Navworx rising?

Ravioli

Ejection Handle Pulled
Joined
Dec 1, 2014
Messages
8,022
Location
Somewhere else
Display Name

Display name:
Unwanted Guest - Perma-ban Pending
It seems Navworx is back. They are taking orders again and have upgrade kits for the old product and new product announced.

Will be interesting to watch, since they have been my preferred route to compliance. Hopefully some success in the next couple months and a show special at OSH will make up my mind.
 
I have been following the developments on vaf too. The ads600-exp is not mentioned. I wonder what its status will be.
 
why would they not take orders?....they do have another version that's not included in the AD.
 
The word on the street is the whole company went MIA when all this broke out leading to speculation they were out of business.
 
Has anybody installed a 600B in combination with a GNS-430W and GTX-327? Would love a PIREP.
 
Did I just raise a LOP vs ROP question?

I don't think so. I have a 430/530 WAAS combo in my plane.
Interested in the same thing you are. Hope someone has first hand experience.
Thanks for asking the original question.
 
Not sure if the 430 bit would make a difference to me. Assuming all goes well for Navworx, I'm hoping to install one of their units piped into my Advance EFIS, but I do have a 430 that's also in the panel. If traffic will display on that as well (it currently does where FIS is still available) then that would be great.
 
I'm interested too. I've got a 327 and a 530 non-waas and I'd much rather have the Navworx unit than have to go 345.
 
Navworx had me at

"AutoStealth(tm) Mode:
The UAT technology is the only ADS-B equipment that will allow for privacy. Normally, ADS-B devices transmit the aircrafts ICAO number, a unique code that is assigned by the FAA to each aircraft. When flying VFR however, there is no need to let the FAA know who you are. The ADS600-EXP randomizes the ICAO whenever the squawk code is set to 1200. In addition, the N-Number of the aircraft configured is changed to "N0", an unassigned N-Number."

:)
 
Navworx had me at

"AutoStealth(tm) Mode:
The UAT technology is the only ADS-B equipment that will allow for privacy. Normally, ADS-B devices transmit the aircrafts ICAO number, a unique code that is assigned by the FAA to each aircraft. When flying VFR however, there is no need to let the FAA know who you are. The ADS600-EXP randomizes the ICAO whenever the squawk code is set to 1200. In addition, the N-Number of the aircraft configured is changed to "N0", an unassigned N-Number."

:)

I don't even care about that. In fact, I hope that's configurable so I can include my tail number. But I would rather support a new entry into the market at a lower price point to encourage Garmin et al to be more competitive.

Just my personal stance. Though I can appreciate the desire for increased privacy.
 
The word on the street is the whole company went MIA when all this broke out leading to speculation they were out of business.

I always thought those who went all the way to "out of business" were just trying to manipulate the company into talking.

And of course the first thing any lawyer is going to tell any company with legal or regulatory problems (individuals too) is "SHUT UP".

Zip it.... ziiiiiiiip.
 
Has anybody installed a 600B in combination with a GNS-430W and GTX-327? Would love a PIREP.

Yes Takair, I have an ADS600-B (-013 with ARINC), a GNS430W, and a GTX327. I am not using a TransmonSPE although I did initially. My friend installed a 600-B at the same time as I did and his TransmonSPE has worked perfectly and 100% reliably, so I am an exception as most have no problems with the TransmonSPE.

But for me, the TransmonSPE proved unreliable for Barometric Altitude and Squawk Code source, so I installed an encoder with RS232 outputs (ACK 30.9), and wired it directly into the ADS600-B for BARO ALT source. I had been using the GTX327's RS232 IN to get ground speed from the 430 for GTX327 automatic switching from standby to on, but am now using the 327's RS232 to send the Squawk code directly to the ADS600-B. I also had been using the GTX327's RS232 OUT to send BARO ALT to the 430, but am now using another one of the Ack 30.9's RS232 outputs to send the BARO ALT directly to the GNS430.

I am using the ARINC output from the ADS600-B to show traffic on my GNS430W. This also worked fine (and identically) on my GNS430 before I upgraded to the W. But be aware, if you don't have a heading input (like from an HSI) into your 430 or 430W, you won't see traffic on the main map page (only the Traffic Page), and the traffic won't have directionality.

I upgraded to a 430W a few months ago in anticipation of the AD requirements, and because it was good excuse to do so :)

I have Bluetooth and WIFI outputs from the ADS600-B, so it provides traffic and weather just fine to tablets, phones, etc.

Now to what you probably wanted to know... The 430W is now feeding position source to the ADS600-B and it is fine. My 430W won't get a position in my hangar, but the ADS600-B with its inadequate gps chip would get a good fix within a minute of powerup. That's the only difference I've noticed and it really doesn't matter since I don't fly in a hangar. Both position sources, the Navworx internal GPS and the 430W, provide identical, perfectly clean PAPRRs.

Here is a wiring diagram of the whole shooting match. Good luck!
 
Last edited:
John
Thanks much!! This is exactly what I was hoping for. Just a couple of follow up questions. I had hoped to use the 327 to send baro to the 600B. You mention above that it is possible, but ended up with a new encoder anyway. Do you think the 327 would provide the baro without the need for a new encoder or a TransmonSPE? I wonder if there is a minimum software level for the 327? I seem to recall some note in the install manual. I have not looked at your diagrams yet, but I do appreciate those as well.

I wonder what limits the traffic? I was hoping it would display like that from a 330, where it will show up on the map as well. Does it provide warnings for nearby traffic? Does the display of traffic on the iPAd provide directionality?
 
The garmin 327 transponder may be wired directly to the Navworx. you will also need your altitude encoder wired to the Navworx.

I too have a transmonspe which was removed from service due to lack of current accurate data.
 
I haven't checked yet but everyone needs to look at the big picture in avionics and have a whole plan in mind.

Planning on a Garmin G5 hooked to your GNS4xx/5xx? Is there enough ARINC channels to support that and the Navworxs box?
 
The 327's RS232 will indeed send BARO ALT to your 600B. But the problem is that the 327 will send either Baro Alt, or Squawk, but not both, since it only has the one output and the 327's configuration only gives you an either or choice.

By all means you can use the 327's RS232 OUT to send Baro Alt to the 600B, and I would imagine also to the 430W, since there shouldn't be a problem with two wires coming off the one RS232 OUT line (there isn't any handshaking so as long as the two destinations can be set for the same baud, it should work fine).

Problem is, you still need to send the squawk code to the 600B. Normally you'd capture it with the Transmon, but if that isn't doable (as was the case with my plane and Forane's plane), the only place you can get it is from the 327's RS232 OUT. And that's the problem. The 327's single RS232 OUT can only be configured as BARO ALT or Control (squawk code), and not both. So in my case, I installed the new encoder that would send BARO ALT directly to the 600B, freeing up the 327's RS232 OUT to send the squawk code directly to the 600B.

There isn't a minimum software level for the 327 that I know of. Mine was installed circa 2003 and hasn't been touched since, and it has the same config screens as the newest models.

The 430W does provide traffic warnings on the main map screen, and of course on the dedicated traffic screen. All the iPad and Android apps I've used paint traffic from the ADS600-B beautifully, with direction, relative altitude, speed, tail number, etc. So I don't really miss having good traffic on the 430.

John
Thanks much!! This is exactly what I was hoping for. Just a couple of follow up questions. I had hoped to use the 327 to send baro to the 600B. You mention above that it is possible, but ended up with a new encoder anyway. Do you think the 327 would provide the baro without the need for a new encoder or a TransmonSPE? I wonder if there is a minimum software level for the 327? I seem to recall some note in the install manual. I have not looked at your diagrams yet, but I do appreciate those as well.

I wonder what limits the traffic? I was hoping it would display like that from a 330, where it will show up on the map as well. Does it provide warnings for nearby traffic? Does the display of traffic on the iPAd provide directionality?
 
Last edited:
Not sure if the 430 bit would make a difference to me. Assuming all goes well for Navworx, I'm hoping to install one of their units piped into my Advance EFIS, but I do have a 430 that's also in the panel. If traffic will display on that as well (it currently does where FIS is still available) then that would be great.

Andy, if I had to do it over again, I probably wouldn't bother trying to display traffic on the 430, especially if you have a nice big EFIS to display it on.
 
I see a switch for Blue Tooth to WiFI in John's diagram. Any noted performance difference with an iPad?
 
WingX Pro on the iPad worked great with Bluetooth, and I preferred that instead of WIFI, because I also have a WIFI router in my hangar and I'd have to disconnect from that and then select the Navworx WIFI. With bluetooth, the pairing was automatic and easy. But... WIFI allowed more than one device to be connected, so if you have more than one tablet or phone on board, WIFI would be preferred.

I really hated putting in that switch, but DISPLAY 2 from the ADS600-B did not output TIS-B because of a bug. This will be fixed soon in a Navworx software release and when that happens, I'll have WIFI on Display 2 and Bluetooth on Display 1 and both will be available all the time, and I'll no longer need the switch.
 
I'd be thinking more along the NavWorx line....if they could display both traffic and weather on my 530W vs. just traffic.
 
I don't even care about that. In fact, I hope that's configurable so I can include my tail number. But I would rather support a new entry into the market at a lower price point to encourage Garmin et al to be more competitive.

Just my personal stance. Though I can appreciate the desire for increased privacy.
In order to access the configuration, you bring your laptop to the plane and connect to the wifi put out by the navworx box. A program you have downloaded on your laptop then accesses the navworx configuration. Anonymous mode is simply a checkbox option - check the box and anytime you squawk 1200 you are anonymous. You want that option off, don't check the box.
 
I'd be thinking more along the NavWorx line....if they could display both traffic and weather on my 530W vs. just traffic.

Are you talking about stale NEXRAD data? Depends on what you're trying to dodge/do, but that's almost more what I'd classify as misinformation vs information.

Looking at it side by side with onboard radar, I only use the NEXRAD to see what might end up hours ahead of me, but for sub 200kt GA piston, meh, actually I view NEXRAD as a supplement to onboard, but without onboard Id rather not even display NEXRAD.


In order to access the configuration, you bring your laptop to the plane and connect to the wifi put out by the navworx box. A program you have downloaded on your laptop then accesses the navworx configuration. Anonymous mode is simply a checkbox option - check the box and anytime you squawk 1200 you are anonymous. You want that option off, don't check the box.

How cool is that! Man this really seems to be the top ADSB solution by a good amount, price/features/compatibility
 
How cool is that, this really seems to be the top ADSB solution by a good amount, price/features/compatibility

The product may be fine, but I struggle mightily giving my business to a company that went radio silent for 6 (?) months when the stuff hit the fan with the FAA. Regardless of FAA battles, you *must* communicate, particularly to your existing customers. "We don't know where this is headed." is a much better answer than nothing. At least it is a sign of life. Navworx didn't give its existing customers that courtesy.
 
The product may be fine, but I struggle mightily giving my business to a company that went radio silent for 6 (?) months when the stuff hit the fan with the FAA. Regardless of FAA battles, you *must* communicate, particularly to your existing customers. "We don't know where this is headed." is a much better answer than nothing. At least it is a sign of life. Navworx didn't give its existing customers that courtesy.

As mentioned above, you don't talk when your lawyer says shut up.
 
As mentioned above, you don't talk when your lawyer says shut up.

You can still say "We don't know, but we're working on the situation. As soon as we know anything substantive, we'll post the information." No lawyer is going to tell you not to give your customers something like that as a sign of life.

Instead of using an innocuous canned response, Bill went online with a horrible rant late last year. The rant might have been 100% accurate, but it was (IMO) exactly the wrong thing to do if the goal was to work through the problem and come out the other side with a viable business.
 
As mentioned above, you don't talk when your lawyer says shut up.

There were warranty issues not related to the AD that left people hanging. If their lawyer advised against talking to those people too, they need to find a new lawyer.
 
Back
Top