曝光臺 注意防騙 網(wǎng)曝天貓店富美金盛家居專營店坑蒙拐騙欺詐消費者

checked by reapplying the CRC algorithm prior to distribution, and later by the avionics equipment onboard
the aircraft.
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN EFB AND
FMS DATABASES
The advent of the Electronic Flight Bag (EFB) discussed in Chapter 6 illustrates how the complexity of
avionics databases is rapidly accelerating. The respective FMS and EFB databases remain independent of
each other even though they may share some of the
same data from the database provider’s master navigation database. For example, FMS and GPS databases
both enable the retrieval of data for the onboard aircraft
navigation system.
Additional data types that are not in the FMS database
are extracted for the EFB database, allowing replacement of traditional printed instrument charts for the
1
The majority of the volume of official flight navigation data in the U.S. disseminated to database providers is primarily supplied by FAA
sources. It is supplemented by airport managers, state civil aviation authorities, Department of Defense (DOD) organizations such as the
National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA), branches of the military service, etc. Outside the U.S., the majority of official data is provided by each country’s civil aviation authority, the equivalent of the FAA, and disseminated as an aeronautical information publication
(AIP).
2
The database provider extract occurs at the 21-day point. The edited extract is sent to the avionics manufacturer or prepared with the
avionics-packing program. Data not coded by the 21-day point will not be contained in the database extract for the effective cycle. In order
for the data to be in the database at this 21-day extract, the actual cutoff is more like 28 days before the effective date.
A-3
pilot. The three EFB charting applications include
Terminal Charts, En route Moving Map (EMM), and
Airport Moving Map (AMM). The Terminal Charts
EFB charting application utilizes the same information
and layout as the printed chart counterpart. The EMM
application uses the same ARINC 424 en route data
that is extracted for an FMS database, but adds additional information associated with aeronautical
charting needs. The EFB AMM database is a new
high-resolution geo-spatial database only for EFB
use. The AMM shows aircraft proximity relative to
the airport environment. Runways depicted in the
AMM correlate to the runway depictions in the FMS
navigation database. The other information in the
AMM such as ramps, aprons, taxiways, buildings,
and hold-short lines are not included in traditional
ARINC 424 databases.
THE ROLE OF THE AVIONICS MANUFACTURER
When avionics manufacturers develop a piece of
equipment that requires an airborne navigation database, they typically form an agreement with a database
provider to supply the database for that new avionics
platform. It is up to the manufacturer to determine
what information to include in the database for their
system. In some cases, the navigation data provider
has to significantly reduce the number of records in
the database to accommodate the storage capacity of
the manufacturer’s new product.
The manufacturer must decide how its equipment will
handle the records; decisions must
be made about each field in the
record. Each manufacturer can
design their systems to manipulate
the data fields in different ways,
depending on the needs of the
avionics user. Some fields may not
be used at all. For instance, the
ARINC primary record designed
for individual runways may or may
not be included in the database for
a specific manufacturer’s machine.
The avionics manufacturer might
specify that the database include
only runways greater than 4,000
feet. If the record is included in the
tailored database, some of the
fields in that record may not be
used.
Another important fact to remember
is that although there are standard
naming conventions included in the
ARINC 424 specification; each
manufacturer determines how the
names of fixes and procedures are
displayed to the pilot. This means
that although the database may
specify the approach identifier field for the VOR/DME
Runway 34 approach at Eugene Mahlon Sweet Airport
(KEUG) in Eugene, Oregon, as “V34,” different avionics platforms may display the identifier in any way the
manufacturer deems appropriate. For example, a GPS
produced by one manufacturer might display the
approach as “VOR 34,” whereas another might refer to
the approach as “VOR/DME 34,” and an FMS produced by another manufacturer may refer to it as
“VOR34.” [Figure A-2] These differences can cause
　
中國航空網(wǎng) m.k6050.com
航空翻譯 www.aviation.cn
本文鏈接地址：Instrument Procedures Handbook (IPH)儀表程序手冊下(162)