What happened to Skysensor TSO?

Food for thought...we are all so concerned about TSO approval on a Skysensor or other small device, but how are most GoPro cameras attached to the wings and tails of these aircraft we regularly see on Youtube ? Is GoPro TSO’ed ?
Same as suction cupping an iPad inside. Not permanent, not a modification.
 
approved data for a major alteration
Let's try a different tack using your reference AC 43.210A. Using the AC's flow chart on Figure 3-1, what part of the SkySENSOR installation caused you to select the "B" path to a major alt vs selecting the "C" path to a minor alt? Using the same flow chart I do not find anything with the skySENSOR install that triggers a major alteration per the flow chart, Part 1 major alt definition, or Part 43 Appdx A(a).
 
Let's try a different tack using your reference AC 43.210A. Using the AC's flow chart on Figure 3-1, what part of the SkySENSOR installation caused you to select the "B" path to a major alt vs selecting the "C" path to a minor alt? Using the same flow chart I do not find anything with the skySENSOR install that triggers a major alteration per the flow chart, Part 1 major alt definition, or Part 43 Appdx A(a).
:yeahthat:

Jim
 
we are all so concerned about TSO
And that's the crux of the matter. There are only a limited number of TSOs which are only a design/production specification per Part 21 and not an installation approval. Val Avionics has a very good article on installing non-TSO equipment in TC'd aircraft as alteration.
 
So to summarize I need a field approval which might end up being major PITA depending how the mood is at FSDO to install SkySensor.

Hmm... I will pass
 
And except for SPECIFIC requirements (ELT, Transponder, ADSB out) TSO is NOT required for part 91 aircraft.

Val and I are in absolute agreement about TSO requirements. I took Val one step beyond about 20 years ago; I put out a full house 720 channel com and VOR/LOC nav that was actually (gasp) built by the aircraft owner a-la Heathkit. Installed as a minor modification and not a single hassle. I believe we had about 500 of them in the field at one point in time.

Jim
 
Same as suction cupping an iPad inside. Not permanent, not a modification.

I have seen these bolted to the tie down eyelets. Never seen one suctioned cupped on the exterior of a plane. My point is that we disregard some things and make too big a deal about others. I am aware of the regs...I can still complain about them. :)
 
So to summarize I need a field approval
From what I have seen so far I think in can be done as a minor alteration with a simple AP sign off. The "issue" I'm not 100% on is the Wi-Fi. But following existing guidance on PEDs it doesn't appear the Wi-Fi is an problem either. Definitely worth a discussion with your APIA first before throw towel in.
 
Last edited:
So to summarize I need a field approval which might end up being major PITA depending how the mood is at FSDO to install SkySensor.

Hmm... I will pass

What you really need is befriend a properly rated maintenance technician who is willing to act in a common sense manner...

I actually got the FAA Small Airplane directorate to sign off on connecting my handheld GPS o_O to a device that translated it's CDI outputs into course guidance :eek:, and then connect that as a navigation input to my certified autopilot :rolleyes:. All it really took is finding the people in the FAA who operate in the "common sense zone" ;) and have a couple good hearted conversations...

A couple weeks later, presto! Done! :cool:

If you are near Sacramento, stop by Lincoln (KLHM) and talk to me... Or later this year I'll be based at KECP

Cheers!
 
What you really need is befriend a properly rated maintenance technician who is willing to act in a common sense manner...

I actually got the FAA Small Airplane directorate to sign off on connecting my handheld GPS o_O to a device that translated it's CDI outputs into course guidance :eek:, and then connect that as a navigation input to my certified autopilot :rolleyes:. All it really took is finding the people in the FAA who operate in the "common sense zone" ;) and have a couple good hearted conversations...

A couple weeks later, presto! Done! :cool:

If you are near Sacramento, stop by Lincoln (KLHM) and talk to me... Or later this year I'll be based at KECP

Cheers!

I am unfortunately half a country away, but I will talk to my IA and see what he sayz
 
I have seen these bolted to the tie down eyelets. Never seen one suctioned cupped on the exterior of a plane. My point is that we disregard some things and make too big a deal about others. I am aware of the regs...I can still complain about them. :)

Luckily, the FAA released a letter on this a few years ago, stating that externally mounted cameras do not need approval as long as they don't appreciably affect the flying characteristics of the aircraft and they're not mounted to a control surface. A rare bit of common sense on their part!
 
I am, been doing this since I was 14, I have had to sit in the office in a FSDO and explain my side to the FAA. We do nothing but modifications..... taking green aircraft and installing mods all over the world on certified aircraft going back and fourth with the FAA, but you know what your going to read it however you want. It doesn’t matter to me what your opinion is. My FSDO saw it as a major alteration and decided to give me a field approval. So if you want facts....... I have approved data for a major alteration by the FAA For the installation of a sky sensor. You have your opinion.
I'm new to this forum but as I read this, you have a field approval for the Skysensor, correct?
 
I am, been doing this since I was 14, I have had to sit in the office in a FSDO and explain my side to the FAA. We do nothing but modifications..... taking green aircraft and installing mods all over the world on certified aircraft going back and fourth with the FAA, but you know what your going to read it however you want. It doesn’t matter to me what your opinion is. My FSDO saw it as a major alteration and decided to give me a field approval. So if you want facts....... I have approved data for a major alteration by the FAA For the installation of a sky sensor. You have your opinion.

Hi,

I've been following this thread and want to install a skySensor on my '74 Sundowner. I already have the skyBeacon installed. You stated "I have approved data for a major alteration by the FAA For the installation of a sky sensor. " May I ask if you would be willing to share the copy of your 337 so I can use the same data and justification for my FDSO?

Thanks
 
I would also like to have a copy for my '73 Sundowner. I ordered and paid for a SkyLight, but uAvionix is not certifying it and the SkySensor looks like a good alternative.

Thanks
 
I would also like to have a copy for my '73 Sundowner. I ordered and paid for a SkyLight, but uAvionix is not certifying it and the SkySensor looks like a good alternative.

Thanks

I am in a similar boat with a pre-paid skyLight and got a similar response from an inquiry to their support email process. I called and checked with their front office and the director of sales asked me to send that email response. His response on 9-18-20 was: "I have confirmed, this is not an official position on skyLight. It is still on our Cert path, but has been delayed, yet again. We are exploring additional expedited paths and hope to make a decision and progress soon." Of course that was over a month ago and the decision could be to cancel although A.S. is still showing a Jan 4 2021 expected ship date.
 
Were you talking to Mark at uAvionix? He seemed pretty straight with me that my best bet wat to try for a 337 with or without field approval and install the skySensor. My gut feel is that the ADSB in market is diminishing and they are not aggressively pursuing certification for the slySensor, let alone the skyLight. What airplane are you flying?
 
No, Shane, director of sales. Alon A2 Aircoupe. Pre-purchased through the Ercoupe Owners Club.
 
I am, been doing this since I was 14, I have had to sit in the office in a FSDO and explain my side to the FAA. We do nothing but modifications..... taking green aircraft and installing mods all over the world on certified aircraft going back and fourth with the FAA, but you know what your going to read it however you want. It doesn’t matter to me what your opinion is. My FSDO saw it as a major alteration and decided to give me a field approval. So if you want facts....... I have approved data for a major alteration by the FAA For the installation of a sky sensor. You have your opinion.
Can you send a copy of the 337? I would like to install the Skysensor on my Citabria.
 
Lots of requests here to get copies of a completed 337 for installation. Has anybody received one yet?
 
Gotta wonder it the 337's really exist. I sure hope so...
 
Resurrecting this thread to ask again if anyone has a copy of a 337 SkySensor install they are willing to share.
 
Looks like the skySensor is now TSO approved. Has anyone installed one with this approval?
 
Has anyone installed one with this approval?
FYI: a TSO is not an installation approval. Just a design/production approval. So the previous minor/major alteration discussion above is still valid. Whoever installs the TSO version will have to make that same call today.
 
Last edited:
Very interesting. Airspruce is selling TSO'd skysensors but on the same time uavionix flagged it like TSO coming soon. a couple months ago it was TSO approved on the uavionix site. So finally, the skysensor TSO'd or not?
 
Last edited:
If you go to the uAvionix webpage for the SkySensor, at the bottom there is a Documentation menu. Open that and download the TSO guide. Here is the relevant info:

Screenshot_20240213-221006.png
 
Back
Top