LEE’S SUMMIT, Mo. — Avionics sales dropped 6.5% in the first half of 2016, according to a new report released by the Aircraft Electronics Association.
According to the second-quarter 2016 Avionics Market Report, in the first six months of the year, total worldwide business and general aviation avionics sales amounted to more than $1.1 billion as reported by the participating companies.
That’s down from $1.2 billion in the first six months of 2015.
Sales during the second-quarter months of April, May and June were $549,161,254.23, a 9.3% decrease compared to the 2015 second-quarter sales of $605,519,681.40.
The dollar amount reported (using net sales price, not manufacturer’s suggested retail price) includes all business and general aviation aircraft electronic sales — including all component and accessories in cockpit/cabin/software upgrades/portables/certified and noncertified aircraft electronics; all hardware (tip to tail); batteries; and chargeable product upgrades from the participating manufacturers. The amount does not include repairs and overhauls, extended warranty or subscription services.
Of the more than $1.1 billion in sales during the first six months of 2016, 54.3% came from forward-fit (avionics equipment installed by airframe manufacturers during original production) sales, or more than $605 million.
By contrast, the retrofit (avionics equipment installed after original production) market amounted to 45.7% of sales during the first six months of the current year, or more than $509 million.
According to the companies that separated their total sales figures between North America (U.S. and Canada) and other international markets, 66.8% of sales in the first six months occurred in North America (U.S. and Canada), while 33.2% took place in other international markets.
“With so many new and innovative avionics products introduced to the general aviation market in the first half of the year, it is disappointing to see decreasing sales figures compared to the first six months of 2015, particularly in the retrofit market,” said AEA President Paula Derks. “The lower sales figures are somewhat surprising given the fact that the deadline to equip aircraft flying in U.S. controlled airspace with ADS-B Out avionics is only 40 months away, and the fact that we have seen a slight uptick in the ADS-B equipage pace this year. It will be interesting to see future sales reports following the recent AirVenture Oshkosh event that brought even more avionics products to market, along with the FAA’s ADS-B Rebate program expected to begin later this year.”
I don’t know why it should come as a surprise to the AEA that total sales are down this year. Total sales of new airplanes are down and since more than half of avionics is forward-fit, it should be expected (duh!). The cost of new airplanes is now causing even the “well healed” to slow down. Avionics is in the ‘trickle down’ end of that whole process. And we haven’t even addressed the dearth of new pilot starts … the genesis of where ALL the business comes from.
The retrofit market — where one would expect the 2020 ADS-B requirement to drive a market uptick — is also speaking with its wallet. There is no way that an ADS-B WAAS GPS receiver add-on to a Mode-S ES transponder should cost more than the transponder itself. GA aircraft owners are also balking at this.
E.G., I can buy an external WAAS GPS to feed position to my iPad and navigate with it (under VFR) for ~$150. But if I want to make my Mode S ES transponder ADS-B 2020 compliant and need the same accuracy WAAS GPS position source hooked up to it via RS232, it costs ~$3K … 20 times more. Give us all a break AEA (and FAA) !! And now that one-box ADS-B solutions are coming along, an owner can buy one of those (out only) for around the same price as a stand-alone WAAS GPS position source add-on. The whole ADS-B thing is nutty from a cost perspective. It’s no wonder the FAA, et al, has to offer an incentive for aircraft owners to equip. What if 2020 came and went and less than half the aircraft owners equipped?
The recent announcements that non-TSO’ed — but perfectly capable and reliable — avionics equipment can now be installed under STC is a bright spot in avionics but doesn’t go far enough or fast enough. It’s one thing to require an airliner to be certificated to the hilt but why does my low end GA airplane have to meet the same TSO specs? When the owner of a LSA or E-AB airplane — flying in the very same airspace — can purchase non-TSO’ed equipment but the owner of a certificated airplane has to spend far more money to achieve the very same objectives, something is very wrong. The owner of that very same LSA or E-AB airplane is likely flying a behind an unbelievable panel of electronic wizardry yet it’s not authorized in my C172. To achieve it, I’d have to spend two or three times as much or more to retrofit to an equivalent level. SUM TING WONG! The AEA sales specs, therefore, reflect this problem.
At Airventure 2016, the Administrator stood up in a packed forum and told everyone that the FAA was moving to a “performance based” model. My response … in what century? They purport to have safety as their number one goal but then throw that TSO requirement in on everyone … which drives the cost up SO significantly that owners just naturally balk. They’re waking up … some … with the NORSEE rules but they have to go faster and further and … DO IT NOW !! Until then, the AEA better keep it’s violin players and sob singers on call.