Is everyone in EASAland fitting 8.33 radios and disabling their 25Khz kit??
PDR
You need to be careful here as 500e really does know what he is talking about when it comes to radios and frequencies !
You obviously have no idea how us aircraft owners are tucked up by the manufacturers, whom see to think we are doing them a favour by buying their products.
You need to be careful here as 500e really does know what he is talking about when it comes to radios and frequencies !
You obviously have no idea how us aircraft owners are tucked up by the manufacturers, whom see to think we are doing them a favour by buying their products.
No, it's just that I am not one who chooses to spend my life as a self-pitying victim and I also have a reasonable professional understanding of what it costs to develop, qualify, manufacture and support aviation products.
PDR
PDR
PDR
In that case please justify the following
On a 269 a steel tube 12 inches long with a hole at each end $ 1350
Switch from a 500 $135 same part number from Farnell £ 1.95
Pressure switch on a 109 air conditioning system $ 14500 yes $14500
Now to radios why does a military frequency hopping radio cost less than an airborne 8.33 radio ?
If I want to put 1:50k maps on a Bendix King sat nav they told me I wanted the ......... which would be £ 20k. I bought an iPad with the software in it for £ 400
Nice work if you can get it. The manufacturers don't really get it, they are starting to price things out of the market. Another example for you MD helicopters had just stopped outside overhaul agencies overhauling their main transmissions. Guess what the price just gone up from $ 85k to $ 125k strange really
Yes I might be moaning about it but this keeps going on there will not be an industry left soon. I can't put my prices up by 50% !!!!
In that case please justify the following
On a 269 a steel tube 12 inches long with a hole at each end $ 1350
Switch from a 500 $135 same part number from Farnell £ 1.95
Pressure switch on a 109 air conditioning system $ 14500 yes $14500
Now to radios why does a military frequency hopping radio cost less than an airborne 8.33 radio ?
If I want to put 1:50k maps on a Bendix King sat nav they told me I wanted the ......... which would be £ 20k. I bought an iPad with the software in it for £ 400
Nice work if you can get it. The manufacturers don't really get it, they are starting to price things out of the market. Another example for you MD helicopters had just stopped outside overhaul agencies overhauling their main transmissions. Guess what the price just gone up from $ 85k to $ 125k strange really
Yes I might be moaning about it but this keeps going on there will not be an industry left soon. I can't put my prices up by 50% !!!!
I can get an unemployed homeless person to sit in a chair for a few hours for minimum wage, but to get an ATPL to do the same thing I have to pay serious money. Clearly a total rip-off!
I have no idea what your foot of steel tube does on a 269, but if it's a structurally significant item there will be design costs, certification costs and manufacturing costs. It must be made from material of known provenance (which needs accounting paperwork, and that costs money) manufactured using a qualified and controlled process (which needs accounting paperwork, and that costs money) by suitably skilled, qualified and experienced people (who need accounting paperwork, which costs money). It must then be stored, shipped and installed in a "controlled environment" (which needs accounting paperwork, and that costs money). So it's not the same as popping down to home depot and getting them to saw you off a foot of scaffolding pole.
The same applies to electrical switchgear - if you want it for aircraft use then the FAA/EASA/Etc regulations require that it has additional certification processes, testing and paperwork over and above that for the same part number when sold for non-aircraft use. That costs money.
Having recently (OK, six years ago) been involved in bringing some military aircraft into compliance with the 8.33kHz requirement I most certainly don't recognise the claim that "a military frequency hopping radio cost less than an airborne 8.33 radio" - that's just twaddle.
If you wish to fly with unqualified, untested and mickey-mouse kit in your helicopter then by all means go ahead - just make sure you tell your passengers (any anyone on the ground beneath you) that you are risking their lives because you have a contempt for sound engineering, their safety and the law of the land.
PDR
I have no idea what your foot of steel tube does on a 269, but if it's a structurally significant item there will be design costs, certification costs and manufacturing costs. It must be made from material of known provenance (which needs accounting paperwork, and that costs money) manufactured using a qualified and controlled process (which needs accounting paperwork, and that costs money) by suitably skilled, qualified and experienced people (who need accounting paperwork, which costs money). It must then be stored, shipped and installed in a "controlled environment" (which needs accounting paperwork, and that costs money). So it's not the same as popping down to home depot and getting them to saw you off a foot of scaffolding pole.
The same applies to electrical switchgear - if you want it for aircraft use then the FAA/EASA/Etc regulations require that it has additional certification processes, testing and paperwork over and above that for the same part number when sold for non-aircraft use. That costs money.
Having recently (OK, six years ago) been involved in bringing some military aircraft into compliance with the 8.33kHz requirement I most certainly don't recognise the claim that "a military frequency hopping radio cost less than an airborne 8.33 radio" - that's just twaddle.
If you wish to fly with unqualified, untested and mickey-mouse kit in your helicopter then by all means go ahead - just make sure you tell your passengers (any anyone on the ground beneath you) that you are risking their lives because you have a contempt for sound engineering, their safety and the law of the land.
PDR
Dead on Hughes500, not to mention the development of both those aircraft, 50+ years ago, was paid for by the U.S. tax payer!
PDR1,
Thats what the manufacturers want you to believe and is probably close to reality but does not reflect the "price".
Unfortunately they have been caught out throwing a dart at a phone book as well to price things as to who knows why.
Maybe they actually cannot be arsed to work it out on cost plus and just what they think it is worth as a guess.
Boeing got seriously embarrassed many years ago ripping off the US Gummint.
They have a special secret formula.
Hughes 500,
I first worked on 369 and 269 models for a national distributor probably 40 years ago.
The prices were beyond comprehension then as now.
The current model (AHD) that I work with also beggars belief as to how you could operate it "commercially".
Thats what the manufacturers want you to believe and is probably close to reality but does not reflect the "price".
Unfortunately they have been caught out throwing a dart at a phone book as well to price things as to who knows why.
Maybe they actually cannot be arsed to work it out on cost plus and just what they think it is worth as a guess.
Boeing got seriously embarrassed many years ago ripping off the US Gummint.
They have a special secret formula.
Hughes 500,
I first worked on 369 and 269 models for a national distributor probably 40 years ago.
The prices were beyond comprehension then as now.
The current model (AHD) that I work with also beggars belief as to how you could operate it "commercially".
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: UK
Age: 66
Posts: 919
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PDR1, I have just worked it out,
Sounds like you supply this equipment so you are on the gravy train and have an axe to grind!
Having recently (OK, six years ago) been involved in bringing some military aircraft into compliance with the 8.33kHz requirement
That's right, play the ball rather than the man - a classical indication of an unsupportable argument!
Your allegation is as odeous as it is inaccurate, just like most of the twaddle in this thread. I do not work for a radio "supplier" or an avionics company. I have just been involved in the process of bringing military aircraft fleets into compliance with the new regulations. I was also involved in studies to bring ATM equipment (SSR, PSR, PAR etc) into compliance with the new requirements to "play nicely" with mobile phone transmissions at 2.6GHz, and the wind-farm compliance issue, although we didn't win that one so we didn't get to do it.
The post I was responding to seemed to believe that an 8.33kHz radio fit in a commercial helicopter should by just buying a toy radio from Radio Shack. Fortuinately there are regulations which prevent cowboy operators doing such dangerous things. But if you really, really beleive that then just become the CAM for a helicopter operator and you are at liberty to define and sign off whatever you like - you can repair your aircraft with pieces of scaffolding pole attached with screws from home depot by mexican illegals on $0.05 an hour.
And when the enquiry finds your signature after the ensuing crash you will probably spend the remaining years of your life in jail, with your family stripped of every cent to pay the compensation to the families of the dead pilots, passengers and innocent bystanders.
There are cowboy corner-cutters in every walk of life, but I have to say I'm dissappointed to find them here. These people and their contempt for safety have no place in any aviation organisation.
PDR
Your allegation is as odeous as it is inaccurate, just like most of the twaddle in this thread. I do not work for a radio "supplier" or an avionics company. I have just been involved in the process of bringing military aircraft fleets into compliance with the new regulations. I was also involved in studies to bring ATM equipment (SSR, PSR, PAR etc) into compliance with the new requirements to "play nicely" with mobile phone transmissions at 2.6GHz, and the wind-farm compliance issue, although we didn't win that one so we didn't get to do it.
The post I was responding to seemed to believe that an 8.33kHz radio fit in a commercial helicopter should by just buying a toy radio from Radio Shack. Fortuinately there are regulations which prevent cowboy operators doing such dangerous things. But if you really, really beleive that then just become the CAM for a helicopter operator and you are at liberty to define and sign off whatever you like - you can repair your aircraft with pieces of scaffolding pole attached with screws from home depot by mexican illegals on $0.05 an hour.
And when the enquiry finds your signature after the ensuing crash you will probably spend the remaining years of your life in jail, with your family stripped of every cent to pay the compensation to the families of the dead pilots, passengers and innocent bystanders.
There are cowboy corner-cutters in every walk of life, but I have to say I'm dissappointed to find them here. These people and their contempt for safety have no place in any aviation organisation.
PDR
That's right, play the ball rather than the man - a classical indication of an unsupportable argument!
Your allegation is as odeous as it is inaccurate, just like most of the twaddle in this thread. I do not work for a radio "supplier" or an avionics company. I have just been involved in the process of bringing military aircraft fleets into compliance with the new regulations. I was also involved in studies to bring ATM equipment (SSR, PSR, PAR etc) into compliance with the new requirements to "play nicely" with mobile phone transmissions at 2.6GHz, and the wind-farm compliance issue, although we didn't win that one so we didn't get to do it.
The post I was responding to seemed to believe that an 8.33kHz radio fit in a commercial helicopter should by just buying a toy radio from Radio Shack. Fortuinately there are regulations which prevent cowboy operators doing such dangerous things. But if you really, really beleive that then just become the CAM for a helicopter operator and you are at liberty to define and sign off whatever you like - you can repair your aircraft with pieces of scaffolding pole attached with screws from home depot by mexican illegals on $0.05 an hour.
And when the enquiry finds your signature after the ensuing crash you will probably spend the remaining years of your life in jail, with your family stripped of every cent to pay the compensation to the families of the dead pilots, passengers and innocent bystanders.
There are cowboy corner-cutters in every walk of life, but I have to say I'm dissappointed to find them here. These people and their contempt for safety have no place in any aviation organisation.
PDR
Your allegation is as odeous as it is inaccurate, just like most of the twaddle in this thread. I do not work for a radio "supplier" or an avionics company. I have just been involved in the process of bringing military aircraft fleets into compliance with the new regulations. I was also involved in studies to bring ATM equipment (SSR, PSR, PAR etc) into compliance with the new requirements to "play nicely" with mobile phone transmissions at 2.6GHz, and the wind-farm compliance issue, although we didn't win that one so we didn't get to do it.
The post I was responding to seemed to believe that an 8.33kHz radio fit in a commercial helicopter should by just buying a toy radio from Radio Shack. Fortuinately there are regulations which prevent cowboy operators doing such dangerous things. But if you really, really beleive that then just become the CAM for a helicopter operator and you are at liberty to define and sign off whatever you like - you can repair your aircraft with pieces of scaffolding pole attached with screws from home depot by mexican illegals on $0.05 an hour.
And when the enquiry finds your signature after the ensuing crash you will probably spend the remaining years of your life in jail, with your family stripped of every cent to pay the compensation to the families of the dead pilots, passengers and innocent bystanders.
There are cowboy corner-cutters in every walk of life, but I have to say I'm dissappointed to find them here. These people and their contempt for safety have no place in any aviation organisation.
PDR
PDR1
All the arguments in your post 26 apply equally to medical equipment, which itself is often a rip off but peanuts in comparison with aviation parts. The reality is that manufacturers charge what they can get away with. They know the aircraft cant be returned to service without their part or overhaul and they have a monopoly.
They would jack up medical equipment to the same level if they could, but as it normally gets charged to an individual patient it would be affordable. Sadly they see aircraft owners as having bottomless pockets, or at least owning items with massive capital cost that are worthless bits of scrap metal unless you pay up.
Dont think you will get much support for your views on this forum
All the arguments in your post 26 apply equally to medical equipment, which itself is often a rip off but peanuts in comparison with aviation parts. The reality is that manufacturers charge what they can get away with. They know the aircraft cant be returned to service without their part or overhaul and they have a monopoly.
They would jack up medical equipment to the same level if they could, but as it normally gets charged to an individual patient it would be affordable. Sadly they see aircraft owners as having bottomless pockets, or at least owning items with massive capital cost that are worthless bits of scrap metal unless you pay up.
Dont think you will get much support for your views on this forum
You're probably right. Too many posts on here present personal (uniformed, innaccurate and downright wrong) opinions as facts.
You can look at almost any sentence that starts with "the fact is..." or "the reality is..." and be pretty certain that what follows is either popular myth or made up on the spot to support a personal grudge because everything in the world is Someone Else's Fault.
Go read the regulations, and work out a fully costed proposal to make these parts in a way that would be compliant with them. That would have to include a proposal to set up an organisation which meets the legal requirements to be an aviation supplier as well, of course, and would then have to show how the costs of the latter are recovered from the sales of the former.
What has been said in this thread would be the equivalent of someone complaining about a £12,000 charter quote when he has worked out that the aeroplane will only use £300 of fuel. It is obvious here that the complainers haven't the faintest idea what is needed to produce these items, they just whine about the cost like they probabl;y whine when it rains, or when there are traffic jams.
This is not grown-up behaviour, you know.
PDR
You can look at almost any sentence that starts with "the fact is..." or "the reality is..." and be pretty certain that what follows is either popular myth or made up on the spot to support a personal grudge because everything in the world is Someone Else's Fault.
Go read the regulations, and work out a fully costed proposal to make these parts in a way that would be compliant with them. That would have to include a proposal to set up an organisation which meets the legal requirements to be an aviation supplier as well, of course, and would then have to show how the costs of the latter are recovered from the sales of the former.
What has been said in this thread would be the equivalent of someone complaining about a £12,000 charter quote when he has worked out that the aeroplane will only use £300 of fuel. It is obvious here that the complainers haven't the faintest idea what is needed to produce these items, they just whine about the cost like they probabl;y whine when it rains, or when there are traffic jams.
This is not grown-up behaviour, you know.
PDR
Last edited by PDR1; 2nd Nov 2017 at 13:18.
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,573
Received 413 Likes
on
218 Posts
I haven't read anything on this thread suggesting fitting illegal parts to an aircraft. People have understandably questioned the cost of certification of aircraft parts.
I'd be very interested to see some facts and figures regarding the need for more air band frequencies. Every year it seems another airfield has closed, rather than new ones opening.
Aviation seems to be an ever smaller dog being wagged by an ever larger tail.
I'd be very interested to see some facts and figures regarding the need for more air band frequencies. Every year it seems another airfield has closed, rather than new ones opening.
Aviation seems to be an ever smaller dog being wagged by an ever larger tail.
I have read your comments PDR1 & find you do not read to closely I did not say fit sub standard parts to helicopters ( I presume it was me you were playing)
What I was pointing out was the component parts are a minute part of cost of the unit most surface mount resistors caps etc cost fractions of a cent\ penny \ yen, the tin ware is cheap to produce the design for a lot of the equipment is standard practice so we have innovation to cost in + sales shipping & profit.
Taking MR mobile digital fixed radio price £400 then doubling it £800 to allow for reduced customer base for aircraft ( not sure that stands up to day with a lot of radio customers moving to phones & PTTi)
We now add £400 for conformity excessive it think but there you go, we are at £1200 add some more profit £ 400 so now £1600 still a big gap Hey I might have forgotten something How about we add a bit more profit £300 still only £1900 & remember MR were taking a profit from £400
What I was pointing out was the component parts are a minute part of cost of the unit most surface mount resistors caps etc cost fractions of a cent\ penny \ yen, the tin ware is cheap to produce the design for a lot of the equipment is standard practice so we have innovation to cost in + sales shipping & profit.
Taking MR mobile digital fixed radio price £400 then doubling it £800 to allow for reduced customer base for aircraft ( not sure that stands up to day with a lot of radio customers moving to phones & PTTi)
We now add £400 for conformity excessive it think but there you go, we are at £1200 add some more profit £ 400 so now £1600 still a big gap Hey I might have forgotten something How about we add a bit more profit £300 still only £1900 & remember MR were taking a profit from £400
DSCF0359.JPGAs Hughes 500 pointed out prices are Crazy
PDR justify price please Please note date these are locating pegs for a 500 clam door
Just to point you in the direction I have been in the owner of electronics RF business for getting on 50 years at service & manufacture level. I have no gripe regarding 8.33kHx spacing
PDR justify price please Please note date these are locating pegs for a 500 clam door
Just to point you in the direction I have been in the owner of electronics RF business for getting on 50 years at service & manufacture level. I have no gripe regarding 8.33kHx spacing
Last edited by 500e; 2nd Nov 2017 at 14:26.
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,573
Received 413 Likes
on
218 Posts
If they're anything like the door locating/locking pins on A109s, there is a loud bang, a rush of air, your ears pop and you hope all you're going to need is clean underwear. But they are factory parts.....
Just because they're certificated with all the expense involved, it doesn't mean to say they're up to the job.
Just because they're certificated with all the expense involved, it doesn't mean to say they're up to the job.
There you go again PDR1, putting up another defense of what if they fail.
What if any commercially used bit of kit fails - the manufacturer can be sued.
Just to take hughes500's examples (and I have owned a 500)
500 switch $135. If it fails the item wont turn on or off
anaesthetic machine switch - far more complex $42. If it fails the patient dies
500 pressure switch $14500. Similar used for orthopaedic operations £160. Again if it fails patient ends up with failed joint replacement,permanent limp, pay out massive
Aviation is not the only industry where items are used on a small scale, have to be designed and tracked and where failure can result in horrendous litigation.
What if any commercially used bit of kit fails - the manufacturer can be sued.
Just to take hughes500's examples (and I have owned a 500)
500 switch $135. If it fails the item wont turn on or off
anaesthetic machine switch - far more complex $42. If it fails the patient dies
500 pressure switch $14500. Similar used for orthopaedic operations £160. Again if it fails patient ends up with failed joint replacement,permanent limp, pay out massive
Aviation is not the only industry where items are used on a small scale, have to be designed and tracked and where failure can result in horrendous litigation.
Have seen a few missing or door cracked around the lower corner, some the doors are distorted enough for them to miss the hole they locate in. (I do not suggest this is the norm or a good idea) never heard of one coming off in flight due to missing \ broken pin, I await to hear different ? may be if the latches let go.
I also owned a share in a 500 for 8 years the bill were paid by me & partner, not by a corporation or company, both of us felt we were cash cows & sold it, the same as a lot of private owners.
I would suggest you are clutching at straws to justify the price
Shy
Don't get me started on 500 door locking mechanisms complicated to make, adjust, & keep adjusted, then the poor material they are made of, Wear is an understatement
I also owned a share in a 500 for 8 years the bill were paid by me & partner, not by a corporation or company, both of us felt we were cash cows & sold it, the same as a lot of private owners.
I would suggest you are clutching at straws to justify the price
Shy
Don't get me started on 500 door locking mechanisms complicated to make, adjust, & keep adjusted, then the poor material they are made of, Wear is an understatement
Last edited by 500e; 2nd Nov 2017 at 19:42.