What's new
Van's Air Force

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

Full fadec

N360DF

Member
Folks,

What options is it in the marked actually ?

- FlyEfII
- SDS outdated tech.

Is it any new on the marked ?

Best regards
 
Folks,

What options is it in the marked actually ?

- FlyEfII
- SDS outdated tech.

Is it any new on the marked ?

Best regards

What parts or features of the EM-5 do you think were outdated? Perhaps we've addressed your concerns on the EM-6.
 
What parts or features of the EM-5 do you think were outdated? Perhaps we've addressed your concerns on the EM-6.

Ross, any details released yet on EM-6? I’m still about a year from purchasing but I may be making the decision don system sooner than that. Anxiously awaiting the details. I agree that “outdated” is a grossly unfair characterization of SDS.

Looking forward to learning more about what SDS has in store for product improvements with EM-6!

Best,

Patrick
 
Ross, any details released yet on EM-6? I’m still about a year from purchasing but I may be making the decision don system sooner than that. Anxiously awaiting the details. I agree that “outdated” is a grossly unfair characterization of SDS.

Looking forward to learning more about what SDS has in store for product improvements with EM-6!

Best,

Patrick

The main new features are as follows:

Data logging to an SD card now in addition to the original Windows laptop/ tablet. Will use an updated version of SDSDash to view and manipulate data.

Users will be able to reflash the CPUs themselves to update software in future which will speed things up and eliminate the shipping hassle.

Capability for a switch to retard timing when using different fuels- ie Mogas vs. Avgas.

User programmable automatic closed loop mixture control running off a wideband O2 sensor. This is intended mainly for unleaded Avgas and Mogas use.

O2 sensor power relay/ delay/ diagnostic features.

Several new self diagnostic/ test features.

Upgraded software to negate sensor failures.

5th Gauge mode.

PWM output capability.

Future CAN BUS capability. Hardware on board and pin connections done.

Some other minor features and behind the scenes stuff that user feedback suggested.

Production EM-6 boards are in process now.
 

Attachments

  • EM611.jpg
    EM611.jpg
    26.7 KB · Views: 770
What parts or features of the EM-5 do you think were outdated? Perhaps we've addressed your concerns on the EM-6.


Before I was able to reply you had addressed the updates.

I can confirm you have covered most likely two or more of my concerns.
The user update, flashing. And since this is possible i assume you added
newer chip-set ? My third is the display.

I happy to see you update you product and after this is done I have no
reason to say its outdated. (Maybe still outdated display look)
But I suspect this is coming to ?

I am happy you did this information :)
 
(Maybe still outdated display look)

Go to http://www.sdsefi.com/aircraft.html & scroll down to the section "New Design1 Programmers" for a picture of the current SDS display. I don't think it's outdated at all.

Quoting that page:

As of late 2019, we are supplying the new Design1 programmers as standard on all EM-5 aviation kits to replace the original 3 1/8 round programmers. Designed to fit above the center stack and integrate better with modern glass panels, these measure 6.25 inches wide and 1.47 inches high. LOP and programmer select functions are now integrated on the keypad as well and the fault warning LED. All EM-5 ECUs can drive these new programmers with a V30 software re-flash to the ECU(s).
 
Before I was able to reply you had addressed the updates.

I can confirm you have covered most likely two or more of my concerns.
The user update, flashing. And since this is possible i assume you added
newer chip-set ? My third is the display.

I happy to see you update you product and after this is done I have no
reason to say its outdated. (Maybe still outdated display look)
But I suspect this is coming to ?

I am happy you did this information :)

The EM-6 uses a different CPU chip. Availability concerns were the main drivers here though. ECUs like this don't need huge processing power. Some others like that marketing hype though...

The programmer was updated in 2019 based on user feedback who predominantly said they wanted a small unit taking up less panel space and they didn't want a round package for their glass panels.

This was actually the first EM-6 part developed. While we looked at graphical touch displays, there were no commonly available ones in this size available at that time. Not a lot of time is spent using the programmer once programming is completed so a simple alpha numeric display with tactile buttons seemed like the best choice here given the small size.

We've had good response to the design and sold many upgrade programmers for older EM-5s.
 
I've had the new rectangular programmer in my airplane since the original SDS install back in January of 2020, love it. It was a pretty new product when I got mine.
 
Folks,

What options is it in the marked actually ?

- FlyEfII
- SDS outdated tech.

Is it any new on the marked ?

Best regards
I wouldn't consider SDS outdated tech. I spent a lot of time digging into the FlyEfII system and the SDS system including hands on experience with the FlyEfII equipment. I feel much more comfortable with the SDS system even if the programmer isn't as flashy. Shoot me a message if you are interested in the details!
 
Interesting

I would be interested in knowing what "makes you more comfortable" about the SDS system.

Here we go again!:D
 
I would be interested in knowing what "makes you more comfortable" about the SDS system.

Here we go again!:D

Yep, but since you asked Bob -

1. Many more years of EFI experience. As you know, SDS was the OEM for FlyEFII's ECU's for many years. If I'm not mistaken, the System32 ECU is FlyEFII's first? SDS has done at least 5? now.

2. Two independent coil packs, one for upper plugs and one for lower. One power source and one ECU to each coil. No need for switches or diodes for redundancy. Don't know how you could do that with FlyEFII's 3 coil packs.

3. If you have a dual bus electrical system like I do - fuel injector power from both busses or all on one (6 cylinder) with an easy switch flip.

4. In my opinion, SDS's hardware (CNC and anodized components) is superior to what Fly EFII offers.

Ross and Barry have gone above and beyond for me and I'm very happy with my choice.

Nomex flight suit on...
 
Last edited:
Back to the OP's post

I always thought single lever control was part and parcel of full FADEC.

If that's the case, then Lycoming iE2, Austro/Thielert/CMI diesels and possibly the newer Rotax engines would qualify (although I think the Rotax has a switch for changing flight modes).

I don't think SDS or FlyEFII really meet the definition.
 
Yep, but since you asked Bob -

1. Many more years of EFI experience. As you know, SDS was the OEM for FlyEFII's ECU's for many years. If I'm not mistaken, the System32 ECU is FlyEFII's first? SDS has done at least 5? now.

2. Two independent coil packs, one for upper plugs and one for lower. One power source and one ECU to each coil. No need for switches or diodes for redundancy. Don't know how you could do that with FlyEFII's 3 coil packs.

3. If you have a dual bus electrical system like I do - fuel injector power from both busses or all on one (6 cylinder) with an easy switch flip.

4. In my opinion, SDS's hardware (CNC and anodized components) is superior to what Fly EFII offers.

Ross and Barry have gone above and beyond for me and I'm very happy with my choice.

Nomex flight suit on...

No flame, just curious. Truly sad that the hardware is so nice and the controller is god awful ugly, though.

Yes, not sure of the reasons for three coil packs when two would have worked.

I use diodes to provide uninterrupted power from two independent sources to one bus, and yes I have a dual bus system. No switches needed.

I have had no issues with EFII as well, and am also very happy with the system.
 
You consider this ugly? This is a beautiful piece of equipment and it works great. Looking forward to the EM-6 upgrade.
 

Attachments

  • design15xsmall.jpg
    design15xsmall.jpg
    56.6 KB · Views: 82
- FlyEfII
- SDS outdated tech.

Neither is "Full FADEC". And it might be best to consider just how much "tech" is necessary to do a job. Both are simple speed-density injection systems. No supercomputer needed.
 
The Lycoming IE2 is a full FADEC system (including prop control), fully certified and only available as part of a complete engine package at the cost of around $100K. https://www.lycoming.com/engines/ie2

It's impressively sophisticated, capable, complicated and expensive.

I had the pleasure of talking to some of the engineers who developed it. A most interesting story.

It's not applicable to your standard 360/ 540 engine so most folks here will never have one on their RV.

We can do a lot of the same things for less money, minus the prop control.

To answer the OP's question, as far as I'm aware, there is no available true FADEC for std Lycoming engines on the market. Years ago there was the Precision Airmotive Eagle EMS. Still a few being used but no longer made or supported.

TCM/ Aerosance had a go on the certified market many years ago and that went almost nowhere and isn't available for Experimentals as far as I'm aware.

Lycoming is missing out here IMO. Look at what Rotax has done on the iS engines. Would be a useful market there if our sales are any indication. Lots of folks want modern engine controls to go with their modern panels. This is 2023 after all and Rotax at least has seen the light. Lycoming certainly has the expertise and money to do it.
 
Last edited:
You consider this ugly? This is a beautiful piece of equipment and it works great. Looking forward to the EM-6 upgrade.

Yes, though ugly may be a bit strong. How about unappealing?

Both systems work great; it is sad that there is so much bad blood between the vendors. Unfortunately, that bad blood carries over to the customers and ends up being divisive in a generally tight knit community. JMO.
 
The Lycoming IE2 is a full FADEC system (including prop control), fully certified and only available as part of a complete engine package at the cost of around $100K. https://www.lycoming.com/engines/ie2

It's impressively sophisticated, capable, complicated and expensive.

I had the pleasure of talking to some of the engineers who developed it. A most interesting story.

It's not applicable to your standard 360/ 540 engine so most folks here will never have one on their RV.

We can do a lot of the same things for less money, minus the prop control.

To answer the OP's question, as far as I'm aware, there is no available true FADEC for std Lycoming engines on the market. Years ago there was the Precision Airmotive Eagle EMS. Still a few being used but no longer made or supported.

TCM/ Aerosance had a go on the certified market many years ago and that went almost nowhere and isn't available for Experimentals as far as I'm aware.

Lycoming is missing out here IMO. Look at what Rotax has done on the iS engines. Would be a useful market there if our sales are any indication. Lots of folks want modern engine controls to go with their modern panels. This is 2023 after all and Rotax at least has seen the light. Lycoming certainly has the expertise and money to do it.

I don’t know, but have a strong suspicion that a lot of dark money is pouring into powerplant control technology for drones and UAV’s.

If there is one lesson from the current war in Ukraine it is the versatility, cost effectiveness and lethality of drones and UAV’s.

The number of new companies in the market and the range of products and capabilities is the first clue that there is a lot (I mean a LOT) of money chasing capability. The fact that it is really hard to get specific data on those products without getting read into the programs and having a specific need to know established is the second clue.

While the safety, reliability and availability requirements are different than manned aircraft there is the possibility that a lot of new capability may be applicable to existing products for the EAB application once it emerges from the shadows.

We should all watch this space very carefully - this is fast moving technology that is being developed to be produced at scale at a low price point. The race is on.

Lycoming is likely only talking about the tip of the iceberg of the development effort they involved with.

Keith Turner
 
I don't doubt Lycoming has considered this technology further but currently don't offer anything for this market and that was what the OP was asking about.

Lycoming dabbled in something called EPiC a few years back- an electromechanical system, not a true FADEC but even that has not been released yet.

Lycoming did IE2 over 10 years ago now, they could easily do a simplified and less expensive system for Experimentals today if they saw the value in it. They have their reasons why they haven't gone down this path I'm sure.

Rotax saw great value in it and all of their new 9 series engines are so equipped. I'd hazard to say that if Rotax released new 180-300 hp engines with EFI/ EI into the market, they'd take a fair share of EXP engine sales away from Lycoming just on the perception and want of having this technology as part of their offerings.

In the meantime SDS will keep supplying this market segment. I guess I should be happy Lycoming isn't right now, we get busier every year.
 
Last edited:
FADEC ( Full Authority Engine Control) when applied to piston engines is a misnomer. People usually think of SINGLE LEVER (throttle or thrust no mixture or prop control). All jets had single thrust lever. They used Hydro mechanical fuel controller to keep the engine within in temp limits. The thrust lever in cockpit was connected via steel cables to fuel controller mechanically. FADEC made it's way into commercial aviation jet aircraft and it was "fly by wire" or "thrust by wire" control. No more steel mechanical cables, all wires and the computer controlled fuel metering, variable stators, EPR, Temps. There are two parallel independent FADEC units per engine.

To say a piston engine has FADEC is not accurate, it's OK, but it is Electronic Fuel Control sure, the Prop is added on. Do you have mechanical cables moving a throttle body and prop Gov? Prop control combined with throttle it is being done on Cirrus, bit it's mechanical linkage not FADEC (I think correct me if I'm wrong).

If you want one go lever get a jet. Ha ha.
 
Last edited:
My UL engine comes as a full FADEC engine from the factory…..one knob control.

Cheers,

It doesn't control prop pitch though which is generally associated with FADECs. Doing the same things as the Rotax or SDS EFI/EI- fuel and spark control only.
 
gmcjetpilot said:
To say a piston engine has FADEC is not accurate, but Electronic Fuel Control sure. However do you have mecanical cables moving a throttle body? As far as prop control combined with throttle it is being done on Cirrus, bit it's mechanical linkage not FADEC (I think correct me if I'm wrong).

If you want one go lever get a jet. Ha ha.

Single lever FADECs certainly exist in piston aviation- Austro, Conti aero diesels both have them. The Lycoming IE2 is also a true FADEC.

You'll note that most modern aero engine designs have electronic engine controls, the above mentioned plus Rotax iS, UL power, D-Motor etc.

Few manufacturers would think of releasing a new engine design without this tech today.

I would compare this to the glass panel revolution on a slightly lower scale due to Lyconental not offering such tech on their legacy aero engines. Few folks are building panels with steam gauges today nor are most aircraft OEMs.
 
Last edited:
I would be interested in knowing what "makes you more comfortable" about the SDS system.

Here we go again!:D
Hi Bob! I was actually trying to avoid the “here we go again” which is why I suggested a personal message if author of this thread wanted more info about my experience. I don’t feel any “bad blood” for System 32, but the drama between the two has been a turn off for both of them for me. I originally had System 32 installed on my engine but changed to SDS. I know that many people have had a good experience with EfII including you. If you or anyone else would like to chat about why I switched I would be happy to have a private discussuon.
 
Actually

Actually, the bad blood I spoke of seems to be between the vendors, and it’s sad.

I know everyone has their own reasons concerning their choices; that’s the great thing about the hobby. I respect your opinions.

I do agree that the mudslinging and continuous digs serve no purpose and are overall detractors from either system.
 
Single lever FADECs certainly exist in piston aviation- Austro, Conti aero diesels both have them. The Lycoming IE2 is also a true FADEC.

You'll note that most modern aero engine designs have electronic engine controls, the above mentioned plus Rotax iS, UL power, D-Motor etc.

Few manufacturers would think of releasing a new engine design without this tech today.

I would compare this to the glass panel revolution on a slightly lower scale due to Lyconental not offering such tech on their legacy aero engines. Few folks are building panels with steam gauges today nor are most aircraft OEMs.
"Modern" like 4 stroke, push rod, over head valves, air cooled (or water) horizontal opposed 4 or 6 cylinder engine are "modern". Ha ha. I would call the Rotax/UL tiny new unproven low HP (80-100HP) niche boutique engines with some dubious history (UL Power) new to the market but not modern. Modern in this case does not mean better than tried, true and frankly superior design and power. Besides Carb, Mechanical FI and Mags work beautifully. However you can replace them. You can replace Carb/Mechanical FI with EFI (hummm who sells that?). Ha ha. You can replace the Mags with Electronic Ignition (EI) and choices abound. I think the Rotax and UL power are fine for LSA's but not full hair and teeth sport cross country aerobatic planes. They are different, apples and orange, not a matter of "modern" or new technology. There is nothing new with these small LSA engines and don't have better efficiency on a HP to FF basis, and in some cases are slower. UL520iS (always use lower case "i" in product ID to be cool) has been put in an RV4 and RV7. The numbers are not impressive, slower and similar fuel burn. Some have installed the smaller UL Power in RV12 vs. the recommended Rotax. Again kind of yawn. So the "modern" thing is meaningless since all these engines are 4 stroke, push rods, overhead valves, Horz opposed. Rotax is water cooled (also not new tech) with PSRU. Spinning engine faster to make more power on smaller displacement is not new, it's a choice. It has some pros and cons.

Lyconental are dinosaurs and Rotax and UL Power are "modern" will be winning at this year coming Reno Air Races. Ha ha. These two "modern" brands could not compete, They could not compete even in the Reno O200 Continental Formula class and win. The Rotax/UL are maxed out and need to turn in excess of 3200 to 5500 rpm to make power, thus requiring lower Prop efficiency or geared PSRU. Don't confuse "modern" with superior Lyconental in both performance and efficiency. These modern engines have nothing but being small. Lower fuel burn? Yes much lower HP. Neither Lyc or TCM compete in this lower HP LSA market, except for the Continental O200 light, one of only three engines (I know of) suitable for and approved for SLSA with Rotax and Jabiru being the other two. However I concede the Rotax has eaten everyone's lunch in the SLSA and LSA market. Modern? No just targeted for that market very well. You can always slap on EFI and EI to any Lycoming or TCM engine and make it "modern".

Airplanes with single lever power control are like cars with EFI and automatic transmission. Drive your Honda Civic from New Orleans (sea level) to 14,160 fr Mount Evans Colorado and never adjust mixture, while adjusting speed with one SINGLE LEVER (skinny pedal on floor) and a single start/start button. We can say the cars have FADEC? OK.

Rotax and UL Power are not single lever are they? They can not accept hydraulic controlled constant speed props, so fixed or an electric prop is needed. Both these engines are electrically dependent and prohibited from aerobatics. "Modern"? Electric props have been around for 80+ years but everything went hydraulic as they are superior. An Airmaster or MT electric prop is about $12K to $18K. My used Hartzell C/S prop was $2500. Ha ha. Add the rebuilt Gov for $1000 I am good to go. Modern? Yep I want oil in my prop that will work with zero maintenance, not a slip disk and brushes and another battery dependent system.

The Continental IO550 in the Cirrus has one lever (kind of) with EFI and mechanical linkage in throttle to control the PROP (I think correction requested). Not Full or Digital. I rather separate Prop control of RPM I select, like I prefer a manual shift car and motorcycle. Modern? My preference and often nothing wrong with existing technology, making modern less desirable for cost reasons and other drawbacks (electrically dependent).

Take any plane with fixed pitch prop, say a Cessna 152, add EFI that automatically adjusts mixture for altitude (as most EFI do). You have one lever. Is it FADEC or just EFI? Some planes have alternate air and cowl flaps "levers", i.e., more levers. Are you going to add that to the FADEC for single lever control to alternate air and cowl flaps? Sometimes pilots have to do pilot stuff.

Diesels doing "FADEC" or single lever is easier because they and run O2 sensors that leaded gas aircraft engines can not due to O2 sensor fouling with lead. However Diamond D62 twin "FADEC" diesels has had some unfortunate accidents do to loss of electrical power. The whole thing is very electrically dependent. Modern? Sure OK. It is also a $1.5M airplane, not very big or fast. The diesels are fairly low power (180HP per side). Most high performance piston twins have 250 to 350 HP per side. I'd buy a single lever turboprop like a used TBM700, Piper Meridian, or PC12 which can be had for $1M before a D62. WAIT. Hold on. My Accountant called me just now. She said I was delusional. Apparently I can't afford those planes. Never mind. Ha ha. Point being old Tech that works well and cost less may be better than new stuff that has new downsides and costs a lot more.

Lyc iE2 is single lever, but not advertised as FADEC. They call it "iE2 Integrated Electronic Engine".

My point a single lever on a piston plane is a different animal than a Jet FADEC with single lever. It is like comparing apples and oranges.
 
Last edited:
You consider this ugly? This is a beautiful piece of equipment and it works great. Looking forward to the EM-6 upgrade.

I think folks are advocating for a more glass cockpit feel sds controller. LED/OLED vs older LCD. Maybe even interface directly with new glass cockpit screens and not even need a separate controller.
 

Attachments

  • SDS maybe.png
    SDS maybe.png
    1,007.2 KB · Views: 64
I think folks are advocating for a more glass cockpit feel sds controller. LED/OLED vs older LCD. Maybe even interface directly with new glass cockpit screens and not even need a separate controller.

We looked at integrating function into the popular Dynon/ Garmin EFIS units but they were so not willing to at the time (2017) to cooperate to make that happen. It would also tie our product to other companies and future software/ hardware updates from them and you never know what that entails. We don't have the R&D capacity to deal with that unknown nor maybe the capacity to even work on the interface code in the first place. This would have to be a cooperative effort with the big 2. If they don't play, it doesn't happen.

Other EFIS brand users would be left out as no way we can work with all of them.

Given that the programmers are not used much once programming is complete, you probably don't need this capability anyway.

The EM-6 will have CAN capability in the future which may allow us to share more ECU data with an EFIS but even that requires technical cooperation from the big guys. One of them didn't see the numbers or benefits for them when we were talking and I get that. They'd have to expend engineering time with us and that has to be worth it for them in the end.

We're just finishing 7 years straight of R&D (CPI, CPI-2, EM-6) now while dealing with unprecedented market growth at the same time. Hoping to get back to 5 day weeks sometime soon and getting away from my 6 and 7 day work weeks from the last several years. Can't sustain that level forever. Looking forward to getting the EM-6 released and concentrating more energies on production again.
 
Last edited:
We looked at integrating function into the popular Dynon/ Garmin EFIS units but they were so not willing to at the time (2017) to cooperate to make that happen. It would also tie our product to other companies and future software/ hardware updates from them and you never know what that entails. We don't have the R&D capacity to deal with that unknown nor maybe the capacity to even work on the interface code in the first place. This would have to be a cooperative effort with the big 2. If they don't play, it doesn't happen.

Other EFIS brand users would be left out as no way we can work with all of them.

Given that the programmers are not used much once programming is complete, you probably don't need this capability anyway.

The EM-6 will have CAN capability in the future which may allow us to share more ECU data with an EFIS but even that requires technical cooperation from the big guys. One of them didn't see the numbers or benefits for them when we were talking and I get that. They'd have to expend engineering time with us and that has to be worth it for them in the end.

We're just finishing 7 years straight of R&D (CPI, CPI-2, EM-6) now while dealing with unprecedented market growth at the same time. Hoping to get back to 5 day weeks sometime soon and getting away from my 6 and 7 day work weeks from the last several years. Can't sustain that level forever. Looking forward to getting the EM-6 released and concentrating more energies on production again.

Good summary Ross. Is there any plan to expand and include some useful OBD features? Is this what you are talking about where the "panels" are streaming the engine data like temperatures and pressures? I suppose there could be an AD interface box that taps the sensor outputs, but certainly not the most economical way to get the data. To progress in the application of known technology (generalized as "OBD") some integration(handshaking as a minimum) will become necessary.

There are many things that could be done by OBD II today, but aren't - example cylinder to cylinder torsional acceleration, to analyze a weak cylinder, starting amperage from the starter to yield compression pressure of each cylinder. Perturbation of A/F to continually optimize each cylinder. Oil pressure vs rpm on startup to recognize oil system issues, or plugged suction or filters. These, and many more, have been proven but not applied commercially.
 
To my knowledge, the Big 2 are not set up to read conventional 5 character OBD codes as they were not designed around automotive use.

We also don't use this protocol as our system is so simple in comparison to OEM automotive systems, it doesn't make sense.

We illuminate the Fault LED on the programmer and display error codes in one of 5 gauge modes directly as below. The photo shows a problem with both IAT and CHT sensors in this case.

Our system lacks the complexity and capability to do more than basic diagnostics of our system. We don't get into engine specific diagnosis like cylinder # misfires. Again, we are not a Garmin, Siemens, Bosch or Delphi and we must work on Lycoming, Continental, Franklin, Rotax, Jabiru, Rotorway and a host of automotive conversion engines as well.

EM-6 will have additional built in diagnostic tools for injector and coil function, some of that previously developed for CPI.

Automotive and aviation commonly use CAN for data transfer between "boxes" and we think this is well proven and most robust. The new CPU has CAN capability but we have not had to time to develop the code for that yet. Possibly in a future software release and this could open more possibilities at that time.

Currently we only output RPM and fuel flow data to the glass displays.
 

Attachments

  • acpgu7.jpg
    acpgu7.jpg
    18.5 KB · Views: 41
Last edited:
Back
Top