Aspens with low frame rate

[emilpemil]

I've seen Aspens installed in a few airplanes. With synthetic vision turned on, it appears the display is only updating a few times a second. This makes updates appear jerky, and honestly it's harder to fly off the instruments with such a slow response. The update frequency is a bit higher with synthetic vision off, but still much lower than any other glass panel I've seen. I may have been looking at older Aspen units - has this improved in newer versions of the unit or is this on all models? Is there anything you can do to improve it? 

[carusoam]

Screen Refresh rate is probably in the specs.  Flying behind something with a refresh rate at one or two Hz is only possible on the calmest day... once or twice per second...

My experience using an early Garmin handheld device. It had a simulated TC that technically could be used in an emergency up to the point things got bumpy...

Compare the refresh rate to the roll rate of the Mooney.  Then add the unusual rates of turbulence...

Back to the Aspens...

What are the refresh or the calculation speeds?  Are they giving a range?

If a computer is multitasking, it is going to slow down...

If the computer speed is slow to begin with... are there any specs given by Aspen or anyone else regarding SV? And all the extra data handling?

Is there a simple button push to go directly to a simple AI mode if bumpy or needed?

Interesting topic!

Best regards,

-a-

[PTK]

An avionics tech at Penn Avionics mentioned this very issue to me about 6 or 7 years ago. We were looking at a demo unit they had. He described it as "jumpy" and to not expect it to be "fluid smooth." It has been this way since they first came out. Unless they've changed something, which I doubt, Aspen was then and more so today old technology.

[gsengle]

As far as I know the aspen is still the same hardware as it ever was.., and now long in the tooth as they say...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[gsxrpilot]

I don't have SV on my Aspen so can't speak to that. I do have the AOA for what it's worth. Mine is certainly "fluid" smooth. There is no perception of the screen refresh at all.

[StevenL757]

<———- Not allowing his Garmin dog admission to this fight  :-)

[MIm20c]

Aspen has a few tricks up their sleves and will be rolling out faster processing boards soon if not already. The displays already have a higher pixel density then some competitor units.  We are really talking about one circuit board and some code that could totally change the appearance going forward. 

Having said all that I’ve noticed the demo reel at the trade shows a little jerky with the SV, lots of terrain, traffic on a collision course, weather showing on the hsi, approach info displayed, etc. I have not seen the SV in real life. 

[Marauder]

I’ve recently added SVT and can’t say I noticed a difference between it on and it off. And I can’t say I have seen any jumpy refresh rates either. I have several YouTube videos posted under Marauder92V, you be the judge. My units were installed in 2012.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

 

[Marauder]

Not allowing his Garmin dog admission to this fight  :-)

He loves Garmin so much that he has yet to install ANY of their glass panels. And of course as the resident expert on glass panels, despite never owning one, he always seems to have a firm grasp on the short comings of them.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[PTK]

On 12/31/2017 at 3:29 PM, emilpemil said:

I've seen Aspens installed in a few airplanes. With synthetic vision turned on, it appears the display is only updating a few times a second. This makes updates appear jerky, and honestly it's harder to fly off the instruments with such a slow response. The update frequency is a bit higher with synthetic vision off, but still much lower than any other glass panel I've seen. I may have been looking at older Aspen units - has this improved in newer versions of the unit or is this on all models? Is there anything you can do to improve it? 

Real life-like motion starts at around 200 fps and the eye detects motion as smooth or "fluid" at around 80 fps. The motion picture industry standard I believe is 24fps. 

Since we aren't talking about high speed gaming, which requires the brain quickly interpret and react to multiple moving targets, a lower fps will suffice.  For our purposes in a pfd we are talking about movement detection and interpertation and for this the minimum fps is around 15 to 20 fps.

Now let's take the G500 and Aspen as examples. The G500 runs at about 60 fps. As a comparison almost all iphone and iPad screens, with the exception of the ipad pro, run at 60 fps. (The pro runs at 120 fps.) To  the human eye 60 fps approaches gaming fluidity rates. And this is with or without sv. The Aspen on the other hand with SV runs at a whopping 5 fps! This affects simple movement, like that of the tapes and bugs for exapmple, and it is noticeable. Some will say it's intolerable but some may tolerate it. Compounding this is the low graphics power of the Aspen. It may be because Garmin designed their screens with sv from the ground up whereas Aspen sv came later as an afterthought and they have not upgraded their graphics refresh rates.

This is not intended on knocking the Aspen products. Perhaps those Aspen owners who seem bothered should put their energy in demanding more from Aspen. Just an observation. 

Happy New Year everyone!

[Mooney in Oz]

I have an Aspen Evolution 1000 Pro with SV added since the software was released and have never noticed any such issues.

IMHO Aspen will release major upgrades or totally new products sometime in 2018 as they have recently offered aggressive discounts on current major products, to possibly clear stock. This is just a wild guess on my behalf.

Victor

[mike_elliott]

6 minutes ago, Mooney in Oz said:

I have an Aspen Evolution 1000 Pro with SV added since the software was released and have never noticed any such issues

Nor have I in at least a dozen planes I have been in that are so equipped. It must be a phenomenon that only happens to pilots who dont fly with an Aspen. 

[Bug Smasher]

I've never had an issue with mine, it's been awesome. No delays or jerkiness in the display, never noticed a slow refresh.

[gsxrpilot]

45 minutes ago, mike_elliott said:

Nor have I in at least a dozen planes I have been in that are so equipped. It must be a phenomenon that only happens to pilots who dont fly with an Aspen. 

Actually it only happens to people who don't have Aspen or Garmin glass in their Mooneys. Those are the best kind of experts. LOL

[PTK]

Aspen. At around 0:30 look at the runway markings presentation.  Also note jumpiness especially on the  tapes. Screen is jerky, sluggish and tired.

 

Original G500, i.e. before 2016 upgrade. At around 2:30 look at the runway markings presentation. Smooth and fluid. Life like. 

 

[gsxrpilot]

4 minutes ago, PTK said:

Aspen. At around 0:30 look at the runway presentation. 

Original G500, i.e. before upgrade. At around 2:30 look at runway presentation. 

Which one of these is your airplane???

 

[mike_elliott]

23 minutes ago, gsxrpilot said:

Those are the best kind of experts.

The best use data from a couple of Youtube videos to be authoritative vs spending time in planes with each system to learn their capabilities.

[MIm20c]

Is that 500 installed in a DA20?  Looks to be a smooth day without any crosswind flying a lot slower. However, I do feel from 50 agl to the surface the Garmin unit looks better.  Probably would have helped to have the Aspen on wide mode as the runway was off the screen for part of the time as the pilot was dealing with crosswind. 

In my opinion the situational awareness is massively higher with the SV on both units and I don’t normally stare at the pfd when I’m 20 feet from the runway. 

@PTK you should probably just link the BT thread (the first google link) although the technical info was given by someone no longer with us.  

Edited January 2, 2018 by MIm20c

[ArtVandelay]

Nor have I in at least a dozen planes I have been in that are so equipped. It must be a phenomenon that only happens to pilots who dont fly with an Aspen. 

Could be an overheating issue, or Aspen in video has traffic, weather, and other options turned on requiring more CPU than others installs. I guess I’m the only one who finds SV completely useless, or worst detracting from the key information.

[Marauder]

Could be an overheating issue, or Aspen in video has traffic, weather, and other options turned on requiring more CPU than others installs. I guess I’m the only one who finds SV completely useless, or worst detracting from the key information.

I had SVT and the AOA added when Aspen ran their last promo. My observations are that SVT has the best value for those who fly in more rugged terrain. Where it helps with us flat landers is obstacle clearance. There are some ridges in my neck of the woods with cell towers on top of them. Landing at an airport near those ridges on a hazy summer day, is where it helps. If you have a MFD, the obstacles are visible there as well.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[Guest]

You can likely find a volunteer to take those old Aspen displays and while you’re at it you could toss in those old 430W.  Their all so last decade.

Clarence

[mike_elliott]

I have to admit, the Aspen display pales compared to the Garmin NXI 1000. They are only 700K, but they come with a new Mooney and you dont have to worry when the KI300 will be available to make your AP work right again  

[Cruiser]

On January 1, 2018 at 10:55 AM, PTK said:

Real life-like motion starts at around 200 fps and the eye detects motion as smooth or "fluid" at around 80 fps. The motion picture industry standard I believe is 24fps. 

Since we aren't talking about high speed gaming, which requires the brain quickly interpret and react to multiple moving targets, a lower fps will suffice.  For our purposes in a pfd we are talking about movement detection and interpertation and for this the minimum fps is around 15 to 20 fps.

Now let's take the G500 and Aspen as examples. The G500 runs at about 60 fps. As a comparison almost all iphone and iPad screens, with the exception of the ipad pro, run at 60 fps. (The pro runs at 120 fps.) To  the human eye 60 fps approaches gaming fluidity rates. And this is with or without sv. The Aspen on the other hand with SV runs at a whopping 5 fps! This affects simple movement, like that of the tapes and bugs for exapmple, and it is noticeable. Some will say it's intolerable but some may tolerate it. Compounding this is the low graphics power of the Aspen. It may be because Garmin designed their screens with sv from the ground up whereas Aspen sv came later as an afterthought and they have not upgraded their graphics refresh rates.

This is not intended on knocking the Aspen products. Perhaps those Aspen owners who seem bothered should put their energy in demanding more from Aspen. Just an observation. 

Happy New Year everyone!

Peter, where did you get these specs?

[LANCECASPER]

2 hours ago, Cruiser said:

Peter, where did you get these specs?

It looks like it came from here: https://secure.beechtalk.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=98642

But neither company quotes their refresh rates in their specs so it's not verified.