Powerflarm's unknown effect on the first contests in US

[chris]

I was wondering how the introduction of powerflarm will effect US
contests, especially Early in the year. Usually changes are made
gradually, and introduced into in regionals a year before nationals.
Not so with powerflarm. It is going to be allowed unrestricted for
nationals from the start.

From what I understand the first powerflarm units are supposed to
arrive in April. I know new products don't always ship as scheduled.
[powerflarm is not as complex as a Dreamliner but still]. Even if
they do ship on schedule there will just be a matter of weeks or days
for pilots to get them installed and get familiar with their
operation.

So some pilots may have them, other's won't especially early in the
year.
The Sports Class nationals are going to be in early May for example.
This seems like a great unknown as to how powerflarm will effect the
contest. It seems that formal & informal team flying could give a
huge advantage to any group of 2+ pilots that choose to cooperate,
maybe for a few minutes, maybe the entire contest.

Without stealth mode won't all powerflarm users have an inherent
advantage in remote sensing of thermals and tracking other pilots
making team flying much simpler/inherent?

Seems like this will have to skew the results and tactics, almost like
having two classes [with & without powerflarm]. At what point is it
unsportsman-like per the current rules, and who decides on what basis
when it appears that a team has formed?

There seem to be a lot of "known-unknowns" and "unknown-unknowns"
regarding the consequences and unintended consequences of the
introduction.

I am a big fan of the Zaon MXR - I've flown several seasons with it
and look forward to the powerflarm for expanding on it's
capabilities.
Just seems like we could be setting ourselves up for a whole contest
season of chaos and possible accusations of unsportsman-like tactics.

I'm done rambling now, any thoughts?
Chris

[Paul Remde]

Hi Chris,

All I can say is that all the concerns you mention came and went in Europe
and Australia and New Zealand. They all love FLARM now. OK "all" may be a
bit strong, but a huge percentage of pilots seem to love it - so much so
that they would never fly in a contest without it.

Time will tell how it goes in the USA. I suspect that a great majority of
pilots will love it.

I can't wait to fly with it. After flying in the Sport Class Nationals last
summer in Parowan, I made a decision that I never wanted to fly in a contest
again until everyone in the contest (or nearly so) had FLARM or something
like it.

Paul Remde

"chris" > wrote in message
...
>I was wondering how the introduction of powerflarm will effect US
> contests, especially Early in the year. Usually changes are made
> gradually, and introduced into in regionals a year before nationals.
> Not so with powerflarm. It is going to be allowed unrestricted for
> nationals from the start.
>
> From what I understand the first powerflarm units are supposed to
> arrive in April. I know new products don't always ship as scheduled.
> [powerflarm is not as complex as a Dreamliner but still]. Even if
> they do ship on schedule there will just be a matter of weeks or days
> for pilots to get them installed and get familiar with their
> operation.
>
> So some pilots may have them, other's won't especially early in the
> year.
> The Sports Class nationals are going to be in early May for example.
> This seems like a great unknown as to how powerflarm will effect the
> contest. It seems that formal & informal team flying could give a
> huge advantage to any group of 2+ pilots that choose to cooperate,
> maybe for a few minutes, maybe the entire contest.
>
> Without stealth mode won't all powerflarm users have an inherent
> advantage in remote sensing of thermals and tracking other pilots
> making team flying much simpler/inherent?
>
> Seems like this will have to skew the results and tactics, almost like
> having two classes [with & without powerflarm]. At what point is it
> unsportsman-like per the current rules, and who decides on what basis
> when it appears that a team has formed?
>
> There seem to be a lot of "known-unknowns" and "unknown-unknowns"
> regarding the consequences and unintended consequences of the
> introduction.
>
> I am a big fan of the Zaon MXR - I've flown several seasons with it
> and look forward to the powerflarm for expanding on it's
> capabilities.
> Just seems like we could be setting ourselves up for a whole contest
> season of chaos and possible accusations of unsportsman-like tactics.
>
> I'm done rambling now, any thoughts?
> Chris

[Mike the Strike]

On Jan 8, 5:59*am, "Paul Remde" > wrote:
> Hi Chris,
>
> All I can say is that all the concerns you mention came and went in Europe
> and Australia and New Zealand. *They all love FLARM now. *OK "all" may be a
> bit strong, but a huge percentage of pilots seem to love it - so much so
> that they would never fly in a contest without it.
>
> Time will tell how it goes in the USA. *I suspect that a great majority of
> pilots will love it.
>
> I can't wait to fly with it. *After flying in the Sport Class Nationals last
> summer in Parowan, I made a decision that I never wanted to fly in a contest
> again until everyone in the contest (or nearly so) had FLARM or something
> like it.
>
> Paul Remde
>
> "chris" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
>
>
> >I was wondering how the introduction of powerflarm will effect US
> > contests, especially Early in the year. *Usually changes are made
> > gradually, and introduced into in regionals a year before nationals.
> > Not so with powerflarm. *It is going to be allowed unrestricted for
> > nationals from the start.
>
> > From what I understand the first powerflarm units are supposed to
> > arrive in April. *I know new products don't always ship as scheduled.
> > [powerflarm is not as complex as a Dreamliner but still]. *Even if
> > they do ship on schedule there will just be a matter of weeks or days
> > for pilots to get them installed and get familiar with their
> > operation.
>
> > So some pilots may have them, other's won't especially early in the
> > year.
> > The Sports Class nationals are going to be in early May for example.
> > This seems like a great unknown as to how powerflarm will effect the
> > contest. *It seems that formal & informal team flying could give a
> > huge advantage to any group of 2+ pilots that choose to cooperate,
> > maybe for a few minutes, maybe the entire contest.
>
> > Without stealth mode won't all powerflarm users have an inherent
> > advantage in remote sensing of thermals and tracking other pilots
> > making team flying much simpler/inherent?
>
> > Seems like this will have to skew the results and tactics, almost like
> > having two classes [with & without powerflarm]. *At what point is it
> > unsportsman-like per the current rules, and who decides on what basis
> > when it appears that a team has formed?
>
> > There seem to be a lot of "known-unknowns" and "unknown-unknowns"
> > regarding the consequences and unintended consequences of the
> > introduction.
>
> > I am a big fan of the Zaon MXR - I've flown several seasons with it
> > and look forward to the powerflarm for expanding on it's
> > capabilities.
> > Just seems like we could be setting ourselves up for a whole contest
> > season of chaos and possible accusations of unsportsman-like tactics.
>
> > I'm done rambling now, any thoughts?
> > Chris

Of course, contest organizers can always specify Stealth Mode.
However, if this results in even a slightly increased risk of
collision because of hidden information on the position of nearby
gliders, they may best be advised to leave them in normal mode. (I,
for one, will prohibit stealth mode in any event for which I am
responsible).

I think the new technology will be great - not only do we have a
fantastic anti-collision device, we now have a remote thermal
detector!

Mike

[Eric Greenwell[_4_]]

On 1/7/2011 9:19 PM, Mike the Strike wrote:

>
> Of course, contest organizers can always specify Stealth Mode.
> However, if this results in even a slightly increased risk of
> collision because of hidden information on the position of nearby
> gliders, they may best be advised to leave them in normal mode. (I,
> for one, will prohibit stealth mode in any event for which I am
> responsible).
>
> I think the new technology will be great - not only do we have a
> fantastic anti-collision device, we now have a remote thermal
> detector!

Isn't odd to worry about stealth mode when it's not mandatory to carry a
PowerFlarm, or what am I missing?

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (change ".netto" to ".us" to
email me)

[Andy[_10_]]

On Jan 7, 10:48*pm, Eric Greenwell > wrote:
> On 1/7/2011 9:19 PM, Mike the Strike wrote:
>
>
>
> > Of course, contest organizers can always specify Stealth Mode.
> > However, if this results in even a slightly increased risk of
> > collision because of hidden information on the position of nearby
> > gliders, they may best be advised to leave them in normal mode. *(I,
> > for one, will prohibit stealth mode in any event for which I am
> > responsible).
>
> > I think the new technology will be great - not only do we have a
> > fantastic anti-collision device, we now have a remote thermal
> > detector!
>
> Isn't odd to worry about stealth mode when it's not mandatory to carry a
> PowerFlarm, or what am I missing?
>
> --
> Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (change ".netto" to ".us" to
> email me)

I think the concern is that with Stealth Mode off pilots with
PowerFlarms will have an advantage by being able to see climb rates
for gliders up to a couple of miles away, whereas pilots without
PowerFlarm will have to find their thermals the old fashioned way -
leeching. ;-)

It remains to be seen how effective a tool it will turn out to be -
and whether pilots will react negatively if it does turn out to be
useful.

9B

[Tom[_12_]]

There should be a concern about "unintended consequences."

The implied requirement of having FLARM may cause a number of pilots
(especially senior pilots) to stop flying contests because they only
plan to actively fly in competitions for a few more years.

They have to decide if spending the money for a FLARM device at this
late stage of their flying career is really worth it.

Having loaner FLARM units will help in this regard, and people like
myself will be willing to offer their units for competitions they are
not going to fly in, but some people will not take advantage of a
loaner program.

There certainly will be a discussion about this subject at the
upcoming "Seniors" contest, and the special seniors contest rules
committee will have this on the agenda.

Tom Knauff

[[email protected]]

On Jan 7, 10:41*pm, chris > wrote:
> I was wondering how the introduction of powerflarm will effect US
> contests, especially Early in the year. *Usually changes are made
> gradually, and introduced into in regionals a year before nationals.
> Not so with powerflarm. *It is going to be allowed unrestricted for
> nationals from the start.
>
> From what I understand the first powerflarm units are supposed to
> arrive in April. *I know new products don't always ship as scheduled.
> [powerflarm is not as complex as a Dreamliner but still]. *Even if
> they do ship on schedule there will just be a matter of weeks or days
> for pilots to get them installed and get familiar with their
> operation.
>
> So some pilots may have them, other's won't especially early in the
> year.
> The Sports Class nationals are going to be in early May for example.
> This seems like a great unknown as to how powerflarm will effect the
> contest. *It seems that formal & informal team flying could give a
> huge advantage to any group of 2+ pilots that choose to cooperate,
> maybe for a few minutes, maybe the entire contest.
>
> Without stealth mode won't all powerflarm users have an inherent
> advantage in remote sensing of thermals and tracking other pilots
> making team flying much simpler/inherent?
>
> Seems like this will have to skew the results and tactics, almost like
> having two classes [with & without powerflarm]. *At what point is it
> unsportsman-like per the current rules, and who decides on what basis
> when it appears that a team has formed?
>
> There seem to be a lot of "known-unknowns" and "unknown-unknowns"
> regarding the consequences and unintended consequences of the
> introduction.
>
> I am a big fan of the Zaon MXR - I've flown several seasons with it
> and look forward to the powerflarm for expanding on it's
> capabilities.
> Just seems like we could be setting ourselves up for a whole contest
> season of chaos and possible accusations of unsportsman-like tactics.
>
> I'm done rambling now, any thoughts?
> Chris

Careful reading of 2011 rules changes would note that the RC has
reserved the option to limit information available from Flarm devices.
A complication is that currently there is no practical way to require
Stealth mode that can be enforced without a Flarm flight log being
turned in every day. Risk is- have a power failure, possibly lose your
flight. There is conversation with Flarm folks over this , and
possible solutions, but first they need to get the product out.
There are quite a number of pilots that are very concerned about the
sporting implications of information that could be available from
PowerFlarm. PowerFlarm will be more capable than Flarm units in use in
Europe.
These concerns will not be ignored. There are some of us that do not
want to see the introduction of a leeching tool.
That said, the RC is strongly behind the implementation of PowerFlarm
as an anticollision device and recognizes that there may be a risk of
some effects this year that we might not want to have long term.
This will be a topic of much discussion and the 2011 pilot poll will
deal extensively with this topic. By then we will have some practical
experience to base judgements on.
UH RC chair speaking as an individual.

[Andy[_1_]]

On Jan 7, 10:19*pm, Mike the Strike > wrote:
> On Jan 8, 5:59*am, "Paul Remde" > wrote:
>
>
>
> > Hi Chris,
>
> > All I can say is that all the concerns you mention came and went in Europe
> > and Australia and New Zealand. *They all love FLARM now. *OK "all" may be a
> > bit strong, but a huge percentage of pilots seem to love it - so much so
> > that they would never fly in a contest without it.
>
> > Time will tell how it goes in the USA. *I suspect that a great majority of
> > pilots will love it.
>
> > I can't wait to fly with it. *After flying in the Sport Class Nationals last
> > summer in Parowan, I made a decision that I never wanted to fly in a contest
> > again until everyone in the contest (or nearly so) had FLARM or something
> > like it.
>
> > Paul Remde
>
> > "chris" > wrote in message
>
> ....
>
> > >I was wondering how the introduction of powerflarm will effect US
> > > contests, especially Early in the year. *Usually changes are made
> > > gradually, and introduced into in regionals a year before nationals.
> > > Not so with powerflarm. *It is going to be allowed unrestricted for
> > > nationals from the start.
>
> > > From what I understand the first powerflarm units are supposed to
> > > arrive in April. *I know new products don't always ship as scheduled.
> > > [powerflarm is not as complex as a Dreamliner but still]. *Even if
> > > they do ship on schedule there will just be a matter of weeks or days
> > > for pilots to get them installed and get familiar with their
> > > operation.
>
> > > So some pilots may have them, other's won't especially early in the
> > > year.
> > > The Sports Class nationals are going to be in early May for example.
> > > This seems like a great unknown as to how powerflarm will effect the
> > > contest. *It seems that formal & informal team flying could give a
> > > huge advantage to any group of 2+ pilots that choose to cooperate,
> > > maybe for a few minutes, maybe the entire contest.
>
> > > Without stealth mode won't all powerflarm users have an inherent
> > > advantage in remote sensing of thermals and tracking other pilots
> > > making team flying much simpler/inherent?
>
> > > Seems like this will have to skew the results and tactics, almost like
> > > having two classes [with & without powerflarm]. *At what point is it
> > > unsportsman-like per the current rules, and who decides on what basis
> > > when it appears that a team has formed?
>
> > > There seem to be a lot of "known-unknowns" and "unknown-unknowns"
> > > regarding the consequences and unintended consequences of the
> > > introduction.
>
> > > I am a big fan of the Zaon MXR - I've flown several seasons with it
> > > and look forward to the powerflarm for expanding on it's
> > > capabilities.
> > > Just seems like we could be setting ourselves up for a whole contest
> > > season of chaos and possible accusations of unsportsman-like tactics.
>
> > > I'm done rambling now, any thoughts?
> > > Chris
>
> Of course, contest organizers can always specify Stealth Mode.
> However, if this results in even a slightly increased risk of
> collision because of hidden information on the position of nearby
> gliders, they may best be advised to leave them in normal mode. *(I,
> for one, will prohibit stealth mode in any event for which I am
> responsible).
>
> I think the new technology will be great - not only do we have a
> fantastic anti-collision device, we now have a remote thermal
> detector!
>
> Mike

A post to UK RAS included:

"In 2010 the BGA competitions committee introduced a rule to restrict
the
use of in cockpit display of fellow competitors situational
information,
the wording is as follows...

EXTERNAL AIDS

All data transmission between competitors or between them and the
ground
is prohibited, except as required by the organisers, or for safety
purposes or for anti-collision warning.
Flarm devices shall be set to "Stealth" mode or equivalent setting
(known as Privacy Mode in some LX Navigation products) for the
duration of
the competition. Other types of devices that are able to receive and
decode
Flarm or other positional data radio transmissions without respecting
Flarm
Stealth data limiting protocol must not be used or carried in the
glider

Should we take the potential change seriously and should the IGC be
considering a similar inclusion into Annex A? "

I actually looking forward to seeing other competitors climb rates.
I'm sure however that there will be a lot of gamesmanship that may
reduce the collision avoidance potential. If a pilot finds 10kts on a
4 kt day do you think he will want to advertise that to anyone else?
I suspect the probability of a momentary disruption in FLARM service
would be quite high. The required complexity of any enforcement rule
is one of the reasons I was so strongly opposed to MIRA.

It will be interesting to see how this all plays out.

Andy (GY)

[hretting]

I for one fear a disaster in the making and feel Flarm should be
banned from contest to allow a period of familarization. It is my
belief that Pilots + New Toys X unreal expectations + (venders x $$$)
divided by NPilots(pilots who are looking out the #!%#ing cockpit) =
****ty day at Black Rock (an old Spencer Tracy movie).
But hey, this is the opinion of a 33,000 ++ hour electrojet captain
who has seen more than his share of knuckhead pilots doing stupid
sh_t.
And now we have non-Flarmers being declared automatic leachers and
Charlie Spratt wanna-bees determining how he's going to run a
contest.
Careful.... Careful.....
Get a senior instructor (UH) who is not emotional (UH). Since this is
where we are heading, make him (UH) supreme guru who will create a
blending process to reduce the risk of Techno-Crashes. A phasing in
plan if you will. He's a sucker for extra large T-shirt with a glider
on it.
Flarm at the seniors..good god...might as well put a hood on everyone.
R

[jcarlyle]

Good rant! Some good points in there, too. But I'm not sure that it's
proper to assume that glider pilots with a "new toy" are going to mean
more problems.

I put in a transponder and took a lot of heat for being interested in
"gadgets". That talk stopped abruptly, and the number of transponders
in my circle of glider pilots went up, the evening a friend and I
landed with a tale about a Lear Jet who turned to avoid the two of us
while we were thermalling. The next subject of conversation was how
many new transponder equipped glider pilots saw commuter flights
noticing them, as evidenced by their turning a bit to stay clear of
the glider.

Flarm has a similar big role to play, in my opinion. Not only will it
let us gliders avoid one another, with its TIS (and soon to come TIS-
B) capability it will help us avoid the age old "doctor in the
Bonanza" who's staring at his panel.

I agree there are considerations for contests. I personally don't
think they're really big, given the European experience, but maybe us
Yanks really are 10x more competitive and will milk any bit of data to
win. Even so, I don't think it's proper to assume all new Flarm owners
will fly automatically be flying heads down. After all, Flarm is sort
of like an audio vario - if it beeps, look at it quickly to see why,
then look out again. Even us old geezers should be able to handle
that...

-John

On Jan 8, 11:09 am, hretting > wrote:
> I for one fear a disaster in the making and feel Flarm should be
> banned from contest to allow a period of familarization. It is my
> belief that Pilots + New Toys X unreal expectations + (venders x $$$)
> divided by NPilots(pilots who are looking out the #!%#ing cockpit) =
> ****ty day at Black Rock (an old Spencer Tracy movie).
> But hey, this is the opinion of a 33,000 ++ hour electrojet captain
> who has seen more than his share of knuckhead pilots doing stupid
> sh_t.
> And now we have non-Flarmers being declared automatic leachers and
> Charlie Spratt wanna-bees determining how he's going to run a
> contest.
> Careful.... Careful.....
> Get a senior instructor (UH) who is not emotional (UH). Since this is
> where we are heading, make him (UH) supreme guru who will create a
> blending process to reduce the risk of Techno-Crashes. A phasing in
> plan if you will. He's a sucker for extra large T-shirt with a glider
> on it.
> Flarm at the seniors..good god...might as well put a hood on everyone.
> R

[jcarlyle]

Darn! I meant to say ADS-B instead of TIS. And to be pedantic I should
note that at a minimum one also needs a Mode S transponder with 1090-
ES Out and In capability in order to see the benefits of ADS-B and TIS-
B display on Flarm (plus flying in the right area where coverage
exists). (Note TIS-B is future capability, and I'm not addressing
UAT.)

-John

On Jan 8, 12:33 pm, jcarlyle > wrote:
> Flarm has a similar big role to play, in my opinion. Not only will it
> let us gliders avoid one another, with its TIS (and soon to come TIS-
> B) capability it will help us avoid the age old "doctor in the
> Bonanza" who's staring at his panel.

[Mike the Strike]

On Jan 8, 7:33*pm, jcarlyle > wrote:
> Good rant! Some good points in there, too. But I'm not sure that it's
> proper to assume that glider pilots with a "new toy" are going to mean
> more problems.
>
> I put in a transponder and took a lot of heat for being interested in
> "gadgets". That talk stopped abruptly, and the number of transponders
> in my circle of glider pilots went up, the evening a friend and I
> landed with a tale about a Lear Jet who turned to avoid the two of us
> while we were thermalling. The next subject of conversation was how
> many new transponder equipped glider pilots saw commuter flights
> noticing them, as evidenced by their turning a bit to stay clear of
> the glider.
>
> Flarm has a similar big role to play, in my opinion. Not only will it
> let us gliders avoid one another, with its TIS (and soon to come TIS-
> B) capability it will help us avoid the age old "doctor in the
> Bonanza" who's staring at his panel.
>
> I agree there are considerations for contests. I personally don't
> think they're really big, given the European experience, but maybe us
> Yanks really are 10x more competitive and will milk any bit of data to
> win. Even so, I don't think it's proper to assume all new Flarm owners
> will fly automatically be flying heads down. After all, Flarm is sort
> of like an audio vario - if it beeps, look at it quickly to see why,
> then look out again. Even us old geezers should be able to handle
> that...
>
> -John
>
> On Jan 8, 11:09 am, hretting > wrote:
>
>
>
> > I for one fear a disaster in the making and feel Flarm should be
> > banned from contest to allow a period of familarization. It is my
> > belief that Pilots + New Toys X unreal expectations + *(venders x $$$)
> > divided by NPilots(pilots who are looking out the #!%#ing cockpit) =
> > ****ty day at Black Rock (an old Spencer Tracy movie).
> > But hey, this is the opinion of a 33,000 ++ hour electrojet captain
> > who has seen more than his share of knuckhead pilots doing stupid
> > sh_t.
> > And now we have non-Flarmers being declared automatic leachers and
> > Charlie Spratt wanna-bees determining how he's going to run a
> > contest.
> > Careful.... Careful.....
> > Get a senior instructor (UH) who is not emotional (UH). Since this is
> > where we are heading, make him (UH) supreme guru who will create a
> > blending process to reduce the risk of Techno-Crashes. A phasing in
> > plan if you will. He's a sucker for extra large T-shirt with a glider
> > on it.
> > Flarm at the seniors..good god...might as well put a hood on everyone.
> > R

Yep, things started going downhill once they allowed those darned
varios to be used in contests. The only instrument decent pilots need
is a yaw string!

Mike

[[email protected]]

On Jan 8, 12:48*pm, Mike the Strike > wrote:
> On Jan 8, 7:33*pm, jcarlyle > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Good rant! Some good points in there, too. But I'm not sure that it's
> > proper to assume that glider pilots with a "new toy" are going to mean
> > more problems.
>
> > I put in a transponder and took a lot of heat for being interested in
> > "gadgets". That talk stopped abruptly, and the number of transponders
> > in my circle of glider pilots went up, the evening a friend and I
> > landed with a tale about a Lear Jet who turned to avoid the two of us
> > while we were thermalling. The next subject of conversation was how
> > many new transponder equipped glider pilots saw commuter flights
> > noticing them, as evidenced by their turning a bit to stay clear of
> > the glider.
>
> > Flarm has a similar big role to play, in my opinion. Not only will it
> > let us gliders avoid one another, with its TIS (and soon to come TIS-
> > B) capability it will help us avoid the age old "doctor in the
> > Bonanza" who's staring at his panel.
>
> > I agree there are considerations for contests. I personally don't
> > think they're really big, given the European experience, but maybe us
> > Yanks really are 10x more competitive and will milk any bit of data to
> > win. Even so, I don't think it's proper to assume all new Flarm owners
> > will fly automatically be flying heads down. After all, Flarm is sort
> > of like an audio vario - if it beeps, look at it quickly to see why,
> > then look out again. Even us old geezers should be able to handle
> > that...
>
> > -John
>
> > On Jan 8, 11:09 am, hretting > wrote:
>
> > > I for one fear a disaster in the making and feel Flarm should be
> > > banned from contest to allow a period of familarization. It is my
> > > belief that Pilots + New Toys X unreal expectations + *(venders x $$$)
> > > divided by NPilots(pilots who are looking out the #!%#ing cockpit) =
> > > ****ty day at Black Rock (an old Spencer Tracy movie).
> > > But hey, this is the opinion of a 33,000 ++ hour electrojet captain
> > > who has seen more than his share of knuckhead pilots doing stupid
> > > sh_t.
> > > And now we have non-Flarmers being declared automatic leachers and
> > > Charlie Spratt wanna-bees determining how he's going to run a
> > > contest.
> > > Careful.... Careful.....
> > > Get a senior instructor (UH) who is not emotional (UH). Since this is
> > > where we are heading, make him (UH) supreme guru who will create a
> > > blending process to reduce the risk of Techno-Crashes. A phasing in
> > > plan if you will. He's a sucker for extra large T-shirt with a glider
> > > on it.
> > > Flarm at the seniors..good god...might as well put a hood on everyone..
> > > R
>
> Yep, things started going downhill once they allowed those darned
> varios to be used in contests. *The only instrument decent pilots need
> is a yaw string!
>
> Mike- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

What's your longest flight without a vario? Mine was about 150 Mi.
UH - resident Luddite

[hretting]

On Jan 8, 12:33*pm, jcarlyle > wrote:
> Good rant! Some good points in there, too. But I'm not sure that it's
> proper to assume that glider pilots with a "new toy" are going to mean
> more problems.
>
> I put in a transponder and took a lot of heat for being interested in
> "gadgets". That talk stopped abruptly, and the number of transponders
> in my circle of glider pilots went up, the evening a friend and I
> landed with a tale about a Lear Jet who turned to avoid the two of us
> while we were thermalling. The next subject of conversation was how
> many new transponder equipped glider pilots saw commuter flights
> noticing them, as evidenced by their turning a bit to stay clear of
> the glider.
>
> Flarm has a similar big role to play, in my opinion. Not only will it
> let us gliders avoid one another, with its TIS (and soon to come TIS-
> B) capability it will help us avoid the age old "doctor in the
> Bonanza" who's staring at his panel.
>
> I agree there are considerations for contests. I personally don't
> think they're really big, given the European experience, but maybe us
> Yanks really are 10x more competitive and will milk any bit of data to
> win. Even so, I don't think it's proper to assume all new Flarm owners
> will fly automatically be flying heads down. After all, Flarm is sort
> of like an audio vario - if it beeps, look at it quickly to see why,
> then look out again. Even us old geezers should be able to handle
> that...
>
> -John
>
> On Jan 8, 11:09 am, hretting > wrote:
>


Yes it would great if everyone had your experience and smarts with
implementing a , what, transponder?, are you kidding. You're comparing
a Flarm with a transponder. And of course you have TCAS in your glider
too! We're talking contest here, not a local jaunt around the area
that encounters a jet, which happens during all your flights, right?
And Mike, I never wrote that Flarm was a bad idea. Go back and read my
thread again. Brillant come back.
We're talking another distraction to the average racer that without
some planning and forethought, could lead to a chain of events not
desired.
The competition committee did good I believe in slowing things (Flarm)
down.
By the way, I have a transponder in my glider too.
R

[Peter Scholz[_3_]]

Am 08.01.2011 15:28, wrote:
> PowerFlarm will be more capable than Flarm units in use in
> Europe.

Do you have any details about the additional capabilities?

--
Peter Scholz
ASW24 JE

[kirk.stant]

On Jan 8, 9:09*am, hretting > wrote:
> I for one fear a disaster in the making and feel Flarm should be
> banned from contest to allow a period of familarization. It is my
> belief that Pilots + New Toys X unreal expectations + *(venders x $$$)
> divided by NPilots(pilots who are looking out the #!%#ing cockpit) =
> ****ty day at Black Rock (an old Spencer Tracy movie).
> But hey, this is the opinion of a 33,000 ++ hour electrojet captain
> who has seen more than his share of knuckhead pilots doing stupid
> sh_t.
> And now we have non-Flarmers being declared automatic leachers and
> Charlie Spratt wanna-bees determining how he's going to run a
> contest.
> Careful.... Careful.....
> Get a senior instructor (UH) who is not emotional (UH). Since this is
> where we are heading, make him (UH) supreme guru who will create a
> blending process to reduce the risk of Techno-Crashes. A phasing in
> plan if you will. He's a sucker for extra large T-shirt with a glider
> on it.
> Flarm at the seniors..good god...might as well put a hood on everyone.
> R

Wow, who ****ed in your wheaties this morning?

How you can state that Flarm should be banned from contests, after a
season where it would have probably prevented two mid-airs and saved
one life?

Where do you get that "Flarmers" will be able to leach better than non-
flarmers. Really? Kindly explain how that will work. I've never seen
that fear raised in any discussion of Flarm.

The whole leaching question is a tempest in a teapot. If it bothers
you, turn on Stealth mode and you can't be leached (but will still get
collision warning).

So if I understand your position, it's fine for the knuckleheads in
their electrojet to not have to look out the window and be warned of
an impending midair by their TCAS (I see you have a xponder in your
glider) but not OK for glider pilots to have a similar safety net -
despite having to fly in a much more collision-prone environment!

And the Seniors is EXACTLY where Flarm should be MANDATORY. Think
about it, and what age does to vision, flexibility, reaction time,
etc.

Sounds like you need to get that senior instructor and have the whole
concept to Flarm and active collision avoidance explained to you!

Kirk
66

[hretting]

First, my apologies for not spelling " leech" correctly and passing it
on to you. Leeching was brought up by an earlier thread and I
responded to it.
My stand is that while you believe the two midairs would have been
prevented by FLARM....I believe that the rapid insertion of Flarm into
the contest regime will create a risk greater than the one we are
trying to reduce.
I believe to reduce that specific risk, we allow for the "Novelty"
period followed by the "Functional check-out" period before we include
it into the contest regime.
Flarm will change the "paranoia" level of the group. Not right
away.....but slowly. This is the dynamics that we must guard.
First the dip, then the spike, then the balance.

You're right about the knuckleheads not looking out.....
But I do.
R

[kirk.stant]

On Jan 8, 7:03*pm, hretting > wrote:
> First, my apologies for not spelling " leech" correctly and passing it
> on to you. Leeching was brought up by an earlier thread and I
> responded to it.
> My stand is that while you believe the two midairs would have been
> prevented by FLARM....I believe that the rapid insertion of Flarm into
> the contest regime will create a risk greater than the one we are
> trying to reduce.
> I believe to reduce that specific risk, we allow for the "Novelty"
> period followed by the "Functional check-out" period before we include
> it into the contest regime.
> Flarm will change the "paranoia" level of the group. Not right
> away.....but slowly. This is the dynamics that we must guard.
> First the dip, then the spike, then the balance.
>
> You're right about the knuckleheads not looking out.....
> But I do.
> R

Thats fine, but I have to disagree. FLARM is not a complex system,
and if you have advanced to the point that you can race a glider while
watching your PDA, glide computer, etc., adding FLARM to the mix is
not going to be a big change.

In fact, it's a lot less of a distractor than the current fad of huge
color moving map displays in racing cockpits. Yeah, I need a Clearnav/
Ultimate so I don't get lost. Just like the guy in the Cirrus (the
one with 4 seats, a motor and a parachute, not the nice glider) with
his Garmin 1000 needs it on a CAVU day in Arizona, where you can see
every mountain in the state at the same time. Look out the window?
That's so 20th Century!

If nothing else, just mute it and don't look at it, that way at least
others will know you are there. Kinda like a transponder/TCAS setup.
I've got some nice black duct tape you can use to cover the display if
it distracts you...

Anyway, the experience in the rest of the world with FLARM seems
pretty positive. That's good enough for me.

Check 6, and Cheers!

Kirk
66

[chris]

On Jan 8, 7:17*pm, "kirk.stant" > wrote:
> Where do you get that "Flarmers" will be able to leach better than non-
> flarmers. Really? Kindly explain how that will work. I've never seen
> that fear raised in any discussion of Flarm.
>
> The whole leaching question is a tempest in a teapot. *If it bothers
> you, turn on Stealth mode and you can't be leached (but will still get
> collision warning).
> Kirk
> 66

Kirk,
My understanding is that if stealth mode is off then a pilot can see
the climb rate of other flarm equipped gliders in the area: One way
to do it is using Winpilot - see this from the winpilot site:
"FLARM Support: Added the ability to track several other gliders in
the vicinity that also carry FLARM on board. WinPilot can now show
visually the position of the other gliders, their bearing, and also
indicate weather or not they are climbing, and if so, what their
current climb rate is."
see the graphic on the main page.
http://www.winpilot.com/images4/News2.gif

seeyou mobile does the same as do other systems:
http://gliderpilot.org/files/FlarmFlightSituationsandPerformance/SeeYou%20Mobile%20Flarm.jpg


So is it a fair competition if in early 2011 part of the fleet is
allowed to share remote thermal sensing data?
Like shooting fish in a barrel, not a contest. To me it appears that
we are allowing team flying - with good displays and coordination 2 or
more pilots could team fly a whole contest season and never have to
talk on the radio. So maybe I turn my stealth mode on to prevent
others from getting my data but that won't stop other pilots from team
flying via flarm.

I do not understand why we would introduce it "unrestricted" for
2011. I realize we/Rules Committee do[es] not have familiarity with
the system, but other countries do, can we learn from them rather than
risk as much chaos? Andy posted the UK 2010 flarm rules earlier in
this discussion, to me it makes sense for us to start off with the
stealth mode required too, that gets the anti-collision function and
reduces the data sharing issues. This is my request to the Rules
Committee.


To Henry's point i do think there is some risk, especially early on of
pilots focusing on their "show me where to find lift radar screen"
that they don't look out the window for the non flarm guys as much.
Ironically could be more dangerous. omg I am agreeing with Henry
on something? ;-)

Chris

[chris]

On Jan 8, 8:16*am, Tom > wrote:
> The implied requirement of having FLARM may cause a number of pilots
> (especially senior pilots) to stop flying contests because they only
> plan to actively fly in competitions for a few more years.
> They have to decide if spending the money for a FLARM device at this
> late stage of their flying career is really worth it.

Also is a barrier to entry for new pilots considering flying their
first contest.

Maybe insurance rates will fall?
Chris

[Martin Gregorie[_5_]]

On Sun, 09 Jan 2011 01:04:10 +0100, Peter Scholz wrote:

> Am 08.01.2011 15:28, wrote:
>> PowerFlarm will be more capable than Flarm units in use in Europe.
>
> Do you have any details about the additional capabilities?

Essentially PCAS and data-out for a transponder with squitter.
See http://www.powerflarm.com/


--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org |

[jcarlyle]

Wow - a complete inability to comprehend. Explains why you're against
a new instrument in the cockpit.

-John

On Jan 8, 5:07 pm, hretting > wrote:
> Yes it would great if everyone had your experience and smarts with
> implementing a , what, transponder?, are you kidding. You're comparing
> a Flarm with a transponder. And of course you have TCAS in your glider
> too! We're talking contest here, not a local jaunt around the area
> that encounters a jet, which happens during all your flights, right?
> And Mike, I never wrote that Flarm was a bad idea. Go back and read my
> thread again. Brillant come back.
> We're talking another distraction to the average racer that without
> some planning and forethought, could lead to a chain of events not
> desired.
> The competition committee did good I believe in slowing things (Flarm)
> down.
> By the way, I have a transponder in my glider too.
> R

[Andy[_1_]]

On Jan 8, 8:46*pm, chris > wrote:
> On Jan 8, 7:17*pm, "kirk.stant" > wrote:
>
> > Where do you get that "Flarmers" will be able to leach better than non-
> > flarmers. Really? Kindly explain how that will work. I've never seen
> > that fear raised in any discussion of Flarm.
>
> > The whole leaching question is a tempest in a teapot. *If it bothers
> > you, turn on Stealth mode and you can't be leached (but will still get
> > collision warning).
> > Kirk
> > 66
>
> Kirk,
> My understanding is that if stealth mode is off then a pilot can see
> the climb rate of other flarm equipped gliders in the area: *One way
> to do it is using Winpilot - see this from the winpilot site:
> "FLARM Support: Added the ability to track several other gliders in
> the vicinity that also carry FLARM on board. WinPilot can now show
> visually the position of the other gliders, their bearing, and also
> indicate weather or not they are climbing, and if so, what their
> current climb rate is."
> see the graphic on the main page.http://www.winpilot.com/images4/News2.gif
>
> seeyou mobile does the same as do other systems:http://gliderpilot.org/files/FlarmFlightSituationsandPerformance/SeeY...
>
> So is it a fair competition if in early 2011 part of the fleet is
> allowed to share remote thermal sensing data?
> Like shooting fish in a barrel, not a contest. *To me it appears that
> we are allowing team flying - with good displays and coordination 2 or
> more pilots could team fly a whole contest season and never have to
> talk on the radio. *So maybe I turn my stealth mode on to prevent
> others from getting my data but that won't stop other pilots from team
> flying via flarm.
>
> I do not understand why we would introduce it "unrestricted" for
> 2011. *I realize we/Rules Committee do[es] not have familiarity with
> the system, but other countries do, can we learn from them rather than
> risk as much chaos? * Andy posted the UK 2010 flarm rules earlier in
> this discussion, to me it makes sense for us to start off with the
> stealth mode required too, that gets the anti-collision function and
> reduces the data sharing issues. This is my request to the Rules
> Committee.
>
> To Henry's point i do think there is some risk, especially early on of
> pilots focusing on their "show me where to find lift radar screen"
> that they don't look out the window for the non flarm guys as much.
> Ironically could be more dangerous. * * omg I am agreeing with Henry
> on something? ;-)
>
> Chris

If seeing other competitors climb rates is a competitive advantage
then that's an additional incentive for everyone to equip with
PowerFLARM. That is exactly where we would have been with MIRA except
that for the 2011 racing reason it's still voluntary and no pilot will
lose a contest day to a FLARM failure.

Andy (GY)

[kirk.stant]

On Jan 8, 8:46*pm, chris > wrote:

> Kirk,
> My understanding is that if stealth mode is off then a pilot can see
> the climb rate of other flarm equipped gliders in the area: *

So maybe I turn my stealth mode on to prevent
> others from getting my data but that won't stop other pilots from team
> flying via flarm.

> Chris

That's the whole point: I you are worried someone will leech (got it
right this time!) your thermal off FLARM, then you select Stealth mode
and no one gets your climb info - and you don't get anyone else's
climb info. But you ALL still get collision warning.

So if all the hotshots are worried about team flying and leeching by
newbies - all it takes is for them to get together in the bar before
the race and agree on selecting Stealth mode. If anyone cheats and
doesn't stealth-up, he still won't see anything unless others also
cheat - and anyone with a Flarm could momentarily deselect Stealth
mode and possibly catch the cheaters.

Sure, people could team fly if they agreed ahead of time - but
remember the flarm logger records the mode, so the probability of
getting caught is pretty high - because anyone can at any time see
that you are not in Stealth mode!

Guys, you are overthinking this issue. At the ranges Flarm will show
other gliders, you either are going to already see it cranking and
banking in a boomer, or by the time you get there the bubble is
gone....

Everyone just take a deep breath, relax, and let's go out and have
fun.

Kirk
66

[Andy[_10_]]

On Jan 8, 6:03*pm, hretting > wrote:

> Leeching was brought up by an earlier thread and I
> responded to it.

Sorry. That was a joke - it's what the winking emoticon means.

The climb rate displays in WinPilot/SeeYou do look pretty
interesting. We'll have to see how much they really turn out to be
useful - or a distraction. It's one thing to be able to see a glider
with a good climb rate on a screen and quite another to be able to get
to the indicated location, find the thermal and actually achieve the
same climb rate.

The only way to know is to try it. I think the RC approach for 2011 is
a responsible and balanced one given both the safety potential and the
uncertainties. I for one would feel pretty bad if we lost another
pilot having ignored the opportunity to do something significant.

Stealth Mode on/off will, I suspect, be a major decision to make as we
get going. I'd encourage the RC to collect feedback contest-by-contest
so we can learn and adapt with each contest experience.

9B

[Peter Scholz[_3_]]

Am 09.01.2011 13:14, Martin Gregorie wrote:
> On Sun, 09 Jan 2011 01:04:10 +0100, Peter Scholz wrote:
>
>> Am 08.01.2011 15:28, wrote:
>>> PowerFlarm will be more capable than Flarm units in use in Europe.
>>
>> Do you have any details about the additional capabilities?
>
> Essentially PCAS and data-out for a transponder with squitter.
> See http://www.powerflarm.com/
>

I'm aware of that, but what would be the "sporting implication" of that
additional information, as mentioned by UH?
--
Peter Scholz
ASW24 JE

[bildan]

On Jan 8, 6:16*am, Tom > wrote:
> There should be a concern about "unintended consequences."
>
> The implied requirement of having FLARM may cause a number of pilots
> (especially senior pilots) to stop flying contests because they only
> plan to actively fly in competitions for a few more years.
>
> They have to decide if spending the money for a FLARM device at this
> late stage of their flying career is really worth it.
>
> Having loaner FLARM units will help in this regard, and people like
> myself will be willing to offer their units for competitions they are
> not going to fly in, but some people will not take advantage of a
> loaner program.
>
> There certainly will be a discussion about this subject at the
> upcoming "Seniors" contest, and the special seniors contest rules
> committee will have this on the agenda.
>
> Tom Knauff

Tom, that's probably a concern. However, I remember "old timers"
leaving competition when radios were installed claiming it wasn't
possible to fly a glider safely and talk on a radio at the same time.
They predicted glider parts raining from the sky as pilots collided
while fumbling with a radio. It was a decision many of them
regretted.

[chris]

On Jan 9, 10:18*am, Andy > wrote:

> If seeing other competitors climb rates is a competitive advantage
> then that's *an additional incentive for everyone to equip with
> PowerFLARM.
> Andy (GY)

So at what point do we just call them "cross country cooperative fly
togethers" and remove the words competition and contest?

The ideal setup is a duo discus with large format computer screens,
the guy in back can just operate the computers and track all the other
gliders and navigate to each marked thermal.

Chris

[[email protected]]

On Jan 9, 11:16*am, Peter Scholz > wrote:
> Am 09.01.2011 13:14, Martin Gregorie wrote:
>
> > On Sun, 09 Jan 2011 01:04:10 +0100, Peter Scholz wrote:
>
> >> Am 08.01.2011 15:28, wrote:
> >>> PowerFlarm will be more capable than Flarm units in use in Europe.
>
> >> Do you have any details about the additional capabilities?
>
> > Essentially PCAS and data-out for a transponder with squitter.
> > Seehttp://www.powerflarm.com/
>
> I'm aware of that, but what would be the "sporting implication" of that
> additional information, as mentioned by UH?
> --
> Peter Scholz
> ASW24 JE

Look at the web site for LS8000. One feature is the use of Flarm info
to identify a marker ("target") in the distance, get his climb info,
and calculate your arrival height at his thermal. This, and other
potential developments of these principles(display of the "better"
target to chase), have quite significant implications on the character
of gliding competition in my view. I seem to remember, but haven't
confirmed, that PowerFlarm will have greater range than current Flarm.
UH

[Andy[_10_]]

On Jan 9, 9:57*am, chris > wrote:
> On Jan 9, 10:18*am, Andy > wrote:
>
> > If seeing other competitors climb rates is a competitive advantage
> > then that's *an additional incentive for everyone to equip with
> > PowerFLARM.
> > Andy (GY)
>
> So at what point do we just call them "cross country cooperative fly
> togethers" and remove the words competition and contest?
>
> The ideal setup is a duo discus with large format computer screens,
> the guy in back can just operate the computers and track all the other
> gliders and navigate to each marked thermal.
>
> Chris

That happens today. I've been SN-10 operator, navigator, thermal
scout, glider spotter and tactician as a passenger. With an
experienced back-seater it can be a big advantage - adding a Flarm
seems a small incremental bump in capability compared to the value of
adding a good back-seater in the first place.

I will be very interested to see if the concern about Flarm taking
most of the skill out of contest flying comes to pass. Good pilots
today are skilled at finding fast climbing gliders within a few miles,
just using their eyeballs. I don't consider that a detriment to
competition. I don't consider GPS to be a detriment to competition
either - or Spots, or radios, or transponders, or compasses, or
variometers or altimeters, or supplemental oxygen or parachutes for
that matter.

9B

[Andy[_1_]]

On Jan 9, 12:32*pm, WR > wrote:

> As one of my racing buddies put it "next year will be an unrestricted
> technical free-for-all, don't be the guy who brings a knife to a
> gunfight."

It has always been a technical free-for-all, within the constraints of
the class that was chosen. I flew Std class for years in an
uncompetitive glider, and I was known to have described that as
bringing a knife to a gun fight. It only took money to solve that
problem.

The amount of money to buy PowerFLARM and a display device is
insignificant compared to the investment in a new glider.

I'm still not convinced that the competitive advantage of having a PDA
showing climb rates will be that great but I'm looking forward to
trying it. What I need is a system that monitors my task average
climb rate, my current climb rate, the climb rates of all others in
the area, and then guides me to the best next thermal taking into
account deviation from course line and probability that the thermal
will still be there when I arrive. Of course it will also tell me the
best time to leave the one I'm in now.

I expect it will be a while before a PDA system does that better than
the pilot and even then it won't have the skill to find the unmarked
thermal that's better than all the marked ones. Luck and skill are
not going to go away as significant factors in contest results.

Andy (GY)

[Jim Beckman[_2_]]

At 17:57 09 January 2011, chris wrote:
>
>The ideal setup is a duo discus with large format computer screens,
>the guy in back can just operate the computers and track all the other
>gliders and navigate to each marked thermal.

And the GIB can also run the electronic counter measures and man the
machine guns when appropriate.

Jim Beckman

[BruceGreeff]

I think there is too much FUD around Flarm (That's IBM speak for Fear
Uncertainty and Doubt)

Experience of introducing Flarm in the south African racing environment
was effectively painless. There was never a decrease in safety
attributable to Flarm.

To my knowledge there was no material increase in leeching. If you can
keep up to leech, the Flarm is unlikely to help much...
If you are close enough to the other thermal to be able to use the
information about relative climb rate - you can probably verify the
differential as effectively visually. Certainly I am not aware of anyone
gaining advantage this way.

Have contests become safer? Hard to say - but I am a lot more
comfortable with no beeps emanating from the flarm. OK - in my case that
is generally because the others are so far ahead.

And yes - mid airs, in contests and others were a significant percentage
of fatals in SA. There are at least three pilots who would still be with
us if they had Flarm working. Since Flarm became common we have not had
any. Apparently Flarm does what it says on the box - improves safety in
glider operations...

Some use it well, some don't - as with everything.

Cheers
Bruce

On 2011/01/09 4:03 AM, hretting wrote:
> First, my apologies for not spelling " leech" correctly and passing it
> on to you. Leeching was brought up by an earlier thread and I
> responded to it.
> My stand is that while you believe the two midairs would have been
> prevented by FLARM....I believe that the rapid insertion of Flarm into
> the contest regime will create a risk greater than the one we are
> trying to reduce.
> I believe to reduce that specific risk, we allow for the "Novelty"
> period followed by the "Functional check-out" period before we include
> it into the contest regime.
> Flarm will change the "paranoia" level of the group. Not right
> away.....but slowly. This is the dynamics that we must guard.
> First the dip, then the spike, then the balance.
>
> You're right about the knuckleheads not looking out.....
> But I do.
> R
>
>
>
>
>

--
Bruce Greeff
T59D #1771 & Std Cirrus #57

[Peter Scholz[_3_]]

Am 09.01.2011 19:33, wrote:
> On Jan 9, 11:16 am, Peter > wrote:
>> Am 09.01.2011 13:14, Martin Gregorie wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 09 Jan 2011 01:04:10 +0100, Peter Scholz wrote:
>>
>>>> Am 08.01.2011 15:28, wrote:
>>>>> PowerFlarm will be more capable than Flarm units in use in Europe.
>>
>>>> Do you have any details about the additional capabilities?
>>
>>> Essentially PCAS and data-out for a transponder with squitter.
>>> Seehttp://www.powerflarm.com/
>>
>> I'm aware of that, but what would be the "sporting implication" of that
>> additional information, as mentioned by UH?
>> --
>> Peter Scholz
>> ASW24 JE
>
> Look at the web site for LS8000. One feature is the use of Flarm info
> to identify a marker ("target") in the distance, get his climb info,
> and calculate your arrival height at his thermal. This, and other
> potential developments of these principles(display of the "better"
> target to chase), have quite significant implications on the character
> of gliding competition in my view. I seem to remember, but haven't
> confirmed, that PowerFlarm will have greater range than current Flarm.
> UH

LK8000 (as all other peripheral devices) can only interpret the
information it gets from the Flram device. Since Version 4.0 targets in
stealth mode will NOT transmit <Track>,<TurnRate>,<GroundSpeed> and
<ClimbRate> in the PFLAA record. <RelativeVertical> will be transmitted
degraded, unless the target is concidered to be a danger target.

Therefore there is IMHO no way to get the (tactical important) data from
a Flarm target in stealth mode. So it's up to the pilot by setting
stealth mode ON/OFF to decide if other pilots can receive those tactical
information or not.

Re. range: from my experience the effective transmit range of the FLARM
signal is strongly influenced by the position of the Flarm aerial,
especially with modern CFK gliders. On my flights I typically receive
Flarm targets in a distance of up to 15-20km. But some targets are
barely visible at all, due to a bad antenna position.

Even if PowerFLARM has an extended range compared to standard FLARM
devices (although I have found no confirmation yet for this), it would
not change much, as any information about a gliders height & climb rate,
that is further away than 25km, would not influence my tactical short
term decisions very much. 25km are a long way to go for my ASW24, and in
the heigths we operate, I would usually need another lift on the way to
get there comfortably. Maybe that is different where you fly,

I have never flown a contest in the US, but here in (continental) Europe
no one seems to have a problem with the possible additional tactical
information you can get with FLARM in a contest. Those who worry can set
the stealth mode.

So, relax, fly your contests with FLARM for a year, and I predict the
discussion about mandatory stealth mode etc. will be over before the end
of the seasan 2011.
--
Peter Scholz
ASW24 JE

[PCool]

Peter, there is a difference between "transmitted through the air" and
"transmitted by wire to your PDA".
Then I remind that transmission is broadcasted, and if a "target" is in
threat with another aircraft 10km aways,
maybe because in the same thermal, then it will transmit all informations to
everybody, in the air.
Enough said.

"Peter Scholz" > ha scritto nel messaggio
...
>
> LK8000 (as all other peripheral devices) can only interpret the
> information it gets from the Flram device. Since Version 4.0 targets in
> stealth mode will NOT transmit <Track>,<TurnRate>,<GroundSpeed> and
> <ClimbRate> in the PFLAA record. <RelativeVertical> will be transmitted
> degraded, unless the target is concidered to be a danger target.
>
> Therefore there is IMHO no way to get the (tactical important) data from a
> Flarm target in stealth mode. So it's up to the pilot by setting stealth
> mode ON/OFF to decide if other pilots can receive those tactical
> information or not.

[Richard[_9_]]

On Jan 9, 8:06*am, Andy > wrote:
> On Jan 8, 6:03*pm, hretting > wrote:
>
> > Leeching was brought up by an earlier thread and I
> > responded to it.
>
> Sorry. That was a joke - it's what the winking emoticon means.
>
> The climb rate displays in WinPilot/SeeYou do look pretty
> interesting. *We'll have to see how much they really turn out to be
> useful - or a distraction. *It's one thing to be able to see a glider
> with a good climb rate on a screen and quite another to be able to get
> to the indicated location, find the thermal and actually achieve the
> same climb rate.
>
> The only way to know is to try it. I think the RC approach for 2011 is
> a responsible and balanced one given both the safety potential and the
> uncertainties. I for one would feel pretty bad if we lost another
> pilot having ignored the opportunity to do something significant.
>
> Stealth Mode on/off will, I suspect, be a major decision to make as we
> get going. I'd encourage the RC to collect feedback contest-by-contest
> so we can learn and adapt with each contest experience.
>
> 9B

Hi,
I've updated my web site with details and pricing on the new
PowerFlarm Antileaching Device.
It looks very interesting. Its ability to totally prevent leaching is
amazing.
It will be compatible with all Flarm Units and PowerFlarm Units. I
have many pre-orders. It will be ready for immediate shipment soon.
You can see details and pre-order here:

http://www.craggyaero.com/cloaking.htm

I can’ wait to fly with one!

Richard
www.craggyaero.com

[Big Wings]

I see the version you have on your web site is for 125/250VAC.
When will you have a 12VDC version available?

At 15:13 10 January 2011, Richard wrote:
>Hi,
>I've updated my web site with details and pricing on the new
>PowerFlarm Antileaching Device.
>It looks very interesting. Its ability to totally prevent leaching is
>amazing.
>It will be compatible with all Flarm Units and PowerFlarm Units. I
>have many pre-orders. It will be ready for immediate shipment soon.
>You can see details and pre-order here:
>
>http://www.craggyaero.com/cloaking.htm
>
>I can=92 wait to fly with one!
>
>Richard
>www.craggyaero.com
>

[Richard[_9_]]

On Jan 10, 7:38*am, Big Wings > wrote:
> I see the version you have on your web site is for 125/250VAC.
> When will you have a 12VDC version available?
>
> At 15:13 10 January 2011, Richard wrote:
>
>
>
> >Hi,
> >I've updated my web site with details and pricing on the new
> >PowerFlarm Antileaching Device.
> >It looks very interesting. *Its ability to totally prevent leaching is
> >amazing.
> >It will be compatible with all Flarm Units and PowerFlarm Units. *I
> >have many pre-orders. *It will be ready for immediate shipment soon.
> >You can see details and pre-order here:
>
> >http://www.craggyaero.com/cloaking.htm
>
> >I can=92 wait to fly with one!
>
> >Richard
> >www.craggyaero.com- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

OH No! I see a preorder recall in my future.

Richard
www.craggyaero.com

[cernauta]

On Mon, 10 Jan 2011 08:56:29 +0200, BruceGreeff >
wrote:

>I think there is too much FUD around Flarm (That's IBM speak for Fear
>Uncertainty and Doubt)

We've been through the same "FUD" in Italy ;-)
>
>Experience of introducing Flarm in the south African racing environment
>was effectively painless. There was never a decrease in safety
>attributable to Flarm.

I've flown more than 20 competitions, maybe 30, since Flarm was
available in Europe (2005 I think). So far, the races have been safer
in my opinion. No collisions between Flarm-equipped gliders.
>
>To my knowledge there was no material increase in leeching. If you can
>keep up to leech, the Flarm is unlikely to help much...

Since Flarm "radar" or display has been available (a couple of racing
seasons), it has been just a little easier to catch-up with a glider I
was trying to leech, after I lost visual contact for a while.

>If you are close enough to the other thermal to be able to use the
>information about relative climb rate - you can probably verify the
>differential as effectively visually.

The climb rate is so unreliable (most probably uncompensated) that it
never helped me locate a thermal I didn't see earlier (gliders, birds
etc.).
It has helped me understand that I was not centered correctly, on some
occasions.
Once the two glider are established in the same thermal in a steady
climb, the value shown by the display becomes comparable and reliable.
By them it's too late to be of any use except: "darn, I have to
squeeze the best lift there apparently is".

Under cloudstreets, or convergence lines, it is now easier to compare
the different flight paths and decisions. I may say that I now learn
much more from each flight.

>
>Have contests become safer?

I believe contest are safer. And, some may be surprised by this
statement, more fun for me.
Let me explain. Racing gliders are now a bit easier to spot in the
sky, and I get more "awareness" of how they're doing. So, I feel more
involved.

>. There are at least three pilots who would still be with
>us if they had Flarm working.

Same in Italy. There was a collision, killing one. The other glider
had no Flarm on board.

>
>Some use it well, some don't - as with everything.

Cloud flying is prohibited in Italy. In the pre-start tactical game, I
have seen Flarm objects flying higher than cloudbase, above me.
Was Flarm only a witness of their behaviour, or an encouragement? I
don't know, but I know that loggers and software allow for analysis
and, if guilty, penalization of the offenders.

aldo cernezzi
-
www.voloavela.it
The Italian Gliding magazine


>
>Cheers
>Bruce