to get this installed prior to any customer deliveries. 

 

But ultimately it is Rotax who has the final say when it is to be released.

 

FD also played a large part in the Teflon hose exemption.  Our goal is always to provide a responsible, safety minded approach to all requests and to minimize the expense to our owners if possible.

 

Dave Armando

D.O.M.

Flight Design USA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Each of we CTLSi owners has a fun problem in regard to this fix.  We either have to pull the ECU ourselves and send it to a Rotax repair for a 15 minute upgrade of firmware.  Or we have to go to a shop and have it pulled and wait several days for the round trip to a Rotax repair.

 

Regardless of how this got done, it's a burden new owners should not have had to deal with by having a product delivered with a KNOWN problem in the unit.

 

Makes one wonder how many other KNOWN problems are waiting....  Disclosure would have been nice.

 

First you complain that you had to wait on your airplane, and now you say they should have kept it until the problem was fixed.

There is a saying that has to do with new rope that comes to mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any new product on the market with new technology will always have updates and changes the first year. It's one reason they say never be first in line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Two days ago:

 

"WHY DONT YOU TELL FD TO GET THEIR BUTTS IN GEAR AND FIX THE FIRMWARE FOR THE EGT PROBLEM....WE CTLSI OWNERS ARE WAITING."

 

Today:

 

"Regardless of how this got done, it's a burden new owners should not have had to deal with by having a product delivered with a KNOWN problem in the unit."

 

:lol: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well Morden tell us again how your 50 landing tires are doing?

About to solve that problem, actually. But I'm not screaming for a fix and then complaining when one is provided. I figured out what needs to be done, and I'm doing it.

 

If manufacturers waited until products were perfect, they'd never ship a single thing. You wanted bleeding edge, so you should expect to get cut occasionally. All airplanes have problems; some get fixed immediately, some years later, some never. In the overall scheme of things you got the fix pretty close to "immediately."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 912iS is not a new product.  And FD has no excuse not disclosing KNOWN problems in their products prior to and during delivery. 

 

And for the record?  The newly trained Rotax 912iS guy at FD West Lone Mountain did find the firmware problem when we took delivery and noticed the light the first time while still flying around KVGT.  The response from Germany?  Oh gosh, that does look strange, it might be a parameter problem - let us get back to you.

 

Now suddenly its a 'known' problem for several years?  Credibility is a precious thing to lose and a great way to lose it is to be inconsistent in your customer relations.

 

Well Morden tell us again how your 50 landing tires are doing?

 

What is this "known problem for several years" nonsense all about? The 912is engine was introduced not quite 2 years ago. http://www.eaa.org/news/2012/2012-03-08_rotax.asp in my book several is more than 2.

The service bulletin for the update just came out from Rotax last month.

The ECU is a Rotax supplied part. The SB for the issue comes from Rotax. This is not something that Flight Design has control over.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is new. Anything less than 2 years is new and it takes time for bugs to show up in all ways, shapes and forms because we all use it differently under different conditions. This has happened for several reasons. Aircraft Mfg's don't follow Rotax's wiring specs and this is a big one. I have seen it. All aircraft Mfg's seem to be at fault to one level or another. Software not designed by Rotax has bugs that crop up just like new computers and new software have in other technological applications, otherwise we would never need updates and no one would ever need to take a new car back to the dealer to get fixed. No one is immune, just ask Toyota or other auto Mfg's with 100's of thousands of recalls, Apple or Microsoft. It doesn't make any difference how big a company everyone is susceptible. Using other Mfg parts to install install a complete system makes compatibility an issue and parts do  fail.

 

I don't like it any more than anyone else, but it has been a part of all of our lives since we were born.

 

No one says it's fun and we all hate to be on the wrong side of a fix, but if you buy new things that can be a real part of being first.

 

If change a new design was never done we would never have progressed from the CT2K and we wouldn't never have design changes and no Mfg. will treat a product like the consumer, good or bad.

 

In the scheme of things sending an ECU in for an update is better than having a cooked engine and down for months. So it really is minor even though it is inconvenient.

In the end you still have a top of the line LSA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×