August issue of Flying: ARNAV has received FAA approval for its Engine Trend Monitoring/Data Recording (ETM/DR) system, which will display engine data on its MFDs, and Cirrus will offer it as an option in the SR20.
August issue of Flying: ARNAV has received FAA approval for its Engine Trend Monitoring/Data Recording (ETM/DR) system, which will display engine data on its MFDs, and Cirrus will offer it as an option in the SR20.
Does anyone know when???
Harrell
When? Field installable retrofit? (There some minor disadvantages of flying early production models…)
Han K
August issue of Flying: ARNAV has received FAA approval for its Engine Trend Monitoring/Data Recording (ETM/DR) system, which will display engine data on its MFDs, and Cirrus will offer it as an option in the SR20.
When? Field installable retrofit? (There some minor disadvantages of flying early production models…)
According to Cirrus, the Arnav display already has all the hardware required for the engine monitoring, all that is needed are the sensor probes (EGT and CHT) to be installed and wired (the firewall connector has provision for them), and to have the existing fuel-flow sensor wired to the Arnav, and new software loaded. The sensors are standard, the software has been the missing link.
Arnav have had engine monitoring in their small displays for a while, it seems to have been too hard to port it to the big display. So don’t hold your breath.
There are also problems with the Arnav moving map and checklists - under certain conditions the Arnav display does not correctly update after changes are made on the 430 - the “reference only” limitation is to be taken very literally (I believe Robin Taylor found this out, too). The checklists are inadequate - I’ll be using the Wings Aloft printed checklist unless the Arnav ones can be edited.
What really bugs me is that it would be so easy to fix these things - it’s all just software!! The reality is that Arnav seemingly don’t care, and Cirrus don’t have the expertise.
What really bugs me is that it would be so easy to fix these things - it’s all just software!! The reality is that Arnav seemingly don’t care, and Cirrus don’t have the expertise.
I think we can all agree that the SR20 excels when you look at features, performance, comfort, all at a great price. They picked some of the best avionics like Garmin and STEC. But that ARNAV leaves something to be desired. They may be working overtime to improve the product but who knows. I hope that the people at ARNAV and Cirrus realize the shortcomings of this product! ARNAV may think they have the best product, but the consumer sure doesn’t have that perception and PERCEPTION IS REALITY.
If ARNAV would publish the interface specs, we’d see some action. This is a reference-only instrument, right? What do the regs say about owner mods to the software? Imagine how useful the ARNAV could be if it ran the PalmOS.
What really bugs me is that it would be so easy to fix these things - it’s all just software!! The reality is that Arnav seemingly don’t care, and Cirrus don’t have the expertise.
When? Field installable retrofit? (There some minor disadvantages of flying early production models…)
According to Cirrus, the Arnav display already has all the hardware required for the engine monitoring, all that is needed are the sensor probes (EGT and CHT) to be installed and wired (the firewall connector has provision for them), and to have the existing fuel-flow sensor wired to the Arnav, and new software loaded. The sensors are standard, the software has been the missing link.
I think the answer to ARNAV’a apparent apathy lies in their difficulty getting software programmers in the Seattle area. They along with most other companies in the area have long standing job postings for programmers.
I do avionics integration but am not a programmer. Maybe an interested real-time programmer and I should team up to help them. 
Arnav have had engine monitoring in their small displays for a while, it seems to have been too hard to port it to the big display. So don’t hold your breath.
There are also problems with the Arnav moving map and checklists - under certain conditions the Arnav display does not correctly update after changes are made on the 430 - the “reference only” limitation is to be taken very literally (I believe Robin Taylor found this out, too). The checklists are inadequate - I’ll be using the Wings Aloft printed checklist unless the Arnav ones can be edited.
What really bugs me is that it would be so easy to fix these things - it’s all just software!! The reality is that Arnav seemingly don’t care, and Cirrus don’t have the expertise.