Mikeyme1998 OP t1_j31vjpw wrote

Ohhhh ok, that makes sense. I figured I'd mention my nationality just because it's a completely seperate classification and license process as compared to M classifications here, so I felt it was important to avoid confusion


Mikeyme1998 OP t1_j2zy6hj wrote

Ohhhh yeah, I see where the confusion lies! With something like the DA40NG, you're saving money on no MFD, probably only one pitot static system (so only one ADC), one GEA71 for engine parameters, possibly only one transponder that might not be diversity, no weather radar, etc. The G1000NXi is kind of like the base platform that can accommodate a number of different systems, and a full quote like half a million is something an airliner would get.


Mikeyme1998 OP t1_j2zruw0 wrote

I do agree that the industry as a whole underpays techs and especially apprentices. I was extremely fortunate to find a company that allows me to live comfortably and maintain a life outside of work, but hearing stories from around the airport about new hires being paid less than fast food workers does disappoint me, especially with how desperate everyone is for good techs of all sort.

Honestly I don't have the life experience to feel like I can share a founded opinion on sustainability and compare the Canadian aviation sector to others around the world, and I think that there are a lot of underpaid professions and careers that also have definite room to grow that land outside of aviation.

Sorry if this answer seems kind of weird, I honestly challenged myself with this one and I had a hard time gathering my thoughts when it comes to financial politics


Mikeyme1998 OP t1_j2zpsgv wrote

Like anything, there will be a depreciation as soon as the work is done and it flies. You also likely won't find an aircraft with a G1000NXi under a few million dollars being sold by a manufacturer, so the price kind of scales. There are G1000NXi systems for like, Cessna 172s, but the price I mentioned above would be more geared towards dual turbine engine installs with an MFD. For example, the DAHER Kodiak 100 comes with a G1000NXi straight from factory, but costs north of $2,000,000.


Mikeyme1998 OP t1_j2zp3fo wrote

Calling it my 'favorite' is kind of tough, but I always felt so affected by Alaska 261 (the MD83 that had the horizontal stab jackscrew strip itself off and completely free the horizontal stab). The sheer desperation of the pilots and the way by which the plane twisted and inverted is just heart wrenching. Having such a lack of control is just an awful thought. The whole maintenace crew in my first hangar always took the jackscrew greasing task card very seriously (not that others were completed otherwise) because a lot of them were alive and some even working during that disaster (that was very seriously maintenance caused).


Mikeyme1998 OP t1_j2znw8l wrote

Glassdoor would probably be of more help than myself... I don't personally know any aerospace engineers, and really the only engineers I encounter would be the ones who help us develop STCs or provide them for installs, and maybe DARs who come to inspect a newly developed STC. Sorry I couldn't be of more help!


Mikeyme1998 OP t1_j2zn7s4 wrote

I'm sorry to say I don't fully understand the question. To answer the first part, avionics is aviation electronics. In fact I think some of the schools that teach it are changing the title to "aviation electronics" to clear it up with potential students.


Mikeyme1998 OP t1_j2zmteo wrote

I haven't. I've seen some job postings for it, but doing so doesn't count towards maintaining your avionics license and after a while it would fall off. Perhaps one day, but for now I'll stick to the real ones I think!


Mikeyme1998 OP t1_j2zmkud wrote

I'm unfortunately not the best story teller, but point form short events I can do! And you can ask me to tell you more if any of these pique your interest!

  • When I spilled hydraulic fluid in both my eyes (around my safety glasses) while rewiring an engine. I've never been so afraid of losing a sense in my life (turns out it just dries the hell out of your eyes and turns them very red)

  • The first birdstrike plane that came into the hangar. Sure it LOOKED gruesome, but what I didn't expect was the SMELL...

  • When a ramp agent was trying to put out a GPU that had caught fire and accidentally sprayed purple-k (corrosive fire retardant) into both engines of a parked A320, forcing a dual engine change

  • Changing a wingtip navigation light on an Airbus A330 during high winds and in -40 without windchill. I really wanted that logbook sign off.

  • Riding my motorcycle home at dusk, on a road adjacent to one of the runways at my home airport, and 'racing' a plane I had just finished handing over to the pilot after a sizeable upgrade. I don't think I stopped smiling for about 2 days.

  • Having the entire shop see my flight simulator peripherals for my computer come in because I ordered them to the shop. I get teased to this day.

  • Doing a complete install on a Piper Navajo for a survey camera before realizing the STC was developed by an engineer who happened to be one of my middle school friends from a small BC town

Hopefully some of these made you smile or sounded interesting!!


Mikeyme1998 OP t1_j2zkc9g wrote

Not in any capacity that is beyond what you can find online... I only recently heard about this technology and I'm currently not too concerned with knowing it, as it is not yet certified in Canada. If you're interested in hearing my opinion on it, I don't have many complex feelings as long as it passes Transport Canada certification and retains a safe track record. Autoland systems have been around for many years, but introducing them to G3000 flight decks (usually on smaller private jets) is pretty awesome. Anything that makes low visibility and complex approaches and landings easier, in my mind, keeps the passengers safer.


Mikeyme1998 OP t1_j2zjct7 wrote

It certainly is possible, but it would be hard to start one without prior reputation. The hardest part will be trying to find companies who trust you enough to allow you to grow through them; taking extra time because you need to borrow test boxes or order parts for instance. But that being said, my company was started by two techs who wanted to do things the right way and we are doing very well now! Of course there are growing pains, but overall if you have the dedication I'm sure you'll find success.

In US, all avionics work is completed by mechanics (or A&P [Airframe and Powerplant] technicians). I'm sure there are specialized shops and nuances that I'm missing, but as far as official titles go, in the US it all falls under aircraft maintenance as far as I know.


Mikeyme1998 OP t1_j2zimgj wrote

Canadian Pacific has a holiday train that makes its way around Canada around, obviously, holiday time. It's just a standard freight train but its full of lights and decorations. I like that one because I remember it coming through every city and town I ever lived in growing up, and so seeing it today makes me appreciate and reminisce about my childhood.


Mikeyme1998 OP t1_j2zfxxj wrote

Not a problem! I am in fact a civilian avionics tech. But I think any sort of aviation is something that people should be excited about! It's really quite a neat industry and the technology that we use is really fascinating to learn about.


Mikeyme1998 OP t1_j2zfoqw wrote

The Garmin GFC500 and GFC600 is very very close to universal. Each aircraft install is different of course, but the GFC500 I know for a fact can be fit onto multiple types of Cessna, Piper, Mooney, Cirrus, and Beechcraft aircraft. Each type is different, but there are airframe specific kits and manuals that outline exactly how sheetmetal and avionics go about fitting and installing the autopilot system in its entirety.


Mikeyme1998 OP t1_j2zdnwn wrote

Our company actually just finished a contract for a G950 (G1000 without autopilot) on a 1900D! I don't know if a G1000 is in the cards, but the two systems are nearly identical besides the autopilot that is used