FAA Proposes Civil Penalty of Nearly 3.7 Million Against ADS-B Manufactuers

“The U.S. Department of Transportation’s Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) proposes a civil penalty of $3,685,000 against NavWorx Inc. of Rowlett, Texas, for allegedly producing and selling navigation
units that did not meet FAA requirements and for allegedly misleading customers about those products.”

Based on what I’ve read, this could be a problem for NavWorx. 3.7 million is a large penalty, but considering the situation it could’ve caused problems. Personally, I think that the fine should go through if there actually is a problem with ADS-B navigation equipment, as it could lead to losing track of aircraft in the sky.

For those that don’t know, ADS-B is a surveillance technology that allows aircraft to be tracked via transmissions to satellite. If the software were to fail, it could cause major problems for navigation as the ATC would not be able to see the aircraft.

So what does everyone here think about this? For those that are pilots or ATC, how does ADS-B help you fly or control the aircraft in your airspace? Let me know what you think.

Source

https://www.aviation.ca/2017102622538/news/international/us/federal-aviation-administration/22538-press-release-faa-proposes-civil-penalty-of-nearly-37-million-against-manufacturer-of-ads-b-navigation-units

7 Likes

Well deserved penalty. Rules are meant to be followed.

If ATC wouldn’t be able to track the precise location of a aircraft, there could be serious mid-air collisions. This is not something to be taken lightly.

3 Likes

My thoughts exactly. I wasn’t 100% sure on the use of ADS-B but if it’s that serious then you are correct it is a very well deserved penalty. Typically I’ve found that when the FAA wants to penalize someone, it’s well deserved. They have strict rules for a reason

2 Likes

Losing the aircraft from radar might also cause some HUGE conspiracies. Especially with the disasters that have happened in aviation history.

6 Likes

Clarifying so said company made an unreliable transmitter?

4 Likes

In short, yes and they ended up selling it to people

3 Likes

Very interesting…like they say, “snitches get stitches”…

1 Like

If it doesn’t meet requirements it should be a larger penalty.

1 Like

How is 3.7 million dollars not a large penalty? You must be rich.

1 Like

My view is that the penalty should reflect the danger it could represent to aircraft (ex. Mid-Air collision)

This penalty should make the company face some “pain” economically

I’m sure if the FAA fines them 3.7 million dollars they will face some pain. In fact, so much pain that the company already closed its doors as of about a month ago.

But I agree with you, no amount of money is worth a person’s life that could be caused by a disfunctional ADS-B. Yet 3.7 million is still a hefty fine there’s no doubt about that.

1 Like

Don’t wanna sound rude so I’ll just get that out of the way first lol. In terms of big business (at least in my experience) the 3.7 million would still be a hit but not super major. Maybe I’m wrong though lol I’m not an expert on that stuff

When the radar screen goes dark… it’s tome for non-radar procedures… in a Tower when it goes dark… time to get out those binos… still using ground based in most of the states

1 Like

This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.