Why IFR GPS so expensive?

cocolos

cocolos

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Jul 4, 2012
Messages
468
Location
Davis, CA
Display Name
Display name:
cocolos
From a technical perspective why are IFR GPS? I am curious is it costly to get a GPS certified?
 
cocolos said:
From a technical perspective why are IFR GPS? I am curious is it costly to get a GPS certified?
Click to expand...

Are you talking about Garmin, Garmin or Garmin?

So you get my point about lack of competition.

There's also a small market too, throw in cumbersome certification requirements and a splash of liability insurance and you're there.

Actually when you compare them to $4,000 NAV/COMM's they're a bargain.
 
Someone will chime in with more specifics, but IIRC, you have to hook the GPS a certain way. You can install a garmin 430, for example, and it isn't necessarily IFR legal.

And yes, I'm sure it costs a company a decent amount of money to get their GPS certified for IFR use. Otherwise, there would be more available.
 
bartmc said:
Are you talking about Garmin, Garmin or Garmin?

So you get my point about lack of competition.

There's also a small market too, throw in cumbersome certification requirements and a splash of liability insurance and you're there.

Actually when you compare them to $4,000 NAV/COMM's they're a bargain.
Click to expand...
I think that just about covers it.
 
I don't see why others wouldn't join the market.
 
There were others, but Garmin bought them!
 
There are a number of other companies that make GPS systems (ex: BAE, Honeywell, ect...), unfortunately they don't sell them to GA.
I can understand why Garmin's prices are as they are, not too much competition and FAA certification. Flying would have been significantly cheaper if we didn't have to get everything FAA certified, but for a very interesting reason we tend to buy stuff that's FAA certified.
 
Well I just think all this stuff can be made cheaper. Better yet I know it can be made cheaper.
 
cocolos said:
Well I just think all this stuff can be made cheaper. Better yet I know it can be made cheaper.
Click to expand...
I doubt you could do it much cheaper given the small market, regulatory issues, certification issues, and liability issues.
 
jesse said:
I doubt you could do it much cheaper given the small market, regulatory issues, certification issues, and liability issues.
Click to expand...

Regulatory and certification are the biggies. Just look at the bang for the buck you get in the experimental market, i.e. Dynon, Grand Rapids Technology, etc.

Moreover, regular data updates from GRT are downloadable from their website for free, saved to a thumbdrive and plugged into your panel for the updates. See if Garmin ever provides any free data updates!
 
Palmpilot said:
There were others, but Garmin bought them!
Click to expand...

This is true. The Garmin 480 (not 430) is one heckuva fine piece of equipment and it wasn't originally built by Garmin but Garmin bought if from... sold it as a GNS 480 then discontinued it. They then came out with the 530 which is bigger and more expensive but I dont think it offers as much. We have a 182RG and a turbo 210 with a 480.
 
cocolos said:
From a technical perspective why are IFR GPS? I am curious is it costly to get a GPS certified?
Click to expand...
Two facts to consider:
  1. For non-aviation systems, the market would be in the tens of millions of units, but certified aviation systems barely reach six figures, so the certification cost per unit is increased by a couple of orders of magnitude.
  2. It has taken Bendix/King nearly a decade to get the KSN770 certified and it's still not there, but Garmin introduces new non-aviation devices annually, so the certification cost is astronomically higher.
'Nuff said?
 
LDJones said:
Regulatory and certification are the biggies. Just look at the bang for the buck you get in the experimental market, i.e. Dynon, Grand Rapids Technology, etc.

Moreover, regular data updates from GRT are downloadable from their website for free, saved to a thumbdrive and plugged into your panel for the updates. See if Garmin ever provides any free data updates!
Click to expand...

You forgot Avidyne. ;)

Non certified -v- certified. Same old song, second verse. Buy certified planes and you limit your choices for panel updates. :dunno:
 
Last edited:
The big cost comes into certification, which is a ridiculous effort. Garmon's business model includes charging a good sum for their products. It also works - they're still in business selling these things. But remember you're talking about several million in development costs that need to be recouped, and profit made to support the next effort.

Experimental does have an advantage in being able to go without all these expensive tests, but can do tests that are equivalent yet cheaper, and don't require the oversight.

It also depends on the threshold of pain. I was talking to a friend about the costs of these things, and he couldn't believe a 530W was *only* $10k. Add a few zeros for the transport category world.
 
Geico266 said:
You forgot Avidyne. ;)

Non certified -v- certified. Same old song, second verse. Buy certified planes and you limit your choices for panel updates. :dunno:
Click to expand...

There's an uncertified competitor to the GTN/GNS GPSes?
 
Ron Levy said:
The cost of making the unit isn't the issue -- the cost of certifying it is.
Click to expand...

What's more the cost is to certify to standards that are archaic. When was the software tso last updated? 1992?
 
Ron Levy said:
The cost of making the unit isn't the issue -- the cost of certifying it is.
Click to expand...

That in a nut shell is why this industry is in such sorry shape.
 
You can put a walmart microwave in your Bonanza legally if you can show compliance...
 
How many NEW garmin units do you think they sell per year? 5,000?

(ipad 1) 300,000 iPads were sold on their first day of availability.
 
cocolos said:
Well I just think all this stuff can be made cheaper. Better yet I know it can be made cheaper.
Click to expand...

Think 50 times about that. You make software cheaper by skimping on the testing, as even a very lean organization will spend half its budget on that -- and in aerospace it's conventionally quite a lot higher (THIS is where the higher costs go -- development cost is not a function of unit sales, so the development cost per unit is much higher when you have a small number). In a complex system, lack of testing means it doesn't work. Not that it works and you can't prove it. The fault will almost certainly lie in a corner case the developers didn't consider. Which will make it a link in an accident chain.

There are also installation costs, along with testing the installation, but those aren't included in the unit cost.
 
bnt83 said:
You can put a walmart microwave in your Bonanza legally if you can show compliance...
Click to expand...

Yeah, but we're hearing how great experimental is because you don't have to put certified radios in, in wondering how a guy in an RV can file /G and request an LPV approach legally with an uncertified radio.
 
Chip Sylverne said:
What's more the cost is to certify to standards that are archaic. When was the software tso last updated? 1992?
Click to expand...

fyi DO-178C was released in early 2012, albeit DO-178B or DO-178C aren't software standards or TSOs.
 
DO-178 and 160 aren't software/hardware standards, but they need to be complied with in order to certify. And compliance is very expensive.

They're pretty current, but they just keep on adding things to it that aren't always very helpful.
 
cocolos said:
How expensive is certification?
Click to expand...

It deppends on what exactly you're doing, but $1 million isn't a bad ballpark for a GPS, give or take a few hundred thousand. The last cert program I was working on for an electronic aircraft item was well over that strictly for the electronics..

This cert work is on top of all development testing.
 
rmlewisjr said:
Notice that there is not much difference between a part 91 Cessna and a part 135 or part 121 aircraft. Much the same hoops to jump through. :mad2:
Click to expand...

That has to do with CAR 3/Part 23 vs Part 25. Until they let owner experimental for Part 91...
 
Bob Noel said:
fyi DO-178C was released in early 2012, albeit DO-178B or DO-178C aren't software standards or TSOs.
Click to expand...

Just to nitpick, because that's what we do around here :D, my understanding is the upgrade is released, but not expected to be certified by the FAA until sometime this year. DO 178 B was released and certified in 1992.
 
Chip Sylverne said:
Just to nitpick, because that's what we do around here :D, my understanding is the upgrade is released, but not expected to be certified by the FAA until sometime this year. DO 178 B was released and certified in 1992.
Click to expand...

to continue the nitpick, if an applicant decided to use DO-178C objectives in the PSAC, I'm pretty sure the FAA would be ok with that.
 
denverpilot said:
Using the exact same chipsets and hardware a giant market is. Argument doesn't fly. Literally.
Click to expand...

The chipsets and hardware are the cheap parts...
 
denverpilot said:
Using the exact same chipsets and hardware a giant market is. Argument doesn't fly. Literally.
Click to expand...


The CERTIFICATION, Engineering, Warranty, Liability, overhead, proffit, etc is recouped via sales to a

SMALL MARKET <-----------
 
Avionics manufacturers are in it for the $$$. IDK about you but if I hook a rich person on flying and he wants (insert item here) REEEAAAL BAD its cost him BIG.


Typical cost of an MRI Machine is over $1 million. My myoelectric prosthetic hook was $35k
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top