Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Tech Log
Reload this Page >

ERJ 190-300 - internal networking specifics

Tech Log The very best in practical technical discussion on the web

ERJ 190-300 - internal networking specifics

Old 27th Jun 2017, 12:28
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Geneva, Switzerland
Age: 58
Posts: 1,903
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
ERJ 190-300 - internal networking specifics

Folks

Just came across this FAA publication.

Does anyone know what we are speaking of here ? Are they proposing to interconnect the entertainment system and the aircraft systems ? Is this specific to the 190-300 (and not other 190 models) ?

I find this passage quite troubling:

The Embraer Model ERJ 190-300 airplane design introduces the potential for access to the aircraft-control domain and airline-information-services domain by unauthorized persons through the passenger-information-services domain
I am really curious about what's being discussed here...
atakacs is offline  
Old 27th Jun 2017, 13:12
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 15,786
Received 196 Likes on 90 Posts
Originally Posted by atakacs
I am really curious about what's being discussed here...
From the Special Conditions:

"Some systems installed on the Embraer Model ERJ 190-300 airplane will use operating systems that are widely used and commercially available from third-party software suppliers. The security vulnerabilities of these operating systems may be more widely known than are the vulnerabilities of proprietary operating systems that the avionics manufacturers currently use.

These special conditions contain the additional safety standards that the Administrator considers necessary to establish a level of safety equivalent to that established by the existing airworthiness standards."

Scary stuff ...
DaveReidUK is online now  
Old 27th Jun 2017, 14:41
  #3 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Geneva, Switzerland
Age: 58
Posts: 1,903
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Well I wouldn't have an issue of them using say Linux for in-fight entertainment.

But to connect it to the flight systems... ?

And still wondering about the specifics of this being a -300 "issue"
atakacs is offline  
Old 27th Jun 2017, 21:57
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Denver
Posts: 1,216
Received 12 Likes on 7 Posts
I read it as - Embraer, in adding a dash-300 version of the 190, wants to redesign things from scratch so that one computer, with one satellite link, and other peripherals, can handle all the computational needs of the aircraft.

E.G. ACARS and passenger wifi all run through one cable to one sat antenna. (but not limited to that - everything runs through one CPU and network, or two/three with backups)

Presumably saves weight and physical complexity (boxes and wiring) and possibly electrical power drain. I.E. money, in both construction and operation.

(Not totally new to Embraer - remember the specific warning about the interconnect between GPS signal loss and aircraft control problems, that came up in a discussion of the Phenom and US Military GPS jamming tests a year ago - Embraer likes tying everything together in one neat package.

http://www.pprune.org/tech-log/58004...m-300-gps.html ). [EDIT: I notice you started that thread too - I guess you do remember it]

ONLY applies, thus far, to the ERJ 190-300 aircraft specificially.

FAA is proposing specific extra hoops Embraer must jump through (and asking for comments on those proposals) to prove the aircraft systems are isolated, by security software or some such, before certifying it. Embraer must explain or demonstrate to the FAA:

- Exactly how - technically - will the flight-critical control and comm parts of the network/operating system be isolated securely from the passenger-entertainment parts?

- Exactly what policies and procedures will be written down and enforced, by Embraer and by operators, to ensure that the technical process and pieces will be correctly implemented, verified, tested and maintained during the operational life of the aircraft?

Last edited by pattern_is_full; 27th Jun 2017 at 22:08.
pattern_is_full is offline  
Old 28th Jun 2017, 00:32
  #5 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Geneva, Switzerland
Age: 58
Posts: 1,903
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Thanks, sounds like a very likely explanation.

Very bad idea IMHO....
atakacs is offline  
Old 28th Jun 2017, 03:14
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Denver
Posts: 1,216
Received 12 Likes on 7 Posts
I can't say I disagree. But with (reportedly) an A380 carrying 500 km of wiring and a 737NG 67km of wiring, there's a strong incentive to reduce that weight.

http://colonialwire.com/wp-content/u...E-WEIGHTS1.pdf

Just wait until some bright boy comes up with a plan to eliminate ALL the wiring weight, by simply transmitting all flight control commands to the control surfaces (and everything else) via Bluetooth™ or some such.
pattern_is_full is offline  
Old 28th Jun 2017, 07:44
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 1998
Location: wherever
Age: 55
Posts: 1,616
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Some aircraft already transmit wheel speed and tyre pressure via wifi.
FE Hoppy is offline  
Old 28th Jun 2017, 09:48
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: U.K
Posts: 89
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Just wait until some bright boy comes up with a plan to eliminate ALL the wiring weight, by simply transmitting all flight control commands to the control surfaces (and everything else) via Bluetooth™ or some such.

Or just use a cable, can't hack one of those, well hacksaw would do it I spose :-)
simmple is offline  
Old 28th Jun 2017, 10:06
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 15,786
Received 196 Likes on 90 Posts
Originally Posted by simmple
Or just use a cable, can't hack one of those
A novel technique like that would need a buzzy name - they could call it "fly-by-wire".
DaveReidUK is online now  
Old 28th Jun 2017, 14:28
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Denver
Posts: 1,216
Received 12 Likes on 7 Posts
Indeed. We started with mechanical cables, and then as the forces got heavier in larger planes, we switched to hydraulically-augmented force transmission, and when that got too heavy, we switched to electrical cables/wires.

But now even the electrical wires are so massive - in the aggregate - that they add several tonnes or more to the aircraft weight. That's several tonnes of fuel or payload we can't carry.

And wiring has other issues: Wiring Matters: An overview of the aircraft wiring issue

Embraer is just attempting a "clean sheet" approach to the electronics and wire nests that have accreted in planes as stuff gets added on top of other stuff. Cut down on the "spaghetti" factor by combining operations and functions - after all, most computers are "idling" at 1% of CPU use, waiting for us humans to ask them to do something.

But - there is a security concern, if the cabin has access to the same system the pilots are using. So the FAA is raising the question of how to handle that, and asking the industry (us!) for comment.
pattern_is_full is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.