What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

Vertical Power VP-50, VP-100, VP-200 owners, please read

cjensen

Well Known Member
News from Astronics Ballard Technology regarding VP-50, VP-100, and VP-200 systems only-

Product obsolescence usually brings angst with both customers and their supplier. We at Astronics Ballard Technology had an unusual situation with the acquisition of the Vertical Power products. As many of you may know, we acquired only the VP-X Sport and the VP-X Pro products, plus bins and boxes of all kinds of parts. As a service to the community, we continued to provide repair support for already obsolete products such as the VP-50/VP-100/VP-200 whenever possible. However, we are now out of most the useable parts and many are no longer attainable. Therefore, we are discontinuing factory service support for these already obsoleted units. If you have one of these units and would like to upgrade to a VP-Pro, please contact Chad Jensen to discuss options.

Rest assured, we enjoy being part of the community and will continue to offer the highly successful VP-X Pro and Sport through our dealer network. Also, keep following us. I think you will be pleased with the Primary Power System (PPS) which will be released shortly after operational qualifications are complete.

Please contact Chad for further assistance.

Best regards,

Bill Schuh
Vice President of Sales
Astronics-Ballard Technology
[email protected]
 
So Chad, seeing as we are now totally orphaned, can we get copies of schematics associated with the internals of these boxes so a third party would have a hope of providing support when needed? Or are we left with trying to reverse engineer these things?

Who owns the Intellectual Property (IP) associated with my VP-200? FYI I am in the midst of redoing my panel but not willing to part with this technology.

BTW, going to the VP-X Pro would be a downgrade, not an upgrade :eek:.

Thanks
 
Last edited:
Most unfortunate and disappointing to know we all now have a ticking timebomb and sooner or later we will be AOG with no way to fix it unless we upgrade.

Option A - what would it take to change a VP100 to a VPX type unit? Is it a plug and play? Or total rewire?

Option B - rip everything out and just go back to ol'reliable C/B's.....


Well, at least VP stepped up and warned us! Thanks for that at least. Most people dont like to takes the bullets :D
 
One more reason to stick with CBs: Klixon and P&B still make 'em. So do a bunch of other sources. What a bummer for all owners of the legacy VP products.
 
Amen -

....

BTW, going to the VP-X Pro would be a downgrade, not an upgrade :eek:.

Ditto that!! As a VP-100 owner, I deliberately wanted a separate electrical system without being integrated into then emerging, rapidly developing SkyView PFD. It was not a 'defect' or feature that became 'obsolete' but a benefit that was eliminated in the rush to VP-X.

In spite of the sophistication of the VP-X system it lacks that separation that was desirable as an early adopter. I just cut my 'final' version of the panel and am approaching the point of no return, riveting on the forward skin. The panel features the VP-100 'front & center' -- which may soon be a gaping hole. I can adapt more easily than the 2nd hand owner of a plane for which there is an expensive A&P project to support in the future.

At each stage of a build one accepts that acquisitions today may be superseded by newer versions tomorrow, even before the first engine start. But superseding and obsolescing are NOT synonymous terms. (We used to say, "Sooner or later you have to shoot the engineer and get the product out the door.") You evaluate, acquire and implement, knowing that a better version will emerge faster than you say, "upgrade".

As a retiring geek, 'new version' is the mantra of the industry. Dynon has exemplified the software upgrade to enhance the hardware, and each year continues to impress with their vision of making it function beyond expectations. Astronics runs the risk of being seen as a one size fits all, and leaving orphans like cookie crumbs to mark the path to the next product.

Let's hold our collective breath and hope there is a viable path for the early adopters.
 
So Chad, seeing as we are now totally orphaned, can we get copies of schematics associated with the internals of these boxes so a third party would have a hope of providing support when needed? Or are we left with trying to reverse engineer these things?

Who owns the Intellectual Property (IP) associated with my VP-200? FYI I am in the midst of redoing my panel but not willing to part with this technology.

BTW, going to the VP-X Pro would be a downgrade, not an upgrade :eek:.

Thanks

Hi Mark,

I will find answers to your questions...I think I know the answers, but before I go making my assumptions and give you incorrect info, give me a day or so to find out for sure.

We understand the frustration that this brings...I'll do everything I can to provide the answers to questions regarding this announcement.
 
I hate to say it but I saw this coming years ago despite the assurances that product support would continue.

Walking around the fallow exhibit halls at oshkosh and talking with a few avionics makers, it's clear there's an incredible upheaval going with many of these companies. some are consolidating, some are just going under.

I don't know what's going to happen but this is the reality of the post-steam-gauge era. You have to pick the product that's right for you. You also to have estimate your odds of being stuck with an orphaned product, particularly when dealing with those that are a little groundbreaking, and VP certainly was that.

I don't blame the new company for leaving the old customers on their own.

But, man, when the VP-50 goes (and that was a great, great product that's done everything I asked), I'm not entirely sure I'll put myself in this position again.

As for the assurances of manufacturers. They're worth nothing. There are no guarantees in this era.
 
Last edited:
This is very disappointing news. Avionics should not have to go through the same upgrade cycle as a laptop or desktop; I can't be redoing my panel every couple of years. In fact, I haven't even completed my installation and my $100K panel will have to be scrapped and redone, at who knows what cost. And I can't even upgrade because the G900X is not supported. Even if it was, I still need to redo the panel because the VP-200 display would have to be removed, not to mention structure for the two VP-200 CUs.

Let me say that this is not Ballard's fault (if they had bought the VP-200 rights, that would be another story). In fact, they have been going out of their way to help out with my system anyway. But this should be a cautionary tale for people choosing avionics - I've now had two providers evaporate like this (fortunately my Blue Mountain Avionics EFIS is still limping along). Cutting edge tech is all well and good but the product has to have a reasonable life span. That's why I went with Garmin for the new panel; the other EFIS offerings are awesome but I'm going with a company I know will be around - not that I expect the others to go away, but I didn't expect BMA or Vertical Power to disappear. And that's another reason why I wouldn't want to go with a VP-X; Ballard's support is great but will it last? Twice burned, third time shy.

That said, I am in the market for spares. I don't want to redo my panel yet, so I'd like to have a VP-200 display unit and at least one CU. If you have a VP-200 system and are thinking of ditching it, let me know.
 
This is very disappointing news. Avionics should not have to go through the same upgrade cycle as a laptop or desktop; I can't be redoing my panel every couple of years.

One way or another, you're going to pay. Most of the internal components (processors etc) eventually go obsolete, so if you want the same units supported over a long time period, you'll either have to pay for a huge upfront spares inventory (which the company won't want to hold on to for tax reasons), or you pay a whole bunch of money to the supplier for them to keep all the tooling and equipment on hand to make new parts, or you pay the NRE for the design team to develop backwards-compatible units out of new hardware. All of these costs will be rolled into either the initial purchase price, or the repair/replacement charges, and if the manufacturer goes belly-up, you just lost that much more money and still have nothing to show for it.

This is part of why certified and military equipment costs so much.

Otherwise, you accept the obsolescence and upgrade as required. The overall costs are probably a wash, but the initial purchase price is kept lower and in the end you at least (usually) get a nice upgrade somewhere along the line.
 
I say this with the caveat that I also have a panel that has nothing but flat panel computer screens in it (not one round instrument anywhere).
panel%252520pic%252520large.JPG

There is something to be said for an instrument that works for decades exactly as it did when it was originally manufactured. Such is the case with traditional round dial altimeters, airpseed indicators, etc. I really do like the capabilities of my computer screens in the cockpit but I do not like to have to continually be upgrading them via updated software and most certainly if it becomes necessary to upgrade the hardware.

Prior to Mark selling Vertical Power, I had a catastrophic failure of my VP50. I shipped the failed instrument to them, they tested it, found it had an unrecoverable failure and shipped me a new replacement VP50 that so far has worked flawlessly. All of this was done AFTER they had stopped manufacturing and selling the VP50. It was great support. In order to maintain these type of computers in such critical functionality in our airplanes we need to have some semblance of expectation that we will not be attempting to fix the problem on our own without knowing details of how the system operates. I am no electrical engineer and doubt I would ever crack open the box and dive into some circuit failure on my own but it would be good to know that someone could do that if needed if they were provided with the appropriate reference materials to fall back upon. If that is not possible then it is most likely I will end up as others have stated, I will revert my electrical system back to CB/Fuses for my power needs.
 
This is a good example of why some companies succeed and others fail -- customer service.

Ausman had it -- although his history was starting and selling companies and there was no reason to believe he wouldn't do the same with VP at some point. Stein certainly has had it, and it's a big, big part of what people should consider when outfitting their RVs.

You have to evaluate the chances of a product being orphaned and come up with a calculus in your decision making that subsequently considers customer service. It HAS to be up there with all the short-term components that we usually consider when making purchasing decisions.

VP-100 was orphaned almost immediately. VP-50 was orphaned somewhat later, and VP-200 (the legacy product of the company) was orphaned some time after that.

We simply had to have known that VP and its subsequent owner were going to reach this point, given the high-churn nature of the company.



Yep, not real happy I've got an obsolete product as my entire (well, 90%) of my electrical system. But it's working well, I've got to throw out the entire instrument panel by 2020 anyway, and there's still a guy down in Farmington< MN. who won't steer me wrong when it comes time to do so.
 
There are ways around obsolescence ... but you need some volume to justify it.

One thing is that there's no rule that says a given electronic product MUST have the exact same hardware. In fact most products of this type that has longevity will have a number of different hardware revisions over time.

So long as you VP-50 works as advertised, whether it has resistor brand X or Y in it matters little to you. The same could be true of the CPU even, depending on how it's built.

But in order for someone to product and maintain and support multiple hardware revisions of a product, you need the sales, or the expectation of sales, to be there.

The justification of "some components simply could not be sourced anymore", while valid, is only part of the explanation ... the other half is "... and we didn't want to modify the hardware to use some new components". that last part is business decision, not a technical one, most of the time. Can be dead simple, or really complicated. Replacing a crystal with another is easy, having to move ARM CPU architectures is another (Both in hardware AND software).

Though in almost all cases, one could product version 2 of the VP-50 that still would do everything V1 did, it may not be worth the effort. That would be a reflection of sales and profit potential, things that are quite limited in the small world of experimental aviation.

I sure would love to see manufacturers open source hardware, and even software, to obsolete products. Great way to provide the opportunity for on-going support, but also to stimulate the sector to innovate, learn and grow. But then I "grew up" in the open source software world :)
 
I sure would love to see manufacturers open source hardware, and even software, to obsolete products. Great way to provide the opportunity for on-going support, but also to stimulate the sector to innovate, learn and grow. But then I "grew up" in the open source software world :)

That would indeed be great, but I don't expect anyone to actually follow through because it's almost begging for a lawsuit (which, no matter how frivolous and no matter whether you win, will bleed you dry).

Edit: that said, I have seen agreements where the source code is kept in escrow and released to the customer(s) if certain specified things like bankruptcy etc. occur.
 
I think the primary concern is that obsolescence, planned or not, is required for continued product development.

Product 2 won't sell nearly as well if Product 1 stays alive longer than you thought it would. "Open" the data for product 1, someone starts manufacturing it, supporting it, and your product 2 doesn't sell as well.
 
In the technology industry we are often on what we call the bleeding edge of technology. This is where new products often are very risky and companies frequently fail. The experimental nature of experimental aircraft means that we are frequently in that area of product development. People have good ideas and good intentions come up with products and bring them to market. In fact it takes an incredible amount of time and effort to field even the simplest of products. These developments often require considerable personal sacrifice. We should all keep this in mind when we have products for whatever reason that go obsolete and keep reasonable expectations. The advantages we have over certified aircraft come at a cost. The cost is the volatility of products. We have comparatively rapid product developments and we have the advantage of technology developments, but all of this does not come for free. When you buy a new type of product you take on the risk of obsolescence no matter what you pay for it. We should all remember that. The alternative is buying certified products which have much longer life cycles. None of us want that.

I've said my 2 cents and I'm sure others will disagree, but I have been involved in the electronics industry for a long time and I probably have a different viewpoint than many of you who spend your hard earned money just like I do on these products.
 
BTW, next year is the 40th anniversary of the ATO fuse ;)

 
Last edited:
BTW, next year is the 40th anniversary of the ATO fuse ;)

I like these a lot! in addition, I use them now in conjunction with the VP50. I have two fuse panels in my plane now that house them. If my VP50 ever does crater, I have plans to just re-route the wiring from the Vertical Power CPU to these fuse blocks and plug in a dozen or so fuses and call it good.
 
I sure would love to see manufacturers open source hardware, and even software, to obsolete products. Great way to provide the opportunity for on-going support, but also to stimulate the sector to innovate, learn and grow. But then I "grew up" in the open source software world :)

I might 've mentioned here (or maybe elsewhere, I don't remember these things anymore) that I ran in to so many people in the Exhibit halls who work for companies that produce things for the experimental market who are really distraught right now.

This is mostly for products aimed at projects being built, not necessarily cool things to have once you've got a flying airplane.

I thought the pipeline was full of projects but I guess it's rather dried up a bit, perhaps outside of RVs.

I don't know how a lot of these companies are going to be able to stick around.

It's really shaking out right now; tough time to be deciding where to soak your millions once you get past Dynon and Garmin, I guess.

If I'm a builder right now I'm thinking having a Plan B and designing panels and electric systems for ultimate flexibility and portability wouldn't be a bad idea at all.
 
I like these a lot! in addition, I use them now in conjunction with the VP50. I have two fuse panels in my plane now that house them. If my VP50 ever does crater, I have plans to just re-route the wiring from the Vertical Power CPU to these fuse blocks and plug in a dozen or so fuses and call it good.

Keep in mind the VP-50 is as much about switches as it is CBs and fuses.

Man it was a happy day when a simple software upgrade gave me wig-wag flexibility. I thought, "wow, think of all the cool things that might be coming down the pipeline that could be added only with a software upgrade."

Great, great product, though. Simple and elegant.
 
Simplicity in VP

One of the simple beauties of the VP product is the concept that a "switch" is more analogous to a 'key' on the keyboard that a conductor of power. Any simple 'switch' in the VP configuration is just sending a signal to the 'black box' to perform some function.

Pins (connected to a wire and a device) send the power through the system, and one can reconfigure a 'switch' to 'control' multiple 'pins' and power the 'devices'. It's an elegant solution that simplifies wiring but it does not antiquate electrical principles. With my VP-100 I still have connectors, wiring, and devices. Nothing prevents me from installing a fuse panel and reconnecting the wiring to new switches and operating the electrical components of the plane. And that alternative has not become obsolete, just old fashioned. It lacks the ability to 'set' a circuit breaker value on the fly, or easily measure the current on each and every device.

Suppose I could find some old round gauges to install and have a 'retro' look.
 
I think the primary concern is that obsolescence, planned or not, is required for continued product development.

Product 2 won't sell nearly as well if Product 1 stays alive longer than you thought it would. "Open" the data for product 1, someone starts manufacturing it, supporting it, and your product 2 doesn't sell as well.

Well, in this case, sorta. The VP-X is not a replacement or upgrade of the VP-200. In fact, I can't use it in my panel, nor will it work for anyone who used it with more conventional avionics, because it requires a few select makes/models of EFIS to be useful. (I mentioned to Chad today that Ballard should make a display unit for the VP-X for those of us who don't have the 'right' EFIS; he said it was an idea that had been kicked around at Ballard.) I suspect that I may have been one of the last, if not the last, purchaser of the VP-200 (through Aerotronics) and there was no hint to them or myself until after the purchase that the product was going away. If there had been, I would have never purchased it, no matter how sexy it was (and it is!). Now I'm stuck - either make it work or do a miserable upgrade. This was not 'product development', it was product abandonment.
 
Last edited:
(I mentioned to Chad today that Ballard should make a display unit for the VP-X for those of us who don't have the 'right' EFIS; he said it was an idea that had been kicked around at Ballard.)

Keep in mind that the protocol for interfacing with the VP-X is publicly available. Nothing really stopping anyone from producing a stand alone interface for the VP-X.
 
Last edited:
Civility Please

Having once worked for Marc, I cannot say I left as his biggest fan. But it is entirely unfair for posters here to impugn his motives or ethics, regardless of their fair frustrations. I did not always agree with Marc's business decisions, but I believe he always made them with the very best interests of all his stakeholders in mind, and especially in the interests of his customers. I would not work for Marc again (nor would he hire me), but I would gladly be a customer of any of his future endeavors.

As for our own project, when we get to the panel, I will eagerly purchase a VP-X to power it up, and having seen its engineering in depth, I have much more faith in it (and its much larger installed base) than I do in the legacy products (which were still good, just not as good as the current offerings).

--
Stephen

p.s. I understand and support people expressing their justified frustrations in this thread, but I'm surprised the moderators are permitting personal attacks to survive on what is normally the most civilized forums on the Internet.
 
Last edited:
p.s. I understand and support people expressing their justified frustrations in this thread, but I'm surprised the moderators are permitting personal attacks to survive on what is normally the most civilized forums on the Internet.

Fair enough; I edited my post to remove the direct comments about Mark. I can't do anything about the posts that quoted me, though. Hopefully those posters will also edit their posts.
 
as early adopters of the VP-200, we consciously took that risk... nobody knew for how long/in what form the company or the product would be around...

thanks to Chad/Ballard for being upfront about it. it's better if everyone knows where we stand. that being said, i would also extremely encourage that documentation regarding hardware and software could be released. at least to the existing customer base, so that some form of self-servicing could emerge.

the VP-200 itself is just an extremely attractive and sexy product, and contains a really cutting-edge concept with the flight-phase-dependent automatic mode switching. that part was maybe even a bit ahead of its time. and the market likely was mainly embracing the easier/integrated wiring/getting rid of the individual circuit breakers. that's where the VP-X went...
By the way, no significant issues with the VP-200 to report ever. Other than maybe having to do second boots a few times when booting from freezing cold in winter.
It hasn't let us down in the 300hrs, and most importantly, no issues ever in flight.

judging by the market only now adopting / garmin producing flight control units/mode control panels (we developed our own 7+ years ago and have been flying it for 5 years to control the AFS 3400s EFIS), we were ahead of the market also in this regard.
so the automated electric mode switching will eventually reemerge in some form, that i'm sure. and the vp-x also could be the right foundation for it, except maybe for the lack of bistable switching. (resetting states at reboot/recycle).
the rest is purely a display/software/logic problem and interfacing through the documented VP-X interface.

regards,
bernie
 
I have not finished my build yet but I do have a VP-200. Will the latest software update be available so that I can make sure I have updated it to the most current level?

I plan on "building on" with my current plan including the VP-200, and then try and figure out what to replace it with after that. If I change now, I may never get my build done!

pdj
 
Pointing out that people who specialize in start-ups to pursue an idea often sell companies and start new companies isn't a personal attack. It's the nature of entrepreneurs. It's neither a positive, nor a negative. It's just something that must be part of the calculus in weighing all aspects of any purchase decision.

I'm not sure what the references are to Marc from a former employee and I don't care that much. I always found him delightful and in my first interview with him -- I'm pretty sure I was the first writer to profile Vertical Power and the VP-200 -- I asked him about his plans for the company and the concern that he would sell it eventually.

To my knowledge he didn't have a problem with the question and answered it forthrightly as a matter of course.

I got FANTASTIC service from the original entrepreneurs at VP and consider it a great experience. The load planning spreadsheet was outstanding and, holy smokes, their documentation was far, far superior to anything I've ever seen on any product ever.

At my age, I'm pretty sure I'm going to break down before the VP-50 does.
 
Last edited:
I have not finished my build yet but I do have a VP-200. Will the latest software update be available so that I can make sure I have updated it to the most current level?

I plan on "building on" with my current plan including the VP-200, and then try and figure out what to replace it with after that. If I change now, I may never get my build done!

pdj

Current software revisions are still available on the VP website here-

VP-50/100/200 Software
 
I am not sure I agree with Stephen's remark about Marc truly having the customers interest in mind. Marc was selling his VP400 (Lancair Evolution) right to the end, then VP sells and the product is quickly unsupported. The caused considerable expense and delays redoing the panel! I am not naive enough to believe that everyone involved did not have previous knowledge that this was the course, and surely no calls to the customer.

I did not use VP for my next panel, thankfully cemented by VP's latest statement!
 
Current version available but ..

Current software revisions are still available on the VP website here-

VP-50/100/200 Software

Yes Chad, the 'current version' is still available for the most recent UPDATE to the VP-100. However, the technology trap is waiting. It can only be installed on a previous version. The trap is what could happen if the unit needs to be reloaded from scratch as when a corruption occurs to the OS? Many products have 'full installs' and 'upgrades' available. Without the full install version a future effort at self support will be the end of an otherwise functioning/recoverable conditional.

And as a previous person noted, the VP-X is not simply the latest version in a series of enhanced models, it is a new version which departed from the 50/100/200 paradigm. Those models all 'stood alone' with display, control, and switches from which the aircraft electrical system was independently operated. The VP-X concept integrated display into a limited number of EFIS brands/models and reverted to user defined and installed switches. So the VP-X was not attractive to those already involved with 50/100/200 installations. They weren't stupid, short-sighted, or unaware of potential new versions but were happy to have the stand-alone solution. They made a judgment call based on a logical path that stand-alone VP units would continue to be marketed.

I personally was happy to see Astronics acquire VP, because it meant a larger commitment to the electronic control systems. NOT ONCE did I ever see reference to VP-X being the ONLY product-line acquired. That would have been a clear warning to alter my continued installation of the VP-100, or seek options. So ... we'll see what the future holds.
 
I find it strange that a company like Astronics Ballard Technology is being portrayed as the bad guy in this whole mess. Folks, they did not purchase the rights to those product lines......the fact that they ever supported them at all is most likely their only mistake in all of this.

I seriously think all this negative energy is being focused in the wrong place!

Here are a few hints on how to contact the right person regarding the products in question:

https://www.facebook.com/marc.ausman/about

https://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=2175803&authType=NAME_SEARCH&authToken=b3EM&locale=en_US&trk=tyah&trkInfo=clickedVertical%3Amynetwork%2CclickedEntityId%3A2175803%2CauthType%3ANAME_SEARCH%2Cidx%3A1-1-1%2CtarId%3A1438727665224%2Ctas%3AMarc%20Ausman

https://www.eaa.org/eaa/person/marc-ausman?id=9BDD29EF0DC249A0882C7B3DD1F63849

http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showthread.php?t=16224&highlight=marc+ausman

http://www.vansairforce.com/community/member.php?u=1587

http://www.aircraftwiringguide.com/

PS: This post is not intended to reflect negatively on Marc. It is my opinion based on what I know about this mess is that he is the only one that can properly respond to the issue some are having with this announcement....
 
Last edited:
I find it strange that a company like Astronics Ballard Technology is being portrayed as the bad guy in this whole mess. Folks, they did not purchase the rights to those product lines......the fact that they ever supported them at all is most likely their only mistake in all of this.

Huh. I'm not seeing anyone portrayed as a bad guy. It is what it is.
 
Legacy VP-X?

Chad,

For those of us (I have no idea how many there are) who have the original/legacy VP-X (not the Pro or Sport), do we face the same parts obsolescence issues? Is this unit fully supported by Astronics?

Knock on wood, my VP-X has performed flawlessly for 3+ years & 250+ hours.
 
Last edited:
Status Update - ??

Chad,

For those of us (I have no idea how many there are) who have the original/legacy VP-X (not the Pro or Sport), do we face the same parts obsolescence issues? Is this unit fully supported by Astronics?

Knock on wood, my VP-X has performed flawlessly for 3+ years & 250+ hours.

Seems like a good place and time to add my question - What is the latest update (Chad?) on any other potential discounts on VP-X replacements for those who are faced with the dreaded obsolescence? You originally said to give you a few days to get caught up on the situation in the aftermath of the decision announced. Well, it's now been a few days, and the 2Q2015 Financials have gone to the big presentation, etc. Maybe you have some news?
 
As discussed in email...standard would be 10% off of a Pro with a trade in. However, since each system is a little different (duo, CCS, new-never installed, etc...), we will look at each potential trade in on a case by case basis to determine how each would be handled.
 
And VP-X Sport?

As discussed in email...standard would be 10% off of a Pro with a trade in. However, since each system is a little different (duo, CCS, new-never installed, etc...), we will look at each potential trade in on a case by case basis to determine how each would be handled.

You refer to the PRO only, but that's a more expensive system to start. Is this an indication that the Sport is potentially another member of the Legacy family? What difference does it make to Ballard/Astronics if the Sport is a good fit to the mission of the builder?

You're also requiring the return of the legacy unit (VP-50/100/200), evaluating that on a "case by case basis"? So for a approx. $200 I would turn in the unit (VP-100 in my case, $2,000 new) which has never been flown, and barely turned on for testing, and then spend another $1,800-2,000 to replace it? :eek:

My suggestion is that an owner of a legacy product (which is NOT flying) should sell their legacy to someone who is already flying and may need/want the spare to avoid more complex and expensive further conversion and downtime. Financially this is a no-brainer but it does not provide Ballard/Astronics with any more spare parts to support the majority of legacy owners left orphaned in the process. ;):confused:

In addition it seems that a little more leeway and generosity on the part of such a massive player in the industry would have been within reach. To say the least, I'm personally disappointed by this offer.
 
Pro or Sport, doesn't matter...we make the assumption that the Pro would offer more for legacy replacement.

Financially, you would be better suited to offer it for sale, no question about that.
 
Cost of replacement matters.

Pro or Sport, doesn't matter...we make the assumption that the Pro would offer more for legacy replacement.

Financially, you would be better suited to offer it for sale, no question about that.

The Pro might offer 'more' - that's why various models exist. But one size is not the same as one price. $2,000 vs $1,300 when faced with an unplanned expense is worthy of consideration. For ME, the Sport is adequate (Day VFR mission, LED's and Dynon full-house), but I can see why the Pro will be required for others. Thanks for clarifying the option on your offer.

Is the discount still 10% if selling privately, as opposed to 'turn-in your legacy'? Just to be clear.:rolleyes:

Lastly, having checked several of the VP-X vendors this morning the Sport is not IN STOCK and indications of at least mid-August before available? Can you comment on the apparent across the board product supply delay?

gary
 
Is the discount still 10% if selling privately, as opposed to 'turn-in your legacy'? Just to be clear.:rolleyes:

Lastly, having checked several of the VP-X vendors this morning the Sport is not IN STOCK and indications of at least mid-August before available? Can you comment on the apparent across the board product supply delay?

gary

If you sell privately, the discount won't apply...never heard of any manufacturer offering that kind of deal. :rolleyes:

Spruce always has them, they are a stocking distributor and as such they must always have them in stock and available to ship. There is no delay in production from Ballard.
 
Spruce TODAY - No Stock

If you sell privately, the discount won't apply...never heard of any manufacturer offering that kind of deal. :rolleyes:

Spruce always has them, they are a stocking distributor and as such they must always have them in stock and available to ship. There is no delay in production from Ballard.

VP-X Sport
"No Stock (Expected Mon Aug 17 2015)"

But I called them and confirmed, in case their webmaster made a mistake. Maybe you should double check your facts before using the term "ALWAYS". ;)

Based on the requirement to both surrender my obsolete VP-100 and a mere 10% discount on a VP-X Sport, I've followed your sage advice and arranged to sell my unit for considerably better terms to someone who will be able to now self-support his completed and flying plane. :cool:

It will be replaced when the timing is right.
Thanks
 
Last edited:
whoo hoo...

Whoo hoo, 10% with a trade in... Pass.

I really like my VP-50 and would not replace it unless it was dead... even then, this 'offer' sounds like more hassle than just ordering a new unit from ACS (if they actually had them).

Too bad there is no support for these fine products.
 
There are examples of ...

Whoo hoo, 10% with a trade in... Pass.

I really like my VP-50 and would not replace it unless it was dead... even then, this 'offer' sounds like more hassle than just ordering a new unit from ACS (if they actually had them).

Too bad there is no support for these fine products.

Praise for Dynon and their support policies - a great contrast to this orphanage plan. Check that out and see if BT's approach delivers the same level of confidence.

Prayers for the flying VP-50/100/200 users who may someday need spares and go through the conversion THEN. They have a great product now and the loyalty to those units is well earned. :)
 
Back
Top