Sender: <marv@lancaironline.net> (Marvin Kaye)
To: lml
Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2002 13:08:12 -0400
Message-ID: <redirect-1642270@logan.com>
From: Brent Regan <Brent@regandesigns.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:0.9.4) Gecko/20011019 Netscape6/6.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: Blue Mountain EFIS testing
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Calvin Watrich writes:

<<The Prime Directive of the experimental aviation category was set out 
for people to build, learn and enjoy their aircraft at their own leisure.>>

I don't know who this guy is but I think he has been playing with a 
Phaser on "Stun". Kirk Hammersmith and Capt. James Tiberius Kirk are two 
different people, and one is fictional.

As one of the engineers who is responsible for the EFIS-2000 I know 
first hand that Kirk is no pushover. He steadfastly demanded that we 
would have to SHOW him a system with all the features WORKING in a REAL 
airplane. His admiration for the Chelton (formerly Sierra) hardware was 
EARNED. I was there. Kirk was as generous with BM as Chelton. He spent 
many hours of his time giving the new products the opportunity to prove 
themselves. He was frustratingly honest about the results and it was 
that honesty that helped drive the perfection of the system.

Kirks posting was not critical, it was factual. The writer seems to be 
making the argument that as members of the experimental community we 
should be kind to struggling companies so that they can perfect their 
products. What next, sitting in a big circle holding hands and singing 
"We are the World"? Balderdash! How will they know what to improve?

The "Prime Directive" of the free market demands that you will either 
demonstrate your claims or perish. In the case of avionics it is 
critical that the facts relating to performance are made public. Lives 
are at stake. Many try and few succeed but there are lessons to be 
learned from all. We did learn from Archangel. We learned "Don't do it 
that way"!

BTW Gordon is the marketing director at Chelton and was not responsible 
for writing the EFIS-2000 application.

Step back a moment and look at things in perspective. You can go out and 
buy a Rockwell Collins EFIS multi screen system for about $500K. For 
only about 10% you can buy a comparable system from Chelton. For those 
who say that still isn't cheap enough I would counter that just the 
component cost (ICs, capacitors, connectors etc.) of the Chelton system 
is greater than the retail price of the BM system. Are all those parts 
needed? Only if your want to meet the operational requirements for 
aircraft service (temperature, EMI, HIRF, vibration etc).

Can you buy a system with the performance and specifications of the 
EFIS-2000 for 20% the cost? I don't know. Can you buy a new car for 
$2000? Would you want to drive around in it?

Chelton was selected by the FAA for the Capstone program, beating out 
ALL the other avionics companies, even the ones that received federal 
funds to develop just such a system. Imagine that. The feds gave 
millions of your tax dollars to companies to develop the next generation 
of avionics and then, when it came to picking one to buy, they chose 
Chelton, who hadn't taken a dime.

Kirk and his ilk were and are critical to the process that brings the 
world new and innovative products that actually work. When they demand 
that you perform as advertised you should take their opinions it to 
heart, quit your whining, go back to the lab and GET IT RIGHT. When you 
find out that it takes more time and money than you expect and you have 
to raise the price to stay in business you will be rewarded by gripes 
that your product is too expensive. It will be your turn to listen to 
those who are ignorant of the full scope of the problem pontificate on 
your greed. At least then you will have the satisfaction of knowing you 
beat the odds.

Been there, done that, got the gray hairs (the few that are left) to 
prove it!

BTW Gordon is the marketing director at Chelton and was not responsible 
for writing the EFIS-2000 application.

Regards
Brent Regan