![]() |
An uneasy avionics feeling...
Like other builders, I have avionics from several vendors in my -14A. My choices stemmed from cost, size, familiarity, capability, prior experience and other issues that everyone faces.
To date in the 325 hours on the airplane everything has worked together well. But a recent experience has led me to some concern about this mix and match setup. The trigger for it was the new software for Garmin?s GTN 650 (adding VNAV and along track offset) that is not seen by either my Dynon Skyview displays or the Dynon autopilot. Something needs to be done to make the two talk to each other. I am wondering what and by whom. My question does not deal specifically with either Dynon or Garmin or with any other manufacturer. I mention them here only because they are the two players involved. I am wondering in general what degree of cooperation is required when a box manufactured by one company interfaces with a different box manufactured by another when a software upgrade is made by either of them. Asked more directly: 1. In today?s software world, does Garmin have to actually give coding or other specific information to Dynon to make the interface work? 2. Or, is all necessary information automatically contained in the Garmin ARINC data that can be picked off and used by Dynon to implement the interface? 3. In the worst case, what if a manufacturer decides its upgrade is proprietary and thus only available to owners of its other boxes? Does this not penalize a customer who owns one box from them which interfaces with other boxes from other manufacturers? You can substitute any company names you wish because this is a general question that is likely to occur in the future as more capability is added to different avionics. My post is a shot in the dark to see if anyone familiar with this can address it. Is the concern legitimate? |
I can't answer your questions, but I am getting the same uneasy feeling while currently shopping for avionics. Specifically, it appears that Dynon and Garmin both require their own brand of ADS-B "In" receivers. It appears that other vendors (GRT and MGL) allow a EchoUAT to provide "In" (traffic and weather) to display on the EFIS.
I understand why a vendor would want control of ADS-B "Out" components... but why "In"? And why can't a Skyview send airport codes to a Garmin GTR200 Com radio? |
This is why ARINC came into being. To standardize avionics and interfaces.
(Airlines drove it) If a manufacturer uses proprietary interfaces and protocols, it is usually to keep out competition. Draw your own conclusions. |
Quote:
2. No. For example, a Garmin TSO’d GPS can output the data needed for ADSB out. But that data is via a proprietary code. 3. Yes. Garmin has in the past changed its proprietary codes, causing heartburn for other small companies and owners of devices that had reverse engineered the code. Sometimes this has been done without explicit warning. Of course, you are not obligated to update software. Companies in capitalist economies are supposed to maximize their profits. Some companies (GRT, for example) think they will do best if they work with as many other boxes as possible. Others(Garmin) think they will maximize profits if they force their buyers to go all-Garmin. Some (Dynon) seem to be in-between. |
This situation reminds me of the olden days of computers when each software program had to have a printer driver for your specific printer. Am I dating myself?
|
ARINC is an a industry standard format. The protocol and label definitions are available.
|
Question here also?
On this subject, is that not what the ARNIC box is intended for in the Garmin line of add-ons?
Yours, R.E.A. III # 80888 |
Quote:
ARINC is built into the GTN/GNS IFR Navigators. |
Yes, but, to answer the OPs original question: Not all information is available via ARINC. e.g., data needed for adsb-out is not in the ARINC data stream. It is in an RS232 data stream, but in a proprietary format. The data stream that lets two 430?s share flight plans is proprietary. etc.
|
ARINC is many things, not just the 429 labels and physical interface.
GAMA Also has a standard set of 429 labels published. ARINC Establishes characteristics for many things in order to enable interchangeability. https://www.aviation-ia.com/product-categories/arinc https://www.aviation-ia.com/product-...ies/700-series |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:04 AM. |