ADSB 472

[dwightsmall]

I have several flights with the improved -472 and with firmware V15.3.3 and it works well. Not dropping targets as before and I am slowly gaining confidence that I am "seeing" all possible traffic. I have been flying mostly in the mountainous southern Arizona area around Tucson and Phoenix. Occasionally I will see a target disappear but that only seems to happen when a plane is flying at a lower altitude and flies into a radar mountain shadow or descends below an altitude where radar coverage would is doubtful. I really like the fact that I'm getting reliable 1090 and 978 traffic direct, airplane to airplane, from those planes equipped with either 1090 or 978 out. My status report in the lower right part of my Dynon display sometimes briefly drops from ADSB OK to TIS OK or ADSB NO RADAR but that only seems to happen when the receiver is switching from one ADSB tower to another. The status display might switch back and forth a couple or three times in a few seconds but recovers stability nicely. I have not seen any traffic displays or warnings coming from my own plane. I've challenged the new equipment/software rather hard by flying low around the Tucson area mountains and I think it is working as well as the ADSB system is capable of doing. I'm happy with it.

 

[GalinHdz]

So how do we go about getting our "old" -472 replaced/upgraded to a "new" -472 unit? Do we have to contact DYNON or will DYNON contact us?

:-?

 

[jakej]

I’m guessing Dynon will announce when they are ready to do that, probably working on the best solution that helps everyone - they know that many are waiting for a solution.[ch128521]

 

[rleffler]

I had similar experiences with the ADSB status until I used the Flightaware filter. I've not had an unexpected status change since then.

I have several flights with the improved -472 and with firmware V15.3.3 and it works well. Not dropping targets as before and I am slowly gaining confidence that I am "seeing" all possible traffic.  I have been flying mostly in the mountainous southern Arizona area around Tucson and Phoenix. Occasionally I will see a target disappear but that only seems to happen when a plane is flying at a lower altitude and flies into a radar mountain shadow or descends below an altitude where radar coverage would is doubtful. I really like the fact that I'm getting reliable 1090 and 978 traffic direct, airplane to airplane, from those planes equipped with either 1090 or 978 out. My status report in the lower right  part of my Dynon display sometimes briefly drops from ADSB OK to TIS OK or ADSB NO RADAR but that only seems to happen when the receiver is switching from one ADSB tower to another. The status display might switch back and forth a couple or three times in a few seconds but recovers stability nicely. I have not seen any traffic displays or warnings coming from my own plane.   I've challenged the new equipment/software rather hard by flying low around the Tucson area mountains and I think it is working as well as the ADSB system is capable of doing.  I'm happy with it.

 

[dwightsmall]

I installed the Flightaware filter too but still had some traffic drops so I removed the filter and installed the improved SV-472. I understand that the improved -472 has filtering and has improved sensitivity. Along with the new firmware, 15.3.3, I now get excellent results.

 

[rvator51]

Hi Dwight,

How did you get your hands on a new and improved 472? I am hearing months before they will be available to swap out original 472 units.

 

[swatson999]

I honestly don't care if it turns out to be months, as long as I get on a list and eventually get one. I'm fine waiting (and actually dread crawling back in the aft area to swap it out ).

I've flown for over 20 years before ADS-B in, I can wait a few more months for an improved version. My Mark I Eyeballs still work just fine.

 

[turbopilot]

I loaded the new software, running original 472 (with firmware update) and FlightAware filter. So far I don't see any difference.

So it is entirely possible those of us running an old 472 with new firmware and a FlightAware filter will not see any difference with a new 472 if the only change in the hardware is better filtering.

What ever happens my ADSB IN functionality appears to be performing nominally now.

 

[mrdaud]

Again, just a word of caution regarding the FlightAware filter. There are at least two reports suggesting that the filter may (may, not necessarily does) squelch the 978 signal to the extent it is not processed through the 472. Remember, a by-pass filter passes specific frequencies and blocks any others. Understandably, those experiencing extreme 472 malfunctions that went to the filter did so with good cause. However, once Dynon institutes their fix, and if individuals keep the filter, they may not be getting full function of the 472 (no 978), even though the 1090 input is fine. The only way to tell is by bench testing or structured air-to-air testing. It would be nice for Dynon to fully test the filter in their system and provide some feedback.

 

[GalinHdz]

I loaded the new software, running original 472 (with firmware update) and FlightAware filter. So far I don't see any difference.

So it is entirely possible those of us running an old 472 with new firmware and a FlightAware filter will not see any difference with a new 472 if the only change in the hardware is better filtering.

What ever happens my ADSB IN functionality appears to be performing nominally now.

I upgraded my SkyView display and -472 firmware yesterday. Today I did two 1hr flights and the "old" -472 with the upgraded firmware worked significantly better. I had no drop outs but didn't have anything to compare the data against so I don't know if I was displaying all the available ADS-B traffic.

https://flightaware.com/live/flight/N819PR/history/20180317/1500Z/KSGJ/KGIF

https://flightaware.com/live/flight/N819PR/history/20180317/1900Z/KGIF/KSGJ

FWIW: "old" -472, updated firmware with an installed FlightAware filter.

 

[Dynon]

Again, just a word of caution regarding the FlightAware filter.  There are at least two reports suggesting that the filter may (may, not necessarily does) squelch the 978 signal to the extent it is not processed through the 472.  Remember, a by-pass filter passes specific frequencies and blocks any others.  Understandably, those experiencing extreme 472 malfunctions that went to the filter did so with good cause.  However, once Dynon institutes their fix, and if individuals keep the filter, they may not be getting full function of the 472 (no 978), even though the 1090 input is fine.  The only way to tell is by bench testing or structured air-to-air testing.  It would be nice for Dynon to fully test the filter in their system and provide some feedback.

The filter is actually broad enough (in actual performance) to cover both the 978Mhz and 1090Mhz bands. In actual practice, it helps real-world performance on 978Mhz more than on 1090Mhz. The new hardware has improved sensitivity, which means you'll see both traffic and weather from airplanes and towers further out. The although the original hardware + filter + new software will see some improvements, it will only get you so much. For some of you, it may actually work well, but ultimately, you deserve better, and so we'll be swapping them all out (yes, it will take some time) for the newer hardware that gets you the performance you deserve.

 

[Dynon]

So how do we go about getting our "old" -472 replaced/upgraded to a "new" -472 unit? Do we have to contact DYNON or will DYNON contact us?

  :-?

Production is limited for now. We know about all of you that have traded-in your original -470s, as well as folks that bought -472s directly from us. We'll be in touch if you're in one of those categories. If you bought a -472 elsewhere, hang tight. We'll have info available soon on a trade-in program for everyone. Thanks for your patience!

 

[alexe]

I had a chance to fly twice today with the NEW -472 and the 15.3.3 firmware. First, let me say there has been a great improvement in stability. Targets were displayed consistently and reliably.

The only issue I noticed was that on four or five occasions, target aircraft were displayed twice on the display. In each case the vector arrows were slightly different in length, but were pretty much overlayed on top of one another. After a short while, the double display cleared up in each of the observed cases. Could this be some sort of artifact of the new “coast” feature?

 

[swatson999]

I had a chance to fly twice today with the NEW -472 and the 15.3.3 firmware. First, let me say there has been a great improvement in stability. Targets were displayed consistently and reliably.

The only issue I noticed was that on four or five occasions, target aircraft were displayed twice on the display. In each case the vector arrows were slightly different in length, but were pretty much overlayed on top of one another. After a short while, the double display cleared up in each of the observed cases. Could this be some sort of artifact of the new “coast” feature?

I've seen that before, with the older software, so perhaps not.

As an aside, flying this weekend, I got a traffic alert on what appeared to be an aircraft waaaaay away from me (10 miles or so) that displayed as having a HUGE velocity vector which crossed my immediate path. As in, the plane would have to doing Mach something or other! It was only there for a second or three, then displayed correctly (and no more alert). Got my attention

If it ever happens again, I'll try to bag a screen grab...

 

[tylerpattison]

The only issue I noticed was that on four or five occasions, target aircraft were displayed twice on the display.

Alexe,
We refer to this phenomenon as 'ghosting'. The most frequent cause of ghosting is marginal radar or ADS-B ground station coverage. It unlikely that it is related to the traffic coasting feature.

 

[alexe]

Thanks Tyler. It’s just odd that I have never observed this “ghosting” of other aircraft before when running the old -472 (and -470) and pre 15.3.3 firmware. Don’t get me wrong, I can live with it. I just thought I would share my experience with the new hardware and software.

 

[Jrskygod]

I flew with the new ADSB 472 and 15.3 today and the difference was remarkable. It appears that Dynon finally got it right. Today was a typical traffic day and I have never seen so many targets with no drop outs before.

Those of you that are waiting be patient - it will be worth it.

 

[caummisar]

will the form factor be the same as the current original 472 box and connectors?

Yes, all 472's use identical mechanical features and wiring.

If its going to be a while before I get a replacement 472 for my 470, does Dynon have a dummy 472 box I can get so I can move ahead with my build?  I have to change or re-build the antenna cable and dSub connector and it would be nice to have a box to mount and connect to while waiting....even a returned early 472 would help.

 

[Raymo]

If its going to be a while before I get a replacement 472 for my 470, does Dynon have a dummy 472 box I can get so I can move ahead with my build?  I have to change or re-build the antenna cable and dSub connector and it would be nice to have a box to mount and connect to while waiting....even a returned early 472 would help.

The connection to the 470 is the same as the 472, based on prior Dynon responses to the question. Only the mount holes will change. The mount hole pattern is shown in the installation manual, page 1404 of the AD revision.

 

[caummisar]

If its going to be a while before I get a replacement 472 for my 470, does Dynon have a dummy 472 box I can get so I can move ahead with my build?  I have to change or re-build the antenna cable and dSub connector and it would be nice to have a box to mount and connect to while waiting....even a returned early 472 would help.

The connection to the 470 is the same as the 472, based on prior Dynon responses to the question. Only the mount holes will change. The mount hole pattern is shown in the installation manual, page 1404 of the AD revision.

Sorry to differ, but the 470 dSub and antenna connection are on one side and the 472 has those connections on two different sides.  Envision this.  Hold the 470 with the dSub and the antenna in the down orientation.  In the same orientation, the 472 connections would be: dSub to the left and and the antenna connection to the right.
Also, the 470 "box" dimensions are approximately 7" x 4.5" x 1.1" in outside dimensions. The 472 is is approximately 2.79" x 4.10" x .97" in outside dimensions.

Thanks