What's new
Van's Air Force

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

Open EFIS/EIS

GrayHawk

GrayHawk

Well Known Member
DISCLAIMER: Yes, I know: just buy one of the existing experiment EFIS units and spend the time & money flying instead!

Anyone out there interested in an open EFIS effort for experimental aircraft? I would say, of the current experimental EFIS/EIS units available, the MGL Avionics systems comes closest to being 'open'. The 3 or so projects listed on SourceForge seem to be inactive and/or for unmanned quad helicopter 'toys'. I am thinking of a project where persons could join in & participate via a project web site. There are many 'facets' to a project of this size.

Or maybe there are groups already working on systems?
 
Yes, your comments are quite spot on and allow me to elaborate.

The big (huge !) downfall of open source in the context of EFIS is a basic one: Hardware.
If you want to throw together some embedded PC system, get an AHRS from somewhere, a compass from some place, engine monitoring - that alone is a major headache, all the fancy stuff - encoders, drivers, ARINC. What about power and stability. What about the hardware working reliably at altitude with higher radiation levels ? Where will you get a screen that works nicely in sunlight ? How are you going to join all of that together in a way it will not fall over the moment you press the PTT on your VHF. How are you going to handle all the EMI and radio interference that your system will be causing ?

OK, that was not to put you off the idea but to tell you what will cause the whole house of cards to tumble down.

This is why we started Enigma.
It will not be open source as far as our own operating system and application is concerned for a number of very good reasons - one of them is that we are using our own programming language, compilers, tool chains - not a scratch of C anywhere. That makes it kind of difficult to support in the context of open source. But that is just one of the reasons.

BUT - now that "but" is in capitals. We have not forgotton our promises. Enigma will be "Open system" - that is different from "Open source". We are planning to release a version that is running Windows CE - so with this you have exactly what you want and you can program the hardware anyway you like. The Open source concept is then entirely up to whoever runs his system on ours !

What makes this even more attractive is the fact that we have Odyssey and soon Voyager in the same spirit (and another 4 instruments in the wings that have yet not got names...).

This all will happen unless some company buys us to prevent it !

Rainier
CEO MGL Avionics

GrayHawk said:
DISCLAIMER: Yes, I know: just buy one of the existing experiment EFIS units and spend the time & money flying instead!

Anyone out there interested in an open EFIS effort for experimental aircraft? I would say, of the current experimental EFIS/EIS units available, the MGL Avionics systems comes closest to being 'open'. The 3 or so projects listed on SourceForge seem to be inactive and/or for unmanned quad helicopter 'toys'. I am thinking of a project where persons could join in & participate via a project web site. There are many 'facets' to a project of this size.

Or maybe there are groups already working on systems?
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Rainier Lamers said:
Yes, your comments are quite spot on and allow me to elaborate.

The big (huge !) downfall of open source in the context of EFIS is a basic one: Hardware.
If you want to throw together some embedded PC system, get an AHRS from somewhere, a compass from some place, engine monitoring - that alone is a major headache, all the fancy stuff - encoders, drivers, ARINC. What about power and stability. What about the hardware working reliably at altitude with higher radiation levels ? Where will you get a screen that works nicely in sunlight ? How are you going to join all of that together in a way it will not fall over the moment you press the PTT on your VHF. How are you going to handle all the EMI and radio interference that your system will be causing ?

OK, that was not to put you off the idea but to tell you what will cause the whole house of cards to tumble down.

This is why we started Enigma.
It will not be open source as far as our own operating system and application is concerned for a number of very good reasons - one of them is that we are using our own programming language, compilers, tool chains - not a scratch of C anywhere. That makes it kind of difficult to support in the context of open source. But that is just one of the reasons.

BUT - now that "but" is in capitals. We have not forgotton our promises. Enigma will be "Open system" - that is different from "Open source". We are planning to release a version that is running Windows CE - so with this you have exactly what you want and you can program the hardware anyway you like. The Open source concept is then entirely up to whoever runs his system on ours !

What makes this even more attractive is the fact that we have Odyssey and soon Voyager in the same spirit (and another 4 instruments in the wings that have yet not got names...).

This all will happen unless some company buys us to prevent it !

Rainier
CEO MGL Avionics
Click to expand...
Aaaaah! Don't make me angry. I was just trying to gauge interest (and got little) :p

Your system may be close to 'open system' but doesn't have the display I want (~6.5" active TFT, 800 nit or so). But it will have this display size shortly, right? And of course, I want to add a second display (or call it an MFD), without a second set of sensors, but with different customized functions displayed on each.

As for AHRS & compass modules, there are several sources, one of which is MGLAvionics with the filters already embedded.

So I'm hoping you don't get bought out.......... but if you do, it'd be nice to have some other way to stay 'open', system or source.
 
Don't worry, I just made a joke - I'm not about to retire just yet...

No plans to use a 6.5" screen currently.
we'll be using 10.4" (Odyssey), 8.4" (Voyager), 5.7" Enigma and a similar system using a high resolution 5.7" screen (effectively a "mini" Odyssey).
Then we'll do a few 3.6" units.

The Enigma uses a VSTN 1000nits screen which is quite remarkable in direct sunlight while we are currently working on a version with a 1500nits TFT screen (The 1500nits TFT has about the same "visual" brigtness as the 1000nits VSTN due to physical pixel size).

Yes, our SP-4 is availble for OEM use and is in fact used by many for exactly that. Typical uses are UAVs, EFIS systems and a lot of camera stabilizing applications. It's quite popular and used by several universities for various projects.

Rainier
CEO MGL Avionics

GrayHawk said:
Aaaaah! Don't make me angry. I was just trying to gauge interest (and got little) :p

Your system may be close to 'open system' but doesn't have the display I want (~6.5" active TFT, 800 nit or so). But it will have this display size shortly, right? And of course, I want to add a second display (or call it an MFD), without a second set of sensors, but with different customized functions displayed on each.

As for AHRS & compass modules, there are several sources, one of which is MGLAvionics with the filters already embedded.

So I'm hoping you don't get bought out.......... but if you do, it'd be nice to have some other way to stay 'open', system or source.
Click to expand...
 
GrayHawk said:
DISCLAIMER: Yes, I know: just buy one of the existing experiment EFIS units and spend the time & money flying instead!

Anyone out there interested in an open EFIS effort for experimental aircraft? I would say, of the current experimental EFIS/EIS units available,

Or maybe there are groups already working on systems?
Click to expand...

It would be an interesting project. I'm sure it can be done with "off the shelf" hardware. That's how most of the current systems are done anyway.

Here are a few links I came across when looking into it a while ago.

http://www.lucubration.com/galileo/
http://www.karoliinasalminen.com/blog/?p=102
http://rtime.felk.cvut.cz/helicopter/visualisation
http://www.pcflightsystems.com/?gclid=CNj3y53ggpACFQc-YAodAyTzpA
http://www.kitplanes.com/magazine/avionics_electronics/7268-1.phtml
http://www.aerospectra.com/efis/svis.htm
http://www.cobbin.com/synthetic-vision.htm
 
Rainier Lamers said:
Don't worry, I just made a joke - I'm not about to retire just yet...

No plans to use a 6.5" screen currently.
we'll be using 10.4" (Odyssey), 8.4" (Voyager), 5.7" Enigma and a similar system using a high resolution 5.7" screen (effectively a "mini" Odyssey).
Then we'll do a few 3.6" units.

The Enigma uses a VSTN 1000nits screen which is quite remarkable in direct sunlight while we are currently working on a version with a 1500nits TFT screen (The 1500nits TFT has about the same "visual" brigtness as the 1000nits VSTN due to physical pixel size).

Yes, our SP-4 is availble for OEM use and is in fact used by many for exactly that. Typical uses are UAVs, EFIS systems and a lot of camera stabilizing applications. It's quite popular and used by several universities for various projects.

Rainier
CEO MGL Avionics
Click to expand...

I appreciate the joke.... & took it that way. To further clarify my comment, I meant not scare me off (rather than angry) as if I bought one tomorrow, it would probably be MGL. The display I was thinking of, the midsize, is the Voyager. That's the one I'm interested in. I was wrong on the size. When is the Voyager expected?

There seems to be a lot of work going on with the IMUs. In reading, I see everything from QuadRotors to unmanned water vehicles to unmanned rockets. Some of it a little bit 'scary'. I just want it to make a manned RV safer.
 
Open system gets a big thumbs up from this geek!

Off to MGL Avionics to drool on the pretty panels again!

edit: yup, still really, REALLY cool.

They introduced a radio I hadn't seen before.
 
Last edited:
I agree, this would be a cool project. I am a VB/Java guy, but I messed with some more robust languages back in college. I think Ada is used in most avionics applications (did a bit of programming with that on Sun workstations) -- certainly willing to hear thoughts from others interested.....
 
smoore said:
Open system gets a big thumbs up from this geek!

Off to MGL Avionics to drool on the pretty panels again!

edit: yup, still really, REALLY cool.

They introduced a radio I hadn't seen before.
Click to expand...
I think they also have a Com/Nav radio in the works. Right now I have to punch a zillion keys just to listen to an airport I might be flying by. Would be nice to have the panel or 'something', load the settings in automatically (without paying 5 $$$$$ to Garmin).
 
We are busy with the Voyager display itself now - it does not exist yet but I am expecting first samples VERY soon. It's based on the same technology that is used with the Odyssey display - super wide temperature range, extremenly high contrast (over 600 !), high brightness (around 800 nits for this one) and hard, scratch resistant non-reflective surface done in a new technology that does not "white out" at certain angles of sunlight.

Voyager is expected 2nd quarter 2008 for shipping. It's a nice size, just right for panels that just can't take the Odyssey due to size restrictions.

Yes, there is a lot going on regarding IMUs. Low cost gyros combined with increasing knowledge of how to make them useful (despite their shortcomings) is fueling a revolution.
Now, all I need is for somebody to produce a real low cost three axis gyro - I'd love to drop the prices of our AHRS....

Rainier
CEO MGL Avionics

GrayHawk said:
I appreciate the joke.... & took it that way. To further clarify my comment, I meant not scare me off (rather than angry) as if I bought one tomorrow, it would probably be MGL. The display I was thinking of, the midsize, is the Voyager. That's the one I'm interested in. I was wrong on the size. When is the Voyager expected?

There seems to be a lot of work going on with the IMUs. In reading, I see everything from QuadRotors to unmanned water vehicles to unmanned rockets. Some of it a little bit 'scary'. I just want it to make a manned RV safer.
Click to expand...
 
I hear you !
Hang on - we are working on some good stuff...

Currently, with our systems and a compatible radio (Garmin SL30, SL40, XCOM, Philser and of course our own radios) you can allready do this.

Simply go to the "nearset airprorts: (one button press), select desired airport (one button press), select desired frequency (last button press).

Airspaces: SHIFT+IMS then select airspace you are interested in (airspaces you are in, under, over or close to are shown) then select frequency.

"Other" frequencies - SHIFT+Radio, select from list. Usualy you would put area or chat frequencies in here.

Rainier

GrayHawk said:
I think they also have a Com/Nav radio in the works. Right now I have to punch a zillion keys just to listen to an airport I might be flying by. Would be nice to have the panel or 'something', load the settings in automatically (without paying 5 $$$$$ to Garmin).
Click to expand...
 
Jamie Aust said:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=230196317812

Have you looked at these yet ?
Click to expand...

That is a three axis accelerometer - not a gyro.
BTW: we have not yet found a three axis accelerometer that we like. In our systems we use two accelerometers - one X/Y and another for the Z axis. All of the three axis accelerometers we so far had a look at are inferior to the solution we use now. Accelerometers, while much cheaper than gyros, are often not given the required attention in an AHRS design - all the attention goes to the gyros. Many accelerometers suffer from large bias temperature drift and have serious scale factor linearity issues, while of less importance than the gyro performance, it nevertheless can impact on some parts of the systems performance.

Rainier
CEO MGL Avionics
 
Summary

Thanks to everyone who responded to my original query. The feed back was useful.

I think I am going to go ahead and create a secure collaborative web site for an open EFIS system. Just the process of doing that is a good way to document thoughts (opinions) of what it should look like. Then if it gets to the point of being 'opened' to others, the material will at least be better organized.

Rainier: Your comments re: the difficulty of certain elements is well taken. Most of the items mentioned were already in my notes and have been reseraching some elements for some time; and as I mentioned, even to the point of using the MGL Avionics AHRS (OEM version) (or one of a couple of other options). Just in general I had wanted to use a modular approach which would allow outsourcing some critical elements. Another question for you is whether the planned comm, nav/comm, transponder will be offered in the 'traditional stack' form factor also? Also will watch for progress on the 'Voyager' system.
 
GrayHawk said:
Thanks to everyone who responded to my original query. The feed back was useful.
Rainier: Another question for you is whether the planned comm, nav/comm, transponder will be offered in the 'traditional stack' form factor also? Also will watch for progress on the 'Voyager' system.
Click to expand...

No, most likely not - our goal is to integrate all RF into the EFIS panels (with seperate "dumb" modules that are very low cost as they do not need any forms of user interface themselves).
Our two models of panel mount VHF and one model of panel mount NAV are all 3.5" (3 1/8" hole) units for the simple reason that this size allows decent sized displays and controls and there is practically nothing on the market targeted at this size (there are plenty of 2.14" units with tiny displays and fiddly knobs around - no need for us to add yet another one).

The good news is that our modular RF products will be made available to other EFIS manufacturers (we have two signed up so far) and could very well look at general OEM (like we do with some of our other stuff) as well. The more we produce the cheaper the things can become - and everybody benifits.

Good luck with your open source efforts - I hope it will prove more successful than has been achieved thus far. If you pull it off, it has great potential to further revolutionize experimental EFIS and who knows what will come out of it.
While I'm very much overworked currently, I'd be interested perhaps once things calm down a little here to contribute to your effort.

Rainier
CEO MGL Avionics
 
Oh Yeah

My dream is a PC with a panel mounted monitor running MountainScope for the moving map and weather (also drives an autopilot), some sort of open efis, and a nice engine monitor. I think all the units currently available fall just a little short or are priced way too high for what they do (or don't do).

There is some real cool stuff happening in the flight sim realm as far as glass displays, and it really wouldn't take much to port this over with some of the "off the shelf" sensor packages that the manufacturers use. Most are just nice embedded processors, some software, and sensors that anyone could buy.

I really like OpenGC, but there are others as well.

I, also,get turned off by all the people on this forum who's only pleasure in life is to tell others why they shouldn't experiment... They either want you to put whatever they purchased in your plane, or buy whatever they are selling.

Not much experimental in this aviation anymore.

DR (Not that DR)
 
Support

Actually, I am willing to help by supplying some hardware, my son may be willing to help with any programming.

DR
 
open efis.

Coolness. I have been wanting to do something like this for a while now. And I have recently bought a Samsung Q1 Ultra tablet pc to experiment with just that.

The Q1 ultra came with windows vista installed which makes the device into a super slow slow dog of a machine! But after installing gentoo linux on it, I'm convinced that this platform has some potential. It has a 8 inch touch screen that is really bright. I've flow with it a bit and it's pretty readable while flying. And I like the idea of designing it with a easy to use touch screen interface.

I'll keep updates on my progress if anyone is interested. But I'm also intrested in helping out on anything other EFIS ideas other people have. I have C/C++/Assembly background, with some embedded development experience.

Christopher.
 
Samsung Q1U OpenEFIS

I too have a Samsung Q1U with 7" display. I've upgraded to 2Gb and that really helped a lot with Vista. I have very briefly played with Linux. I'm currently keeping Vista because I use PocketFMS (which is Windows based) as a moving map backup. I'm also using the Q1U to capture data from my GRT EIS using Waiter's (www.iflyez.com) program.

By all means, keep us up to date on your progress.

--
Michael


loopfuzz said:
The Q1 ultra came with windows vista installed which makes the device into a super slow slow dog of a machine! But after installing gentoo linux on it, I'm convinced that this platform has some potential. It has a 8 inch touch screen that is really bright. I've flow with it a bit and it's pretty readable while flying. And I like the idea of designing it with a easy to use touch screen interface.
Click to expand...
 
Roddzilla said:
My dream is a PC with a panel mounted monitor running MountainScope for the moving map and weather (also drives an autopilot), some sort of open efis, and a nice engine monitor. I think all the units currently available fall just a little short or are priced way too high for what they do (or don't do).

There is some real cool stuff happening in the flight sim realm as far as glass displays, and it really wouldn't take much to port this over with some of the "off the shelf" sensor packages that the manufacturers use. Most are just nice embedded processors, some software, and sensors that anyone could buy.

I really like OpenGC, but there are others as well.

I, also,get turned off by all the people on this forum who's only pleasure in life is to tell others why they shouldn't experiment... They either want you to put whatever they purchased in your plane, or buy whatever they are selling.

Not much experimental in this aviation anymore.

DR (Not that DR)
Click to expand...
I don't feel that the Open EFIS idea is dead. My feeling is that the 'EXPERIMENTAL' on our planes means ALL aspects of the plane & flying the plane; including the electronics.

But I also have to say that I continue to be surprised by the openness and honesty of some individuals like Rainier. All of the issues that he replied with as a testament to the difficulty are both real and true. Sure you can buy (off the shelf) small module with 3 MEMs gyros and 3 accelerometers on it, that will give you a reasonable attitude reference........, for about 3 seconds at least before it drifts off. The real creativity is in the firmware that does the filtering & error correction in a reliable manner. ALL of the issues Rainier mentioned are there and would need to be worked on.

Another thing I see as a problem for an Open EFIS effort would be the diversity of thought. In a project with many different people with many different ideas, you would need to implement the 'core' set and leave the system flexible enough that other individuals could then implement their 'fringe' functions. Making an extremely open, flexible system that is still fast & reliable is hard. Not saying it shouldn't be done or can't be done, it is just hard.
 
Roddzilla said:
and it really wouldn't take much to port this over with some of the "off the shelf" sensor packages that the manufacturers use. Most are just nice embedded processors, some software, and sensors that anyone could buy.
Click to expand...

Hmm, I knew I was wasting my time all these years, it's so easy... :)

I, also,get turned off by all the people on this forum who's only pleasure in life is to tell others why they shouldn't experiment... They either want you to put whatever they purchased in your plane, or buy whatever they are selling.
Click to expand...

Ouch ! that hurt.
I hope you were not refering to my post...

Not much experimental in this aviation anymore.
Click to expand...

Have a closer look...
Please.

Rainier
MGL Avionics
 
Open system ? Here's an "opened" system for starters.

This is what you are trying to do. You still need to add AHRS, compass and engine monitoring sub-systems.
These are the first real images of an Odyssey prototype to leave this office, outside and inside.
Nothing here is off-the-shelf. Every PCB is custom designed just for the Odyssey, including the "plug-in" CPU card running a dual external, concurrent 32 bit bus with 8 bus masters (some 45 GByte/s internal data transfer rates - theoretical). There are 4 processors running concurrently in this system (not counting external items).

Enjoy - you saw it first on "Van's".

Rainier
CEO MGL Avionics
odyssey3.jpg

odyssey1.jpg

odyssey2.jpg
 
Last edited:
New perspective on, and some insight into Odyssey!

Hi guys,
Rainier Lamers said:
These are the first real images of an Odyssey prototype to leave this office, outside and inside.
Click to expand...
Wow, boss: I have been staring at the first prototype, second prototype and first production models daily for the last few months... But these photos have added new meaning to the phrases: "a different perspective" and "providing some insight"! :p

Some seriously "arty" lines! I like! :D

Cheers,
 
PocketFMS

sonex293 said:
I too have a Samsung Q1U with 7" display. I've upgraded to 2Gb and that really helped a lot with Vista. I have very briefly played with Linux. I'm currently keeping Vista because I use PocketFMS (which is Windows based) as a moving map backup. I'm also using the Q1U to capture data from my GRT EIS using Waiter's (www.iflyez.com) program.
Click to expand...

How do you like the PocketFMS? I have my Q1u with a dual boot (running XP though) so I can run Apic Map ( http://www.approach-systems.com/apic.asp ) which is a free moving map for windows.
 
OpenEFIS/PocketFMS

I started using PocketFMS many moons ago with an iPAQ. The current iteration is currently still geared toward using a PocketPC in the cockpit. The PC version is missing the touch screen features needed to make it really useful in the cockpit. A version is now in Beta test that adds a lot of custom-ability and should bring the PC version to the cockpit usability of the PDA version. I've already bought the RAM mount for the Q1U and plan on putting it in my plane when it's done. Right now, I'm using it as a kneepad device when I go flying in the C152 I rent.

All in all, I like it.

--
Michael


loopfuzz said:
How do you like the PocketFMS? I have my Q1u with a dual boot (running XP though) so I can run Apic Map ( http://www.approach-systems.com/apic.asp ) which is a free moving map for windows.
Click to expand...
 
MGL -- Rainier

No, I wasn't specifically talking about your posts... Take a stab at mentioning that you want to put an alternative engine in your RV.. and post it in the ALTERNATIVE ENGINES forum.... start ducking as soon as you hit 'post'.

It is ironic, however, that a thread on an open EFIS project has turned into some discussion about your product.;)

When I am ready, I will look at your products... but that's not what I'm about right now. Time (or lack of it) will ultimately dictate the direction I take.

Yes, I do think it is fairly easy to implement a simple EFIS. That does not mean that I am comparing a simple EFIS to your product. It took me about 2 hours to program a QSI Qlarity panel that would read the serial output from an IMU-6 and display a very ugly but functioning EFIS screen.

Let's face it, anyone can go purchase any number of AHRS modules that are ready to go out of the box. Crossbow, Sagem, Xsens, etc...

You want some cool stuff take a look at sparkfun.com almost all the parts right there to turn your RV into a UAV that will fly a GPS course.

There are great EFIS products out there, I'm just the type that likes to experiment. It's probably the same reason I'm trying to build an airplane. Probably the same desire that caused you to start your company!

Keep up the good work with the MGL line, you may just hit all the spots that I want and force me to buy one of yours instead of attempting to construct my own!

Respectfully,

DR
 
MGL - Again

Rainier:

I forgot to say thanks for the pics of the Odyssey. It's a drop dead sexy looking unit.

2 of those in a panel would look real nice.


Also, an alternative to some of the other SS AHRS out there is the http://www.sparkfun.com/commerce/product_info.php?products_id=754

Not premier, but would make a heck of an inexpensive backup EFIS unit. No matter the primary EFIS, I will have a PC running mountainscope for moving map... there may be one of these hooked to that same PC with a little software just waiting in case something failed. Heck, I forgot mountainscope can display attitude info! There's my backup!



DR
 
Roddzilla said:
Rainier:

I forgot to say thanks for the pics of the Odyssey. It's a drop dead sexy looking unit.

2 of those in a panel would look real nice.


Also, an alternative to some of the other SS AHRS out there is the http://www.sparkfun.com/commerce/product_info.php?products_id=754

Not premier, but would make a heck of an inexpensive backup EFIS unit. No matter the primary EFIS, I will have a PC running mountainscope for moving map... there may be one of these hooked to that same PC with a little software just waiting in case something failed. Heck, I forgot mountainscope can display attitude info! There's my backup!



DR
Click to expand...
The sparkfun.com unit is one of the ones I've been looking at also. Vers 3 will have an ARM7 processor with room for custom code.

As far as 2 Odysseys in an RV panel.... TOO BIG
However 2 Voyagers, JUST RIGHT
(Odyssey shown above RV-6 panel for comparison, ignor construction lines)

normal_VoyagerPanel.JPG
 
Roddzilla said:
It is ironic, however, that a thread on an open EFIS project has turned into some discussion about your product.;)
Click to expand...

Yes, you are right - I am sorry for comming across that way. It does look like I've hijacked the thread (which is not my intention).
It's for good reason though - open source EFIS is indeed very close to my heart and if you read the Q&A that is still on our website you will find references to just that (this was written before launch of Enigma).
I do now have a suitable platform at very reasonable cost (believe me, we don't make much on these things - for us this is not much more than a hobby that got out of control), so it is a platform that is simply crying to go that way.
But if it happens - it needs to be done right. This will require my full attention and much of my time. At this point in time we have some 20 instruments !!! in advanced stages of development so time is precious. But, I think once our RF line is out - I may find the time to document the hardware and basic software in the way that will make it possible to go open source (or open system) with it.

I am fully aware that there is a lot of software talent out there and there are individuals who would love to do this, even just for the fun and challenge of it. The big stumbling block so far has been hardware - yes, you can throw together stuff as you mention - but it will never be an ideal solution. For one thing, your tablet PC is hardly built to radiation hardened standards - and with 2GBytes of "soft" dynamic RAM - I cringe at the thought of taking that to altitude (With Vista ? OhMyGosh...). But that is just one of almost countless reasons.
If you, as you mention, are just after a very simple EFIS - then it's even worse as you will end up with a very expensive solution that does very little.

Rainier
CEO MGL Avionics
 
Last edited:
loopfuzz said:
How do you like the PocketFMS? I have my Q1u with a dual boot (running XP though) so I can run Apic Map ( http://www.approach-systems.com/apic.asp ) which is a free moving map for windows.
Click to expand...

As a further commitment (for those that still doubt us), we are working very closely with PocketFMS and currently Enigma is beta testing the PocketFMS database. This means you can use PocketFMS for flight planning and then fly the plan on Enigma using the PocketFMS data on airports, waypoints, airspaces etc.

As a further development, PocketFMS is preparing to use Enigma as platform to run PocketFMS itself.

This will not replace our own, free FlightPlanner but is an option over and above it.

Rainier
CEO MGL Avionics
 
Last edited:
No Tablet PC

Nah, no tablet for me. I have a very small (mini ITX) 2ghz MSI board with 4gb memory and 32GB solid state drive. Hoping to get one of the faster 128GB SSD's soon. Has dual monitor capability, but have not figured out to do with that (entertainment??)

Add a GPIO/serial to ethernet block that would allow alarms (GPI's) to show up on the screen.

I am running a stripped down and stable XP pro that takes about 190MB for the entire OS (tinyXP).

This is what will run moving map with weather software (current favorite is mountainscope). Mountainscope will output NMEA to drive an autopilot as well.

All in, I'm looking at about $2000 including redundant 20ch WAAS gps. I had the CPU, memory, etc... so I saved some there.



I would like to create a recessed monitor similar to planepc.net, except with a flush glass panel cover silkscreened black around the edges like my wifes Imac.. This would prevent touch screen operation so I may have to drop the glass cover idea.
 
Roddzilla said:
This would prevent touch screen operation so I may have to drop the glass cover idea.
Click to expand...

We have had a look at touch screens at length (and I would guess so have other EFIS manufacturers). Reasons are obvious.

But, in practical tests we found them nearly unusable in flight - even in just very moderate turbulence. You just can't rest your finger on a "button" to push it.
So, make provision for at least a few external buttons - you will need them. Consider perhaps one of those small USB numeric pads.
If you can get a screen without touchscreen overlay, you may find that it works better in sunlight.

Touch screens could be quite nice if you are on the ground and have to enter flight plans etc.

Rainier
CEO MGL Avionics
 
Thanks Rainier

Thanks for the insight on the touchscreen use. I was thinking of it for setting up only. One of the biggest problems I have with touchscreens is the effect the touch material has on the visual quality.

One of the many laptops I have is an HP tablet PC... great device except for the visual image quality. Looks like there is a 1000mil coating on the screen!!

I don't know if I will have the time or the will to attempt an EFIS alone, but I have no issues with alternative GPS's, moving maps, weather, etc...

Maybe a nice mountainscope set-up and a couple of your voyagers will be enough for me.

I'm currently focused on an rs232 autoswitch. Want to get it down to 2x2 inches. Takes the ouput of my 2 highly accurate GPS's and will autoswitch on the failure of one. has 2 small status lights and a manual switch that go on the panel. I may add a distribution amplifier to give me 4-6 outputs of the active GPS stream. It may be overkill, but I may also use a PLC to parse the GPS data for errors... it would then switch on loss of lock, complete loss of rs232 data, or garbage NMEA data. As several scripts exist for PLC's that parse NMEA data, this shouldn't be too difficult.

I did see that sparkfun now carries the 32 channel waas 5hz units... they are only 1.2x1.2 inches.. slightly smaller than my 20ch units. I may have to get a few of these to play with -- Especially considering the accuracy. 2 of these would easily fit under the fiberglass at the top of the Vstab or anywhere else for that matter.

God help me for not wanting a taildragger with a lycoming engine and steam gauges... I don't post here more because of all the curmudgeons who have nothing to do but pounce on anyone who embraces the 'experimental' in this aviation.

maybe in about 15-20 years things will be different:D.

By the way Rainier, thanks for doing what your doing... If not for people like you all of us would be stuck with 40's era instrumentation.

DR
 
Roddzilla said:
...and steam gauges... I don't post here more because of all the curmudgeons who have nothing to do but pounce on anyone who embraces the 'experimental' in this aviation.
Click to expand...
I've been working on my own home brew EFIS for a while & I LOVE the fact that I fly an EXPERIMENTAL. It certainly isn't the most economical way to go (especially if you consider time), but it has been loads of fun.

Like was mentioned earlier, hardware is definitely an issue & can hamper an open project in an embedded type project. Just an example, I've used two different single board computers (SBCs), both from the same manufacturer (only 1 part number apart) & they have very different ways of dealing with output to an LCD.

Another thing to note, is that SBCs evolve as quickly as your desktop PC, so wait as long as you can before buying one. You can get lots of non-hardware specific coding done before plopping down cash for a computer. It's amazing what you can get now for the $400 I paid for my SBC two years ago.

My setup won't be a stand-alone unit. To cut the corner on development (and to keep from having to dust off my Kalman filter knowledge), I'm using a serial output from my Blue Mountain EFIS to provide all the aircraft info (airspeed, alt, vvi, heading, lat/long, etc.). Dynon & probably others have similar outputs. What I really wanted out of this project is to have another EFIS screen so that I could fly the plane easily from the right seat. I have a set of steam gauges for backups.

I don't plan on making my code open source (sorry), but some reading on my project is here: http://www.thedukes.org/rv/lcd.html Sooo close...
 
Roddzilla said:
You really need to make that open source!

Looks su-weeeet.
Click to expand...
Thanks, but, ummm, that's probably not gonna happen. I wrote everything in C++. Pretty easy to learn the basics of if you've done any programming. I wrote some Ada code back in the 90's, but that's no fun & certainly tough to find support for these days. I don't recommend Ada unless you need to update the computer on a 1978 model F-15. There are lots of free compilers & resources out there targeted at game & embedded development...both match a home brew EFIS fairly well. If you spend money on a compiler you can even cook your own Windows XP Embedded OS.

Have fun!
 
GrayHawk said:
I don't feel that the Open EFIS idea is dead. My feeling is that the 'EXPERIMENTAL' on our planes means ALL aspects of the plane & flying the plane; including the electronics.

But I also have to say that I continue to be surprised by the openness and honesty of some individuals like Rainier. All of the issues that he replied with as a testament to the difficulty are both real and true. Sure you can buy (off the shelf) small module with 3 MEMs gyros and 3 accelerometers on it, that will give you a reasonable attitude reference........, for about 3 seconds at least before it drifts off. The real creativity is in the firmware that does the filtering & error correction in a reliable manner. ALL of the issues Rainier mentioned are there and would need to be worked on.

Another thing I see as a problem for an Open EFIS effort would be the diversity of thought. In a project with many different people with many different ideas, you would need to implement the 'core' set and leave the system flexible enough that other individuals could then implement their 'fringe' functions. Making an extremely open, flexible system that is still fast & reliable is hard. Not saying it shouldn't be done or can't be done, it is just hard.
Click to expand...

Hi GrayHawk,

I think a FOSS EFIS would be a great idea too, and as a software developer with both open and closed source experience, I can see real benefits in doing so. The main being quality and auditability. I greatly respect the work done by the smaller guys in the experimental EFIS field, but then you look at (say) the Chelton gear with it's DO-178B Level A cert, and you realise there's just no way to be sure the non-certified gear *really* does what it's supposed to; you can't look for yourself, and there's no 3rd party verification to check.

This is particularly important for a system like an EFIS, because so much is software. Software has bugs - always - and code that is readily auditable, testable, and fixable, should mean a more reliable system. No, it wouldn't be easy, and quality assurance would need to be the highest priority... and that my friends is the least fun part of software engineering. But yeah, I'd be keen to work on something like this. Might even fly it in a couple of years when my planned-for -7 takes to the sky.

Did you manage to secure a website? I noticed that www.openefis.org, etc, is already gone...

Rich
 
RichB said:
Hi GrayHawk,

I think a FOSS EFIS...... snip .......
Did you manage to secure a website? I noticed that www.openefis.org, etc, is already gone...

Rich
Click to expand...
Not sure what 'FOSS' stands for??
I have a web site. It is local only, on one of my servers. I hadn't really picked a domain name. A lot of the domain names get snapped up by speculators, making life difficult for the real users.

What I ended up doing, was putting my thoughts down onto 'bits' in an organized manner, detailing the feature set and what I'd like to see in an experimental EFIS, including a higher level block diagram of the system. Pick another individual and you'd be sure to get a slightly different set of features.

Just the process of outlining things and thinking about the architecture was educational for me as I had to reserach quite a few things and consider safety & flexibility in the system architecture. That process also showed several things:

1. That there was a fairly open, commercial, experimental EFIS system already being developed; that matched my architecture fairly closely.

2. Given a set of 30 experimental aircarft builders & pilots, you probably have 30 different & strongly voiced opinions as how to proceed. ;)

3. And then there is the setting of priorities for an older pilot (as in GRAYhawk). Do I want to spend the time designing or do I want to spend the time flying?? Easy choice.

I agree, the software testing & verification would be an important element,
 
GrayHawk said:
1. That there was a fairly open, commercial, experimental EFIS system already being developed; that matched my architecture fairly closely.

2. Given a set of 30 experimental aircarft builders & pilots, you probably have 30 different & strongly voiced opinions as how to proceed. ;)

3. And then there is the setting of priorities for an older pilot (as in GRAYhawk). Do I want to spend the time designing or do I want to spend the time flying?? Easy choice.
Click to expand...

Re 1: Can it be reviewed and built upon by folks like us?

Re 2: I'm not so sure about that... most of the commercial systems seem to converge on their features anyway, so that suggests requirements are fairly well defined. I guess a 6-pack replacement is the starting point. At any rate, open source development has been described as "herding cats" where everyone wants to do their own thing, go their own way. As a result, successful projects usually have a "benevolent dictator" who keeps the project on the right heading, and says no (or not yet) to some of the changes and new features people might propose.

Re 3: Can't argue with that one. This stuff gets time-consuming real fast.

Still keen tho. I'll do a little planning...
 
RichB said:
Re 1: Can it be reviewed and built upon by folks like us?

Re 2: I'm not so sure about that... most of the commercial systems seem to converge on their features anyway, so that suggests requirements are fairly well defined. I guess a 6-pack replacement is the starting point. At any rate, open source development has been described as "herding cats" where everyone wants to do their own thing, go their own way. As a result, successful projects usually have a "benevolent dictator" who keeps the project on the right heading, and says no (or not yet) to some of the changes and new features people might propose.

Re 3: Can't argue with that one. This stuff gets time-consuming real fast.

Still keen tho. I'll do a little planning...
Click to expand...

1: Not the core functionality; but it comes closest to what I want(ed).

2: Agree here, the reason for the smiley. Hardware design would need to be flexible enough to allow software to proceed, so some decisions would need to be made. For progress to be made, probably best done by a 'dictator' approach.
 
This thread is kinda old, but I wanted to pick this conversation back up again. And see how many people out there are still interested.

I've been playing with this embedded linux board on some projects. It's pretty fast and has a lot of cool features. 400mhz arm9 processor, 3 serial ports, 2 usb, network port, audio out and in, sd card slot, lcd video connector, camera connector, and many general purpose IO pins. Only costs around $80.

Linux doesn't have to be used with this board, but it's nice because if you do use it alot of the hardware access layer has already been written.

ResizedImage600535-Mini2440.jpg


Christopher.
 
You might be interested in an nVidia Ion board. It certainly has the graphics power to pump out just about anything you can program up.

http://www.nvidia.com/object/sff_ion.html

I've been playing with the OSG toolset to see what sort of synthetic vision setup could be put together using opensource data/code. If my project starts to look promising I'll post it on Sourceforge so others can contribute.

Checkout the screenshots from the OSGGIS website with GIS data on OSGEarth models.

http://wush.net/trac/osggis/wiki/Screenshots
 
Last edited:
open source software increasing.

Just thought this was cool...

"An IDC study predicts that open source software will grow at a 22.4 percent rate to reach $8.1 billion by 2013, says eWEEK."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top