Timeline for What is the difference between CAN and ARINC?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 12, 2018 at 6:03 | comment | added | traducerad | Why do people sometime choose CAN over ARINC629 or vice-verca? It seems to me like they are equivalent | |
| Oct 17, 2016 at 12:43 | comment | added | Gerry | It's all about fitting the tool to the job. A Boeing 787 incorporates ARINC 664 for the main network with some subsystems on ARINC 429 and a number of sensors and cockpit controls on CAN (ARINC 825). Almost all the switches on the B787 overhead panel go through a couple CAN busses, eliminating dozens of wire runs. There's also a significant difference in cost. | |
| Oct 17, 2015 at 21:26 | history | edited | DeltaLima♦ | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 351 characters in body
|
| Oct 17, 2015 at 21:24 | comment | added | DeltaLima♦ | Since ARINC 429 has only a single transmitter, timely data arrival is guaranteed, while CAN has to incorporate transmission collision detection & correction which incurs non deterministic time overhead. On the other hand, ARINC 429 only uses a parity bit for bit level error detection whilst CAN allows for various methods including CRC checks. | |
| Oct 17, 2015 at 21:20 | vote | accept | Stack Over | ||
| Oct 17, 2015 at 21:11 | comment | added | Stack Over | And what about the robustness of ARINC and CAN buses? | |
| Oct 17, 2015 at 20:52 | history | answered | DeltaLima♦ | CC BY-SA 3.0 |