Gig 601XL Builder wrote:
Somebody in the group was asking about Chelton the other day. This story ran
recently on AvWeb.

Direct-To Avionics has reportedly ceased operations as of late last month,
leaving potentially dozens of kitbuilders without equipment or immediate
support for experimental versions of the Chelton EFIS. Chelton sold
experimental versions of its EFIS systems to dealers exclusively through
Direct-To. While some builders claim to have paid for components that have
not been delivered, Chelton's official release said, "Chelton has received
various inquiries from persons who have alleged that they were told by D2A
[Direct-To Avionics] that parts for which they claimed to have paid D2A were
'back ordered.' Chelton currently has no purchase orders from D2A and there
are no 'back orders' to be filled. Chelton has also suspended taking any
further purchase orders from D2A and has suspended D2A's status as an
authorized distributor." Requests for comments by Direct-To principals were
not returned over the New Year's weekend.
One avionics shop owner told us that the situation as "a mess," but
cautioned that builders should contact the avionics shop where the package
was purchased immediately. An announcement from Chelton on making existing
customers "whole" was expected after the first of the year. Chelton also
announced that it would continue development of the experimental EFIS. In
addition, Crossbow Technology, which produced the air-data/heading reference
system for the Chelton experimental EFIS in 2004 and 2005, announced an
extension to a free upgrade to users with the NAV425EX-200 unit. Originally
intended to lapse at the end of the year, the Crossbow offer has been
extended to June 29, 2007. Direct-To claimed in early 2006 that there were
problems with the Crossbow device and elected to install a newly produced
Pinpoint inertial reference module.

And Chelton is willing to make good to buyers for a price. "Hey,
you're in luck. The second time you pay for what you already have paid
for, you get a discount!"

The excuse that D2A was an independent entity and therefore Chelton
isn't responsible is dubious since D2A shared booth space at Oshkosh
with Chelton and was therefor represented to the public as being part
of the Chelton family.

Further, Mr. Hammersmith was supporting Chelton in-as-much as he
testified on Chelton's behalf in the Nate Calvin vs. Chelton breach of
contract lawsuit.
http://www.aero-news.net/news/genav.cfm?ContentBlockID=39832E54-95F9-4CEC-A8E8-099E0450E72D&Dynamic=1

Ask Chelton Flight Systems management sometime about all the turnover
they have had in employees... Three engineers, two marketing people, a
partner, and a couple other positions (not counting those that died in
a plane crash) since 2002. For a small company, this is a pretty
significant turnover rate.

This company has had a lot of problems in recent years, most of which I
attribute to poor management decision making and a negative internal
work environment (personal experience).

Its a shame that they have taken the low road on so many things when
they could have done a better job and made better decisions. Yes, this
is a tough business, but winning in this market comes from building
confidence in your customers and getting all your employees onboard and
working toward a common goal with enthusiasm and passion. Instead they
have left trust and ethics lying on the office floor too many times in
the name of dollars and ego.

My two cents.

Dean