Author Topic: FL*RM Integration - Beta Testers  (Read 68730 times)

Ian Melville

Re: FL*RM Integration - Beta Testers
« Reply #60 on: October 23, 2016, 06:34:56 am »
Hi Alan,
Happy to be a FLARM target.
I have not had a chance to air test mine yet. On the ground I a yet to see a FLARM equipped aircraft, but I put that down to testing out of flying hours, and the fact that FLARM signal has nothing like the range you would expect, and any RF obstruction will reduce the chances of seeing FLARM traffic dramatically. I understand OGN stations us high gain antenna to get better range.

So a test would be useful for us both.

Screen shots look good, but I see no $PFLAA... messages which will be targets the FLARM unit has seen. Note PAW also generates $PFLAA... messages for P3i and transponder targets it has seen, but with only the FLARM RedBox connected to the terminal emulator, that should not be an issue.

flyingalan

Re: FL*RM Integration - Beta Testers
« Reply #61 on: October 23, 2016, 08:55:22 am »
thanks Ian,
do you see the $pflaa string coming from your flarm box with no targets ? Which Flarm box are you using ?
I'm wondering if the Redbox variant actually outputs general target info, i.e the $pflaa string.
Being a 3rd party device (LX)  they may do something different to actual Flarm and only output collision aircraft info. (just a thought). There is no detailed technical info on their web site so if I can't see if they specify this string  from their device.
 I guess I will have to try and get answer direct from LX about what actually comes out of their device.
Your offer to be a source is a good one and I'm happy to visit with my kit of bits !! When would be convenient for you ??
regards
Alan

Ian Melville

Re: FL*RM Integration - Beta Testers
« Reply #62 on: October 23, 2016, 12:16:23 pm »
I'm using a FLARM mouse, and would not expect to see any $PLAA messages if there were no targets in range.

Documentation is hit and miss, I'm scratching my head regarding the mouse config. I found that by default it is set not to report any traffic more that 3km away, even though it may have received a radio signal. These glider boys like to get up close and personals!

I send a PM later with dates etc.

flyingalan

Re: FL*RM Integration - Beta Testers
« Reply #63 on: October 23, 2016, 12:56:06 pm »
OK Ian, it looks like it could be productive for both of us to get together with 2 active Flarms and find out if they really see one another.
I wait your PM, I'm pretty much free anytime.
I have sent e-mail to LX asking them to confirm O/P of LAA string from their box, let's see if they respond
regards
Alan

Richard

Re: FL*RM Integration - Beta Testers
« Reply #64 on: October 23, 2016, 09:46:53 pm »
Update on my Redbox to PAW integration.
I used the USB/RS232 cable from Farnell (USB-RS232-WE-1800-BT-0.0 CABLE, USB A - RS232, SERIAL CONVERTOR). Cheaper ones can be found on e-bay but I used this because previous reports that it worked ok with Flarm mouse.
Pin 1 from Flarm RJ45 is ground (white) and was connected to black on RS232 cable. Pin 3 from Flarm is Tx data (red) and was connected to yellow on RS232 cable. Pin 2 from Flarm is Rx data (black) and was connected to orange on RS232 cable.
In PAW configuration screen on iPad Port 2 was set to Flarm In and 19200 rate, (Redbox must use 19200 to talk to Flarm display indicator).
The gps signal seems to be working and PAW starts ok and talks to SkyDemon displaying ADSB aircraft and Mode C/S rings ok.
I don't seem to be seeing any Flarm traffic on the Skydemon display which is a puzzle but Flarm traffic is short range and in my home test set up it could be none are in range.
Continuing investigation.
Can anyone else confirm that the latest PAW software is seeing and displaying Flarm traffic from a Flarm receiver ??
regards
Alan

Alan
    As I'm awaiting delivery of my USB RS232 from Farnel, I have been looking at the 9pin DubD plug on the end of the Power suply I purchased with the Redbox (http://lxavionics.co.uk/lxcart/index.php?route=product/product&path=102_111&product_id=362) This is what I'm using for the FLARM Redbox updated via my PC. I don't have a Serial Port on my PC so I'm using an old Serial to USB converter. OK this works for the FLARM Updates no problem.
  Also supplied is a straight rj11 to 9pin Sub D this should be wired as described in the user manual BUT it is not and does not match the Diagram in the manual ??? This cable will not work for the updates of the Redbox It looks like the builder of the cable is color blind or the configuration in the manual is incorrect ?
   Checking the wiring in first powered cable I described above, This is also different. The TX and RX are on different pins on the rj11 to the 9pin SubD. Both of the subD plugs use the same pins for G5 TX2 & RX3 it is the rj11 which are different.
  This is very difficult to explain in this text But my main Question is can you check the Plugs you have been supplied and a comparison to wiring diagram in the manual.
Richard.
Europa XS

flyingalan

Re: FL*RM Integration - Beta Testers
« Reply #65 on: October 23, 2016, 10:31:39 pm »
Richard, unfortunately I am not using any "supplied" cables, I just have the box and made my own Farnell USB to RJ11 connector cable.
I'm not sure what manual you are looking at but the one I got off the net seems correct;
pin 1 RJ11 (is white in mine) and goes to pin 5 RS232
pin 2 RJ11 is black and goes to pin 3 RS232   (from RJ11 RX) to RS232 Tx
pin 3 RJ11 is red and goes to pin 2 RS232      (from RJ11 Tx) to RS232 Rx

I have 2 different Flarm display leads (from a previous installation) with RJ11 each end and the colour code wires are completely different colours  on each cable so you cannot go by colour you have to visually look and better still ohm meter up to find what pins 1 2 and 3 are connected to on the open end.

I'm not sure what you are actually seeing on the RJ11 to Dsub, but to work it certainly should be wired as a Xover i.e. pin 2 to 3 and pin 3 to 2
hope this helps,
regards
Alan


gvpsj

Re: FL*RM Integration - Beta Testers
« Reply #66 on: October 24, 2016, 10:30:16 am »
Beware of miss identifying pins on the Flarm rs232. I have just 'blown' my Flarm unit and have had to send it back to the factory for repairs. Got a pin number wrong!!! OOPS
I have a Power Flarm all wired into the PAW but, right now getting nowhere.

Admin

Re: FL*RM Integration - Beta Testers
« Reply #67 on: October 24, 2016, 11:02:45 am »
I have a Power Flarm all wired into the PAW but, right now getting nowhere.

Do you mean that Flarm is not providing its messages, or PilotAware is not able to receive/decode the messages ?

Thx
Lee

gvpsj

Re: FL*RM Integration - Beta Testers
« Reply #68 on: October 24, 2016, 11:52:55 am »
Hi Lee, I do not know right now as I have not had the time to investigate properly. I suspect that either the 'repair' at the factory has left a fault on the PowerFlarm or I have not got the data rates set up correctly. I am suspicious as the PowerFlarm display now indicates a wiring fault and I have not altered any wiring in that part of the setup. I have to do the work in 'spurts' as the valley I live in is so narrow I have to go up onto the ridge to get signals.

Admin

Re: FL*RM Integration - Beta Testers
« Reply #69 on: October 24, 2016, 03:13:47 pm »
Hi Lee, I do not know right now as I have not had the time to investigate properly. I suspect that either the 'repair' at the factory has left a fault on the PowerFlarm or I have not got the data rates set up correctly. I am suspicious as the PowerFlarm display now indicates a wiring fault and I have not altered any wiring in that part of the setup. I have to do the work in 'spurts' as the valley I live in is so narrow I have to go up onto the ridge to get signals.

Not sure about the data rat on the powerflarm, but for the flarm mouse it is 19200
Thx
Lee

Richard

Re: FL*RM Integration - Beta Testers
« Reply #70 on: October 24, 2016, 09:53:58 pm »
Richard, unfortunately I am not using any "supplied" cables, I just have the box and made my own Farnell USB to RJ11 connector cable.
I'm not sure what manual you are looking at but the one I got off the net seems correct;
pin 1 RJ11 (is white in mine) and goes to pin 5 RS232
pin 2 RJ11 is black and goes to pin 3 RS232   (from RJ11 RX) to RS232 Tx
pin 3 RJ11 is red and goes to pin 2 RS232      (from RJ11 Tx) to RS232 Rx

I have 2 different Flarm display leads (from a previous installation) with RJ11 each end and the colour code wires are completely different colours  on each cable so you cannot go by colour you have to visually look and better still ohm meter up to find what pins 1 2 and 3 are connected to on the open end.

I'm not sure what you are actually seeing on the RJ11 to Dsub, but to work it certainly should be wired as a Xover i.e. pin 2 to 3 and pin 3 to 2
hope this helps,
regards
Alan

Alan,
   Thank you for your help. I'v sorted it now and all working OK. I'm at the same stage as you and need to find another FLARM device to test. Let us know how you go with your test.

The problem I had was confusion  :o  LX supply me with a rj11 to 9SubD  This is wired the wrong way which made testing impossible. Now the USB to RS232 cable arrive simply checking the wiring and following your connection All is good.

Thanks again.
Richard.
Europa XS

flyingalan

Re: FL*RM Integration - Beta Testers
« Reply #71 on: October 24, 2016, 10:14:05 pm »
Richard, Glad it is sorted.
I'm most uneasy about my set up. Today I monitored the data strings coming out of the Redbox looking for the $pflaa string that gives position of other Flarm aircraft. At the same time I monitored flarm aircraft on Open Glider Network to see when anyone come close. Well I'm on the edge of the circuit at Halton and today flarm aircraft were doing circuits so I had several movements varying between 5 Kms and 1 Km from me. ( I could see them visually). To my disappointment I did not see even one $pflaa string coming from the flarm box. Very strange, it is part of flarm protocol surely LX haven't missed it out !
I've sent email to LX asking the question but I'm really puzzled why it doesn't seem to work.  Well Wednesday I guess we will have definitive test, so fingers crossed .
Alan

Richard

Re: FL*RM Integration - Beta Testers
« Reply #72 on: October 24, 2016, 10:24:49 pm »
Alan,
    At home I'm nowhere near any FLARM traffic so testing at home for positive targets is a nonstarter., but looking at the strings in hypeterminal I see the $pflaa strings along side the GPS position strings but no actual traffic to report. Do you get the empty $pflaa strings?
Richard.
Europa XS

exfirepro

Re: FL*RM Integration - Beta Testers
« Reply #73 on: October 24, 2016, 10:28:19 pm »
Hi All,

I'm just back from a week out in the Western Isles with the family (by boat unfortunately not plane), so just getting back to grips with the forum. Apologies therefore if I am repeating details already covered.

Before going away, I did several fairly substantive tests with my FlarmMouse equipped PAW against local flarm-equipped gliders/tow planes and also my CFI's PowerFlarm equipped flexwing. The tests provided positive 'on screen' (SD) moving flarm contacts though only from fairly close range (< 2Km) despite setting my FlarmMouse to display from maximum range. By deliberately flying extremely close to each other, the contacts with the CFI's aircraft also provided collision alarms on both our Flarm LED displays, so I can confirm that the PAW/FlarmMouse setup definitely works. I have no personal experience of the LX Flarm 'Red Box', but to be sold as 'Flarm' or 'Flarm Compatible' it has to use the standard Flarm pinout setup and data protocols, so has to supply exactly the same data as my (LX) FlarmMouse.

I must admit to falling into the trap at my first attempt to attach an RJ12 plug to the end of my Farnell USB/RS232 lead, of inadvertently connecting Flarm Tx to PAW Tx. The cables must be connected Flarm Tx to PAW Rx as you describe above Alan. You can also connect the Paw Tx wire (orange in the Farnell cable) to the Flarm Rx 'pin 2' in the RJ12 if you want to as this might be used later, but this is not required at this stage.

Remember to setup the correct PAW USB port to 'Flarm In and 19,200 Baud'. (If in doubt as to which port is which, they are as follows:

Port 1 Top left USB port (with the Ethernet port to the left).
Port 2 Bottom left USB port (with the Ethernet port to the left).
Port 3 Top right USB port (with the Ethernet port to the left).
Port 4 Bottom right USB port (with the Ethernet port to the left).

You must also configure your Flarm unit to provide either 'Flarm Only' Messages (if still using your PAW GPS) or to provide 'Navigation and Flarm' Messages if you want (or need) your Flarm unit to provide the GPS data to PAW.

Before testing, you should note that although the system worked pretty much as expected, I did find an anomaly relating to Flarm targets displaying the incorrect altitude and I also had an audio alert problem. I passed these on to Lee for investigation but haven't heard whether he has managed to sort these out yet.

Regards

Peter

« Last Edit: October 24, 2016, 11:00:23 pm by exfirepro »

flyingalan

Re: FL*RM Integration - Beta Testers
« Reply #74 on: October 24, 2016, 10:57:25 pm »
Richard, I'm most intrigued, no I don't see any empty $pflaa strings from my Redbox and I'm surprised I wouldn't have expected any with no contacts.
I do see $pflau strings which are part of the Flarm alarm protocol if I understand correctly.
The plot thickens !
regards
Alan

Alan,
    At home I'm nowhere near any FLARM traffic so testing at home for positive targets is a nonstarter., but looking at the strings in hypeterminal I see the $pflaa strings along side the GPS position strings but no actual traffic to report. Do you get the empty $pflaa strings?
[/quote]