ARNAV Q&A....(long)

Guest Discussion
1

I posted two seperate emails to ARNAV and got responses the same day. Below are the questions and answers. I assume they will appreciate me posting this because some of you may have the same questions and it will save them from having to reply again.

======================

ARNAV,

I am a position holder and waiting for my Cirrus SR20. I very much want to get engine monitoring and would much prefer to have it installed at the
factory. It would seem to be a cleaner install and I would not have any down time for installation after delivery.

I am scheduled for late October or early November. Is there any chance that this will be a factory option by then? As I understand it Cirrus is waiting for you to complete some FAA certification so they can make it a factory
option? Do I have that correct?

Thanks
David

David,

ARNAV has an STC (#02165AK) for an Engine Monitoring System on the Cessna 180 and 208 aircraft.

Avionics shops can install the retro-fit Engine Monitor on the SR20/22. They need to obtain local FAA field approval using the above STC as a reference and document the installation on an FAA form 337, Major Repair and Alteration.

ARNAV has applied for an STC specifically for the SR 20/22, and expect approval in August. We will provide Cirrus the STC paperwork as soon as it is approved.

Basically, I think this confirms your understanding of the situation.

Check back any time if you have additional questions or comments.

===============

Thanks so much for responding to my question regarding Cirrus and when they will be able to do factory installation.

One more question, does the ARNAV screen in the Cirrus have the pixel capability to display the resolution of a sectional chart with the correct software? If it does, does ARNAV have any plans to develop this?

Thanks

David Raab

=======

David,

The resolution of the ICDS 2000 is adequate to display charts, however, we made the decision some time ago not to do charts.

We may change our minds about displaying charts, but we have nothing in the works at this time.

We really do appreciate your interest in ARNAV. We’re always looking for ways to improve our products so feel free to check in again.

Thanks,

John

2

I posted two seperate emails to ARNAV and got responses the same day. Below are the questions and answers. I assume they will appreciate me posting this because some of you may have the same questions and it will save them from having to reply again.

======================

ARNAV,

I am a position holder and waiting for my Cirrus SR20. I very much want to get engine monitoring and would much prefer to have it installed at the
factory. It would seem to be a cleaner install and I would not have any down time for installation after delivery.

I am scheduled for late October or early November. Is there any chance that this will be a factory option by then? As I understand it Cirrus is waiting for you to complete some FAA certification so they can make it a factory
option? Do I have that correct?

Thanks
David

David,

ARNAV has an STC (#02165AK) for an Engine Monitoring System on the Cessna 180 and 208 aircraft.

Avionics shops can install the retro-fit Engine Monitor on the SR20/22. They need to obtain local FAA field approval using the above STC as a reference and document the installation on an FAA form 337, Major Repair and Alteration.

ARNAV has applied for an STC specifically for the SR 20/22, and expect approval in August. We will provide Cirrus the STC paperwork as soon as it is approved.

Basically, I think this confirms your understanding of the situation.

Check back any time if you have additional questions or comments.

===============

Thanks so much for responding to my question regarding Cirrus and when they will be able to do factory installation.

One more question, does the ARNAV screen in the Cirrus have the pixel capability to display the resolution of a sectional chart with the correct software? If it does, does ARNAV have any plans to develop this?

Thanks

David Raab

=======

David,

The resolution of the ICDS 2000 is adequate to display charts, however, we made the decision some time ago not to do charts.

We may change our minds about displaying charts, but we have nothing in the works at this time.

We really do appreciate your interest in ARNAV. We’re always looking for ways to improve our products so feel free to check in again.

Thanks,

John

David; Thanks, very useful information. MIKE#396

3

Thanks for the info. This is the first “definitive” answer regarding the screens native chart-quality resolution. So I guess that the limiting factor isnÂ’t the display, but rather the computer hardware (graphics card or equivalent) or the software.
IÂ’m glad to hear that they may “change their mind” about charts. [Duh!]
Arnav sounds to me like die-hard old DOS users who resisted Windows. I might be able to understand it if their old-fashioned setup was at least more affordable, but out-dated and expensive? Now there’s a concept!

Get with it, folks!

Joe

4

The resolution of the ICDS 2000 is adequate to display charts, however, we made the decision some time ago not to do charts.

The actual screen resolution is 640 x 480; clearly greater than what we’re actually seeing at the moment.

  • Mike.
5

Dave,

It is great you got answers from ARNAV. I attempted to get some of the same info from them via e-mail about two months ago and received no response.

However, the response provided to you seems to indicate what I had feared, that there is no real product development going on. The engine monitoring package was complete months ago at Sun-N-Fun where they showed it to me. The only thing that seems to have happened since then is sending an application for OEM installations.

I have been hesitant until now, but I am ready to join the ranks of those wanting a change, or at least another choice regarding the MFD. Cirrus needs to be aligned with a company more progressive than ARNAV.
Greg

I posted two seperate emails to ARNAV and got responses the same day. Below are the questions and answers. I assume they will appreciate me posting this because some of you may have the same questions and it will save them from having to reply again.

======================

6

I’m with you Greg,

Having read the numerous posts regarding the lackluster performance,capabilities,R&D and service for the $13,000+ Arnav system,I’ve got to believe this company’s motto is “Yesterday’s Technology Tomorrow”. Maybe it’s time for a change. How about a tally of yeas and nays from the readers of this board that can be forwarded to the K Brothers?

Dave,

It is great you got answers from ARNAV. I attempted to get some of the same info from them via e-mail about two months ago and received no response.

However, the response provided to you seems to indicate what I had feared, that there is no real product development going on. The engine monitoring package was complete months ago at Sun-N-Fun where they showed it to me. The only thing that seems to have happened since then is sending an application for OEM installations.

I have been hesitant until now, but I am ready to join the ranks of those wanting a change, or at least another choice regarding the MFD. Cirrus needs to be aligned with a company more progressive than ARNAV.
Greg

I posted two seperate emails to ARNAV and got responses the same day. Below are the questions and answers. I assume they will appreciate me posting this because some of you may have the same questions and it will save them from having to reply again.

======================

7

I’m with you Greg,

Having read the numerous posts regarding the lackluster performance,capabilities,R&D and service for the $13,000+ Arnav system,I’ve got to believe this company’s motto is “Yesterday’s Technology Tomorrow”. Maybe it’s time for a change. How about a tally of yeas and nays from the readers of this board that can be forwarded to the K Brothers?

Dave,

I became a position holder in spite of not because of the Arnav.
M. Myers

It is great you got answers from ARNAV. I attempted to get some of the same info from them via e-mail about two months ago and received no response.

However, the response provided to you seems to indicate what I had feared, that there is no real product development going on. The engine monitoring package was complete months ago at Sun-N-Fun where they showed it to me. The only thing that seems to have happened since then is sending an application for OEM installations.

I have been hesitant until now, but I am ready to join the ranks of those wanting a change, or at least another choice regarding the MFD. Cirrus needs to be aligned with a company more progressive than ARNAV.
Greg

I posted two seperate emails to ARNAV and got responses the same day. Below are the questions and answers. I assume they will appreciate me posting this because some of you may have the same questions and it will save them from having to reply again.

======================

8

Okay, so I’m not a position holder any more and I’ve only flown with the Arnav once. But it only took that once for me to be underwhelmed by it. (The SUA outlines were almost unreadable with my sunglasses on, e.g.). After the flight I mentioned that Avidyne, UPSAT, et. al., seemed to be way ahead of Arnav in announced features. Bruce Gunter tried to make excuses by saying that Arnav just wasn’t advertising as aggressively, but he admitted, even way back then, that they might have to consider replacing the Arnav.

I’m getting pretty skeptical (surprise, huh?) about Cirrus constantly hiding behind the “too hard” excuse. Plenty of those backwards, antique, spam-can manufacturers we seem to enjoy bashing seem quite willing and able to get the new stuff certified. (Heck, I’m beginning to think Cirrus and Arnav may have a lot more in common that we think … and that’s especially disappointing for a company that’s so forward looking in other areas.)

I’m not saying Cirrus should give the new stuff away – I think most would be willing to pay for it – but it should at least be available.

Joe

I’m with you Greg,

Having read the numerous posts regarding the lackluster performance,capabilities,R&D and service for the $13,000+ Arnav system,I’ve got to believe this company’s motto is “Yesterday’s Technology Tomorrow”. Maybe it’s time for a change. How about a tally of yeas and nays from the readers of this board that can be forwarded to the K Brothers?

Dave,

It is great you got answers from ARNAV. I attempted to get some of the same info from them via e-mail about two months ago and received no response.

However, the response provided to you seems to indicate what I had feared, that there is no real product development going on. The engine monitoring package was complete months ago at Sun-N-Fun where they showed it to me. The only thing that seems to have happened since then is sending an application for OEM installations.

I have been hesitant until now, but I am ready to join the ranks of those wanting a change, or at least another choice regarding the MFD. Cirrus needs to be aligned with a company more progressive than ARNAV.
Greg

I posted two seperate emails to ARNAV and got responses the same day. Below are the questions and answers. I assume they will appreciate me posting this because some of you may have the same questions and it will save them from having to reply again.

======================

9

Having read the numerous posts regarding the lackluster performance,capabilities,R&D and service for the $13,000+ Arnav system,I’ve got to believe this company’s motto is “Yesterday’s Technology Tomorrow”. Maybe it’s time for a change. How about a tally of yeas and nays from the readers of this board that can be forwarded to the K Brothers?

My 1st choice is the AvroTec/Avidyne 10.4" moving map which has sectionals and low altitude enroute and is supposed to be getting approach plates. My 2nd choice is $13,000 and leave the space empty so I can install my 1st choice and get some money left over.

10

Nothing but good can come from at least having a choice of another MFD. Right now, ARNAV has a captive customer buying large quantities of an outdated product. What a wonderful position to be in.

I would be willing to stick with them if they at least had real action plans for serious product enhancements in the near future, but that doesn’t seem to be the case. When I think about what we COULD be having in that panel space, I get very impatient with CD and ARNAV.

Maybe it’s time to start putting pressure on CD. This is a time when an owner’s association would benefit by providing a more definitive, collective voice. We need to get that going too.

IMHO,

Greg

I’m with you Greg,

Having read the numerous posts regarding the lackluster performance,capabilities,R&D and service for the $13,000+ Arnav system,I’ve got to believe this company’s motto is “Yesterday’s Technology Tomorrow”. Maybe it’s time for a change. How about a tally of yeas and nays from the readers of this board that can be forwarded to the K Brothers?

Dave,

It is great you got answers from ARNAV. I attempted to get some of the same info from them via e-mail about two months ago and received no response.

However, the response provided to you seems to indicate what I had feared, that there is no real product development going on. The engine monitoring package was complete months ago at Sun-N-Fun where they showed it to me. The only thing that seems to have happened since then is sending an application for OEM installations.

I have been hesitant until now, but I am ready to join the ranks of those wanting a change, or at least another choice regarding the MFD. Cirrus needs to be aligned with a company more progressive than ARNAV.
Greg

I posted two seperate emails to ARNAV and got responses the same day. Below are the questions and answers. I assume they will appreciate me posting this because some of you may have the same questions and it will save them from having to reply again.

======================

11

From the very beginning I have been critical of the lack of panel real estate in the Cirrus.

One of the prime characteristics of pilots is that we are incurable gadget freaks. Since Cirrus seemed to be very well attuned to pilots’ desires in their design, I presumed they knew this. So I was surprised that they left no room in the panel for new gadgets! I figured their plan was to use the Arnav as the display/control-head for add-ons. (Either that or they had no plan at all!)

Arnav has proved to be woefully unresponsive (and Cirrus puts up with it) and there’s no room in the panel for alternatives.

Cirrus doesn’t seem to understand that this is more than just a display issue. It’s a question of the future expandability and upgradability of the panel, and what has us concerned.

IMHO, Cirrus has completely missed the mark in this area.

JOe

12

Joe – got the point (though not 100 convinced, as will elaborate later) the first time you put up this exact posting! (See “ARNAV Resolution,” above.)

13

Joe – got the point (though not 100 convinced, as will elaborate later) the first time you put up this exact posting! (See “ARNAV Resolution,” above.)