Primarily for general aviation discussion, but other aviation topics are also welcome.
By GAFlyer4Fun
The balance lies in GA not wanting to adopt the traffic systems and standardisation of display formats that is in the airline world and so the GA community re-invents the wheel to make it cheaper and uncertified to further reduce costs.

The price point has always been the fundamental barrier to developing technology (and new aircraft designs) for the GA market. This is what really hinders investment in GA kit otherwise we could have had all this traffic stuff sorted a decade ago.

The Avidyne website gives traffic options that are certified for use with the IFD.
For those manufacturers that is their opinion of a viable price point. Of course typical GA wants everything for a tenth of the price. GA just does not have the economy of scale that the car industry has for progressing the technology. Of course there are some people that like things a bit more old skool and less automated.
User avatar
By Dave W
That's not so. The GA Community is not reinventing the wheel - it is attempting to find an affordable and cost effective set of tyres.

It's all very well complaing that "if only people spent money on what I want them to, all would be perfect" but that's unrealistic.

It's also unnecessary: We have already seen that you don't have to spend a fortune to gain the functionality, and it's the functionality people want - the paperwork is a sometimes necessary adjunct. Certification is not a panacea - there are several examples of certified conspicuous solutions that only manage half a job - Garmin 330, for example.
PaulSS liked this
By GAFlyer4Fun
There are industrial big players that have the capability to do some great kit for GA but choose not to based on their own assessment of what the GA market is worth compared with all the costs to get product to market with their perceived volume of sales. Obviously those sorts of companies have bigger overheads to cover which impacts on the pricing/affordability.
We should be grateful to companies that actually do anything for GA.

To make the point a slightly different way, even after 65 years, Cessna still cannot do a brand new C172 for £50k even after selling 40,000 aircraft. If they could, for those people that like the C172, the economics could encourage owners to get a new one rather than spend 20k on an engine overhaul, 10k on repaint, thousands on maintenance, more money on regulatory kit upgrades. (Other aircraft brands and models are available).
With a higher turnover of brand new aircraft, many of these issues about having traffic displays and standardisation of this and other kit as technology evolved would get consumed into new aircraft specs (compare the instrument panel of a brand new one with the spec 40 years ago). Then there would be a diminishing need for non-technical pilot owners to try and understand what products are available/compatible/affordable for retrofit to 40 year old aircraft and what the limitations might be, and then pay more money out for more capability as the goal posts move or they did not make the right choice at the right time. Standardisation of kit also helps with standardising pilot training and renters that fly different examples of the same type.

For whatever reason, the well established GA aircraft manufacturers have kept the price of new aircraft so high that they sell a small number of aircraft.
I dont see this ever changing so the forum will continue to have plenty of discussions about upgrades and compatibility and what is right and wrong, why something did not work as expected, all with various opinions and preferences.
Makes a change from discussing Air Law, OHJ, ... lol.