The FAA issued an emergency order Nov. 22 suspending the authorization NavWorx uses to manufacture certain Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B) navigation units.
The authorization, known as a Technical Standard Order Authorization (TSOA), enables suppliers to produce components for use on aircraft after proving that each component meets FAA standards.
Federal regulations set forth FAA’s authority to inspect suppliers’ quality systems, facilities, technical data, and products to determine whether they meet safety standards. These regulations also provide that FAA may witness any tests necessary to determine a product’s compliance.
The suspension order was issued after NavWorx declined on repeated occasions to allow FAA personnel to conduct the required inspections. The suspension is immediate and will remain in effect until NavWorx consents to the inspections and demonstrates compliance with FAA standards.
The FAA is concerned that two versions of the company’s ADS600-B units (pictured), carrying part numbers 200-0012 and 200-0013, may contain an internal Global Positioning System (GPS) chip that does not meet the FAA’s minimum performance standards for transmitting an aircraft’s accurate location.
On June 29, the FAA requested to inspect NavWorx’s facility to determine the specific GPS unit and software installed in part numbers 200-0012 and 200-0013, and if the units are marked correctly.
NavWorx informed the inspector that he would not be allowed inside the company’s facility. During subsequent correspondence, NavWorx agreed to allow an Aug. 31 inspection, but then denied access when FAA inspectors arrived, according to FAA officials.
NavWorx later agreed to allow inspectors into the facility on Nov. 21 but they were again denied access.
Due to the company’s unwillingness to comply with these requirements, the FAA has determined that NavWorx’s continued use of its FAA authorization is contrary to the interests of safety in air commerce.
During the suspension, NavWorx may not mark or otherwise indicate that its ADS600-B units meet FAA standards, agency officials noted.
I was about to purchase the nav worx, but am now not sure. I really like the privacy mode which others do not offer. One almost has to think the FAA has it in for Nav worx because the 1200 squawk will not allow them to know who it is… so how the heck will they send you a bill when user fees are implemented?
I purchased the NavWorx ADS600B system in good faith, that it was a fully TSO’d FAA approved system just prior to the first FAA Notice in September. When I called support they informed me that issue would be resolved soon. The installation was begun prior to the first letter in September, but the installation was stopped and put on hold by the installer. Now several months later the plane is out of Annual and still stuck in the hangar until this is resolved or the system is removed, at additional expense and the plane is restored to it prior airworthy condition. But yet after several delays and the hopes for a resolution are dwindling. Other who installed this system with the affected part numbers were able to pass the required in flight tests required by the FAA. This has me a bit puzzled. First until the latest revelation and suspension by the FAA, why weren’t we notified of the problems much earlier? Many off us would not have purchased the system now in order the qualify for the FAA’s Rebate program. NavWorx return/refund policy was 30 days. Because of their promises and delays I exceeded that. Since they do have FAA approved unit’s, as a purchaser, many of us didn’t know the difference until this situation was made known. I sincerely hope they can make the necessary corrections to all the affected buyers of their product. At this point I feel committed to their product and with a return and modification/correction to the main box the system should easily come into compliance. My investment is nearing the $4000 mark including the installation, not to mention the down time to my aircraft. My IA will not sign off the Annual with unapproved parts, understandably so. I sent NavWorx a suggestion stating I would pay a reasonable additional fee to have my box upgraded to the approved system. Without fully understanding the technical or certification compliance issues, I don’t think, once everyone calms down and complies, that NavWorx can clear their name and go forth with an approved product.
Without FAA approval, you cannot install this unit in a certified airplane so basically, its a boat anchor.
There is no way I would buy this unit under the circumstances. What are they trying to hide ?? If there unit was in compliance, they would be proud to show it off to the FAA. J.R.S.
What about those who have already purchased and installed the unit?
Geez, am I glad I didn’t drop $1900 when we saw these ADS-B out units at Sun-n-Fun, or at Oshkosh this year. And what is with agreeing to a visit from FAA and then denying entry when the inspectors show-up? And again a second visit is agreed and then not allowed. Bet the FAA was pissed after that. I would have been. Maybe their chinese chips were bogus and Navworx knew it. Too bad for the poor guys who got suckered into the sales pitch and bought and installed the boxes. Now what, the boxes must be removed and a ligitimate ADS-B out box installed for another $3000 plus installation? I bet few buyers will get their money back….if any. My mechanic suggested in June of 2016 to wait a bit till the market shakes out some of the chaff (Navworx, in this case) and the whole show settles down. I believe I will follow his advice.
Why? What is the reason that NavWorx refuses to allow inspection. Should we continue to wait or shop elsewhere? This could go on forever without resolution.
bobdaszy
Definitely shop elsewhere. From my first-hand experience even before the navworx refusal to comply with faa regulations, the only positive thing about their units was the price. Garmin and Appareo would be a good place to start looking. L3 is okay but I’m underwhelmed by the king/avedyne/trig branded boxes.