On Sep 19, 9:52 am, "Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net
wrote:
100 Million USD? Really, you think it would be that high?

No, I just picked a number that I was pretty sure it would not
exceed.

But let's say you are right. If every single aircraft registered in the US
added your widget that would be amortized to about $500/plane.

While I fully agree that anything sold to go into an aircraft costs more
than it should at least some of that cost is there for a reason.

I think the "more" part is *significant*. See below:

I'll bet if you call Intel's OEM sales unit and ask for a price on 500 INTEL
Core 2 Duo E6300 which is selling for around $155.00 anywhere on the web and
told them that you were going to put it in a certified aviation application
the price would jump significantly if they would sell it to you at all.

Well, something has to be certified. After all, the people who make
glass cockpits have to get CPU's and SRAM from somewhere.

Here's a question and answer from Blue Mountain Avionics' website. They make
a EIS for experimental aircraft. Keep inmind what they are talking about is
for something that will go in an experimental aircraft. They are just
talking about GPS IFR approach certification.

Q: Is EFIS/One certified for GPS approaches?

On the advice of our most trusted avionics dealer and partner, we have
decided not to pursue it. For what it will cost to do TSO C129A testing and
certification, we'd have to raise the price of the EFIS by more than the
cost of a high-volume certified unit. We think it's a better deal to have a
reasonably priced glass cockpit, and the interconnect available for those
who want to fly GPS approaches. If you have a certified GPS, you can plug
it in to drive the flight director and autopilot in approach mode.

I guess it's true that if you are selling devices in low-volume,
certification is not worth the cost.

This illuminates the real problem, which is that the approach to
building aircraft monitor and control systems is not the same as for
building computers. One of the reasons that computers are so cheap is
that the almost demand interchangeability. IBM and other large
companies, for a long time, have been able to lock in customers with
proprietary hardware, but the PC market will not tolerate this. While
I am not saying that companies like Garmin are deliberately trying to
lock in customers, it does not appear to me that they are making any
effort to commoditize their systems either. I think there is enormous
opportunity for a company to break away from this mindset and start
down the path of total commoditization and interchangeability.
Simple, cheap, robust USB-base monitors and controls will go a long
way.

Let's take an example:

Jim Stewart noted in a response to my OP, noting that...

"A Lowrance 2000c gives you terrain, airspace,
VFR chart, airports and frequencies in a very
nice little package for about 700 USD on discount."

Here it is:

http://www.lowrance.com/Products/Aviation/AM2000C.asp

He's right, it's cheaper than $1800, but...$700? When I look at that
device, I see nothing more than a PDA, a database, and some software.

Continuing with this example, let's suppose I take my $700 instead and
buy a standard basic PC from Dell. The Inspiron 531S is selling for
$529US: http://configure.us.dell.com/dellsto...=DDCWGC2&s=dhs.
Note that it comes with 17inch, LCD color monitor, $160GB hard drive,
"in-flight movie viewing system" (DVD drive and Windows Media
Player). I would want two of these machines in my airplane, so let's
say cost is $1058.

Now I look at the link that Jim Stewart gave:

http://www.dynonavionics.com

First, let me point out that my goal is not to criticize Dynon. [One
should commend them for trying to bring the price down.]

However, looking at the EFIS-D100 (http://www.dynonavionics.com/docs/
D100_intro.html), which costs $2400, one reads:

"Dynon's EFIS-D100 is the most affordable large screen Electronic
Flight Information System on the market today. Based on the best-
selling EFIS-D10A, the 7" wide-screen display features large, easy to
read text and graphics and is capable of displaying multiple pages
side by side in a split-screen format. The instrument integrates
multiple flight instruments, including airspeed, altitude, gyro-
stabilized magnetic compass, turn rate, slip/skid ball, bank angle,
and vertical speed. Other useful functions include a clock/timer, g-
meter, voltmeter and density altitude/true airspeed calculator."

When I see this device, I see

1. My two Dell computers with 17" monitors
2. More software
3. USB-based devices everywhere. I don't see why some sensors like
pressure sensor should not cost $50US or less.

For instance, the clock-timer.....we need not discuss what value such
a thing has in a PC. It's essentially 0$. G-meter...at worst case,
that's a USB-base accelerometer. Voltmeter...again..$10 would be a
conservative cost for USB-based device. Attitude indication, same
thing. Also, since I'd be using PC with 160GB hard disks each, there
would be plenty of space for maps of entire planet.

So let's say that each USB-gadget costs $50 in quantity on average,
and there are 12 of them, so that's $1200 if I double-up each device
for redundancy. My total system cost, including two computers, and 24
USB-based gadgets without software, would be $2258, less than the one
device for $2400. One could throw in a software-radio, and get access
to the entire suite of aviation radio communications. The massive 320
GB of hard-disk space would make things like logging trip data,
including weather information, almost trivial.

So a different approach might be to stop making finished systems and
instead focus on components. Manufacturers would make controls in
sensors in wide variety, all conforming to USB standard. A (cheap)
commodity PC would be able to control everything. And (licensed)
software developers could do their part.

-Le Chaud Lapin-