I didn't read all of the comments, so I apologize if this has already been pointed out...

The reason Citation Mustang M2 was created is give Cessna a loophole to put the G3000 in the CJ1+, they have an agreement with Collins to put Proline avionics in the CJ line.

Nowhere does Cessna call the Citation M2 the Citation Mustang M2. And then you have the CJ3+ that also has the G3000. The agreement with Collins seems to have expired long ago.

Collins is not happy about the G3000 going into the 525 fleet instead of the Proline Fusion. My understanding is the Garmin avionics package to an OEM is signficantly less expensive then the equivalent Collins and Collins would not lower their cost to Cessna.

It also gives Cessna compatible avionics from the 172 to the CJ3+ which loyal brand pilots like.

I think Garmin has been very smart. They're in effect doing the Trojan horse approach to business that many Eastern car manufacturers successfully have perfected over the last 50 years. Get in cheap and with great value, until you control the market. Then hike prices once they're on the hook.

Collins has nowhere to go. Played their hand. Like I've said in other threads, some businesses are very shortsighted. Yes, you can bludgeon your customers with inferior ware if you have no competition. But the minute someone else comes along with a better mouse trap, you're customer base is gone. And they'll actively stay gone because of the traumatic experiences they had. That's what's going to happen to Collins if they don't smarten up. Look how well it worked out for Bendix/King. From number 1 to number nothing in less than 10 years. They'll never come back from that.

Here's what they should do. Port the Proline/Apex/whatever-the-hell-the-latest-thing-is-called to a GA box (and don't skimp on features either), like a G750 competitor. Offer it at a competitive price, tout your years of pro experience, yadda, yadda. Then the customer base will encounter them when they come up through the ranks. These are the pilots that will later go into aviation, manufacturing and be CEO's of aviation companies. Guys who can influence what system goes into an airplane in 10 years….

But some just don't see past the next annual report - or have owners who don't.

And one day, somebody will do that to Garmin.

Choice always makes things better and cheaper.

Mike C.

You are the master of platitudes.

Garmin is less dependent on aviation then Rockwell Collins is. In 2014 aviation was 13% or revenues and 15% of operating income.

From http://sites.garmin.com/en-US/annualreport/

It's interesting that Garmin is becoming so dominate in aviation even though it represents a relatively small portion of their business. They are doing a great job where others have been slow to stagnant in development.

Now THAT says alot about their Aviation pricing !

Garmins fitness & outdoor segment iare the most profitable. And auto is the least according to that chart. Consumer is generating most of their operating income.

Sems like the smart phone mapping functions would erode a lot of Garmin's consumer business.

There is a little more to the story it was my plane.
1. Boca refused to work on my plane and then billed me 300 which I didn't pay. Then they put a big do not fly sticker on my plane without doing any work so I just took it off.

2. I appealed the FAA tag to ntsb and just won. Took a year and I was doing it pro se but hopefully equal access to justice act will make faa pay me a few 100k. The gist of the story was that I repaired a dent on my tail cone that was done with logbook entry. I had to explain to faa lawyer how lightning protection requires bonding between parts and as long as the tail cone is not cut in half it remains bonded. I am fighting the Foia with FAA for the emails that eclipse sent them.

3. Eclipse literally whited out sections of the repair manual and accused me for doing an illegal repair. I had to get an FAA legal opinion to state I can use the repair manual that I got when I bought the plane 2008 version not the 2010 version that makes all repairs illegal. Google Siilats FAA to see the opinion it's nice.

4. Dr refused to honor the MEL. On page 25 of the MEL it says time limits not applicable to part 91 but they just didn't want to listen. I had to pay a 4K fine to take off. After fine no problem go fly.

5. FAA tried to revive my registration. Congressman intervened got my registration back. The FAA administrator guy actually lied to congressman now subject to hotline investigation hopefully gets fired.

6. Not the first legend told about me. I once refused FAA inspector entry to my burning man plane he entered anyway and got hotline investigation and fired. http://airnation.net/hangar/threads/faa ... yle.14386/

7. Key with FAA is go immediately to ntsb. I am 4:0 at ntsb regarding stupid tags. Faa has no idea about eclipse maintenance. Eclipse tells them to tag and they will tag. Key in ntsb is not to allow them to withdraw case but file motion to dismiss with prejudice. Then you get your money back (1% per month of the plane value)

Hey, Keith, good to hear from you.

The FAA sure came out squarely in your favor with the December, 2015 Legal Interpretation. I was pleased to hear they sided with you on it. Since that time, Cary Winter, the former head of engineering, left the company, and the new CEO, Alan Klapmeier, has had a number of initiatives aimed at improving customer support and satisfaction.

One of them concerns the Garmin-equipped airplanes, like ours. We're headed Monday to Texas for installation of a pair of Garmin GTN 625 touchscreen navigators, GTX 345R ADS-B compliant transponders, GDL-69A and the FS210 FlightStream system, which will make the plane ADS-B compliant, add the ability to transmit flight plans from ForeFlight to/from the panel avionics, put XM weather and ADS-B weather from the panel on the ipad, add airways, and much more. Eclipse supports the upgrade despite it coming from an outside provider, so there certainly has been some progress in the company's approach to things from the harsher days you encountered:



It remains a great little jet. I've missed you in our community.

Ken

I am amused at the "integrated avionics" that were "future proof". Welcome to the modern age!

Turns out the future was the same Garmin stuff you can put in a 172.

Mike C.

Keith,

I admire your actions in this issue and the willingness to assert your rights.

There is more and more abuse of power by the manufacturers when it comes to the maintenance programs, service bulletins, and factory service centers.

The FAA is having a tough time walking the line on the rules, can't violate the APA, but want to empower the manufacturers. Can't have it both ways.

Mike C.

No, you can't actually put most of an Eclipse avionics system in a 172 any more than you can put jet engines on one:



Avio is the descriptive name for the highly integrated package of work-reducing, safety-enhancing features that constantly oversee, monitor and manage hundreds of parameters in the jet, enabling a single pilot to function as if he had a built-in copilot. Various portions of Avio, like the GPS source units, radios, transponders, displays, etc etc, can indeed be updated as time goes by notwithstanding your prognostication some years ago that that would not be possible.

Ken

Well I also got expelled from the eclipse owners group for a year by the eclipse owners group! It's good that Cary left, he was unreasonable. The year is now owner so I will join that group again although it looks like everyone is in beech talk talking about eclipses anyway