You might want to go back and read some of the earlier articles on these units. Navworx didn't initiate a pissing contest they had units in production 'decertified'. That means the feds ok'd the production and then said 'stop'. Navworx had a good thing going and had their production stopped. While they tried to work out a solution, they were threatened with an AD. Sounds just a bit heavy handed.
Web
I've read them all, including the FAA's letters to NavWorx. I see zero evidence, either from the letters and documents that NavWorx published, nor from the letters and documents the FAA has published, that NavWorx made ANY efforts to work with the FAA to find a solution. Things got so acrimonious that the FAA took the unprecedented step of publishing many of the emails and documents exchanged with NavWorx. I believe this was a response to NavWorx broad insinuation of FAA corruption and payoffs by an unnamed "large manufacturer of GPS, avionics, and ADS-B devices" to get the FAA to "shut down" NavWorx. Poppycock. NavWorx behaved like a petulant 3-year-old, and eventually the FAA was forced to revoke the TSO and publish the AD.
NavWorx devices were indeed TSO'ed – with software that broadcast SIL level of "0" (the lowest performance level). The FAA agreed that the devices met that standard, thus issuing the TSO. There would have been no TSO revocation, nor any AD issuance, had NavWorx continued to build the units PER THEIR TSO. The problem occurred when NavWorx made what the FAA (and pretty much anyone reading the tea leaves here) considered to be a significant change to the software. They began broadcasting SIL level 3 instead of 0. That's a whole different class of data to the FAA, and NavWorx definitely knew that.
Why did NavWorx do that? Well, sometime after their TSO was granted, the FAA clarified the rules, such that ADS-B traffic broadcasts would only be relayed from the ground stations to aircraft broadcasting SIL level 3 (the more accurate GPS signals that the entire NextGen system was designed around). NavWorx was (perhaps understandably) upset with this "rule change" and felt it was unfair. Rather than go through the FAA approval process (as required by their existing TSO) to change their software, they chose to unilaterally change that software to broadcast SIL level 3, and distribute it to their customers without obtaining FAA approval - a clear violation of their TSO and the TSO approval process. When the FAA found out about it, NavWorx tried to justify their actions by blaming the FAA for "changing the rules mid-stream" (which is indeed one way of looking at the change to require SIL level 3, but it doesn't matter - the rules are what the FAA says they are).
At that point, the FAA was still perfectly willing to sit down with NavWorx and review the engineering data to formalize the TSO approval of the new software (and here's the key point) PROVIDED that NavWorx could show that the GPS chip they were using actually did meet the requirements set down for SIL level 3 broadcast. NavWorx was very public with their claims that the chip they were using met the FAA standards, and that they had the engineering data to prove it. NavWorx set an appointment with the FAA inspectors to come review that data so they could get that TSO approval. Remember: At this point, the NavWorx TSO was still in effect, with the FAA only calling for them to roll back that software update or prove compliance with the TSO standard.
So, on the date for which the meeting was scheduled, the FAA folks showed up at NavWorx (remember - this was a meeting
requested by NavWorx). Much to their surprise, they were turned away and refused admittance to the facility. (NavWorx later claimed their chief engineer was on vacation on that day, which begs the question "Why would you request an engineering review meeting with the FAA on a date when your chief engineer is on vacation?") Shortly thereafter (with a few more emails exchanged), the FAA revoked the TSO for the NavWorx units, and began the NPRM process which led to the AD.
Then suddenly, a few days ago, the NaxWorx home page (
http://navworx.com) shows the following:
The ADS600-B Gen 2.0 product utilizes a GPS module from a third-party vendor. Although the vendor represented their GPS module met 14 CFR 91.227, the FAA recently determined the GPS module does not meet 14 CFR 91.227.
We are unable to sell the ADS600-B, or provide AD updates, for either certified or experimental aircraft.
Therefore, we are not currently conducting any business and have ceased operations.
We will provide updates if they become available.
Draw your own conclusions... I feel very sorry for their customer base.
