Flarm and stealth

[John Cochrane[_2_]]

As the US gets ready for the arrival of flarm, a big question on many
US pilot's minds is, what about stealth mode? From an armchair
piloting point of view, it seems that seeing gliders in a several km
range, with climb rates attached, could be a major competitive
issue. With this in mind, whether to require stealth mode in
competitions is being actively debated.

I'd like to hear from our European friends with lots of contest
experience, just how this is playing out. Do you find that non-stealth
displays are in fact very useful? Where stealth mode is either not
required or not enforced (WGC), is it becoming de rigeur to have a
secondary display and follow the gaggle with your flarm? Or are the
theoretical advantages overstated, and in the real world flarm
leeching isn't that big an issue; you're better off looking out the
window and seeing who is racked up in a tight turn?

Where stealth mode is required, is it being enforced, and how much of
a pain is that proving to be? Certainly the obvious protocol,
involving cockpit checks for hidden flarms, daily submission of flight
logs, and penalties for absence of such logs, seems rather onerous.

Thanks in advance. We are fortunate to have your experience so we
don't have to rethink this all from scratch!

John Cochrane

[John Cochrane[_2_]]

Clarification for US pilots: "Stealth mode" means other people can't
see you from a great distance, nor see your climb rate, on devices
attached to flarm. In return, you can't see them or their climb rates
either; they only show up when they pose a collision threat. If you
select "stealth mode" this is reflected in the flarm IGC file, so
scorers can verify the setting.

But I'm hoping for more actual experience from Europe than theoretical
opinions from the US!

John Cochrane

[T8]

On Oct 28, 5:06*pm, John Cochrane >
wrote:
> Clarification for US pilots: "Stealth mode" means other people can't
> see you from a great distance, nor see your climb rate, on devices
> attached to flarm. In return, you can't see them or their climb rates
> either; they only show up when they pose a collision threat. If you
> select "stealth mode" this is reflected in the flarm IGC file, so
> scorers can verify the setting.
>
> But I'm hoping for more actual experience from Europe than theoretical
> opinions from the US!
>
> John Cochrane

Keep in mind that Powerflarm is said to have longer range than
Flarm.

-T8

[Bob Kuykendall]

On Oct 28, 2:06*pm, John Cochrane >
wrote:

To heck with stealth, what about ECM?

[Dave Nadler]

On Oct 28, 5:29*pm, Bob Kuykendall > wrote:
> To heck with stealth, what about ECM?

That's why the payload is proprietary and encrypted ;-)
See ya, Dave

[Peter Scholz[_2_]]

Am 28.10.2010 21:53, John Cochrane wrote:
> As the US gets ready for the arrival of flarm, a big question on many
> US pilot's minds is, what about stealth mode? From an armchair
> piloting point of view, it seems that seeing gliders in a several km
> range, with climb rates attached, could be a major competitive
> issue. With this in mind, whether to require stealth mode in
> competitions is being actively debated.
>
> I'd like to hear from our European friends with lots of contest
> experience, just how this is playing out. Do you find that non-stealth
> displays are in fact very useful? Where stealth mode is either not
> required or not enforced (WGC), is it becoming de rigeur to have a
> secondary display and follow the gaggle with your flarm? Or are the
> theoretical advantages overstated, and in the real world flarm
> leeching isn't that big an issue; you're better off looking out the
> window and seeing who is racked up in a tight turn?
>
> Where stealth mode is required, is it being enforced, and how much of
> a pain is that proving to be? Certainly the obvious protocol,
> involving cockpit checks for hidden flarms, daily submission of flight
> logs, and penalties for absence of such logs, seems rather onerous.
>
> Thanks in advance. We are fortunate to have your experience so we
> don't have to rethink this all from scratch!
>
> John Cochrane

In the (regional) competitions that I attended, there was no requirement
of Flarm stealth mode, and almost all pilots had their Flarm configured
in open mode. So everyone was in fact free to hide himself from others
at the cost of not receiving tactical informations himself.

I have no knowledge of a competition here in Germany where the rules
required stealth mode, but there may have been such competitions that
I'm not aware of. Others might want to jump in here.

I have the butterfly display installed in my glider, and I personally
found it quite useful to get the information if a glider circling 3km in
front of me actually had a strong or weak lift, or to get the info that
in 10km distance there was a lift that I could reach straight on,
without having seen the glider that send out the signal.

In competitions this info might be (relatively) less valuable, because
one (at least me) always tends to be in the proximity of a few other
competitors, so normally the Flarm tactical information is only used to
confirm my decision made on 'gut feeling'.

It is much more valuale on normal X/C flights, where I often get
information about thermals 10-15km ahead. This quite often lead to
decisions that I probably wouldn't have made without that information.
--
Peter Scholz
ASW24 JE

[Tony[_5_]]

On Oct 28, 4:29*pm, Bob Kuykendall > wrote:
> On Oct 28, 2:06*pm, John Cochrane >
> wrote:
>
> To heck with stealth, what about ECM?

too close for missiles i'm switching to guns?

[Jerzy]

On Oct 28, 5:53*pm, Peter Scholz >
wrote:
> Am 28.10.2010 21:53, John Cochrane wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > As the US gets ready for the arrival of flarm, a big question on many
> > US pilot's minds is, what about stealth mode? From an armchair
> > piloting point of view, it seems that seeing gliders in a several km
> > range, with *climb rates attached, could be a major competitive
> > issue. *With this in mind, whether to require stealth mode in
> > competitions is being actively debated.
>
> > I'd like to hear from our European friends with lots of contest
> > experience, just how this is playing out. Do you find that non-stealth
> > displays are in fact very useful? Where stealth mode is either not
> > required or not enforced (WGC), is it becoming de rigeur to have a
> > secondary display and follow the gaggle with your flarm? Or are the
> > theoretical advantages overstated, and in the real world flarm
> > leeching isn't that big an issue; you're better off looking out the
> > window and seeing who is racked up in a tight turn?
>
> > Where stealth mode is required, is it being enforced, and how much of
> > a pain is that proving to be? Certainly the obvious protocol,
> > involving cockpit checks for hidden flarms, daily submission of flight
> > logs, and penalties for absence of such logs, seems rather onerous.
>
> > Thanks in advance. We are fortunate to have your experience so we
> > don't have to rethink this all from scratch!
>
> > John Cochrane
>
> In the (regional) competitions that I attended, there was no requirement
> of Flarm stealth mode, and almost all pilots had their Flarm configured
> in open mode. So everyone was in fact free to hide himself from others
> at the cost of not receiving tactical informations himself.
>
> I have no knowledge of a competition here in Germany where the rules
> required stealth mode, but there may have been such competitions that
> I'm not aware of. Others might want to jump in here.
>
> I have the butterfly display installed in my glider, and I personally
> found it quite useful to get the information if a glider circling 3km in
> front of me actually had a strong or weak lift, or to get the info that
> in 10km distance there was a lift that I could reach straight on,
> without having seen the glider that send out the signal.
>
> In competitions this info might be (relatively) less valuable, because
> one (at least me) always tends to be in the proximity of a few other
> competitors, so normally the Flarm tactical information is only used to
> confirm my decision made on 'gut feeling'.
>
> It is much more valuale on normal X/C flights, where I often get
> information about thermals 10-15km ahead. This quite often lead to
> decisions that I probably wouldn't have made without that information.
> --
> Peter Scholz
> ASW24 JE- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

I had Flarm connected to ClearNav during 2010 WGC it worked perfect,
most 18 meter class pilots didn't have stealth mode, climb rate of
gliders was useless. The most important part was that I could see on
the screen gliders behind me and in my blind spots in addition to
warning about collision. It was eye opener how many gliders I didn't
see till Flarm warning. Flying in thermal with 50+ gliders was no
problem, no excessive warnings, just as needed.
Jerzy XG

[Dave Nadler]

On Oct 28, 6:51*pm, Jerzy > wrote:
> On Oct 28, 5:53*pm, Peter Scholz >
> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Am 28.10.2010 21:53, John Cochrane wrote:
>
> > > As the US gets ready for the arrival of flarm, a big question on many
> > > US pilot's minds is, what about stealth mode? From an armchair
> > > piloting point of view, it seems that seeing gliders in a several km
> > > range, with *climb rates attached, could be a major competitive
> > > issue. *With this in mind, whether to require stealth mode in
> > > competitions is being actively debated.
>
> > > I'd like to hear from our European friends with lots of contest
> > > experience, just how this is playing out. Do you find that non-stealth
> > > displays are in fact very useful? Where stealth mode is either not
> > > required or not enforced (WGC), is it becoming de rigeur to have a
> > > secondary display and follow the gaggle with your flarm? Or are the
> > > theoretical advantages overstated, and in the real world flarm
> > > leeching isn't that big an issue; you're better off looking out the
> > > window and seeing who is racked up in a tight turn?
>
> > > Where stealth mode is required, is it being enforced, and how much of
> > > a pain is that proving to be? Certainly the obvious protocol,
> > > involving cockpit checks for hidden flarms, daily submission of flight
> > > logs, and penalties for absence of such logs, seems rather onerous.
>
> > > Thanks in advance. We are fortunate to have your experience so we
> > > don't have to rethink this all from scratch!
>
> > > John Cochrane
>
> > In the (regional) competitions that I attended, there was no requirement
> > of Flarm stealth mode, and almost all pilots had their Flarm configured
> > in open mode. So everyone was in fact free to hide himself from others
> > at the cost of not receiving tactical informations himself.
>
> > I have no knowledge of a competition here in Germany where the rules
> > required stealth mode, but there may have been such competitions that
> > I'm not aware of. Others might want to jump in here.
>
> > I have the butterfly display installed in my glider, and I personally
> > found it quite useful to get the information if a glider circling 3km in
> > front of me actually had a strong or weak lift, or to get the info that
> > in 10km distance there was a lift that I could reach straight on,
> > without having seen the glider that send out the signal.
>
> > In competitions this info might be (relatively) less valuable, because
> > one (at least me) always tends to be in the proximity of a few other
> > competitors, so normally the Flarm tactical information is only used to
> > confirm my decision made on 'gut feeling'.
>
> > It is much more valuale on normal X/C flights, where I often get
> > information about thermals 10-15km ahead. This quite often lead to
> > decisions that I probably wouldn't have made without that information.
> > --
> > Peter Scholz
> > ASW24 JE- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> I had Flarm connected to ClearNav during 2010 WGC it worked perfect,
> most 18 meter class pilots didn't have stealth mode, climb rate of
> gliders *was useless. The most important part was that I could see on
> the screen gliders behind me and in my blind spots in addition to
> warning about collision. It was eye opener how many gliders I didn't
> see till Flarm warning. Flying in thermal with 50+ gliders was no
> problem, no excessive warnings, just as needed.
> Jerzy XG

Thanks Jerzy - Can you tell us if you had "competition mode" set ?
Best Regards, Dave "YO electric"

[Jerzy]

On Oct 28, 6:54*pm, Dave Nadler > wrote:
> On Oct 28, 6:51*pm, Jerzy > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Oct 28, 5:53*pm, Peter Scholz >
> > wrote:
>
> > > Am 28.10.2010 21:53, John Cochrane wrote:
>
> > > > As the US gets ready for the arrival of flarm, a big question on many
> > > > US pilot's minds is, what about stealth mode? From an armchair
> > > > piloting point of view, it seems that seeing gliders in a several km
> > > > range, with *climb rates attached, could be a major competitive
> > > > issue. *With this in mind, whether to require stealth mode in
> > > > competitions is being actively debated.
>
> > > > I'd like to hear from our European friends with lots of contest
> > > > experience, just how this is playing out. Do you find that non-stealth
> > > > displays are in fact very useful? Where stealth mode is either not
> > > > required or not enforced (WGC), is it becoming de rigeur to have a
> > > > secondary display and follow the gaggle with your flarm? Or are the
> > > > theoretical advantages overstated, and in the real world flarm
> > > > leeching isn't that big an issue; you're better off looking out the
> > > > window and seeing who is racked up in a tight turn?
>
> > > > Where stealth mode is required, is it being enforced, and how much of
> > > > a pain is that proving to be? Certainly the obvious protocol,
> > > > involving cockpit checks for hidden flarms, daily submission of flight
> > > > logs, and penalties for absence of such logs, seems rather onerous.
>
> > > > Thanks in advance. We are fortunate to have your experience so we
> > > > don't have to rethink this all from scratch!
>
> > > > John Cochrane
>
> > > In the (regional) competitions that I attended, there was no requirement
> > > of Flarm stealth mode, and almost all pilots had their Flarm configured
> > > in open mode. So everyone was in fact free to hide himself from others
> > > at the cost of not receiving tactical informations himself.
>
> > > I have no knowledge of a competition here in Germany where the rules
> > > required stealth mode, but there may have been such competitions that
> > > I'm not aware of. Others might want to jump in here.
>
> > > I have the butterfly display installed in my glider, and I personally
> > > found it quite useful to get the information if a glider circling 3km in
> > > front of me actually had a strong or weak lift, or to get the info that
> > > in 10km distance there was a lift that I could reach straight on,
> > > without having seen the glider that send out the signal.
>
> > > In competitions this info might be (relatively) less valuable, because
> > > one (at least me) always tends to be in the proximity of a few other
> > > competitors, so normally the Flarm tactical information is only used to
> > > confirm my decision made on 'gut feeling'.
>
> > > It is much more valuale on normal X/C flights, where I often get
> > > information about thermals 10-15km ahead. This quite often lead to
> > > decisions that I probably wouldn't have made without that information..
> > > --
> > > Peter Scholz
> > > ASW24 JE- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > I had Flarm connected to ClearNav during 2010 WGC it worked perfect,
> > most 18 meter class pilots didn't have stealth mode, climb rate of
> > gliders *was useless. The most important part was that I could see on
> > the screen gliders behind me and in my blind spots in addition to
> > warning about collision. It was eye opener how many gliders I didn't
> > see till Flarm warning. Flying in thermal with 50+ gliders was no
> > problem, no excessive warnings, just as needed.
> > Jerzy XG
>
> Thanks Jerzy - Can you tell us if you had "competition mode" set ?
> Best Regards, Dave "YO electric"- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

I didn't set competition mode
Jerzy

[Andrej Kolar[_3_]]

> whether to require stealth mode in competitions is being actively debated.

This is how Flarm works:
1. If you see another Flarm then the other Flarm sees you.
2. If you are in stealth mode then others don't see you but you also
don't see others (but you do still get the alarm when there is
immediate danger of collision)

Given the above it is actually pilot's decision whether he will choose
stealth mode or not. If he doesn't he has the opportunity to see what
others are doing. If he does enable stealth mode then he doesn't see
the other gliders around him.

I would say that >90% of the pilots in competition leaves Flarm in
normal mode. I certainly do. Either way it's not a problem and both is
completely fair for all pilots involved.

Andrej Kolar
--
glider pilots use
http://www.naviter.com

[Kevin Christner]

On Oct 28, 2:29*pm, Bob Kuykendall > wrote:
> On Oct 28, 2:06*pm, John Cochrane >
> wrote:
>
> To heck with stealth, what about ECM?

You can already "chaff" other competitors - water ballast!

[RW[_2_]]

On Oct 28, 6:54*pm, Dave Nadler > wrote:
> On Oct 28, 6:51*pm, Jerzy > wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Oct 28, 5:53*pm, Peter Scholz >
> > wrote:
>
> > > Am 28.10.2010 21:53, John Cochrane wrote:
>
> > > > As the US gets ready for the arrival of flarm, a big question on many
> > > > US pilot's minds is, what about stealth mode? From an armchair
> > > > piloting point of view, it seems that seeing gliders in a several km
> > > > range, with *climb rates attached, could be a major competitive
> > > > issue. *With this in mind, whether to require stealth mode in
> > > > competitions is being actively debated.
>
> > > > I'd like to hear from our European friends with lots of contest
> > > > experience, just how this is playing out. Do you find that non-stealth
> > > > displays are in fact very useful? Where stealth mode is either not
> > > > required or not enforced (WGC), is it becoming de rigeur to have a
> > > > secondary display and follow the gaggle with your flarm? Or are the
> > > > theoretical advantages overstated, and in the real world flarm
> > > > leeching isn't that big an issue; you're better off looking out the
> > > > window and seeing who is racked up in a tight turn?
>
> > > > Where stealth mode is required, is it being enforced, and how much of
> > > > a pain is that proving to be? Certainly the obvious protocol,
> > > > involving cockpit checks for hidden flarms, daily submission of flight
> > > > logs, and penalties for absence of such logs, seems rather onerous.
>
> > > > Thanks in advance. We are fortunate to have your experience so we
> > > > don't have to rethink this all from scratch!
>
> > > > John Cochrane
>
> > > In the (regional) competitions that I attended, there was no requirement
> > > of Flarm stealth mode, and almost all pilots had their Flarm configured
> > > in open mode. So everyone was in fact free to hide himself from others
> > > at the cost of not receiving tactical informations himself.
>
> > > I have no knowledge of a competition here in Germany where the rules
> > > required stealth mode, but there may have been such competitions that
> > > I'm not aware of. Others might want to jump in here.
>
> > > I have the butterfly display installed in my glider, and I personally
> > > found it quite useful to get the information if a glider circling 3km in
> > > front of me actually had a strong or weak lift, or to get the info that
> > > in 10km distance there was a lift that I could reach straight on,
> > > without having seen the glider that send out the signal.
>
> > > In competitions this info might be (relatively) less valuable, because
> > > one (at least me) always tends to be in the proximity of a few other
> > > competitors, so normally the Flarm tactical information is only used to
> > > confirm my decision made on 'gut feeling'.
>
> > > It is much more valuale on normal X/C flights, where I often get
> > > information about thermals 10-15km ahead. This quite often lead to
> > > decisions that I probably wouldn't have made without that information..
> > > --
> > > Peter Scholz
> > > ASW24 JE- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > I had Flarm connected to ClearNav during 2010 WGC it worked perfect,
> > most 18 meter class pilots didn't have stealth mode, climb rate of
> > gliders *was useless. The most important part was that I could see on
> > the screen gliders behind me and in my blind spots in addition to
> > warning about collision. It was eye opener how many gliders I didn't
> > see till Flarm warning. Flying in thermal with 50+ gliders was no
> > problem, no excessive warnings, just as needed.
> > Jerzy XG
>
> Thanks Jerzy - Can you tell us if you had "competition mode" set ?
> Best Regards, Dave "YO electric"

Dave,
In Parowan in blue and over Nevada unlandable desert, Flarm would
improve safety( many gliders got damaged).But for all other occasions
this idea would get more pilots buy Power Flarm.
Win, win situation.
GPS made us safer,Flarm can make us safer,pilots reports can make us
safer,infrared thermal vision would make us safer,Power Flarm with
transponder would make us safer..
I think WGC (both in Szeged and in Prievidza) didn't force anybody
to use stealth mode was to increase safety.
I don't have Flarm yet.
Ryszard

[Maurizio]

For my Italian experience, where 60% of pilots and 100% in competition
are now using Flarm, I would feel not so secure anymore to fly now
without a flarm.
When I meet other gliders without is not nice , but it still happens a
lot.
So obviously it is better to always keep your eyes well open like if
you don't have your flarm on board.
I am very happy to see that Flarm is arriving also in the US, as I
will beging flying in the USA soon as I am moving there.
If, on top of usual flarm functions, you also even add the possibility
to use and to see transponders, it is exactly what we need !
( We also have/use the swiss DSX T-Advisor that is a fully compatible
Flarm produced by a different factory and that is top " swiss "
quality, see www.d-s-x.net : they also do great tracking tools and
more )

Further more, a Flarm connected for example with a See You PDA or
PNA, it is definitelly a great XC and soaring tactic help ! ( Or
Clear Nav or what ever sees flarm and read and reports his information
on the screen). As, on a See You"ed" PDA or PNA screen, you will see
the other XY "flarmed" gliders performances while thermalling, or
while gliding and looking for best netto. ( obviously within the Flarm
range that is not SO big .. )
So you will choose to stay in your own thermal, or on your track, as
you see that the other XY "flarmed" glider is in a weaker or worst
area than your one.
You don't need to communicate with the "flarmed" pilot, as you may not
even know him. Just see : + 3 in you vario or on your netto while he
is + 1.5 .. and stay where you are. So in competition is a good help
( even if during competitions you also have a bunch of other
information to care about ) .
Flarm sensors also help See You, if connected with it, to better
thermal centering and to be definitelly more precise .
Ciao
Maurizio
From Italy

On Oct 28, 9:53*pm, John Cochrane >
wrote:
> As the US gets ready for the arrival of flarm, a big question on many
> US pilot's minds is, what about stealth mode? From an armchair
> piloting point of view, it seems that seeing gliders in a several km
> range, with *climb rates attached, could be a major competitive
> issue. *With this in mind, whether to require stealth mode in
> competitions is being actively debated.
>
> I'd like to hear from our European friends with lots of contest
> experience, just how this is playing out. Do you find that non-stealth
> displays are in fact very useful? Where stealth mode is either not
> required or not enforced (WGC), is it becoming de rigeur to have a
> secondary display and follow the gaggle with your flarm? Or are the
> theoretical advantages overstated, and in the real world flarm
> leeching isn't that big an issue; you're better off looking out the
> window and seeing who is racked up in a tight turn?
>
> Where stealth mode is required, is it being enforced, and how much of
> a pain is that proving to be? Certainly the obvious protocol,
> involving cockpit checks for hidden flarms, daily submission of flight
> logs, and penalties for absence of such logs, seems rather onerous.
>
> Thanks in advance. We are fortunate to have your experience so we
> don't have to rethink this all from scratch!
>
> John Cochrane

[Paul Remde]

Hi John,

I have not flown with FLARM yet... But I did fly in the Sport Class
Nationals in Parowan, UT this year - in which there was a major mid-air
collision and at least one other near-miss. I wanted FLARM (for myself and
everyone else at the contest) so bad I could taste it.

I have also been a Competition Director and Contest Manager at several U.S.
soaring contests and competed in a number of soaring contests.

It seems to me that enabling Stealth mode reduces safety. It reduces the
amount of knowledge you get about traffic around you. Also, it reduces the
amount of information you get about thermals in front of you. To me,
information about thermals in front of me increases my personal safety
factor because it reduces the likelihood that I will need to landout
(especially on a weak day) - which has inherent risks (especially over
rugged terrain).

In the roles of Contest Manager and Competition Director, I always had in
the back of my mind thoughts of liability. I was somewhat concerned that
the decisions of the people running the contest could come back to bite us
all in the event of a tragic accident. With that in mind - (as a Contest
Manager or Competition Director) I would never enforce any rule that reduces
safety. Therefore I am strongly opposed to any rule that requires the use
of Competition Mode or Stealth Mode. Also, doing so would increase the
workload of the contest volunteers (because they would need to chase down
FLARM logs every day) - who are working quite hard already.

I hope that the U.S. Contest Rules Committee finds through this thread that
forcing the use of Stealth or Competition modes is not being done anywhere
in the world. I don't know whether or not that is true - but I suspect it
is from what I have heard from my customers around the world. I believe
that people at FLARM recommend not using Stealth or Competition modes. I
hope that Urs (from FLARM) can comment on his thoughts about those modes.

Best Regards,

Paul Remde

"John Cochrane" > wrote in message
...
> As the US gets ready for the arrival of flarm, a big question on many
> US pilot's minds is, what about stealth mode? From an armchair
> piloting point of view, it seems that seeing gliders in a several km
> range, with climb rates attached, could be a major competitive
> issue. With this in mind, whether to require stealth mode in
> competitions is being actively debated.
>
> I'd like to hear from our European friends with lots of contest
> experience, just how this is playing out. Do you find that non-stealth
> displays are in fact very useful? Where stealth mode is either not
> required or not enforced (WGC), is it becoming de rigeur to have a
> secondary display and follow the gaggle with your flarm? Or are the
> theoretical advantages overstated, and in the real world flarm
> leeching isn't that big an issue; you're better off looking out the
> window and seeing who is racked up in a tight turn?
>
> Where stealth mode is required, is it being enforced, and how much of
> a pain is that proving to be? Certainly the obvious protocol,
> involving cockpit checks for hidden flarms, daily submission of flight
> logs, and penalties for absence of such logs, seems rather onerous.
>
> Thanks in advance. We are fortunate to have your experience so we
> don't have to rethink this all from scratch!
>
> John Cochrane

[PCool]

See www.lk8000.it/about.html for what you can actually do with a flarm
when you want to follow someone..

You can actually "see" the IAS, and thus know its MC, and even if the vario
values are scrambled when you are far away from the "target", still their
averages is valid.
I mean, in 4-5 years we discovered, here in europe, many different
applications for Flarm.

Something that has not been discussed here, is the fact that Flarm does
actually stores in the log the position of gliders seen during the fligth.
This was critical to find a friend lost during a competition in Rieti, last
year.

Everything is nice and smooth in Flarm, except for one thing: they use a
closed proprietary protocol, and thus they operate in monopoly.
However, to be honest their products are excellent and they have a really
good pricing policy.
When you buy a Flarm IGC you also get a logger, at an unbeatable value for
that price.

Also Butterfly avionics are doing wonderful things.

paolo

[T8]

On Oct 29, 7:57*am, "Paul Remde" > wrote:
> Therefore I am strongly opposed to any rule that requires the use
> of Competition Mode or Stealth Mode. *

And I'm just as strongly opposed to any device that returns us to
endless start gate roulette and reduces sailplane racing to Nascar
style "drafting". But so what? That isn't what John was asking for.

It would be a nearly trivial matter in software to block all
communication with other flarm devices more than (pick a number) two
miles away. No impact at all on safety w.r.t. midair collision
avoidance. Being able to detect climbing gliders and knowing their
climb rate at > 5 miles (as PowerFlarm is said to be capable of doing)
is a *huge* potential game changer and John is absolutely right to be
thinking forward on this.

-Evan Ludeman / T8

[Mark Dickson[_2_]]

In the UK Flarm has to be set to stealth mode for use in
competitions. This was introduced this year. Organisers may
make spot checks for compliance, but I'm not aware of any checks
being made. It didn't seem to cause any issues, apart from the
minor hassle of making the file change on the sd card.

At 11:57 29 October 2010, Paul Remde wrote:

>I hope that the U.S. Contest Rules Committee finds through this
thread
>that
>forcing the use of Stealth or Competition modes is not being done
anywhere
>
>in the world. I don't know whether or not that is true - but I
suspect it
>
>is from what I have heard from my customers around the world.

[cernauta]

On Thu, 28 Oct 2010 12:53:32 -0700 (PDT), John Cochrane
> wrote:

>As the US gets ready for the arrival of flarm, a big question on many
>US pilot's minds is, what about stealth mode?

This year I flew competitions in Italy, Spain and Switzerland. There
was never any requirement to select any particular Flarm setting. Most
of the pilots had in standard mode.
My impression is that this is the way to go.

Where "team flying" is accepted, the pilots regularly use Flarm
indications to be aware of the position of the partner, reducing radio
chat.

Vertical speeds as indicated for the surrounding gliders is mostly
unreliable, but you can learn to make good use of it, somehow.



Some considerations:

Sometimes my Flarm could spot gilders inside clouds (maybe only a few
hundred feet above cloudbase, not permitted by the rules. In facts,
Flarm records might help identify the "bad guys.."

A minority of pilots may possibly develop habits that I consider
wrong: turning Flarm off (or disabling the gps antenna or whatever) to
hide their position upon finding the last thermal. Flying through
clouds as Flarm doesn't indicate any traffic inside.
I believe this is a side-effect that will desappear, given enough time
and experience.

It has taken more than 5 years for Flarm to be generally well accepted
by pilots and competition pilots. A minority are still negating the
usefulness of this device, or are against requiring Flarm as mandatory
equipment (for competition).

[Peter Scholz[_2_]]

Am 29.10.2010 17:53, cernauta wrote:
> ...
> Vertical speeds as indicated for the surrounding gliders is mostly
> unreliable, but you can learn to make good use of it, somehow.
>

I usually look more at the change in relative vertical distance to a
specific target to determine if's worth to leave my thermal in favour of
somebody elses. This can be decided in 30-60 seconds.

[John Cochrane[_2_]]

This is very interesting. We started with "is there really a tactical
advantage in seeing other gliders on flarm." Some US pilots are
adamantly opposed to allowing this to happen, and view it as a big
negative to the contest soaring experience. I seem to be hearing "yes,
and we like it."

John Cochrane

[T8]

On Oct 29, 1:02*pm, John Cochrane >
wrote:
> This is very interesting. We started with "is there really a tactical
> advantage in seeing other gliders on flarm." Some US pilots are
> adamantly opposed to allowing this to happen, and view it as a big
> negative to the contest soaring experience. I seem to be hearing "yes,
> and we like it."
>
> John Cochrane

Contest soaring is a game.

The game has changed a lot since

[Steve Koerner]

Remde has argued that there would be a safety advantage in allowing
normal mode so that thermals in the vicinity could be located and
assessed. I think it sounds like fun to be able to do that but I am
skeptical about any net safety advantage. The problem that I see is
that normal mode will dictate a significant amount of face down
time. This would be especially true during the prestart gaggle time
when it would be critical to see when other pilots are leaving on
course and whether they are hitting decent lift. It is exactly the
congested prestart period which is by far the most dangerous part of
racing now even without that added distraction. Of course, Flarm
itself helps to reduce the hazard but I doubt that setting ourselves
up for maybe 10% or 20% face down time during the prestart interval is
a really smart idea.

Perhaps we can ask for a software feature that automatically forces
competition mode until the glider has traveled say 15 miles from the
launch point.

[T8]

On Oct 29, 1:02*pm, John Cochrane >
wrote:
> This is very interesting. We started with "is there really a tactical
> advantage in seeing other gliders on flarm." Some US pilots are
> adamantly opposed to allowing this to happen, and view it as a big
> negative to the contest soaring experience. I seem to be hearing "yes,
> and we like it."
>
> John Cochrane

Contest soaring is a game... one that has changed an awful lot since I
started out in the map/camera/eyeball/high speed gate days. I wasn't
real thrilled about the switch to GPS and I feel some of the same
feelings towards the ability of flarm to tell us about gliders beyond
visual range. One of the things I like about this sport is that it's
difficult enough to be daunting. It was still more so pre-GPS, and I
liked that even better.

Probably, I'll get worn down on Flarm the same way I got worn down on
GPS: it just won't be practical to police this.

But when our moving map displays start plotting thermal locations,
strengths and working bands before we even arrive... we may be
racing... and the speeds will be impressive... but man, it's all a bit
of a con at that point. My $0.02. Bet Romeo agrees with me,
anyway :-).

Geeze. I'm more of a curmudgeon than most of the "Seniors".

-Evan Ludeman / T8

[toad]

> Geeze. *I'm more of a curmudgeon than most of the "Seniors".
>
> -Evan Ludeman / T8

You were born a curmudgeon. :-)

Todd Smith / 3S

[RW[_2_]]

On Oct 29, 3:27*pm, T8 > wrote:
> On Oct 29, 1:02*pm, John Cochrane >
> wrote:
>
> > This is very interesting. We started with "is there really a tactical
> > advantage in seeing other gliders on flarm." Some US pilots are
> > adamantly opposed to allowing this to happen, and view it as a big
> > negative to the contest soaring experience. I seem to be hearing "yes,
> > and we like it."
>
> > John Cochrane
>
> Contest soaring is a game... one that has changed an awful lot since I
> started out in the map/camera/eyeball/high speed gate days. *I wasn't
> real thrilled about the switch to GPS and I feel some of the same
> feelings towards the ability of flarm to tell us about gliders beyond
> visual range. *One of the things I like about this sport is that it's
> difficult enough to be daunting. *It was still more so pre-GPS, and I
> liked that even better.
>
> Probably, I'll get worn down on Flarm the same way I got worn down on
> GPS: it just won't be practical to police this.
>
> But when our moving map displays start plotting thermal locations,
> strengths and working bands before we even arrive... *we may be
> racing... and the speeds will be impressive... but man, it's all a bit
> of a con at that point. *My $0.02. *Bet Romeo agrees with me,
> anyway :-).
>
> Geeze. *I'm more of a curmudgeon than most of the "Seniors".
>
> -Evan Ludeman / T8

Evan,
So You are one of the guys who finds thermal under the visible cloud
and pray to your god to make it disappear, so nobody can see it and if
somebody goes same track crashes and burns.
Ryszard

[WR]

On Oct 29, 12:02*pm, John Cochrane >
wrote:
> This is very interesting. We started with "is there really a tactical
> advantage in seeing other gliders on flarm." Some US pilots are
> adamantly opposed to allowing this to happen, and view it as a big
> negative to the contest soaring experience. I seem to be hearing "yes,
> and we like it."
>
> John Cochrane

Any device that allows you to “see” another competitor that you could
not otherwise acquire with your eyeball gives a tactical advantage,
period.
Keep in mind we started down this FLARM road for one purpose, to
avoid another Chris O’Callaghan type tragedy.

It bothers me that some are using the safety soapbox to promote the
use of FLARM for something other than collision avoidance with
regards
to US competition soaring. Where does that line of reasoning stop?
Perhaps we should only race over landable terrain or everyone should
be required to fly a motorglider. Wouldn’t that be safer? If not
knowing
where the next lift is scares you, buy a motorglider.
If racing scares you, don’t race. If the contest rules concern you,
don’t
organize, host, manage or CD a US contest.

PowerFlarm in full up mode will be Leacher’s wet dream. I define a
good
leach as someone who has a capable aircraft, average to above average
airmanship skills but lacks the confidence to make his own
decisions.
Why make a racing decision when you can follow the lead pack on
Flarm?
That’s great for weekend flying around the field, but it has no place
in racing.

If I am not a collision threat to you, or you to me, than you have no
need or
right to know my location and rate of climb. The day the rules
REQUIRE me
to share my location and climb rate with fellow competitors will be
the day
I stop racing.

For the record I have a PowerFlarm on order. I’m buying it for one
purpose/reason.
I have two young children and I don’t want to be involved in a fatal
midair.
But I still want to Race.

Bill Ruehle WR

[T8]

On Oct 29, 11:40*pm, RW > wrote:
> On Oct 29, 3:27*pm, T8 > wrote:

> > Geeze. *I'm more of a curmudgeon than most of the "Seniors".
>
> > -Evan Ludeman / T8
>
> Evan,
> So You are one of the guys who finds thermal under the visible cloud
> and pray to your god to make it disappear, so nobody can see it and if
> somebody goes same track crashes and burns.
> Ryszard

Gosh no. But re-reading your earlier post... are you seriously trying
to sell leeching technology as a safety enhancement? No thanks!

I'm with Bill Ruehle 100%.

-Evan Ludeman / T8

[Paul Remde]

Hi Bill,

Well said and with many good points. I respect your opinion and I'm certain
many U.S. soaring contest pilots agree with you.

However, I suspect that many of those pilots will "change their tune" after
flying with FLARM and over time. I'm sure European pilots had the same
feelings 5 years ago, yet now many of them are used to FLARM and like the
thermal strength data - hence why most contests don't require Stealth or
Competition modes be turned on.

Years ago a wise soaring instructor (Bob Wander - if I remember correctly)
said - "There wouldn't be any fun or challenge to soaring cross country if
all the thermals were painted pink." At the time I agreed with him. But
after listening the Dick Johnson talk about how cool it would be to see all
thermals all around you, I started to believe that I would love to have more
thermal strength information available. I now believe that it would
increase my "fun" to be able to see "thermals" ahead of me on a
cross-country task. But it does change the game - a lot! And it will take
a while for many to come around to that way of thinking. And many never
will.

All I ask is that you keep an open mind - at least until after you have
flown with FLARM in an environment with many other gliders. Once you get
used to flying with it from your local gliderport you may really miss the
thermal climb rate information when you go to a contest.

I certainly may be wrong. I can't see the future. But this is my opinion.

Best Regards,

Paul Remde
Cumulus Soaring, Inc.

"WR" > wrote in message
...
On Oct 29, 12:02 pm, John Cochrane >
wrote:
> This is very interesting. We started with "is there really a tactical
> advantage in seeing other gliders on flarm." Some US pilots are
> adamantly opposed to allowing this to happen, and view it as a big
> negative to the contest soaring experience. I seem to be hearing "yes,
> and we like it."
>
> John Cochrane

Any device that allows you to “see” another competitor that you could
not otherwise acquire with your eyeball gives a tactical advantage,
period.
Keep in mind we started down this FLARM road for one purpose, to
avoid another Chris O’Callaghan type tragedy.

It bothers me that some are using the safety soapbox to promote the
use of FLARM for something other than collision avoidance with
regards
to US competition soaring. Where does that line of reasoning stop?
Perhaps we should only race over landable terrain or everyone should
be required to fly a motorglider. Wouldn’t that be safer? If not
knowing
where the next lift is scares you, buy a motorglider.
If racing scares you, don’t race. If the contest rules concern you,
don’t
organize, host, manage or CD a US contest.

PowerFlarm in full up mode will be Leacher’s wet dream. I define a
good
leach as someone who has a capable aircraft, average to above average
airmanship skills but lacks the confidence to make his own
decisions.
Why make a racing decision when you can follow the lead pack on
Flarm?
That’s great for weekend flying around the field, but it has no place
in racing.

If I am not a collision threat to you, or you to me, than you have no
need or
right to know my location and rate of climb. The day the rules
REQUIRE me
to share my location and climb rate with fellow competitors will be
the day
I stop racing.

For the record I have a PowerFlarm on order. I’m buying it for one
purpose/reason.
I have two young children and I don’t want to be involved in a fatal
midair.
But I still want to Race.

Bill Ruehle WR

[[email protected]]

On Oct 30, 8:26*am, T8 > wrote:
> On Oct 29, 11:40*pm, RW > wrote:
>
> > On Oct 29, 3:27*pm, T8 > wrote:
> > > Geeze. *I'm more of a curmudgeon than most of the "Seniors".
>
> > > -Evan Ludeman / T8
>
> > Evan,
> > So You are one of the guys who finds thermal under the visible cloud
> > and pray to your god to make it disappear, so nobody can see it and if
> > somebody goes same track crashes and burns.
> > Ryszard
>
> Gosh no. *But re-reading your earlier post... are you seriously trying
> to sell leeching technology as a safety enhancement? *No thanks!
>
> I'm with Bill Ruehle 100%.
>
> -Evan Ludeman / T8

UH Agrees 100%

[RW[_2_]]

>
> Gosh no. *But re-reading your earlier post... are you seriously trying
> to sell leeching technology as a safety enhancement? *No thanks!
>
> I'm with Bill Ruehle 100%.
>
> -Evan Ludeman / T8

We have already info of no problem with leeching from 5 year old Flarm
experience in Europe.
But if somebody who is not serious about racing thinks this way,
let him buy it.
Lets keep this myth alive.
This way we have more Flarms.
RW

[John Cochrane[_2_]]

On Oct 30, 7:46*am, wrote:
>
> > Gosh no. *But re-reading your earlier post... are you seriously trying
> > to sell leeching technology as a safety enhancement? *No thanks!
>
> > I'm with Bill Ruehle 100%.
>
> > -Evan Ludeman / T8
>
> UH Agrees 100%

BB still has ears on and wants to hear facts from people who have
contest experience flying with Flarm. So far in this thread we have 3
posts from people who have done so, and 27 strongly held opinions (pro
and con) from US pilots who have never been in the air with a flarm
system.

As I count the three, one basically says it's not much use for
locating thermals (also my experience, but that based only on one
WGC); the second says it helps a lot, but after a few years of similar
grumbling about the end of the sport, european pilots seem to be
converging to a view that they like it, and it enhances the race
experience. The third says it's great for safety but is silent on the
competitive issue.

We (US) still don't have much information, on "does it work?", on "do
pilots, after experience, think this is the End Of Soaring or actually
enhance the contest experience?, on "what happens if you mandate
stealth mode and don't enforce it" (WGC), on "are you able to enforce
it without chaos?"

I do think we have to watch the tendency to dream in our winter
armchairs about how great/terrible the next technical innovation will
be and either demand (mandate)/ban it preemptively. (Remember GPS?
ELT?) We in the US are a bit fortunate in this case that there is a
decade of experience we can mine rather than have to figure this out
completely on our own. If we will only be a little quiet and listen.

John Cochrane BB

[T8]

On Oct 30, 11:07*am, RW > wrote:
> > Gosh no. *But re-reading your earlier post... are you seriously trying
> > to sell leeching technology as a safety enhancement? *No thanks!
>
> > I'm with Bill Ruehle 100%.
>
> > -Evan Ludeman / T8
>
> We have already info of no problem with leeching from 5 year old Flarm
> experience in Europe.
> But if somebody who is not serious about racing thinks this way,
> let him buy it.
> Lets keep this myth alive.
> This way we have more Flarms.
> RW


Pick one, you can't have 'em both:

A. " We have already info of no problem with leeching from 5 year
old Flarm experience in Europe."

B. "In Parowan in blue and over Nevada unlandable desert, Flarm
would improve safety" (by making it easier to leech)

-T8

[John Cochrane[_2_]]

As we think about this, I also think we need help on the
practicalities of a stealth mode requirement.

First, It seems we would need a cockpit check to make sure a
competitor doesn't have a second flarm driving his PDA, so a few
buddies can fly "team mode" while everyone else has stealth on. Then
we need to demand Flarm IGC files every day from every competitor, the
scorer would have to know what to look for to check both stealth
status and security. Finally we would need a system of penalties for
missing flarm files or security failures of the flarm files (can't
have guys editing it on notepad to change the stealth indication).

Is this how it works in countries (UK?) that are imposing a stealth
mode requirement? Is all that working out? I know at WGC there was a
stealth mode requirement that everybody ignored. This does not seem
like the right outcome.

Second, how do you insist on stealth and not also ban PCAS (zaon xrx),
or ADS-B traffic receivers and displays? Many gliders are equipped
with transponders, and more so will be in the future. GA ADS-B
receivers are on their way as their many advocates on other flarm
threads like to point out; not very good for glider collision
avoidance, but inevitably will show you everything with a transponder
in a 5 mile range. Are we going to ban all traffic alert systems, or
without glider specific filters? This doesn't seem possible or wise.

From those with strong opinions we should require stealth mode right,
now, explaining the practicalities would help. And I'm curious how
other countries that are requiring stealth mode are dealing with these
problems. My brain hurts...

John Cochrane

[wiktor256]

On Oct 30, 11:47*am, John Cochrane >
wrote:>
> First, It seems we would need a cockpit check *to make sure a
> competitor doesn't have a second flarm driving his PDA, so a few
> buddies can fly "team mode" while everyone else has stealth on.

Wouldn't the second flarm show up on other pilots' screens as well?
That would be very suspicious seeing two gliders at the same location,
so it would be easy to spot pilots with two flarms.

Wiktor Kozlik

[wiktor256]

Requiring that flarm is in the stealth mode during contests doesn't
accomplish the goal of preventing pilots from seeing each other
thermal strengths. This is because it is easy to calculate it in a PDA
using just the GPS data from the flarm. It's just a matter of time
before this is implemented in existing PDA software (some of it is
already done in LK8000). And then what? Do we disallow certain PDA
software? Is this the way we want to go?

It is certainly possible to have a PDA software that would keep track
of all the competitors, their start times, average speeds, their
estimated MacCready settings, etc. And there seems to be nothing in
Flarm to stop that. The only thing that can reduce the usefullness of
this type of software is to reduce the flarm range to only the minimum
needed for safety. Unfortunately, PowerFlarm seems to have an
increased range over the regular flarm used in Europe.

Wiktor Kozlik

[Paul Remde]

Hi John,

Well said.

Just to be clear - I am not in favor of mandating anything. I don't want to
mandate the use of FLARM at all. My hope is that enough people will start
using FLARM that the others will hear how great it is and then also buy one.
If there are a few hold-outs (after a year or 2 or 3) that are the only
people not using FLARM at a contest or crowded gliderport or along a crowded
ridge - I imagine they will be pressured by the other competitors (hopefully
in a friendly way) to buy one.

I agree that it will be tough to make any big decisions until we have a lot
more experience. But that makes it tough to make rules for 2011 contests.
I'm glad I'm not on the U.S. Contest Rules Committee this year. : )

Best Regards,

Paul Remde

"John Cochrane" > wrote in message
...
> As we think about this, I also think we need help on the
> practicalities of a stealth mode requirement.
>
> First, It seems we would need a cockpit check to make sure a
> competitor doesn't have a second flarm driving his PDA, so a few
> buddies can fly "team mode" while everyone else has stealth on. Then
> we need to demand Flarm IGC files every day from every competitor, the
> scorer would have to know what to look for to check both stealth
> status and security. Finally we would need a system of penalties for
> missing flarm files or security failures of the flarm files (can't
> have guys editing it on notepad to change the stealth indication).
>
> Is this how it works in countries (UK?) that are imposing a stealth
> mode requirement? Is all that working out? I know at WGC there was a
> stealth mode requirement that everybody ignored. This does not seem
> like the right outcome.
>
> Second, how do you insist on stealth and not also ban PCAS (zaon xrx),
> or ADS-B traffic receivers and displays? Many gliders are equipped
> with transponders, and more so will be in the future. GA ADS-B
> receivers are on their way as their many advocates on other flarm
> threads like to point out; not very good for glider collision
> avoidance, but inevitably will show you everything with a transponder
> in a 5 mile range. Are we going to ban all traffic alert systems, or
> without glider specific filters? This doesn't seem possible or wise.
>
> From those with strong opinions we should require stealth mode right,
> now, explaining the practicalities would help. And I'm curious how
> other countries that are requiring stealth mode are dealing with these
> problems. My brain hurts...
>
> John Cochrane
>

[Paul Remde]

Hi,

I'm not convinced that using FLARM will increase leaching. Many of the
posts have assumed that it will. A pilot that plans to leach can do so
using his/her eyeballs anyway. As it is now he/she (for example) can see 2
gaggles out in the distance. They may or may not be able to tell remotely
which gaggle is climbing better due to how much they are climbing up and
away (as seen visually - without FLARM). FLARM will probably make it easier
to determine which gaggle is in a better thermal. But again, I have never
flown with FLARM...

Best Regards,

Paul Remde

"T8" > wrote in message
...
On Oct 30, 11:07 am, RW > wrote:
> > Gosh no. But re-reading your earlier post... are you seriously trying
> > to sell leeching technology as a safety enhancement? No thanks!
>
> > I'm with Bill Ruehle 100%.
>
> > -Evan Ludeman / T8
>
> We have already info of no problem with leeching from 5 year old Flarm
> experience in Europe.
> But if somebody who is not serious about racing thinks this way,
> let him buy it.
> Lets keep this myth alive.
> This way we have more Flarms.
> RW


Pick one, you can't have 'em both:

A. " We have already info of no problem with leeching from 5 year
old Flarm experience in Europe."

B. "In Parowan in blue and over Nevada unlandable desert, Flarm
would improve safety" (by making it easier to leech)

-T8

[WR]

Nobody anywhere has flown with PowerFlarm with its increased range and
capabilities. My post was based on the information I have about
PowerFlarm and my own speculation as to what it could do to US
competitve soaring if it was "required by rule" to be operated in open
mode 100% of the time. I'm not for mandating anything with regards to
Flarm operation. Personally I don't care if some want to try Flarm
team fly, have at it. That type of team flying is very different from
radio teamwork in that you can't select your teammates with Flarm.
What I want to see is for everybody that races to put a Flarm in their
ship, turn it on (mode or your choice), than lets go race and not run
into each other.

Bill Ruehle WR

[Steve Koerner]

Nobody has advocated requiring open mode. The issue is whether to
require stealth mode. The simple path is to make it pilot option.
Given the lack of experience with a brand new device, simple is
probably wise. After we've gained a year or two of operating
experience with powerflarm it may become clear that this issue should
be reopened.

If the mode is optional, the predictable behavior of pilots will be to
operate in stealth mode if you do not have a computer on board to
process the competitors flarm data. If you do have such a computer on
board, you will be inclined to operate in open mode because this will
clearly be a net benefit to the individual competitor (I can say that
even without knowing whether the benefit will be tiny or huge). After
a few years, most competitors will have such a computer or display on
board and most all will be flying in open mode. From what has been
reported, it sounds like that is how it has mostly played out in
Europe.

I'm still troubled by the heads down safety cost that will come with
this new safety device if open mode is allowed. The heads down time
in the US with Powerflarm may be greater than in Europe because the
higher power level will make the information all the more useful and
important to monitor. I wish I could see a solution to the heads
down concern that I'm having. Am I the only one who is worried about
that?




On Oct 30, 9:51*am, WR > wrote:
> Nobody anywhere has flown with PowerFlarm with its increased range and
> capabilities. *My post was based on the information I have about
> PowerFlarm and my own speculation as to what it could do to US
> competitve soaring if it was "required by rule" to be operated in open
> mode 100% of the time. *I'm not for mandating anything with regards to
> Flarm operation. *Personally I don't care if some want to try Flarm
> team fly, have at it. *That type of team flying is very different from
> radio teamwork in that you can't select your teammates with Flarm.
> What I want to see is for everybody that races to put a Flarm in their
> ship, turn it on (mode or your choice), than lets go race and not run
> into each other.
>
> Bill Ruehle WR

[RW[_2_]]

On Oct 30, 12:50*pm, "Paul Remde" > wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm not convinced that using FLARM will increase leaching. *Many of the
> posts have assumed that it will. *A pilot that plans to leach can do so
> using his/her eyeballs anyway. *As it is now he/she (for example) can see 2
> gaggles out in the distance. *They may or may not be able to tell remotely
> which gaggle is climbing better due to how much they are climbing up and
> away (as seen visually - without FLARM). *FLARM will probably make it easier
> to determine which gaggle is in a better thermal. *But again, I have never
> flown with FLARM...
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Paul Remde
>
> "T8" > wrote in message
>
> ...
> On Oct 30, 11:07 am, RW > wrote:
>
> > > Gosh no. But re-reading your earlier post... are you seriously trying
> > > to sell leeching technology as a safety enhancement? No thanks!
>
> > > I'm with Bill Ruehle 100%.
>
> > > -Evan Ludeman / T8
>
> > We have already info of no problem with leeching from 5 year old Flarm
> > experience in Europe.
> > But if somebody who is not serious about racing thinks this way,
> > let him buy it.
> > Lets keep this myth alive.
> > This way we have more Flarms.
> > RW
>
> Pick one, you can't have 'em both:
>
> A. * " We have already info of no problem with leeching from 5 year
> old Flarm experience in Europe."
>
> B. * "In Parowan in blue and over Nevada unlandable desert, Flarm
> would improve safety" (by making it easier to leech)
>
> -T8

Evan,
Open your mind.I take both.
Flarm climb rates are not reliable, so useless for leeching.
Pointing to active thermal area in rocky Nevada desert, might save
somebody's life.
Ryszard
ps.John, sorry for my one more (no Flarm expert) posting.
pps.Hank, 3 years ago I send a email to Flarm guys about US Flarm
sales.
Was told : never, because US has too many lawyers.(this email is
still hidden in my gmail)
Imagine yourself as instrumental to shut off ,maybe life saver
options
of Flarm in eyes of smart Jewish lawyer defending young Joe
wife rights.
Joe was local glider pilot in Utah.He had not much experience,
but being local , got reverse seeding preference.So he got
in the contest.
Day was blue and CD liked to send everybody over Nevada desert.
5 min before Joe died 2 of18m motorgliders equipped with same Flarm
like Joe's( but mandatory by rules comity blocked) flew by.It was
visible from GPS logs 8 miles
down the task they find thermal.Joe was thinking it is time crash
landing, those 2 had engine, so no hope for him.He didn't see them
thermaling.Lawyer could figure out : Joe could easy get to the hot
spot.
I know already this lawyer name if you want to try your argument
before it happens, he is a glider pilot.I don't know real Joe name
yet.
pps.Bill,I'm also100% for your idea of pilot decision to set the mode.

[Michael Huber]

I´ve never flown in a serious competition with FLARM, but I have flown
near a competition site. Based on my own experience with competition
pilots blasting through thermals with circling gliders and also on
reports from Szeged I strongly hope stealth mode gets dropped
completely. This would at least give other pilots an early warning
that a cloud of gliders is approaching and allow them to avoid flying
close to a few "pilots" with more adrenaline than responsibility.

Michael

[Rhubarb[_2_]]

It seems that Flarm will give you the "ability to see climb rates of
gliders out in front" either through
* PDA software processing
* seeing a large gaggle which is a good indicator
* seeing relative height change between you and others while circling

I think this will increase gaggling since it will be even more
important to start last. Result - everyone starts late.

So, I think, Stealth mode will be a requirement in comps. If a pilot
switches to Open mode then there should be some kind of penalty.
Switching back and forth between Stealth (when things are peachy) and
Open (when low) should not be allowed.

Peter

[Pat Russell[_2_]]

> If racing scares you, don’t race.

Bingo!

As the technology advances we go faster and faster, the point spreads
get smaller, and the truly talented pilots don't stand out any more.

Nowadays we need fourth generation electronics to protect us from the
hazards created by the third generation electronics.

Who needs it?

[Jerzy]

On Oct 31, 10:13*am, Pat Russell > wrote:
> > If racing scares you, don’t race.
>
> Bingo!
>
> As the technology advances we go faster and faster, the point spreads
> get smaller, and the truly talented pilots don't stand out any more.
>
> Nowadays we need fourth generation electronics to protect us from the
> hazards created by the third generation electronics.
>
> Who needs it?

"As the technology advances we go faster and faster, the point spreads
get smaller, and the truly talented pilots don't stand out any more."
Not true, see WGC 18M results http://www.flatlandcup.hu/2010/competition/18m/085_18m_tot.htm
90% of pilots didn't use stealth mode, see the spread , in some tasks
just 15% finished task, based on above statement all should finish.
We don't circle 50% of the time during task any more, in some tasks we
don't circle at all, so as tactical tool Powerflarm is useless as
safety tool is superior.
The only way to avoid gagle is to fly OLC :)

[Brad[_2_]]

> The only way to avoid gagle is to fly OLC :)

We need to lobby the OLC admin to get rid of the 15km change.

Brad

[Andrej Kolar[_3_]]

> BB still has ears on and wants to hear facts from people who have
> contest experience flying with Flarm.

I hope you guys don't mind too much of overseas experience.

> Any device that allows you to “see” another competitor that
> you could not otherwise acquire with your eyeball gives
> a tactical advantage, period.

This is true. And the best part of it is that I can choose when I am
making myself available for leeching (in normal Flarm mode) and when I
am not (in stealth mode).

Andrej Kolar
--
glider pilots use
http://www.naviter.com

On 30 okt., 16:14, John Cochrane >
wrote:
> On Oct 30, 7:46*am, wrote:
>
>
>
> > > Gosh no. *But re-reading your earlier post... are you seriously trying
> > > to sell leeching technology as a safety enhancement? *No thanks!
>
> > > I'm with Bill Ruehle 100%.
>
> > > -Evan Ludeman / T8
>
> > UH Agrees 100%
>
> BB still has ears on and wants to hear facts from people who have
> contest experience flying with Flarm. So far in this thread we have 3
> posts from people who have done so, and 27 strongly held opinions (pro
> and con) from US pilots who have never been in the air with a flarm
> system.
>
> As I count the three, one basically says it's not much use for
> locating thermals (also my experience, but that based only on one
> WGC); the second says it helps a lot, but after a few years of similar
> grumbling about the end of the sport, european pilots seem to be
> converging to a view that they like it, and it enhances the race
> experience. The third says it's great for safety but is silent on the
> competitive issue.
>
> We (US) still don't have much information, on "does it work?", on "do
> pilots, after experience, think this is the End Of Soaring or actually
> enhance the contest experience?, on "what happens if you mandate
> stealth mode and don't enforce it" (WGC), on "are you able to enforce
> it without chaos?"
>
> I do think we have to watch the tendency to dream in our winter
> armchairs about how great/terrible the next technical innovation will
> be and either demand (mandate)/ban it preemptively. (Remember GPS?
> ELT?) *We in the US are a bit fortunate in this case that there is a
> decade of experience we can mine rather than have to figure this out
> completely on our own. If we will only be a little quiet and listen.
>
> John Cochrane BB

[playtimeover]

;753453']On Oct 28, 4:29*pm, Bob Kuykendall wrote:
On Oct 28, 2:06*pm, John Cochrane
wrote:

To heck with stealth, what about ECM?

too close for missiles i'm switching to guns?

Yes I think. :D