the_other_dougreeves said:Nice photo!
Woo, I'm intrigued. With this I may have to once again consider the AFS system. The lack of a TRUE HSI from the Nav radio (GNS-430/480) was what made me not consider it previously. The HSI presentation around the AI circle is especially cleaver-definately worthy of a patent you are seeking.N401RH said:We are currently testing our 429 interface and should be shipping them before Oshkosh.
Rob Hickman
Advanced Flight Systems
ARINC. An avionics data bus. With this, an EFIS in this case can receive data such as flight plan management, Air-Data, Radio, etc via this bus rather than via discrete analog connections. Basically, the HSI function that is available on the AFS now only with the SL-30 via the RS-232, *should* be available from ANY Nav radio with an ARINC429 I/O port.AltonD said:Clue me in. What is the 429 interface used for?
Rob,N401RH said:We are currently testing our 429 interface and should be shipping them before Oshkosh.
Rob Hickman
Advanced Flight Systems
I'm sure Rob will chime in here, but in the meantime... I spent some time at his booth at OSH last year while he demo'ed the connectivity features of the units. It is my understanding that as long as one unit has the EFIS brains, and the other has the EM brains, the information can be swapped and displayed on either. The connection between them is made using a your standard Cat-5 Network Cable. Click-Click and your connected. Pretty slick if you ask me.w1curtis said:can the units be *tied* together so that you can display any (EFIS or Engine) information on either?
What is the connection between the between the units?
N401RH said:Sorry, the Weight and Balance program will not run on a PC.
Sincerely, Rob Hickman RV-4 N401RH
Engine monitor redundancy would probably cause more problems that it solved but I guess if you wanted full EFIS redundancy, you would install one EE (combination) and one EF (EFIS only) unit. In my case with an EF and an EM, I would rely on the steam gauges and Garmin navigators if the EFIS should fail. The nice thing about this architecture is that it should suit various "comfort" levels.rleffler said:I'm assuming the only negative would be if one unit failed, you would lose the funcationality on both displays for which data is being supplied by the failed unit. So for total redundency, you would need to install two 3500-EE units. Although have two engine monitors is probably not required or easily implmented.