EFIS Features ? the Information Revolution

There are many amazing things about the ?glass cockpit? revolution. By virtue of their solid state design, failures due to mechanical problems have been virtually eliminated. The ability to bring the information from multiple instruments onto one screen has made the instrument scan smaller, and arguably more efficient. Costs for a highly reliable instrument panel ? with redundancy ? have gone done. But in my mind, all of these benefits (as important as they are) pale in comparison to the most promising technological advance represented in the growing EFIS movement ? the integration, processing, and display of useful INFORMATION to the pilot.

Sure, attitude information is useful, as is airspeed, altitude, or position. But think about it ? all of these things we are taught how to monitor early in our flying career. We do them automatically. But what about the more difficult aspects of flying ? particularly instrument flying? Think about all of the ?computations and calculations? that have traditionally been done in the pilot?s head. Generating this information takes brain cells, processing time, and are subject to mistakes. It is a sad fact that such mistakes are often the root cause of fatal accidents.

For instance, the simple task of forming a mental picture of where you are. Navigating with VOR?s, ADFs, and paper charts required a pilot to build a mental model of the surrounding environment. And then he or she had to rotate and translate that mental map as they maneuvered. And then came?.the moving map display! How hard is it to picture your position relative to the final approach course, the runway, and the surrounding terrain when the bloody electronics draws the dang picture for you?! Just think about how many brain cells are now free to do something else ? like maintain situational awareness about the weather, or your altitude.

Or how about all of those mental math exercises that we used to do? How long will the fuel last at your current use rate? Now how far can you go with that fuel? Well what are the winds doing? Can I make it to my destination, shoot an approach, fly to the alternate, and stil have reserves? And what if I climb 4,000? to get better economy ? will that help? Oh DANG! I just flew past my clearance limit while trying to do arithmetic! Modern EFIS software can do all of this for you ? calculate the current winds, show you the fuel you?ll have at every upcoming waypoint, It can tell you the current miles per gallon, specific fuel consumption, flow rate, fuel remaining, time remaining, and as you vary the red blue and black knobs, it will show the results in each of these parameters instantly! Gone are the days when we just had to guess and then wait a while to see if we had done any good.

So what is the purpose of this thread? To blog and pontificate on how good we have it? No?.I have higher expectations than that. I?d like to start talking about features ? things that actually help us, or can help us, fly better, safer, and with better situational awareness. What kind of features would you like to see in an EFIS? And then, folks (users, providers ? whoever), let?s see how many of these features already exist in systems that are available on the market! If someone says ?I?d like to see a moving map that lists how much fuel I?ll have at each airport on the map if I turn towards it right now?, it would be cool if someone else came back and said ?Hey, EFIS XXX and YYY do that right now!? And if you say ?I want an EFIS that shows the complete NOS approach plate with the airplane?s current position at all time??, some EFIS manufacturer might say ?cool idea ? maybe we?ll work on that?.? And maybe the thread will lead to a catalog of features that people can use to help them decide what system (current or future) best fulfills their needs.

And maybe this thread will die after one or two postings ? you never know?.

The rules are:

1) Post the features you want, know exist (and find useful), know don?t exist but you want?.post if you KNOW that a certain system answers those needs. Post if you know that they are on the way.

2) No vendor bashing ? this is POSITIVE thread. Be constructive. If someone has a feature, great. If they don?t, well?.chances are they are probably working on it anyways.

3) No outright advertising. Facts only. Keep it civil, all that jazz?..

Flight Director

Having flown behind a Flight Director and HITS. I find HITS really difficult. I love my flight director in my A36.

I want one of the EFIS Vendors to come out with a FD.

Living around mountains as I do, I have an intense interest in the prevention of flight into terrain accidents, as well as taking off on the wrong runway. I've got listings of terrain accidents that date back to the fifties, and there are far too many, including the recent ones.

Most of it, has boiled down to not having a "big enough" picture of the situation, when today's technology has already made it possible. In so many words, today's high tech could have prevented quite a number of recent accidents, had the aircraft had the equipment on board. Two examples are the ComAir wrong runway crash, and the Hendricks Motorsports flight into rising terrain. The Motorsports plane had a GPS, but it was the old line from point A to B type.

What I'm excited about, is the 3D rendered terrain mesh overlay systems, as well as combining this computer driven database with infrared images, as used in some GulfStream jets.

The whole point will be making severe IMC and nighttime look like mid day. This should even help prevent the average of three mountain accidents we seem to get around here, every year. I remember you (Paul) writing an article on these systems, which included a complete synthetic IFR approach, a year or so ago. Great stuff! Desktop flight simulations and Google already use data-bases that have much more definition and resolution than most aircraft setups that I've seen so far. With the advances in electronics, I can see the day, when high res 3D overlays should be a normal everyday experience for most panels. The pic in the example is from Google.

L.Adamson

http://img526.imageshack.us/img526/1621/google4yg3.jpg

Bingo Fuel Arc

Great idea Paul.

I'd like to tap a large EFIS screen w/my finger over an airport and have a little box pop up next to it with several options:

• Direct Goto (autopopulates GPS)
• Frequency (box shows all the radio freqs associated with that airport - I tap on one and it auto-feeds into my standbye)

In addition to that, I'd like a 'Bingo Fuel Arc' (similar to the 'cones of safety' that anywheremap uses. A circle (not a perfect circle - one that takes wind speed and direction into account) showing where I'll be when I reach bingo fuel.

b,
d

Paul,

Please start a company that markets such products and then give me a chance to come work for you. Or, head up a NASA project that does this sort of thing and then tell me how to come and join the project.

Sigh.

I am stuck working on airliner/military transport FMSs and cockpits. The stuff we are telling the government is "cutting edge" is badly designed rehashes of 1970s to 1990s software and hardware. For example, all of our products are stuck using a thing called an MCDU - a character text display terminal that is the primary user interface to all the FMS and all the FMS controls. Pathetic.

I can just off the top of my head design far better systems for my own RV. A few years back I tried to talk a friend who had once started and sold an avionics company into joining me in a venture to develop a system that would be a pilot for an airplane. Not an autopilot, no this idea was to have a system that could figure out in realtime what kind of airplane it was sitting in, then, using a similar process to what you or I would use, would perform experiments to determine how to fly the airplane it found itself in. Unfortunately, I couldn't figure out a business case for such a device and my friend is no working for a company that is doing helmet mounted displays. But it could work - I could figure out how to program a computer to do what I would do when I am sitting in a new airplane that I haven't flown before. I wrote a similar paper for a former employer about how to use a similar concept for an active anti-armor missile defense system, but it was considered too futuristic for the Future Combat System.

Right now, our avionics software is bogged down in 1970s-1990s technology. We are stuck with software supersitions about how software for safety critical systems has to be developed and it is killing off innovation. If I want to design a "new" device (say for an upgrade to the B-52 or the C-130) it has to interact with ARINC 429 and MilStd 1553 busses. Yuck. Worse, it may have to be designed to work in an ARINC 653 system. Old boat anchor technologies. And developing new software for an avionics system? You are talking about having the burden of DO-178B hanging around your neck.

What would I like in my RV if I had the time and energy to develop my own system? What is within my abilities as a software engineer? First, the airplane has to be fully controllable with a complete failure of the electrical system and all computers. Need a backup system of standby instruments. And the pilot has to have the ability to do whatever he needs to do in the airplane with only those backups instruments. The last two flight I have flown were meant to wean me off of my dependence on the GPS - I spent quality time in the CAP 172 flying VORs and NDBs around the state in the dark.

Second, and probably much more interesting to the discussion here, I would like to see a thin box device for a standard general purpose avionics control panel. Imagine a device that looks like a tablet computer with about a ten inch by ten inch screen. It could be about two inches think. Around the screen are a set of buttons much as you might see in an F/A-18 MFD. The panel is designed to run user interface graphics programs downloadable from separate mission computer(s). The panel has enough processor power to control the airplane in an emergency but is primarily designed to provide a graphics display. The panel has one to several eternet interfaces and several USB interfaces and perhaps a serial (RS232) type diagnostics port. Inside the software allows a mission computer to download any number of GUI programs as the mission computer(s) might offer. The firmware of the panel guarantees the integrity of the operation of the downloaded programs. Information is transferred between the panel and the mission computer(s) at ethernet or USB speeds. Realtime video is possible, so if say the mission computer provided a FLIR interface the the panel could display the FLIR to the pilot. Or perhaps a synthetic vision system to the pilot, or a realtime satellite weather imagery translated and rotated to match the pilot's synthetic vision.

Then there are one or more mission computers located somewhere else in the airplane that could determine the capabilities of the avionics independently from the user interface. Separating the mission computers helps with partitioning critical functions from less critical functions. The mission computers can do things like control a fly by wire system to fully automate the flight of the airplane from taxi to landing.

You could have a mouse pointer-like interface to the panels that is controlled by a second joystick for the right hand. It would have a thumb button to allow selections just like a mouse. Your left hand controls the stick like always and is used for direct control of the airplane but your right hand is used for controlling the avionics - and, perhaps the throttle/propeller by way of the mission computer (forward backward controls the throttle, side to side controls the pitch). Oh, and of course there is voice recognition software that could be added. Imagine getting into the airplane and simply telling it to fly a flightplan of your choosing from take off to landing. Very do-able at this point in time.

So much you could do - but only in an experimental aircraft. The regulations for software and hardware development for certified aircraft would make all of this almost impossible to attempt. Oh, how about this - the mission computer is constantly computing the ten best engine out landings from where you are at any time - and is able to present you with these options on the panel as soon as it determines that the engine has failed - and is capable of landing the airplane at the best one in case you fail to respond to the engine out (if say you were incapacitated). Using what it has learned from the onboard imagery collection system (your airplane carries along a video camera and correlates video of the ground in the areas you fly in with GPS and satellite data to constantly determine where a good landing site is). So say I take off from KGRR (Grand Rapids) on 26L. The airplane take pictures of the ground under the takeoff area and analyzes them to determine if there are landing sites for engine out. If it finds viable options, it stores them away for future reference. At a later date, if departing KGRR and you have an engine out the mission computer offers landing options throug the panels to the pilot. Just an idea...

Sigh. Now I have to go back to work and reverse engineer the 737 FMS software to figure out why the latest version is crashing in California but not in our lab.

Nice Thread


1. I would like to see some one come up with a runway overlay.

I see it as you come to the airport the runway is shown on the EFIS in front of you in some sort of floating 3D strip.

2. On the high end, EFIS with weather should give me the best runway to land on ... by showing the airport runways with a cross wind calc with each.

Ironflight said:

There are many amazing things about the ?glass cockpit? revolution. By virtue of their solid state design, failures due to mechanical problems have been virtually eliminated. The ability to bring the information from multiple instruments onto one screen has made the instrument scan smaller, and arguably more efficient. Costs for a highly reliable instrument panel ? with redundancy ? have gone done. But in my mind, all of these benefits (as important as they are) pale in comparison to the most promising technological advance represented in the growing EFIS movement ? the integration, processing, and display of useful INFORMATION to the pilot.

Click to expand...

When I was building my RV-7 I wanted these benefits for the electrical system. Using multiple boxes for discrete functions and 'dumb' 50-year old wiring technology was not what I wanted for my plane. Anyway, that's how Vertical Power got started and the same benefits you describe above where an EFIS is used to replace steam gauges applies to solid-state switching to replace breakers and switches and lots of complex wiring.

Generic thoughts

I would just like to see synthetic vision become the norm and *reliable* and then see the vendors keep adding graphical enhancements (basically how it's going already). Three product lines linear to 3 different levels of the latest 'hardware horsepower' (paralleled, of course, by cost.) Modular though so you could upgrade a piece at a time.

Customizable screen layouts and clutter levels to the point where the you can tweak your panel to look like your favorite flight sim.

The Green Arc and other features

After flying advanced-technology (i.e. 1980s-1990s) glass cockpits in the big Boeings, there is one EFIS feature that I enjoy and would find useful in many situations, both VFR and IFR. It's the dynamic "green arc" that, in an airliner, correlates to the point in space where you will reach your pre-set altitude. It moves as you change your vertical speed, and as you change the pre-set altitude.

A simpler version of this could be implemented in the experimental market by having the arc dynamically display where your current flight path intersects with the terrain, using the terrain database already found in many current EFIS map systems. In this form it would be nice for descent planning/monitoring, terrain awareness, and other uses, and would not require any pilot input.

Coupled with a preset altitude input from the pilot, it could function much like the "Honeywell green arc" I mentioned above, a feature which is nice for making step-down altitude restrictions and performing approaches.

Some people may laugh at such pilot "crutches," but I enjoy being on the point on the technology curve where manufacturers apparently have excess processing power and might actually be looking for ways to use it to enhance safety and situational awareness.

For any manufacturers out there who will peruse this thread, I urge you to spend at least as much time designing human-friendly ways to convey information as you do on figuring out how to acquire and process the data itself. More data on a screen does not necessarily make for a good EFIS.

My personal opinions are:

1. Simpler and "cleaner" presentations are always better.

2. OBS, heading, altitude, and baro (altimeter) controls should be operated with dedicated KNOBS. They should have no other function, and should operate intuitively. I dislike having to perform these functions with soft menus and buttons. Dynon has made a step in that direction with their HS-34 Expansion module. Every manufacturer should offer similar add-on boxes.

3. If a display system incorporates comm/nav frequency selection capabilites, I think the frequency selection should also be accomplished with dedicated knobs/buttons, a la the Garmin G1000. The less "heads-down" time for the pilot, the better.

3. HITS (Highway in the Sky) was a cool idea, but in practice it's harder to fly precisely using the fly-through-the-boxes type of display. ("Am I centered in the box or am I slightly high?") I see students all the time who spend so much time looking at the boxes that they get mesmerized and forget to keep other things in their crosscheck, like their altitude and airspeed -- especially on approaches. A good dual-cue flight director is far better for precise instrument flying. Again, just my opinion.

4. EFIS indications of engine settings (RPM and MP, mainly) are always better as analog presentations, in my opinion. Trends are much easier to detect when there are needles moving instead of numbers changing. With experience, a pilot can position the needle without even looking at the corresponding units -- just the way everyone used to do with conventional tachometers. (Boy, do I feel old all of sudden...)

5. Keep the bezels on the edges of the displays thin (i.e. close to the instrument panel.) I know of at least two EFIS manufacturers whose displays have such thick bezels that you can't see the top line of information on the screen if the screen is mounted even slightly low on the panel. Just a personal gripe, but hey -- this is a wish-list, right?)

Looking forward to other opinions!

Trends and Predictors

Very interesting ideas so far!

One of the features that I love on the Garmin 396/496 is the little line that protrudes forward of the airplane with a tick mark that shows where the plane will be in one, two, three, etc minutes. Very handy for figuring times of descent or climb. This is a very simple form of "predictor", and it can be made even better if it takes current turn rate into effect. The Shuttle Horizontal Situation display has predictor bugs that show where you're going to be in 20, 40, and 60 seconds, and are very handy for making sue that you're going to stay on the Heading Alignment Cone when turning to the runway. You just crank in a bank angle until the dots are on the curve. (Imagine this as a DME Arc and you'll understand).

tend and predictor information is great because it tells us the future consequences of what we are doing RIGHT NOW. If you don't like where the prediction says you're going, then it is time to take action! This can be applied to heading, altitude, airspeed, etc - once you have a system that can show you the world (a map, preferably 3D), and knows here you are, as well as where you are going, the display is simple.

I like the Flight Director comments....that really should be pretty easy for someone to code. I personally like the HITS displays, having played with them quite a bit in advanced technology simulators, but know that lots of folks have grown up with the traditional "V-Bar" FD's, and they are familiar. that should be a an easy selectable option on an EFIS screen - I know that GRT lets you choose at least three different ways to look at ILS data (needles, bars, or HITS), so having an FD-type could just be another.

Paul

BuckWynd said:

After flying advanced-technology (i.e. 1980s-1990s) glass cockpits in the big Boeings, there is one EFIS feature that I enjoy and would find useful in many situations, both VFR and IFR. It's the dynamic "green arc" that, in an airliner, correlates to the point in space where you will reach your pre-set altitude. It moves as you change your vertical speed, and as you change the pre-set altitude.

A simpler version of this could be implemented in the experimental market by having the arc dynamically display where your current flight path intersects with the terrain, using the terrain database already found in many current EFIS map systems. In this form it would be nice for descent planning/monitoring, terrain awareness, and other uses, and would not require any pilot input.

Coupled with a preset altitude input from the pilot, it could function much like the "Honeywell green arc" I mentioned above, a feature which is nice for making step-down altitude restrictions and performing approaches.

Looking forward to other opinions!

Click to expand...

The GRT H1 has such a green arc that shows position at the point of intercept of the set altitude. I use it all the time.

Uh Oh

Ironflight said:

Very interesting ideas so far!

One of the features that I love on the Garmin 396/496 is the little line that protrudes forward of the airplane with a tick mark that shows where the plane will be in one, two, three, etc minutes.

Paul

Click to expand...

I must have missed that feature! I think I'll like it!

Great idea for this thread, Paul. Let's do some real blue sky (or cloudy sky) thinking and take advantage of computing power and speed and cheap memory.

Bubblehead said:

I must have missed that feature! I think I'll like it!

Great idea for this thread, Paul. Let's do some real blue sky (or cloudy sky) thinking and take advantage of computing power and speed and cheap memory.

Click to expand...

Yeah, just hunt around in the menus -- it's disabled by default. You can set the time scale to your liking.

Nomex Maximus said:

. . .
Oh, how about this - the mission computer is constantly computing the ten best engine out landings from where you are at any time - and is able to present you with these options on the panel as soon as it determines that the engine has failed - and is capable of landing the airplane at the best one in case you fail to respond to the engine out (if say you were incapacitated). Using what it has learned from the onboard imagery collection system (your airplane carries along a video camera and correlates video of the ground in the areas you fly in with GPS and satellite data to constantly determine where a good landing site is). So say I take off from KGRR (Grand Rapids) on 26L. The airplane take pictures of the ground under the takeoff area and analyzes them to determine if there are landing sites for engine out. If it finds viable options, it stores them away for future reference. At a later date, if departing KGRR and you have an engine out the mission computer offers landing options throug the panels to the pilot. Just an idea...

. . .

Click to expand...

I have been thinking this one over some more.

Suppose you have two small video cameras mounted one looking down and left and the other mounted looking down and right. You know the direction they are pointed relative to the airplane body. Suppose also you have an AHRS unit in the airplane and also a GPS unit. It seems to me that you now have the ability to do some calculations and determine where any object that appears in the video image is, and that is you should have as a result a reasonably precise lat lon of the object.

Now suppose that you have a mission computer (or a background task running on a mission computer) that commands the two cameras to take a picture of the ground, say, every 30 seconds. The computer then analyzes the image looking for large flat areas without obstructions. It is looking for, say, a 2000 foot stretch of field without fences, powerlines, ditches, cows, whatever. For each one that it finds in the image it calculates the lat lon of the two longest open stretches. If it hasn't already found this site on a previous flight, it tucks away the information about this potential emergency landing site in the database it is building. Later, post-flight, the pilot can review the potential landing sites found by the computer and approve or disapprove the site for future emergency use.

Now, let's say this pilot goes up again in either IFR conditions or night time. If the engine goes out then the the pilot can immediately be presented with the ten best emergency landing sites in range of the plane - and the ten best would take into account that we'd proably rather land at an airport than a field or a roadway. Even if the pilot cannot see the landing site the mission computer can fly the airplane to the site and if necessary make its best attempt to land should the pilot be incapactitated.

Seems to me the hard parts of this application are already done - we already have AHRS, we already have GPS, WAAS, and ADS-B. The panel can display a sectional of the immediate area. Give the computer control of the radios, transponder and ADS-B and there is darn little left for the pilot to do in an engine out emergency except try to get the engine going again and/or do the final landing flare. All that is really needed to do is the image processing (find long straight clearings, shouldn't be too hard), the database storage and lookup, and the GPS lat/lon calculations of the sites. Of course this also assumes that there is an autopilot to fly the airplane (a different application in the mission computer). Even if you didn't have this autopilot then just the ability of the mission computer to direct you to a known safe landing site with a HITS through darkness or IMC would be very useful.

What do you think?

Weight/Performance Speeds

Most of the higher-end EFIS systems keep a running total of fuel on board. It would be a simple matter for the pilot to enter zero fuel weight for the flight, then the EFIS can add the fuel to zero fuel weight to keep a running total of gross weight.

Not only would an actual current weight be useful information in itself, but now the EFIS could use that weight to display the Va and V(max L/D) for the actual current weight right on the airspeed tape.

Moreover, since the EFIS has the data to calculate density altitude, Vy and Vx could be displayed based on weight and density altitude as well.

Pat

Simulation Capability is Missing!

In my opinion, one of the biggest holes with new cockpit technology is the lack of available simulation capability. I don't want to get into the airplane to learn how to use a new EFIS, and I don't want to have to buy a vendor's EFIS product to use it for the first time. I want to download various vendors' products into a REALISTIC flight simulator and try flying them around my home airport (on my PC), shooting approaches I'm already very familiar with. I want to try out all the features in a nice, quiet environment with a cup of coffee that I don't have to worry about spilling in my lap.

Once I make a selection about which product to buy and install, then I want to get to know it intimately, again, on a PC simulator. Staying proficient with TAA (Technologically Advanced Aircraft) gets a whole lot easier (read safer, too) when you can practice for zero cost on days when its freezing drizzle outside and you don't want to open the hangar door. This approach to development, where a company's entire potential user base can be using their product prior to purchasing and installing it, would have many benefits for obtaining customer feedback on features, usability, enhancements, etc, and I would think it would be an EXTREMELY useful sales tool. Perhaps these sims could be integrated into existing FS products like MS FS. I look forward to the day when vendors at OSH pass out little business-card sized CDs with full-featured sims of their product on them, ready for you to try out at home.

Noah said:

In my opinion, one of the biggest holes with new cockpit technology is the lack of available simulation capability. I don't want to get into the airplane to learn how to use a new EFIS, and I don't want to have to buy a vendor's EFIS product to use it for the first time. I want to download various vendors' products into a REALISTIC flight simulator and try flying them around my home airport (on my PC), shooting approaches I'm already very familiar with. I want to try out all the features in a nice, quiet environment with a cup of coffee that I don't have to worry about spilling in my lap.

Once I make a selection about which product to buy and install, then I want to get to know it intimately, again, on a PC simulator. Staying proficient with TAA (Technologically Advanced Avionics) gets a whole lot easier (read safer, too) when you can practice for zero cost on days when its freezing drizzle outside and you don't want to open the hangar door. This approach to development, where a company's entire potential user base can be using their product prior to purchasing and installing it, would have many benefits for obtaining customer feedback on features, usability, enhancements, etc, and I would think it would be an EXTREMELY useful sales tool. Perhaps these sims could be integrated into existing FS products like MS FS. I look forward to the day when vendors at OSH pass out little business-card sized CDs with full-featured sims of their product on them, ready for you to try out at home.

Click to expand...

OK, how about this. You buy one of my panels. Since it is about the size of a tablet PC you simply remove it from the control panel and take it home with you. At home, you have a mission computer simulation running on a PC. Connect with an ethernet cable and your PC downloads the actual flight software into your panel. All you need then is a flight sim progran (would Flight Sim X work?) to drive the panel and you can fly your own panel.

For that matter, if the mission computer is absed on a PC design, then it should be a low enough cost item (like a laptop) that you can have a non-flight rated version at home. Just connect your panel to the mission computer you keep at home and you now have the same flight avionics and the same software at home to practice against as you would have in the airplane.

New database: Ideal Off-Field Landing Sites

This doesn't require the complexity of onboard cameras and complex processing algorithms to determine large flat spaces realtime in the aircraft. All the data already exists from satellite photos and topo maps. All is required is for somebody to make a database of such places, focusing on having at least one "suitable" site every XYZ square miles. Heck, you could even identify holes between airports where you could contact RVers to go find and "aerial survey" some suitable sites near their home base. As an example, I live near sod farms which have miles and miles of green grass fields perfect for an emergency off-field landing. Just need to put this spot into the master database which is updated continuously, just like airports, navaids, and TFR databases.

Looking out the window works pretty good for fields within gliding distance. Those that aren't don't matter! Having your head in the cockpit consulting computer databases during an engine failure is bad business.

My initial list:

* Moving map displays that can be customized, including views that look just like sectionals or low-level IFR en-route charts (MX20/GMX200 does this)
* Simple PFD modes with easy-to-use controls to set bugs for heading, altitude and VS (see Avidyne, below)
* Autopilot and flight director coupled with above-discussed bugs so that the bugs can be changed on the PFD and the AP follows without setting it again. AP modes are displayed on top of PFD (GRT and Avidyne do this, but indications could be larger)
* Choice of HSI presentations - traditional round with CDI/RMI needles, arc with mini-map, etc.
* Constantly computed glide circle (Chelton does this)
* Pop-up windows for traffic or terrain warnings on PFD.
* Clearly displayed NAV data (source, freq or waypoint, distance and heading) and ability to switch between sources.
* Horizontal and Vertical layouts

TODR

Avidyne display. Note easy-to-set bugs, which will command the AP. Also, NAV sources are easily identified and switched.

Yukon said:

Looking out the window works pretty good for fields within gliding distance. Those that aren't don't matter! Having your head in the cockpit consulting computer databases during an engine failure is bad business.

Click to expand...

I am talking about conditions where you can't see the ground. Also, while yes you can use a satellite photo database that isn't keeping you very current. You might identify a field from a satellite photo but you don't know how it is plowed recently or if there are cattle on it or fences, etc. Your onboard database is likely to be more current than anything else. Also, it it using pictures from less than 5,000 feet - much better resolution than the satellite pictures.

As for one's head being down to consult the database, First of all the reason you'd be using this is that there is nothing to see out the window. Second, all the computer is going to do is put up a menu of five or ten choices, perhaps on a close up of the sectional or of a satellite map. All you do is take one look at the screen and decide what you want to do.

It's about integration not more door bells

Although there are certainly more features that could be added to the various units already on the market (and as Doug pointed out, somebody is already doing most of them), I think we are at the point of needing to integrate the functionalities of different systems to get a greater output. The one plus one equals three approach...that is, taking advantage of the information from one system to get better information when they are combined.

As an example, Vertical Power started by integrating a lot of known information into identifying the flight mode. Now they are integrating the EFIS data into their systems. Ignoring the problems/expense of that approach, it shows that there is much more that you can do with combining information rather than just displaying it.

At some point (real soon) we get to an overload point of seeing it all and we will need to just see when systems are not working. For example, when a temperature rate of change is an issue and before it becomes a problem. Otherwise, I don't need to clutter the display with the temperature gauge. Of course I could call it up if I'm curious but otherwise I probably have much better things to so and the system can do a better job of noting the changes and trends than I can.

I see the systems adding a higher degree of logic, trend analysis and interpretation to add value while looking at the output of other systems (electronic ignition, etc) for the sources of data that can use integration.

Just a passing thought.

Some more

First I'd like to see Paul compile this in a table and while he's at it, show how many of the suggestions are already available in which boxes. I know GRT and the Garmin 496 together have quite a few including the runway or taxiway on the screen from passing overhead right down to landing. Then I'd like to see which box makers would respond. Paul, this is a terrific thread and I thank you for doing it.

Of those above, I especially like the idea of knowing which airports are within gliding range at current wind conditions. Needed input would be like the paragraph that follows. You need to know the aircraft's glide characteristics.

Now my wish list in addition to just about everything above. I would like to see the box compute and display in real time the angle of climb or descent. Why? Well, how about for short fields with trees? How about for ILS? It should be very easy to compute and find best glide this way, too. Flight testing would be quicker and more accurate.

Now let's stretch that a little. Could it compute angle of attack from attitude, airspeed, G's and angle of flight? I would still want my LRI, but I think that would be a valuable addition.

So far, I've stuck to things that can be determined with the sensors we already have. I'd like to see a strain gauge sensor on the engine mount to sense torque. From torque and RPM could be determined HP independent of mixture. As it stands now, GRT for example, computes power percentage with no regard to mixture and while close, it's not dead on. It uses MAP and RPM and altitude.

Yukon said:

Looking out the window works pretty good for fields within gliding distance. Those that aren't don't matter! Having your head in the cockpit consulting computer databases during an engine failure is bad business.

Click to expand...

I've found, that when the computer generated information is good enough; is that your mind is miles ahead of the airplane, situational awareness wise. In other words, you'll most likely be aware of all those "forced" landing spots well ahead of time (should they be in a database), as well as close by airport/airstrips.

L.Adamson

ncarmon said:

Having flown behind a Flight Director and HITS. I find HITS really difficult. I love my flight director in my A36.

I want one of the EFIS Vendors to come out with a FD.

Click to expand...

It appears that the Avidyne unit has one. Also, there is what appears to be one on the AFS unit, but no mention of it in the text that I found.

hevansrv7a said:

I'd like to see a strain gauge sensor on the engine mount to sense torque. From torque and RPM could be determined HP independent of mixture.

Click to expand...

You can get really close without a strain gauge, which would be affected by pulling G's, prop efficiency, and probably a lot of other things. The Dynon EMS uses the actual Lycoming table to calculate % power, including RPM, MAP, OAT, altitude, and fuel flow. It can even tell you if you are LOP or ROP in real time. It's the exact same data you would pull off the chart by hand, plus some magic to make it better

I know the bells and whistles will keep coming. I would like to see an easier way to install them (Marc hinted at this earlier in this thread.) We have fiber optics carrying hundreds of streams of information, yet I have FIVE wires running to a simple trim motor! One power wire and a few data wires running throughout the aircraft should be able to do almost anything. Need the landing lights on? Send a signal on the data lead and the internal switch in the landing light lets the already-present voltage light up the runway. Coded temperatures from all engine temp sensors could use one data link to the engine monitor. This would probably necessitate yet another standard, but it could actually lead to being able to add an instrument or system without major surgery.

Bob Kelly

Nick Leonard said:

The one plus one equals three approach...that is, taking advantage of the information from one system to get better information when they are combined.

As an example, Vertical Power started by integrating a lot of known information into identifying the flight mode. Now they are integrating the EFIS data into their systems. Ignoring the problems/expense of that approach, it shows that there is much more that you can do with combining information rather than just displaying it.

Click to expand...

Nick is right. Combining data in a way that is impractical or difficult with analog systems is where the real advantage is. EFIS systems do this today to simplify the scan and enhance positional awareness, and we've adopted a similar philosophy with electrical switching. This is not meant to be an advertisement but simply to highlight features that people might not be aware of. Combining information available on today's aircraft can lead to decreased pilot workload and increased safety. A few examples include:
- automatically turning on the boost pump if the fuel pressure drops.
- checking that the aircraft is configured correctly for each mode of flight (for example, making sure your flaps, trim, and mag switch are in the right position for takeoff. Yes, you can use a checklist but there are reliability issues on the human side)
- decreasing the trim speed at higher airspeeds
- disabling the flap switch above a certain airspeed
- turning on the landing lights when the traffic alarm goes off.
- turning off the landing light wig wag automatically below 70 knots.
- presenting checklists automatically right whenyou need them.

Any of these in itself is not a big deal. But you add them up and pretty soon you've added a good margin for safety and simplified the task of managing the aircraft so you can focus on flying. I personally find it very useful even on basic VFR flights, and very helpful in high traffic areas/IFR or when flying formation.

Just my 2 cents to add in support of technology helping to keep us safe!

hevansrv7a said:

Now let's stretch that a little. Could it compute angle of attack from attitude, airspeed, G's and angle of flight?

Click to expand...

GRT tells me that they are currently working on a computed AOA - it's not out yet, but at least you're not alone in thinking about it!

I'd love to compile all of the good ideas I've seen here in a comprehensive list....but I'm not going to make any promises! Time is the one non-renewable resource....

Paul

MCA said:

- automatically turning on the boost pump if the fuel pressure drops.
- checking that the aircraft is configured correctly for each mode of flight (for example, making sure your flaps, trim, and mag switch are in the right position for takeoff. Yes, you can use a checklist but there are reliability issues on the human side)
- decreasing the trim speed at higher airspeeds
- disabling the flap switch above a certain airspeed
- turning on the landing lights when the traffic alarm goes off.
- turning off the landing light wig wag automatically below 70 knots.
- presenting checklists automatically right whenyou need them.

Click to expand...

Add
- audible warning if airspeed above threshold and canopy open.

I like the single (dual?) data cable idea to reduce the mass of wiring that I am currently scared of encountering when I get that far!
I like the offline PC-based simulator idea as well. I see the Avidyne Entegra has one. I wish AFS would bring one out.

hevansrv7a said:

Now let's stretch that a little. Could it compute angle of attack from attitude, airspeed, G's and angle of flight? I would still want my LRI, but I think that would be a valuable addition.

Click to expand...

It's a pretty well known method and of course we have been thinking about this one - it's quite easy to do (simple calculation), but it's not perfect and in my humble opinion should never be used for more than entertainment value. I myself would never use it to land an aircraft unless in perfect conditions - and even then I would not "push it". It also is unsuitable for one of my favourite uses for AOA - steep banks at slow speed, the kind of thing your instructor warned you about.

If our customers insist (as they often do) we'll put it in (we have plenty of memory left) - but with a health warning attached.

Rainier
CEO MGL Avionics

Good topic - keep those comments comming gents...

Good topic and it has my attention.

Just one item (just a small teeny weeny comment) - looks like our systems (and those of one or two of our esteemed and most valued competitors) do most of the requests listed here out of the box in one way or another right now...

Some of the other, FLIR, satellite stuff... - what way should I put it ? Oh yes: "Watch this space".

Rainier
CEO MGL Avionics

I would like navigation display to allow use of scanned charts one of the standard formats (not a proprietary format unique to the manufacturer of the equipment. That way we could use sectionals, or terminal charts, etc.

I can do this currently on a laptop using a mapping software program but it is unwieldy in cockpit.
John

rjtjrt said:

I would like navigation display to allow use of scanned charts one of the standard formats (not a proprietary format unique to the manufacturer of the equipment. That way we could use sectionals, or terminal charts, etc.

I can do this currently on a laptop using a mapping software program but it is unwieldy in cockpit.
John

Click to expand...

We do that on Enigma, Voyager and Odyssey.
Yes, the format used is proprietary - but we have put a document describing the format in the public domain (download from our website) plus we make a free conversion utility available that we call "mapmaker". You can take any chart, picture or hand scribble in common image formats and Geo reference them and then use them.

The reason we use our own image file format for this (rather than, say a jpeg file), is that we need the raster to be perfectly geo referenced and tileable - so you can create a huge, unrestricted size map in multiple image files, is must be possible to seemlessly stitch the tiles together regardless of the actual source resolution (pixels per degree). Also, colors of the source maps need to be mapped to the color space of the instrument so the maps look good on a LCD display in sunlight. Raster maps tend to be big in size. So we also need to add a compression method to the data that allows random access to any part of the image - you don't want to have to load and decompress a 50 MByte file to extract just a small part of it...

We also do vector maps...

Terminal charts, airport diagrams etc are treated differently from maps. Here it makes sense to have individual images/files per item - suitably identified so you can select them easily.

Rainier
CEO MGL Avionics

AlexPeterson said:

It appears that the Avidyne unit has one. Also, there is what appears to be one on the AFS unit, but no mention of it in the text that I found.

Click to expand...

Yes, Avidyne has the FD available in certain OEM configurations, particularly the Cirrus. There is a separate illuminated pushbutton / annunciator that allows one to switch from FD guidance to autopilot control. That's another thing I like about Avidyne - they keep the functionality high but the displays simple.

AFS has claimed in their forum that they are working on providing FD functionality. Given their past performance, I believe that they will have a good implementation of the FD. Hopefully they can integrate the FD and autopilot, but that is a slightly different issue.

TODR

AntiGravity said:

Add
- audible warning if airspeed above threshold and canopy open.

Click to expand...

Yes, the VP-200 has that feature (in next software release, we are working on it now). It's actually a bit more advanced - you can tie the annunciators and alarms to each mode fo flight. So, for example, the canopy alarm only is active in run-up, takoff, cruise, landing modes. Same with engine and electrical alarms. You configure this yourself so you can set it the way you want it to work.

I'd like the capability to have an arc shown defining my maximum glide distance, given my altitude and best glide vertical speed. I would also like to hit a switch that allows this feature to go into "realtime", showing the arc changing as my altitude and vertical speed changes.

Would be REAL handy in case of dealing with an engine-out!

gns 430/530 standby freq monitor?

anybody know if it is possible to monitor the standby freq on the garmin gns 430 and 530 units? seems like you should be able to, maybe with some extra wiring and an audio panel.

clam said:

anybody know if it is possible to monitor the standby freq on the garmin gns 430 and 530 units? seems like you should be able to, maybe with some extra wiring and an audio panel.

Click to expand...

Not sure if it is possible, but it's probably a software problem. The SL-30 and SL-40 do it with software. There's only one receiver in the unit. While monitoring the standby frequency the radio is quickly switching over to the standby to check for radio traffic and then back to the primary freq. This is why when you hear a transmission on the standby freq there is a pulsing sound. It seems like this should be doable with the 430, but only with a firmware update from Garmin. Maybe their 430 receiver can't switch quickly enough to do this?

Auto Trim

Integrating the EFIS with stick forces could allow for the plane to auto trim itself.

Say you are flying straight and level and to do this you have to keep pushing forward with two pounds of force, why not have the EFIS command some nose down trim?

You could do the same when climbing. Pull back on the stick and hold 100 MPH and steady state climb (not a loop) and have the thing dial in the proper amount of trim.

Same goes for the ailerons.

macrafic said:

I'd like the capability to have an arc shown defining my maximum glide distance, given my altitude and best glide vertical speed. I would also like to hit a switch that allows this feature to go into "realtime", showing the arc changing as my altitude and vertical speed changes.

Click to expand...

This is a feature in the Chelton EFIS today, and it is patented. The update is in real time. It calcualtes the glide distance at each point around the plane, so the arc distance varies depending on the terrain.

Victor Airways

I'd like to be able to dial in a Victor airway by number and have the EFIS/moving map ask me how far I'd like to take it (final way point). Then it would include all of the intermediate waypoints on my route, without me having to punch them each in individually. For example, if I fly from my home base of KSBP down to San Diego, I'll probably get V597. That has 7 seperate waypoints going through the L.A. basin that I have to manually enter. I would be easier to dial in V597 ending at SAN, and be done with it. This would be especially helpful if you got re-routed in flight. I'm pretty sure the new display by L-3 is supposed to do this, but I don't know if any others do.

Paul

I am just starting the wiring process so my response may be a bit biased...

For me the biggest improvements could come from ease of installation. The ideal state map for me would be

Step 1: Hook up power and GND
Step 2: Repeat step 1 for for each bus power bus
Step 3: Connect ethernet cable from ethernet hub
Step 4: Repeat step 3 for each backup ethernet hub
Step 5: Go fly

All devices in the cockpit would be connected to one another and could send data back and forth as necessary. To paraphrase Bill Gates - "100MB of bandwidth ought to be enough for anybody." A step further would be to have all the devices 802.11x compatible and not need wires at all. Although, I'd probably feel more comfortable with wires.

hevansrv7a said:

...
Now my wish list in addition to just about everything above. I would like to see the box compute and display in real time the angle of climb or descent. ...

Click to expand...

It came to me when re-thinking this that the GRT and perhaps others are already doing this in a way. The "flight path marker" is doing it. All we need is something to make its vertical position more quantified.

Not necessarily an EFIS issue but...

...when are we going to transition away from AM aviation band radios and into digital voice and data? Seems to me that change is way long overdue...

...I am thinking of a system that pretty much comes on when you power on the aircraft and automatically establishes and maintains comms with ATC depending on where you are and what you are doing. Automatically and continuously gets weather digitally and is ready at any moment to display it to the pilot. Automatically updates the altimeter. Automatically sets the transponder as directed by ATC. Automatically connects you to the appropriate ATC or FSS. Allows ATC to call you even if you aren't listening to them.

... I am thinking of a high UHF or microwave band of freqs that would have drastically more bandwidth than the current avband. Automatic transfer from aircraft to aircraft of position and altitude so everybody know where everybody else is in relation to themselves.

Seems like this is all easy technically and way overdue.

--NM

...and voice control...

...it also seems to me that voice control of an FMS is really not out of reach either technically. Imagine you get into the airplane, put on the headphones and tell it something like

"Enter flightplan.

After taxi, take off from Kilo Golf Romeo Romeo runway two six left at Bravo.

Fly runway heading.

Engage autopilot.

Activate flightplan.

Climb to three thousand feet.

Turn direct to Kilo Mike Kilo Golf.

Turn direct to Kilo Tango Victor Charlie.

Approach and land Kilo Tango Victor Charlie.

End flightplan"

Review the flight plan and if OK, then tell the computer:

"Activate flightplan."

And, as you make these voice commands, the EFIS is showing what the computer has understood you to command. Once verified, the computer calculates all of the flight plan parameters and displays and updates the flightlog as you fly. Even with today's comms technology the flight computer ought to be able to track all available VORs and DMEs to combine with GPS in a Kalman filter type solution to provide enhanced nav position integrity. Flight computer should also be able to automatically tune radios so all you should have to do is say, "Contact Kilo Golf Romeo Romeo clearance delivery" to start things going.

...and having thought about it some more, I really don't want to see much in front of me when things are going right. For example, I want little more than the current airspeed, altitude and heading when I am flying straight and level on autopilot. And the current position displayed on a sectional map.

I only want the display to get detailed when things become off-normal. Machines are good at doing repetitive work - let the machine do the work of monitoring the engine, and maintaining course and altitude, the instrument scan and let me know if there is something that requires my intervention.

n468ac said:

Nice Thread


1. I would like to see some one come up with a runway overlay.

Click to expand...

The MGL box does this today. Download their manual and check it out. Lots of other cool features.

This has been an awesome thread so far! Thank to all that have posted!

..but wait to you see what our engineers have uncorked for our new EFIS.

The thing is AMAZING!

I can't divulge the unique features just yet for fear of being lynched my my design staff but we plan on launching at OSH!!!

I will tell you that it's going to be a very very advanced EFIS competing at a basic basic price point!

Mathew Sharp

Tick mark??

Ironflight said:

Very interesting ideas so far!

One of the features that I love on the Garmin 396/496 is the little line that protrudes forward of the airplane with a tick mark that shows where the plane will be in one, two, three, etc minutes.Paul

Click to expand...

Paul,
I've had my 496 for a year now and just don't "see" those tick marks you mention. What am I missing?

Regards,