delete

[bigrenna]

delete

[bagarre]

I don't think I've ever seen a hand held device mounted in a plane that complies with this.

[GAHorn]

I don't think I've ever seen a hand held device mounted in a plane that complies with this.

I think most of the ones I've seen comply with it.

[bagarre]

These were the points that jumped out at me:

The mounting device installation and attached PED must be placarded appropriately for its intended function and limitations. (Example “Not approved For Primary Navigation.”)

I've never seen any placarded PEDs.

The mount in small airplanes may be installed in the Primary Maximum Field of View (as defined in AC 23.1311-1B) but must not be installed in the Primary Field of View and must not be the primary point of focus.

Granted, with as low as our panels are compared to 'modern' planes, I dont think our panels are even in the Primary Field of View

The installed mounting device (or other securing mechanism) that attaches or allows mounting of the PED system must not be positioned in a way that obstructs visual or physical access to aircraft controls, displays, flight crew ingress or egress, or external vision.

Most are smack in the middle of the panel blocking the oil pressure or are above the panel slightly obstructing external vision. Sure, some would argue that it doesn't obstruct enough external vision but I don't see an allowable percentage of external vision that's permitted to be obstructed. So, if it's above the panel it's obstructing vision and if it's on the panel it's obstructing displays or it's in the Primary Field of View.

The installed mount and any required electrical wiring must be composed of acceptable materials.

Do PED's come with burn tests? Are the electrical wires tefzel or other approved materials?

But that's just one person's interpretation.

[canav8]

Here is what it looks like.

IMG_0295 (800x600).jpg

[bagarre]

That is officially the first PED I've seen that complies

[GAHorn]

Yeah, but those upside-down yokes obstruct the view of the oil pressure and airspeed indicators.

More seriously.... is an external view obstructed if one can move ones head only slightly to see around it?
I suggest not.
Does an opening screen which requires acknowlegement that a unit is not to be used for primary navigtion (such as many handheld GPS units display) meet the requirement?
Since it requires acknowlegement before proceeding to display navigation data, I believe it meets the rule.

The wiring is likely an unknown, but there is no requirement for laptops (IPADs) which are used in the cockpit to meet that rule either.

[canav8]

Yeah, but those upside-down yokes obstruct the view of the oil pressure and airspeed indicators.
Yes but they dont interfer when you land in a heavy Mojave Crosswind
More seriously.... is an external view obstructed if one can move ones head only slightly to see around it?
I suggest not.
Does an opening screen which requires acknowlegement that a unit is not to be used for primary navigtion (such as many handheld GPS units display) meet the requirement?
Since it requires acknowlegement before proceeding to display navigation data, I believe it meets the rule.
The Answer may change but the MTX POI said it had to be installed for the approval, power on or power off so "No George!"

The wiring is likely an unknown, but there is no requirement for laptops (IPADs) which are used in the cockpit to meet that rule either.

The wiring,breaker, should follow 43.13 since it is a new installation.
D

[bagarre]

The wiring is likely an unknown, but there is no requirement for laptops (IPADs) which are used in the cockpit to meet that rule either.

Technically, an iPad is a PED. So, if you mounted it to the aircraft it would need to follow this AC as well.

[GAHorn]

I agree with you, technically, all PEDs hardwired are req'd to follow the rule (but they'll be very busy catching all the violators.)
Rhetorical question: Is an incorrectly-performed minor alteration a minor violation?