Avidyne Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > Avidyne General > IFD 5 Series & IFD 4 Series Touch Screen GPS/NAV/COM
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Flight data transfer from IFD540 to Aspen
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Flight data transfer from IFD540 to Aspen

 Post Reply Post Reply
Author
Message
Cruiser View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie
Avatar

Joined: 24 Feb 2017
Location: Ohio
Status: Offline
Points: 55
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Cruiser Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Flight data transfer from IFD540 to Aspen
    Posted: 29 Jan 2019 at 7:07pm
I have noticed that the flight path data is not being displayed on my Aspen PFD/MFD .
The flight plan route show correctly but the curved path course does not transfer from the IFD540 to the Aspen screen.

I noticed that the HOLD depictions are also missing. The IFD540 shows the actual flight path for entry i.e. parallel, teardrop etc. on the screen but only the standard hold image is shown on the Aspen units.

Anyone know why this data is not getting transferred?

TomK


Edited by Cruiser - 29 Jan 2019 at 7:09pm
Back to Top
nrproces View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie


Joined: 19 Sep 2016
Location: Marion, MT
Status: Offline
Points: 46
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote nrproces Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30 Jan 2019 at 7:41am
Is this a recent phenomenon, or did it just become noticed? Annual recently, or other equipment install since it started? Could be a stream or settings issue, but more information is required to troubleshoot.


Edited by nrproces - 30 Jan 2019 at 7:43am
Sauce
Back to Top
Cruiser View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie
Avatar

Joined: 24 Feb 2017
Location: Ohio
Status: Offline
Points: 55
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Cruiser Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30 Jan 2019 at 9:15am
This condition was actually brought to my attention. I did not notice it so I can't say that it was a change or always this way.
The IFD 540 is wired to the Aspens via 429 data lines per the install instruction.

I thought what was shown on the Avidyne would be shown on the Aspen.
Back to Top
nrproces View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie


Joined: 19 Sep 2016
Location: Marion, MT
Status: Offline
Points: 46
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote nrproces Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30 Jan 2019 at 12:38pm
Well, I have a pro 1500 system that is driven by my 540, on the MFD, which is the second Aspen system that is what I get, a repeat of the 540 stuff, on the primary I do not get that information. What Aspen system do you have?
Sauce
Back to Top
Cruiser View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie
Avatar

Joined: 24 Feb 2017
Location: Ohio
Status: Offline
Points: 55
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Cruiser Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30 Jan 2019 at 2:48pm
here is an image
Capture2.JPG
Back to Top
nrproces View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie


Joined: 19 Sep 2016
Location: Marion, MT
Status: Offline
Points: 46
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote nrproces Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 Jan 2019 at 8:35am
Is auto course enabled? You are at the fix, what is the next fix on your 540? I can only see the Aspen, do you have this shot with the 540 in view?
Sauce
Back to Top
Cruiser View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie
Avatar

Joined: 24 Feb 2017
Location: Ohio
Status: Offline
Points: 55
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Cruiser Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 Jan 2019 at 1:40pm
My IFD540 shows the HOLD racetrack with the parallel entry path and the message at the bottom of the screen Parallel entry.


Edited by Cruiser - 02 Feb 2019 at 8:45am
Back to Top
Tquigley View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie
Avatar

Joined: 01 Feb 2019
Location: Athens, GA
Status: Offline
Points: 3
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Tquigley Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Feb 2019 at 12:02pm
We’ve had the exact same issue.  Approaching KAHN from the south, we specified the RNAV20 with procedure turn at UMMIL. 540 showed proper route, Aspen PFD showed the CDI properly but the MFD did not update magenta line to proper path.  If you look at the top of the MFD it shows that we are on an active segment to KAHN heading 359 degrees and then to UMMIL.  But 359 degrees is the heading to UMMIL and KAHN is more like 280 when this photo was taken.  These photos were several minutes after activating the approach.  Telling it to go direct UMMIL several times didn’t change anything.  Eventually I added UMMIL manually as a waypoint and that fixed it.  That was last weekend.  Yesterday I specified the ILS 27 and things updated immediately.  Very puzzling.  Any ideas?  Getting close to my month in and considering putting the 530 back in and returning the 540 if this keeps up. 









Back to Top
Cruiser View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie
Avatar

Joined: 24 Feb 2017
Location: Ohio
Status: Offline
Points: 55
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Cruiser Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 Feb 2019 at 9:55am
looks like there was a gap in your flight plan. That might have something to do with it.
Back to Top
AviSteve View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group
Avatar

Joined: 12 Feb 2018
Location: Melbourne, FL
Status: Offline
Points: 568
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote AviSteve Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 Feb 2019 at 11:46am
Originally posted by Cruiser Cruiser wrote:

My IFD540 shows the HOLD racetrack with the parallel entry path and the message at the bottom of the screen Parallel entry.
The IFD map is drawn using every bit of information that the IFD has regarding the flight plan.  The Aspen, however, is being driven by the ARINC 429 GAMA Graphics stream.  The GAMA 429 stream doesn't have enough features or capacity to fully replicate what you'll see on the IFD.  That's a function of the decades old spec, not the IFD.  In the specific case you illustrated, the IFD will show a hold entry and the candy-stripe next leg, but the Aspen (or any other device using the GAMA Graphics) will only shown the basic hold.
Steve Lindsley
Avidyne Engineering
Back to Top
AviSteve View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group
Avatar

Joined: 12 Feb 2018
Location: Melbourne, FL
Status: Offline
Points: 568
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote AviSteve Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 Feb 2019 at 11:53am
Originally posted by Tquigley Tquigley wrote:

... KAHN ... Very puzzling.  Any ideas?
I have noticed before that the Aspen is very slow to respond to changes in the ARINC-429 stream.  I'm not sure exactly why that is.  It actually appears to process some of the data quickly, but the active waypoint and the graphics are really slow. 

I did try your exact example using an Aspen PFD and it did ultimately update to UMMIL, but it was minutes before that happened.   I was simultaneously running one of our Entegra MFDs and it responded to the same data stream almost immediately.  It may have something to do with the preceding gap, as suggested.  I'll try to run a few more informal tests here to see if I can do anything in the GAMA graphics stream to kick start the Aspen while not breaking any of the other devices that typically connect to that same stream.
Steve Lindsley
Avidyne Engineering
Back to Top
Tquigley View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie
Avatar

Joined: 01 Feb 2019
Location: Athens, GA
Status: Offline
Points: 3
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Tquigley Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 Feb 2019 at 12:19pm
Thanks for the quick reply.  Our experience is that sometimes it does update after several minutes, other times is simply doesn’t update. Still others it works normally. It was sometimes slow with the Garmin, but never more than 15-20 seconds.   In the attached case, we let it go more than 10 mins with nothing.  Most unsettling is that the Aspen did NOT behave this way with the Garmin 530w so we cant be blaming the Aspen.  Either I screwed something up on the install or the 540 is doing something different and isn’t a perfect substitute for the Garmin.

I’m about to send an email with a few more examples (and some other bugs/questions) to your support email address.  Happy to email them directly to you as well if you would like.  


Edited by Tquigley - 04 Feb 2019 at 12:20pm
Back to Top
AviSteve View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group
Avatar

Joined: 12 Feb 2018
Location: Melbourne, FL
Status: Offline
Points: 568
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote AviSteve Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 Feb 2019 at 4:50pm
Originally posted by Tquigley Tquigley wrote:

Thanks for the quick reply.  Our experience is that sometimes it does update after several minutes, other times is simply doesn’t update. Still others it works normally. It was sometimes slow with the Garmin, but never more than 15-20 seconds.   In the attached case, we let it go more than 10 mins with nothing.  Most unsettling is that the Aspen did NOT behave this way with the Garmin 530w so we cant be blaming the Aspen.  Either I screwed something up on the install or the 540 is doing something different and isn’t a perfect substitute for the Garmin.

I’m about to send an email with a few more examples (and some other bugs/questions) to your support email address.  Happy to email them directly to you as well if you would like.  
I'm not trying to shirk responsibility, but there is an aspect of the Aspen that could be in play here.  I suspect they optimized their software for the Garmin stream and didn't necessarily strictly implement the GAMA 429 spec.  So, anything in our stream that is not in the Garmin stream might not be handled so well.  I believe that to be the case here since my best guess is that the cause of this behavior is the gap immediately preceding UMMIL.  The 530 doesn't have the concept of gaps like the 540 does and gaps *are* represented in the GAMA stream.

I did try a few quick software changes earlier today to see if I could kick-start the Aspen in this case, but to no avail.  I'd have to break open a lot of stuff right now in order to do any more in depth testing and experimentation.

I am curious, though, since there are plenty of users out there using Aspen.  Is anyone else noticing this kind of behavior?  If not, are other techniques being used for activating approaches that mask the behavior?  
Steve Lindsley
Avidyne Engineering
Back to Top
Bob H View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 26 Jan 2018
Location: NH - KMHT
Status: Offline
Points: 114
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Bob H Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Feb 2019 at 12:50am
Isn't it also fair to say that with the higher functionality of the IFD there is a lot more data being pumped out for the Aspen to process?  Sort of like trying to run Windows 10 on an old PC.  I wouldn't blame Windows 10 for the limitations of the hardware.
Bob
Back to Top
Tquigley View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie
Avatar

Joined: 01 Feb 2019
Location: Athens, GA
Status: Offline
Points: 3
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Tquigley Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Feb 2019 at 3:10am
I’m not trying to pick a fight with anyone or cast blame.   Given I see mainly happy reports of IFD540 users and just this (original post and mine) and a few other mentions of issues with aspen MFDs on this forum and no where else, my assumption is that I must have screwed something up.  There must be hundreds of installs with 540s and  and Aspen MFDs so,if this was an ongoing problem, I’d think you would have heard about it.  But, if I didn’t scree something up, it’s kind of a problem that the aspen will draw a line to the wrong place with the 540 in a way that didn’t happen with the Garmin 530 which it replaced.  If I was in IMC when that happened it wouldn’t have been fun.  

Avidyne advertises this as a direct swap for the 530w. Maybe I’m being unreasonable here but that to me means it should just work with rather than break things that worked with the 530. I just went back and reviewed the self install checklist again and nowhere does it say I can’t do it if I also have other things the 530 was driving. I mean isn’t it a safety of flight issue to expect it to interface as the 530 did if it is meant to be a direct replacement? I also just found a compatibility list that does not include the Aspen MFD. If this is really a problem, and your testing seems to suggest it is, shouldn’t there be a limitation for self installs that one only has compatible equipment interfaces with the 530 and, thus, the 540?  


Back to Top
PA20Pacer View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 07 Mar 2012
Location: Illinois (LL22)
Status: Offline
Points: 138
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote PA20Pacer Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Feb 2019 at 7:29am
Originally posted by AviSteve AviSteve wrote:

I have noticed before that the Aspen is very slow to respond to changes in the ARINC-429 stream.  I'm not sure exactly why that is.  It actually appears to process some of the data quickly, but the active waypoint and the graphics are really slow. 


Hi Steve-

I have observed the same behaviour with the Aspen. While it would be nice if the response was faster, it has not bothered me a great deal. This may be something on which you wish to work with Aspen, since many IFD540 users have opted for the Aspen PFD.

Regards,

Bob 
Bob Siegfried, II
Brookeridge Airpark (LL22)
Downers Grove, IL
Back to Top
AviSteve View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group
Avatar

Joined: 12 Feb 2018
Location: Melbourne, FL
Status: Offline
Points: 568
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote AviSteve Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05 Feb 2019 at 9:34am
Originally posted by Tquigley Tquigley wrote:

I’m not trying to pick a fight with anyone or cast blame.   ...
No offense taken, I truly am curious why we haven't heard about this before.  We did plenty of testing with several pieces of equipment that consume the GAMA 429 stream, including Aspen, during development.  We certainly noticed that the Aspen was slow to respond, but just never experienced a case that was as slow as this one.

We'll be taking a look at this exact case to see what we can do to improve the performance.
Steve Lindsley
Avidyne Engineering
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.01
Copyright ©2001-2018 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.055 seconds.