Hello everyone and welcome to another episode of the Genesis podcast. Brought to you by Genesis Aero Systems. I'm your host Daniel Littwin, the voice of b to b, and if you're watching this episode or you're listening along, Guess what? You just jumped into part three of four of a larger conversation with the Genesis Aero Systems team on IMA and Moza. And their differences and where they are complimenting the modern avionics suite of today. So if you missed out on parts one and two, well, you may wanna take a pause and go check those out before you continue with our conversation here. However, if you are fully caught up, then welcome, welcome back, and we are happy to have you here for the rest of our conversation. So without further ado, let's get back to the meat of the episode with the Genesis Aero Systems team again on IMA Moza, their differences, and how they're complimenting the modern avionic suites of today. Well, I imagine another benefit of going with IMA devices and a Moosa foundation is, you know, especially in this industry four point o age and in the age where, you know, improvements on technologies and technology standards happen more and more frequently. I imagine a lot of these devices if they're outside of an IMA orosa context are having to be replaced often, or things can become obsolete rather quickly. So I'm curious if them being integrated in modular avionics and also having that sort of interoperable foundation helps avoid some of those obsolescence issues? Scott and me and Scott, sir? I would say it doesn't necessarily avoid the obsolescence, but it allows more flexibility in addressing the obsolescence. Okay. So you can add systems, change out systems, add new more capability. Because this the interfaces are standard, you can plug one in a lot more easily. Gotcha. And what are maybe some of those newer cutting edge devices that are being plugged in and because of the IMA foundation and the Moosa foundation, you know, lets them, I guess, get to work a little faster. What have you guys worked with? But Tom passed. Yeah. Something like a digital autopilot. Yeah. Now it can exist as a card or a lot of it can actually just exist as software. Same with the radio. Genesis has a line of software defined radios where the function of the radio, the power, the frequencies, is all defined simply by software, where in the olden days, required completely different set of resistors and tubes and capacitors to to go from one frequency to another. Right. Yeah. So I kind of just mentioned this in my last question, but I want to get y'all's higher level or, I guess, bigger picture thoughts on IMA and Moza's place in what I see as a larger trend. Know myself. I'm going to various trade shows. I'm having various conversations on the sort of next era of digitization of systems. I was just at a security and surveillance trade show, ISC West, and there they were speaking almost primarily on the importance of interoperability on open systems and on each device or solution, playing, you know, a very specific but sort of, you know, intentionally collaborative role in a larger ecosystem. Right? So I'm curious how y'all see IMA and MoSA reflecting that larger trend or fitting into that larger trend of lots of systems becoming more standards based and also embracing open architectures. So it's it's a it's a a great question. There's an element of MoSA within aviation as it's being implemented by some of the DOD entities that actually came out of the DOD ground vehicle space. Interesting. They created a data bus, the victory data bus for on for ground vehicles for moving data around from cruise station to cruise station. And that became, I wouldn't say, the foundation of some of the the the thoughts of how DOD is looking at implementing Moses. Mhmm. But it certainly informed that implementation of Moses. So now there's even some some thinking and talking amongst leadership within DOD about could there be commonality not only across aircraft but across systems that were typically ground space or aircraft based systems. Can we begin to take this to a Mosa You know, maybe it's most of one point one now. How do we get at the three point o in ten or fifteen years, where we're able to now get some economies of scale across a much broader set of applications within the Department of Defense. Yeah. And I could see that clearly transitioning the commercial spaces as well. It just seems to be a natural fit as as as digitization continues to accelerate. Yeah. Sure. Any other thoughts on that one? Security is is a another key attribute. And and the more you partition some of these capabilities, the easier it is to test that security within that one module -- Right. -- one feature. When you're adding to a core that's already been tested and proven as secure, the the Eric says fifty three. Yeah. For example, then you can add on to that these and they again, they can be test it separately. Right. And, you know, as a new feature comes along, you test it independently before you bring it into the overall system and then retest it to make sure. But should go a lot more smoothly that way from a security perspective. Gotcha. Yeah. That makes sense. And, you know, obviously, y'all's x pertise in the avionics world. So I don't necessarily expect y'all to, you know, have a deep overview of a bunch of other different open architecture systems or ecosystems But I'm curious if you see integrated modular avionics devices or the Moosa foundation approaching that open architecture ecosystem differently or in a way that's more innovative compared to some of the other ways that we're seeing this industry four point o era embrace open systems and open architecture. I'd say though that aviation is heading down a a a special path. I mean, IMA is -- Sure. Really focused on the aviation. Most of it could apply to anything. But, yeah, it probably it's hard to do that kinda comparison. Sure. I think it used to be, say, thirty years ago or so, the aircraft manufacturers and the DOD, when they would procure a new aircraft, they would they would use primarily one avionic supplier. Sure. Because it's easier if if a company makes all the parts that you need on the airplane, because then you can use proprietary interfaces. You can optimize for this box communicating with this box and this box in that box. And one point of contact, you know? Like, it's -- Yes. One point of contact. But as as as aviation became more sophisticated, systems became more sophisticated, new requirements evolved for for safety. I got to the point where where the aircraft manufacturers couldn't really go -- couldn't really go to one avionics manufacturer because there were so many people working on the aircraft that they needed to come from different places and happen in parallel. And that's kind of where they finally said, okay, if we If we have standard interfaces, this company can do all the primary flight instruments and can do the auto flight system. This company can do the engine management. That company can do all the communications equipment. And at the end of the day, if we've all done our interfaces correctly, and follow the standards everything should work seamlessly. And it allows a much more rapid development cycle. And also, if one of those one of those original companies that worked on it twenty, thirty, forty years ago is no longer around and that product isn't available or has become obsolete, they can plug in a replacement without having to touch everything in the system again. You know, you bring up an interesting point, and I wonder if you all would agree or disagree with me on this point. But, you know, it seems like in the aviation space, The evolution looks a little different because compared to maybe, let's say, you know, industrial manufacturing, that equipment didn't enter you know, the space or become a standard with interoperability or sort of speaking from one device to the next to the next, as a core foundation for why these, you know, pieces of equipment had to be integrated into the process in the first place. When we're talking about an aircraft, an avionics, that sort of communication between devices was already an essential component of, you know, developing an aircraft and its systems. So if anything, there's maybe already a stronger foundation for understanding the importance of, you know, one device communicating to another and that sort of gelled ecosystem. But now it's just fully embracing that and leaning on improvements to technologies that come with this industry four point o digitization era and using that to improve that sort of that already existing foundation, which all agree, disagree, or I I I think you're onto something there, and I think something that's unique about aerospace is there's a safety criticality that that is only in today's world, are you able to start to go for these multi sources that you're talking about. You can have the engine management from one company and the flight instrumentation from another company. Because of the safety criticality, of aerospace in general, the I don't know the thirty years ago, we were there where you could have gone to different companies and had pieces talk to each other and still had a safe environment. And not saying that other air industries don't have safety as paramount, Sure. But within aerospace, safety criticality is is something that it seems to have been a driver for a long time. And perhaps an impediment to the speed of adoption of an open systems approach that now we're mature enough in our technologies to start benefiting. We've got a little bit left on this conversation, but we're gonna hold out just a little longer and call it right there for part three of four of this conversation. So thank you again for tuning in with the Genesis Aero Systems team. We have more to come here shortly. Make sure that you're subscribing on Apple Podcasts and Spotify for part four of four and make sure you're heading to our website, genesis dash aero systems dot com. Again, that's genesis dash aero systems dot com. For previous parts of the episode and for other episodes of the podcast, but also for more information on Genesis, our solutions, our services, and how we are complimenting the modern suite of avionics systems. That are defining aviation today. So thank you again for joining us. Again, I'm your host Daniel Littwin, the voice of b to b, and we'll catch you on the next episode of the Genesis podcast.
