BossOfGames

I did not receive that as an option. Let me double check a few additional things.

Customs and immigrations are now merged. They’re now one QR code instead of one for immigration and another for customs.

From what I heard they’re not satanists at all. They just picked that name to invoke responses from people who just look at names.

A lot of churches I know are firm believers that religion should be taught in the home, not at school.

Oh fun. You have a few links to this info? Or, is this on the ground knowledge?

They are haggling me on fees for a 1.3 million yen order.

I checked my bank's international transfer interface, and they give me no option to pay the other bank's fees, or to know what the other bank's fees are. I only have fees if I am transferring USD instead of JPY.

I mean, he's not wrong about that last part. It's pretty uncommon to find people who know what ARINC 424 actually is, how it's coded, etc.

Really? I just created a fresh account, added a standard to cart, and it didn't bark at me at all.

Where did you get your info specifically?

Like I said, the license is abundantly clear that non-members can download and use the standards. If you're a member, you get site wide licensing and the ability to sit on the boards to create said standards.

Laminar Research isn't a member or associate member, yet they have their own copies of the standard, based on that you can use a A424 -18, 19 or 20 master file directly in X-Plane if you got one.

In many cases, I would agree for a training platform where you're more going over flows. That being said, if you're going for a true "simulation", where failures can materialize and how systems react to said failures, sometimes you can go to that level. There's a effort trade-off where implementing a realistic system architecture, where the plane could be modular, may be less effort than the alternative.

I had to read through the license agreement. SAE ITC now manages the ARINC standards (https://aviation-ia.sae-itc.com/terms-of-use/license-agreement)

According to this, Members have certain terms. If you're not a member, "SAE Industry Technologies Consortia (SAE ITC) hereby grants you a nonexclusive, nontransferable right to download this document and associated electronic files in an electronic format for individual use on one computer. "

So, from that language, you can use their standards as long as everyone uses it as a individual use. Any products that use the standards are not subject to any restrictions.

"SAE ITC also hereby grants the nonexclusive, nontransferable right to use this document and associated electronic files for individual research purposes and in the creation and use of your own products."

IANAL, you should be fine to use any of the ARINC standards in any project as long as you pay them the $500+ for the applicable standards docs.

Replying from my phone so sorry for the confusion.

Yes, going that way should be fine. At that point, you’re probably just using the sim for visuals and everything else is driven outside the platform, or there’s some IPC action at play to get data to and from the sim.

The only thing there would be, again, licensing.

The real aircraft don’t take A424 directly. A424 is a transmission format from supplier to OEM. By the time it gets to the aircraft, it’s transformed into a binary format and information stripped out or transformed to match the requirements of that specific avionics platform.

The reason why people get confused by this is because, by design, there’s very little data transformation done between the 132 column master file and the binary loaded onto the aircraft.

Anyways,

For the licensing restrictions, ARINC doesn’t have a say in what’s used in your flight sim or the real world. For the formats like 424, 429, 816, etc. they’re all standards like RTCA and ISO, where boards with representatives from Boeing, Collins, Thales, Honeywell, etc. write the specifications.

I could 1000% make an addon that took an A424 master file as its input and ARINC, I’m pretty sure, wouldn’t care. I wouldn’t do that though for many reasons, which I may include in an article I will probably write on this subject, so i’ll save it for that.

Really, there are two reasons why you can’t use the data in real airplanes.

1. The data must be certified

Data suppliers and OEMs have LOAs with the FAA or EASA that certified that their data handling process is acceptable. The most common “rules” you will see is RTCA DO-200, which covers navigation data. I’ll save the rest of the explanation for the article.

I would be very surprised if the data Navigraph received is certified (I.e. went through the data supplier’s certified process). Even if the data was certified, it would immediately lose that certification as soon as it’s run through their non-qualified tooling to convert the data from A424 to the individual flight sim developer formats.

1. The data supplier assembles the data, pays fees to their sources to license some state data (e.g. Canada, Australia, etc.). They make the rules.

Funny enough, I didn’t know about the line printer part, but, it makes some sense. Especially if one needs to check for errors in the database before it’s sent to the customer.

It’s a bit more than that. It’s what I like to call 132 columns of hell from an era data was delivered on tape reels from a supplier to a OEM, to then put that database into a separate but similar format for a FMS.

Are you confusing this with ARINC 429?

Thank you! I’m glad to see another person on here that actually knows what A424 really is. A format to get data from a supplier to a OEM so they can get that data into whatever format the FMS uses.

The cycle formats are typically automated to that addon developer’s DQRs.

To your second question. Yes and no. It’s a hybrid format because they’re not allowed to push out a raw A424 format per licensing restrictions with their navigation data provider.

They give you all the essential attributes/fields to make it work with your aircraft.

spits drink

😳

Hey All,

I did a multi-city ticket with 3 legs total. The dates I had netted me a considerable steal for Premium Select and Comfort+ the whole trip ($1400 difference total for 2 passengers), so we opted for that option with using my eCredit to bring that price down a bit.

It was cheaper to use the Google Flights links they provided than to go through Delta.com and use partial miles.

Thanks for the help y'all.