Traffic on the ifd

Yesterday I played a bit more with my dual ifds and I setup my datablocks in the way I wanted.

I was amazed to see that if I choose to display the trafficbox in the left, i lose the ability to also maintain my nav frequencies. I have no idea how i would the set these ? I find this utterly stupid. What is so difficult with putting traffic on the right datablock.

I am also wundering wether it will display the traffic big on the screen if traffic is closeby .. Just as the 530 did.

Last but not least I miss the ability to put the traffic (and the weather) on a big dedicated screen just like the 530 could..

It maybe that this is possible but so far I have not found them.

I have my IFDs configured where there is no traffic box.  I get traffic on the main MAP screen along with weather and a lightning sensor.  I haven't had any operational issues with this configuration.  I will note the following observations:

I hope Gring's experience ends up being the same for most.  It's how we designed the system.  The IFD is very FMS-centric, meaning among other things, that traditional tasks like nav tuning are designed to be nearly irrelevant.  We're not so enamored with that idea that we think it's completely irrelevant, just nearly so - we get that there will always be some instances/scenarios where automation can't get it completely right or anticipate every need but for those things that should be less used, we pushed that into the background.  Nav tuning is one example.   That comes back to the FMS-centric concept.  The system was designed around the presumption that most flying will be via a flight plan.  It was really optimized around the single pilot, IFR model.   When that is the case, all nav tuning (VOR tuning, localizer tuning, etc) is automatic.  It will alert you if there is a problem and many/most/all of the monitor tasks that a pilot was  typically responsible for are done for you.

I agree that having a traffic datablock on the right side will go a long ways, at least to where a traffic page is no longer people's #1 request like Orest's Boeing Banana.

Orest, I was posting to AviJake.  Since you mentioned other HIGH priority items, I chimed in with a plug for my desired capability.

roger, copy.

If the traffic thumbnail is not needed, then there is no problem having both com & vloc radio frequencies shown. However, there is a limitation to 2 freq each (active & standby). There is space for more (e.g. 3 com & 2 vloc as you suggest ... doesn't take any more space than 1 active & 4 stdby coms), but for some reason this is not allowed.

Edited by chflyer - 30 Dec 2014 at 8:40am

Just wanted to acknowledge the additional vote or two for the dedicated traffic page.  No action is planned yet but I am logging/measuring the request level and if it continues to rise or dissipates with more time on the units.

+2 on the traffic.

Would be very useful in the dual 540 scenario.

Hi Victor,

I would be very eager for a dedicated traffic page as well.  

With the 530W, nearing an airport, I always selected the full page traffic display.   When I get a
call, I don't want to be trying to locate the traffic on the relatively cluttered main screen or sorting it
out on the hopelessly small thumbnail.

It should be easy to provide a TFC along with MAP and CHART.   It's the right thing to do.

The more I fly with the IFD, the more I am convinced, that we need a dedicated traffic page, read that as a larger sized display of traffic.

It is not for the enroute/IFR phase, but for when you are transitioning to land or takeoff at an uncontrolled airspace around a small airport, with VFR traffic buzzing around like mosquitos.


It would also be nice to be able to set the approach parameters, as you can with a GNS.

* Orest

Edited by oskrypuch - 20 Apr 2015 at 3:23pm