Skyview ARINC 429

[sandaville]

Will the Skyview system remote Arinc 429 module have more I/O channels than the current 2 available via the HS34 in current systems?

The reason I ask is that the information available on the wiki and other forum posts seems to limit the current 429 input uses to just the Garmin range of 429 capable GPS units. Will Skyview be supporting other 429 labels and appropriate EHSI display fields for such things as DME and ADF (example labels could include 001, 002, 012, 251, 252 & 312 for DME and 162G & 032 for ADF). No WAAS for Australia!

Also what if a second 429 capable Garmin GPS/NAV/COM unit were selected for install over a separate serial GPS and say an SL30 as GPS2 and NAV/COM2.

If you haven't commited to the number of 429 channels yet, I think it would be useful and future proofing for more than just the two. Maybe your ethernet network could allow multiple 429 modules for expansion.

 

[PhantomPholly]

Even if it does not, it should be possible to use switched inputs provided they don't require reconfiguration (e.g. the GPS ARINC from 2 GNS 430s).

But, yes, what ALL the vendors need is an input controller which can accept multiple inputs of multiple types and select between them.

 

[sandaville]

Agreed. Switched inputs would work when like for like units are being switched, but as you say if the config has to change to look for different labels then this is out. Dynon would need to support the labels for the piece of equipment connected.

It would also be a much nicer solution to have the source display as exactly what it is, say GPS2 instead of a generic GPS and ADF or VOR instead of generic NAV.

More I/O also gives room for expansion later. We are talking about a product whose design is based on a modular concept so I hope we can add I/O lines as we need them. I would hate to be restricted with a limited amount, only for some new tech to come along and we can't integrate into our system down the line.

 

[dynonsupport]

When we make an ARINC converter, it will still most likely support ARINC in the way it does today - 2 in, 1 out. This meets the needs of 90% of our customers, and unfortunately, adding ARINC channels is expensive in hardware, so we don't want to drive up the price of the base box.

We do expect that given the way the networking works on SkyView, you will be able to add a number of ARINC converters and do what you want with them.

I'm trying to remember but I think we support DME today over ARINC.

 

[sandaville]

Thanks for the quick reply. I heard about the excellent Customer Service, now I'm experiencing a little for myself.

When we make an ARINC converter, it will still most likely support ARINC in the way it does today - 2 in, 1 out. This meets the needs of 90% of our customers, and unfortunately, adding ARINC channels is expensive in hardware, so we don't want to drive up the price of the base box.

I was a little confused by this statement as I was sure I had seen a post on this forum about the ARINC interface not adding much to the cost of the current HS34 when someone had asked for just a basic HS34 box without the serial links. Sure enough I found this Dynon post:-

There is no current plan for a "simpler" HS34. The nav radio (ARINC and analog) interfaces just don't add that much to the cost.

Can you please clarify.

We do expect that given the way the networking works on SkyView, you will be able to add a number of ARINC converters and do what you want with them.

This is great news because we will be able to add whatever hardware we want now (assuming its supported) and also be safe with the knowledge that we will be future proof too (Software update assumed). This is 100% the right approach. WELL DONE DYNON.

I'm trying to remember but I think we support DME today over ARINC.

I also read this somewhere too. I believe you connect the DME to one of the HS34 429 inputs and configure DME input as DME ARINC not analog.
DME frequency selection is normally channeled from a NAV receiver so if I were to have switch selectable channeling from either NAV1 or NAV2 to a single DME, Will the HSI DME distance field appear only for the selected NAV source 1 or 2. i.e. do you check ARINC transmitted DME frequency (label 035G) against a NAV / DME pairing lookup table to ensure the DME data being received is indeed paired with the NAV frequency selected on the HSI and ignored for any other NAV frequencies.
Also could we have DME Time to go and DME groundspeed as HSI fields to configure on or off as wanted.

Great product by the way. Just trying to do my bit to help make it everything it can be. It all takes time right.

 

[dynonsupport]

I was a little confused by this statement as I was sure I had seen a post on this forum about the ARINC interface not adding much to the cost of the current HS34 when someone had asked for just a basic HS34 box without the serial links. Sure enough I found this Dynon post:-

The HS34 has a lot of extra cost because it has an expensive case, knobs, buttons, leds, light sensor, audio amp.... It's way more than ARINC. So in that case, just pulling one ARINC chip wouldn't let us make it for a lot less, especially since the volume would be low.

Since the new ARINC converter will basically just be an ARINC converter with no other requirements, the vast majority of the cost will be the ARINC circuit. It will also cost less than an HS34 since it costs us less. Since we've already designed a basic ARINC converter system I can tell you that you can't just add more channels without more processing horsepower, which then means a more expensive processor just to support extra channels that hardly anyone will use.

It's all a matter of relativity to the final cost of the product.

DME stuff...

I'll be honest on the DME over ARINC- the reason I don't remember if we even support it is because I've never been asked before. Not sure anyone has ever tried it. Given this, I can't say we're going to put any energy into making it better unless 100 users come to us and say it's their number one wish. As far as we know, we wrote some code and the market told us they didn't want it. I don't think it will do the things you need today, and I don't think it ever will given the way GPS is taking over the market and is so much more functional than a DME and just as legal.

Analog DME does work fine. I think we just never see an ARINC DME receiver in our systems because they are so expensive and DME receivers at all are far between in our market.