The RedByrd TRANSformation. - Page 23

cadillackid · 03-28-2019, 01:05 PM

its Mike and B sales in newcomerstown ohio. there were quite a few thomas that had cruise switches.. dont remember any FS specofically but the panel switches look the same for FE and for the FS.
-Christopher

cowlitzcoach · 03-28-2019, 01:31 PM

Christopher I read through twice what you wrote about trying to figure out how to set the parameters on your ECM.

I think if you had written it in Sanskrit or Mandarin or hieroglyphics I would have understood the same amount.

All my experience is old school and I will admit I have next to zero knowledge in how to troubleshoot and repair the electronics on newer vehicles.

I applaud your expertise and knowledge and I really appreciate you taking the time to walk through the decision loop on how you were able to determine where the glitch was happening.

Keep up the good work!

family wagon · 04-01-2019, 09:17 AM

I thought that was pretty insightful to say "hey, if the computer indicates 100 MPH as a way of showing 'no speed input found' error, then let's give it a synthetic 'speed is 0' input and see what happens."

Booyah45828 · 04-01-2019, 09:32 AM

Pretty impressive Chris!

Did you look at the live data and verify that the tranny was sending a speed 0 signal? I think that is an option that you can tick off whether or not the tcm sends that data but it's been a while since I've had to use allison doc, and even then, it was only to clear out the fluid and filter change indicator.

I'd really be surprised that the ecm would ignore data from the tcm. I'm certain I've had instances where the output shaft speed sensor was faulty and the ecm received vehicle speed through the tcm. Then again, it's been 10 years since I've troubleshooted anything from international.

cadillackid · 04-01-2019, 11:47 AM

the TCM sends the speed signal through as an OSS (output shaft speed) SPN but apparently the navistar ECM only wants the MPH signal as sent in PGN 65265 .. I had originally tried to offer that PGN from source address 3 (I emulated the transmission and claimed its address).. biut the ECM didnt like it... apparently source address 11 (ABS controller) is the only place it likes it from..

now onto navistar.. and their deal... if a device doesnt support a parameter, the stadard is to shot an 'FF' or '255' out... (in J1939, normal values are only to be 0-254).. you fill in unsupported bytes as '1's, or in the case of whole bytes and not bit -mapped.. 'FF'.. the ECM substitutes 100 MPH which is the max the ECM will display.. when the signal is absent.. since my ABS congroller is pre-networked, it is standalone and works with its only wheel speed sensors..

if I wanted to eliminate the need for the hard-wired OSS directly to the ECM, my J1939 translation box that I built, could take the data from the TCM, translate it to source address 11 and ship it down to the ECM which would read it...

you technically need to "claim" an address... however ive founf that most devices are too dumb to pay attention to the unique name field of claimed devices.. and just parse out the source address field and the data... I was able to use my same piece of hardware to send data from multiple source addresses and the various devices acted on it... including being able to idle up and idle down the engine by acting like im a remote engine controller on source address 2... essentially a remote ECM... I could control throttle too! wow! dangerous!

take this to the umpteenth level.. oh wait.. where we are today and the CAN bus being WIRELESS!! connected on some vehicles.. thats right.. onstar, bluelink, comand, and others have a link to the vehicle's MAIN CAN BUS!!

alas why hackers cracking the wireless hash and encryption can control your vehicle...

not to in a navistar because its all wired.. but yes so in your newest stuff...

Sleddgracer · 04-01-2019, 11:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cadillackid

the TCM sends the speed signal through as an OSS (output shaft speed) SPN but apparently the navistar ECM only wants the MPH signal as sent in PGN 65265 .. I had originally tried to offer that PGN from source address 3 (I emulated the transmission and claimed its address).. biut the ECM didnt like it... apparently source address 11 (ABS controller) is the only place it likes it from..

now onto navistar.. and their deal... if a device doesnt support a parameter, the stadard is to shot an 'FF' or '255' out... (in J1939, normal values are only to be 0-254).. you fill in unsupported bytes as '1's, or in the case of whole bytes and not bit -mapped.. 'FF'.. the ECM substitutes 100 MPH which is the max the ECM will display.. when the signal is absent.. since my ABS congroller is pre-networked, it is standalone and works with its only wheel speed sensors..

if I wanted to eliminate the need for the hard-wired OSS directly to the ECM, my J1939 translation box that I built, could take the data from the TCM, translate it to source address 11 and ship it down to the ECM which would read it...

you technically need to "claim" an address... however ive founf that most devices are too dumb to pay attention to the unique name field of claimed devices.. and just parse out the source address field and the data... I was able to use my same piece of hardware to send data from multiple source addresses and the various devices acted on it... including being able to idle up and idle down the engine by acting like im a remote engine controller on source address 2... essentially a remote ECM... I could control throttle too! wow! dangerous!

take this to the umpteenth level.. oh wait.. where we are today and the CAN bus being WIRELESS!! connected on some vehicles.. thats right.. onstar, bluelink, comand, and others have a link to the vehicle's MAIN CAN BUS!!

alas why hackers cracking the wireless hash and encryption can control your vehicle...

not to in a navistar because its all wired.. but yes so in your newest stuff...

something we don't need is a madman taking remote control of a school bus full of kids

cadillackid · 04-01-2019, 12:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sleddgracer

something we don't need is a madman taking remote control of a school bus full of kids

right now none of the CAN is collected and sent remotely that I know of... but its all too easy to send data over a CAN.. I need to do a video of me revving up the RPM on my bus...

but mnore and more cars are connected... but I agree.. and I hope the standards in the future involve more security...

I build cloud servers for a living... I write softwasre for a living.. I spend on average 50% of my efforts on security... many times more...

its indirect methods that are the toughest to protect against.. so lets say I have a computer.. 'A', it has devices 'B', 'C', and 'D' connected to it... device 'B' is a vehicle, devices 'C' and 'D' are other systems.. say monitoring / ELD / any number of things it might be..

computer 'A' and its connection to vehicle 'B' may be real secure.. and near impossible to man-in-the-middle, spoof, etc.. but lets say device 'D' is some iOT device that owner bought off the china-baba-net.. it is authorized access to computer 'A' to do its function... (show his kid sleeping) computer 'A' has an interface to CAN-BUS of vehicle 'B'... if I can break-down device 'D', gain control of computer 'A', now I have un-restricted access to vehicle 'B'...

I never need to break down the strong firewalls that computer A may be behind, nor do I need to crack the hashing mechanisms between computer A and vehicle B... I really dont want to control vehicle B directly when i can let computer A do the heavy hitting for me and do it undetected... I snag control of the back-end software and leave the UI untouched...

while I over-simplified the scenerio.. its the way thinbgs are often done... and why when you curse the I.T. group at your office for not allowing you to plug in your USB speaker, or download your favorite music player on your office PC.... or even charge your phone from the USB port on the PC...

when friends and I have gotten together and had "white hatting" get togethers, its amazing how insecure some of the most common and cool little gadgets out there are...

software bugs and exploits are published... and manufacturers write fixes for them rather quickly.. but they only get deployed in 30% or less of real-world devices.. whiuch means the "hackers guide to being a script-kiddie"is pretty much handed to anyone and everyone... as well as you can google and download the scripts.. you just gotta open a up a VPN, set up a clandetine virtual environment and paste away.....

scary my friends... you'd be surprised at how wide open most home networks are... and many businesses too...

-Christopher

Sleddgracer · 04-01-2019, 01:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cadillackid

right now none of the CAN is collected and sent remotely that I know of... but its all too easy to send data over a CAN.. I need to do a video of me revving up the RPM on my bus...

but mnore and more cars are connected... but I agree.. and I hope the standards in the future involve more security...

I build cloud servers for a living... I write softwasre for a living.. I spend on average 50% of my efforts on security... many times more...

its indirect methods that are the toughest to protect against.. so lets say I have a computer.. 'A', it has devices 'B', 'C', and 'D' connected to it... device 'B' is a vehicle, devices 'C' and 'D' are other systems.. say monitoring / ELD / any number of things it might be..

computer 'A' and its connection to vehicle 'B' may be real secure.. and near impossible to man-in-the-middle, spoof, etc.. but lets say device 'D' is some iOT device that owner bought off the china-baba-net.. it is authorized access to computer 'A' to do its function... (show his kid sleeping) computer 'A' has an interface to CAN-BUS of vehicle 'B'... if I can break-down device 'D', gain control of computer 'A', now I have un-restricted access to vehicle 'B'...

I never need to break down the strong firewalls that computer A may be behind, nor do I need to crack the hashing mechanisms between computer A and vehicle B... I really dont want to control vehicle B directly when i can let computer A do the heavy hitting for me and do it undetected... I snag control of the back-end software and leave the UI untouched...

while I over-simplified the scenerio.. its the way thinbgs are often done... and why when you curse the I.T. group at your office for not allowing you to plug in your USB speaker, or download your favorite music player on your office PC.... or even charge your phone from the USB port on the PC...

when friends and I have gotten together and had "white hatting" get togethers, its amazing how insecure some of the most common and cool little gadgets out there are...

software bugs and exploits are published... and manufacturers write fixes for them rather quickly.. but they only get deployed in 30% or less of real-world devices.. whiuch means the "hackers guide to being a script-kiddie"is pretty much handed to anyone and everyone... as well as you can google and download the scripts.. you just gotta open a up a VPN, set up a clandetine virtual environment and paste away.....

scary my friends... you'd be surprised at how wide open most home networks are... and many businesses too...

-Christopher

my first computer lessons involved 'here is the on/off switch, go for it', so as you can guess I'm far from a 'puter nerd, but I have read about some of the process you describe to hack other computers, and it is scary - yesterday I was looking at some old skoolie posts and clicked on a video - my screen started flashing with different colours and a voice was issuing instructions of what to do, including, 'don't shut down before this message is complete or the whole network will be brought down' - I shut it down so quickly that I didn't take the time to see what video or page I was on - I rebooted expecting to see a ransom wear or some such thing, but it loaded properly - I deleted all the pages that I had been on at the time, and every thing seems to be ok so far, but it did create a helpless feeling

Yukon Cornelius · 04-08-2019, 07:55 AM

Sooooooo much awesome in this thread

love it

Hiura · 05-02-2020, 10:34 AM

Hey Cadillac. You're quite the popular kid in class. Your PM is full. Native mentioned to contact you. You can PM me for me email and I can send you some info this way. Need clarification...and money. Always need more money.

cadillackid · 05-02-2020, 11:31 AM

Ooops!!! sorry about that... I fixed it

Native · 05-02-2020, 05:26 PM

The site needs to send the full inbox owner a message (e-mail) when their inbox is full and a member tried to send a message. Makes sense to me!

EastCoastCB · 05-02-2020, 05:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Native

The site needs to send the full inbox owner a message (e-mail) when their inbox is full and a member tried to send a message. Makes sense to me!

We already have that.

Jolly Roger bus 223 · 05-02-2020, 06:10 PM

i know i am an ass.
may we get back to not commenting on threads that are important to others?
ahave been b nd shut up when we dont know????
opinions only work when you have done it and you give an experience by opinion saying i did this but i think i could/ have been/done better by doing it this way instead of the way i did it is way? the new crowd wants our roof raise failures as well the successs pictures?
might as well do it for them

cadillackid · 05-02-2020, 07:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Native

The site needs to send the full inbox owner a message (e-mail) when their inbox is full and a member tried to send a message. Makes sense to me!

The site really needs to send a message when the box is full before someone sends a message.. or maybe I could just clean out my damn mailbox more often...

cadillackid · 05-02-2020, 07:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jolly Roger bus 223

i know i am an ass.
may we get back to not commenting on threads that are important to others?
ahave been b nd shut up when we dont know????
opinions only work when you have done it and you give an experience by opinion saying i did this but i think i could/ have been/done better by doing it this way instead of the way i did it is way? the new crowd wants our roof raise failures as well the successs pictures?
might as well do it for them

The 500 watt sound system in the RedByrd pretty much is a roof raising success !!

Diverdude0075 · 10-28-2020, 08:28 PM

I just read all 23 pages! Holy moly I feel enlightened! -My Allison 2000 has been purchased! Let the games begin!! (Well, I still need to pick it up...)

Should I purchase the newer ECM? It sounds like a win to do so both for the transmission and engine. Also, my flex plate sounds like it’s missing some teeth when I try to start my bus. Is it the same flex plate for the AT545 and the 2000? Good source to order from? I can fix this while doing the swap!

My bus is a 28 foot 3800, T444E, and I have the three pin connection on the passenger side valve cover.

Thanks Christopher for sharing all your knowledge!

Diverdude0075 · 11-04-2020, 12:24 PM

Christopher, maybe you mentioned it and I missed it... Which fittings did you use on the radiator side of your transmission cooling lines to tie in the stainless steel braided lines?

cadillackid · 11-04-2020, 03:34 PM

they seem to vary.. on mine they are #8 JIC, on some people's they are #10..

SuperAudioGuy · 06-02-2021, 08:24 PM

May I ask your opinion on this?

Sooooooo I have a 1995 DT466E (one of the first "E's" I believe) with an AT-545 behind it, and would love to put in something a lot less slippy and more mountain friendly.

I live in Rigley full time, so the effort and money are worth putting into it. I first looked into the MT-643 thinking it was my only option, until I found this thread and read all 23 pages.

I've found a local skoolie recycler that has a 2009 doner bus with a 4th gen MD-2500, which sounds like it would be a wonderful upgrade. (did you say 3rd gen TCM is best for reprogramming?)

I'm handy, mechanical background, yada yada yada, but I don't have access to the software and scan tools that you've utilized to do your swap...

My question (if you'd be so kind as to share your opinion)
Is this MD-2500 something I can make happen with a lot of running around to authorized Allison and Navistar places to get things flashed and reprogrammed? Can I use the 2009 ECM in my 1995?

Or is the MT-643 my only option without the right tools? Is it a significant enough improvement?

Thank you so much for all of the brilliant and selfless information you've shared here. It's the only info I've been able to find on this specific subject.

Thank you!
-Jason

You may also like: