7
Debate: Did digital bus troubleshooting get easier or harder after the switch from ARINC 429 to ARINC 664?
I've seen avionics techs split on whether the old 429 wiring was more forgiving than dealing with 664's timing issues, but in my experience after retrofitting a 737-800 last fall, the diagnostic tools are way better yet the fault isolation is trickier - anyone else find the learning curve steeper than expected?
3 comments
Log in to join the discussion
Log In3 Comments
cameronb522mo ago
Nah @michael_patel, you're glossing over how 664's timing jitter makes fault isolation a totally different beast than 429's voltage drops.
7
noah_chen1722d ago
Last fall when I swapped out a 429 setup on an old Hawker, I was totally with @michael_patel on this one. I figured 664 was just a protocol swap and the tools would make everything easy. But after spending two days chasing a timing jitter issue with @cameronb52's help, I changed my mind. The diagnostic software is way more powerful now, but finding where the problem lives in the network is a whole different skill. I had to learn a bunch of stuff about packet timing that I never needed with 429's simple voltage checks, and that part is definitely harder.
6
michael_patel2mo ago
...and honestly I'm not sure it's that deep. People act like learning a new protocol is climbing Everest, but it's really just reading a manual and messing around with a test rig for a weekend. The tools are better, sure, but that doesn't make the old stuff any harder to diagnose if you actually knew what you were doing. Feels like folks just want an excuse to complain about progress.
4