More wireless in airplanes stuff

While reading about Boeing's new 787 Dreamliner in AvLeak, I saw that
they will be piping the entertainment to the seatback displays via
wi-fi (or some other wireless technology) instead of wires. I was
surprised to see that...implies they've wrestled with the EMI issues
pretty thoroughly.

Will probably save thousands of pounds of wire. EMI is not a big
problem to tackle if nature of emissions are known.
--
Gene Seibel
Gene & Sue's Aeroplanes - http://pad39a.com/gene/planes.html
Because I fly, I envy no one.

On 11 Apr 2005 11:04:06 -0700, wrote:

Will probably save thousands of pounds of wire. EMI is not a big
problem to tackle if nature of emissions are known.

We've been installing Wi-Fi via STC in Gulfstreams etc for some time
now.

Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com

Don Hammer wrote:
On 11 Apr 2005 11:04:06 -0700, wrote:

Will probably save thousands of pounds of wire. EMI is not a big
problem to tackle if nature of emissions are known.

We've been installing Wi-Fi via STC in Gulfstreams etc for some time
now.


Along with weight savings, not stringing that much wire would save on a
lot of construction labor, as well as removing yet another potential
source of cabin fires and maintenance. (sp?)

My dad, who was an A&P for over 30 years always told me: The less s*%t
there is, the less s%*t there is to break.

Harry

Don Hammer wrote:
On 11 Apr 2005 11:04:06 -0700, wrote:

Will probably save thousands of pounds of wire. EMI is not a big
problem to tackle if nature of emissions are known.

We've been installing Wi-Fi via STC in Gulfstreams etc for some time
now.


Along with weight savings, not stringing that much wire would save on a
lot of construction labor, as well as removing yet another potential
source of cabin fires and maintenance. (sp?)

My dad, who was an A&P for over 30 years always told me: The less s*%t
there is, the less s%*t there is to break.

Harry

wright1902glider wrote:
Don Hammer wrote:

On 11 Apr 2005 11:04:06 -0700, wrote:


Will probably save thousands of pounds of wire. EMI is not a big
problem to tackle if nature of emissions are known.

We've been installing Wi-Fi via STC in Gulfstreams etc for some time
now.



Along with weight savings, not stringing that much wire would save on a
lot of construction labor, as well as removing yet another potential
source of cabin fires and maintenance. (sp?)

My dad, who was an A&P for over 30 years always told me: The less s*%t
there is, the less s%*t there is to break.

I agree with your dad, but if you look at how much circuitry it takes
for a wireless connection to replace a simple length of wire, I don't
think you can say that wireless is less complex.

Matt

I agree with your dad, but if you look at how much circuitry it takes
for a wireless connection to replace a simple length of wire, I don't
think you can say that wireless is less complex.

Matt

Matt,
Trust me, by the time you run a bunch of wires to each seat along with
net hubs etc in a larger aircraft, one wireless router saves a bunch
of weight and cost.

Don Hammer wrote:

I agree with your dad, but if you look at how much circuitry it takes
for a wireless connection to replace a simple length of wire, I don't
think you can say that wireless is less complex.

Matt


Matt,
Trust me, by the time you run a bunch of wires to each seat along with
net hubs etc in a larger aircraft, one wireless router saves a bunch
of weight and cost.

Weight and cost, yes, complexity, no.


Matt

Yes, complexity is higher, but the complexity is at the chip level.
This stuff is getting cheap and it's down to the hobbist level now.
check out http://www.sparkfun.com

As an Aerospace engr I always marveled at the no cell phone use or
other banned electronic devices on aircraft. The amount of testing we
go through to cert a piece of avionics is mind boggling and quite $$$$.
Some of these levels (EMI) would fry you.

Weight and cost, yes, complexity, no.


Matt

Maybe I don't understand what you are getting at. I put wireless in a
Gulfstream G-550. System was a short wire from the onboard server
(Part of the hight-speed data system) to the wireless hub and and
power to the hub. My other option was wires and jacks to each seat
and the cockpit from a hub. Why is wireless more complex?

Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com