Compare MRX with PF Portable

[Andy[_1_]]

> Now that my PowerFlarm PCAS performs as well or better than my Zaon (thanks to the latest firmware and the shorter antenna)

Just last weekend I flew another side by side comparison between the ZAON MRX and my Power FLARM portable.

For about half of the flight the Power FLARM indicated a spurious warning of my own mode C transponder. (Yes, I do have it configured so it knows I have a transponder)

I am using the antennas supplied with the portable but have them extended away from the unit with about 12 inches of RG58U. That allows me to get everything on the glareshield of my PA28.

As I reported earlier, the detection range of the PFP is much improved with the latest firmware update. Hovever, the spurious alerting of ownship tranponder is a signicant issue as this alert will take priority over any other transponder targets. I don't know if it also inhibits FLARM and ADS-B warnings.

My MRX won't be for sale for a while yet.

Andy

[[email protected]]

On Tuesday, August 6, 2013 1:24:46 PM UTC-4, Andy wrote:
> > Now that my PowerFlarm PCAS performs as well or better than my Zaon (thanks to the latest firmware and the shorter antenna)
>
>
>
> Just last weekend I flew another side by side comparison between the ZAON MRX and my Power FLARM portable.
>
>
>
> For about half of the flight the Power FLARM indicated a spurious warning of my own mode C transponder. (Yes, I do have it configured so it knows I have a transponder)
>
>
>
> I am using the antennas supplied with the portable but have them extended away from the unit with about 12 inches of RG58U. That allows me to get everything on the glareshield of my PA28.
>
>
>
> As I reported earlier, the detection range of the PFP is much improved with the latest firmware update. Hovever, the spurious alerting of ownship tranponder is a signicant issue as this alert will take priority over any other transponder targets. I don't know if it also inhibits FLARM and ADS-B warnings.
>
>
>
> My MRX won't be for sale for a while yet.
>
>
>
> Andy

I have mod S transponder and I experience the same issue but not as frequently probably once every 10-15 min sometimes only sporadic sometimes more often. I get an alert and the altitude difference would be jumping around +/- 75 feet but eventually the thing settles and goes away. I was debating if I should not put my ZAON back in.

[[email protected]]

On Tuesday, August 6, 2013 7:38:19 PM UTC-5, wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 6, 2013 1:24:46 PM UTC-4, Andy wrote:
>
> > > Now that my PowerFlarm PCAS performs as well or better than my Zaon (thanks to the latest firmware and the shorter antenna)
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Just last weekend I flew another side by side comparison between the ZAON MRX and my Power FLARM portable.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > For about half of the flight the Power FLARM indicated a spurious warning of my own mode C transponder. (Yes, I do have it configured so it knows I have a transponder)
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > I am using the antennas supplied with the portable but have them extended away from the unit with about 12 inches of RG58U. That allows me to get everything on the glareshield of my PA28.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > As I reported earlier, the detection range of the PFP is much improved with the latest firmware update. Hovever, the spurious alerting of ownship tranponder is a signicant issue as this alert will take priority over any other transponder targets. I don't know if it also inhibits FLARM and ADS-B warnings.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > My MRX won't be for sale for a while yet.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Andy
>
>
>
> I have mod S transponder and I experience the same issue but not as frequently probably once every 10-15 min sometimes only sporadic sometimes more often. I get an alert and the altitude difference would be jumping around +/- 75 feet but eventually the thing settles and goes away. I was debating if I should not put my ZAON back in.



I sent a dump file to FLARM months ago because I was having some issues with less than optimum PCAS. Included were some alerts which appeared suddenly and it appeared that the PowerFlarm was detecting my own transponder. Within the dump file were a number of comments which said something along the lines of "failed to detect own transponder signal or reply" I sent this with a polite note asking for help to Flarm. Month or so later, I again asked for help. Month or so later I sent an email to the US rep I purchased from to see if he could muster some help. Reply from Flarm to date... NONE.....NONE....NONE...and more NONE....

In contrast, I sent a note to Winter asking for a couple of ASI dials with a change to the orientation to the zero position. They shipped them the next day , the price was a bargain, and were super awesome to deal with. THAT's customer service! Thanks Winter!

[[email protected]]

I also have a ModeS transponder (Trig TT21).
My "Own Transponder" issue was resolved with the update to the core FirmWare 3.31.
I know that this FW update particularly resolved the ModeS "Own Transponder" issue. I am not sure if it also addressed the ModeC "Own Transponder" issue.
(ModeS has the ICAO code encoded in the datastream which helps with recognition)

[Ramy]

While I had less than optimal PCAS reception with my powerflarm until recent firmware upgrades and antenna replacement, I had zero false alarms during the 300 hours I flew with it, not even once. I have a Becker mode C transponder.
My experience so far with both Powerflarm and Butterfly support was very positive. I found both Gerhard and Marc to be very responsive. Just need to know who to contact instead of sending emails to the official email address which may be clogged...

Ramy

[Dan Daly[_2_]]

On Wednesday, August 7, 2013 12:21:18 AM UTC-4, wrote:
> I also have a ModeS transponder (Trig TT21).
>
> My "Own Transponder" issue was resolved with the update to the core FirmWare 3.31.
>
> I know that this FW update particularly resolved the ModeS "Own Transponder" issue. I am not sure if it also addressed the ModeC "Own Transponder" issue.
>
> (ModeS has the ICAO code encoded in the datastream which helps with recognition)

I only see Core Firmware 3.00 on the website. Where is 3.31 available?

[[email protected]]

On Wednesday, August 7, 2013 12:43:30 AM UTC-5, Ramy wrote:
> While I had less than optimal PCAS reception with my powerflarm until recent firmware upgrades and antenna replacement, I had zero false alarms during the 300 hours I flew with it, not even once. I have a Becker mode C transponder.
>
> My experience so far with both Powerflarm and Butterfly support was very positive. I found both Gerhard and Marc to be very responsive. Just need to know who to contact instead of sending emails to the official email address which may be clogged...
>
>
>
> Ramy


Ramy,

I sent all the above mentioned emails to direct individual email addresses. Including the dealer. It appears that FLARM has chosen not to reply/help.

Mark

[[email protected]]

PowerFlarm FirmWare version 3.31
http://www.powerflarm.aero/index.php/en/knowledge-and-support

As Ramy says, I am also very pleased with the current level of the functionality of the PowerFlarm system.
I have had already several all-out alarms for potential collisions, including a ADS-B alarm while turning right base with a Cirrus turning left base.
Great functionality at less than half the price of my parachute.

My communication with the Flarm development works pretty well.
I am not associated with Flarm, PowerFlarm or Butterfly. But I work in High Tech. If I had to run an small operation like Flarm/PowerFlarm and I had to manage a very resource constrained team, I would also elect to focus on development and interaction with a few key knowledgeable users, who are capable of helping debugging. I would refrain from spending much resource on answering random emails/calls. I would most particularly ignore emails from users where it is obvious that they have not read any documentation (even if that documentation is still limited)

If you need generic help, I recommend to consult with established users or on forums like this. The collective knowledge is growing quickly.

Hoping for further adoption of PowerFlarm in the US.

ThreeUniform.

[[email protected]]

I do not work in tech, but If I did, I too might want to try out a new product with a few technically knowledgeable users to help me identify and correct problems. However, I would hope that I would do so BEFORE trying to sell the product on the open market.

What type of parachute do you use? PowerFlarm appears to cost between about $1600 to $1900 in the US. Parachutes seem to be in the $1700 to $2200 range. Hmm, I have not actually used my chute except as a seat cushion. I wonder if it's actually a beta test version...

[Andy[_1_]]

On Wednesday, August 7, 2013 2:16:48 PM UTC-7, wrote:
> PowerFlarm FirmWare version 3.31

Thanks for the tip on ver 3.31. I did not know that was available and it does include a change for own transponder supression.

However, the release notes include -

Known issues:
- Mode C targets at own altitude may be suppressed.


What is the use of a PCAS function that does not reliably detect targets at own ship altitude? These are the ones that can kill you.

Why would anyone part with a ZAON MRX that does reliably detect mode C targets at own altitude?

ZAON has worked out how to inhibit own tranponder alerting without suppresing other same altitude returns. I don't think it was easy for them to achieve though, and there are maintenance menus for tailoring the supression characteristics to a specific installation.

Andy

[jfitch]

On Thursday, August 8, 2013 11:04:41 AM UTC-7, Andy wrote:

>
> Why would anyone part with a ZAON MRX that does reliably detect mode C targets at own altitude?
>

Perhaps because the collision of a glider with a mode C target is extremely rare?

My PowerFlarm installation never shows any mode C targets, but I'm not losing a lot of sleep over it.

[Ramy]

I have many hours of thermaling with other gliders at the same altitude and my PF never failed detecting them. Early on it will occasionally fail to detect mode C traffic further away at any altitude but this had been fixed. After flying with both my Zaon and PF for additional 30 hours or so there was no occasion where my Zaon detected traffic which my PF didn't except that the "afterglow" of the Zaon seem the be a little longer (traffic going out of range continue showing up on my Zaon for another 10 seconds or so).
BTW, I am not affiliated with Flarm or Butterfly but I did some beta testing for them.

Ramy

[kirk.stant]

On Friday, August 9, 2013 4:39:08 AM UTC+2, jfitch wrote:

> Perhaps because the collision of a glider with a mode C target is extremely rare?

Really? I believe they are more common than glider-to-glider, if the whole of glider operations is considered (outside contests, for example). Several towplane/glider collisions come to mind, the Cirrus that hit a towplane with a glider on tow in Colorado, and of course the Hawker bizjet that ran into the ASG-29 over the Sierras - all were cases of Mode C targets that may have been detected early enough to prevent collision with a working PCAS or PowerFlarm.

In many non-contest locations, the most common target that you will see on your PF will be a Mode-C; unlikely that the local 2-33 will have a PF!

Kirk
66

[Dan Marotta]

What do you people mean when you say, "a Mode C target"?

Mode C is simply the altitude report. Do you really mean "Mode A"? Aren't
you talking about every Cessna, Piper, Beech, etc., flying around? I would
wager that there are more Mode A/C targets out there than there are Mode S
(excluding airliners).

Admittedly I've only had my PCAS installed for a couple of months, but I've
never had a problem with it alerting on my own Mode S transponder and I can
verify that it's reading my transponder with a single button hit. True, it
has no azimuth report or visual display, but it's pretty simple to note
whether distance and/or altitude delta are increasing, decreasing, or not
changing. It *does* get annoying while thermalling with another
transponder-equipped glider, but I don't do that too often.


"jfitch" > wrote in message
...
> On Thursday, August 8, 2013 11:04:41 AM UTC-7, Andy wrote:
>
>>
>> Why would anyone part with a ZAON MRX that does reliably detect mode C
>> targets at own altitude?
>>
>
> Perhaps because the collision of a glider with a mode C target is
> extremely rare?
>
> My PowerFlarm installation never shows any mode C targets, but I'm not
> losing a lot of sleep over it.
>

[jfitch]

On Friday, August 9, 2013 2:36:16 AM UTC-7, kirk.stant wrote:
> On Friday, August 9, 2013 4:39:08 AM UTC+2, jfitch wrote:
>
>
>
> > Perhaps because the collision of a glider with a mode C target is extremely rare?
>
>
>
> Really? I believe they are more common than glider-to-glider, if the whole of glider operations is considered (outside contests, for example). Several towplane/glider collisions come to mind, the Cirrus that hit a towplane with a glider on tow in Colorado, and of course the Hawker bizjet that ran into the ASG-29 over the Sierras - all were cases of Mode C targets that may have been detected early enough to prevent collision with a working PCAS or PowerFlarm.
>
>
>
> In many non-contest locations, the most common target that you will see on your PF will be a Mode-C; unlikely that the local 2-33 will have a PF!
>
>
>
> Kirk
>
> 66

There appear to be 8 collisions between gliders and light airplanes in the NTSB database in the last 20 years. I think we counted 7 glider to glider mid airs in the same period (each of which of course involves 2 gliders). Mode C detection would not guarantee collision avoidance, as PowerFlarm glider detection (almost) does. As with glider-to-glider mid air collisions, you are far better served from the standpoint of safety with a little more spin/stall practice than with a PCAS device. You are about 100 times more likely to collide with terrain (and about 3 times more likely to strike a power line) than a light airplane.

And to repeat once more, I'm not arguing against them: I have both PowerFlarm and Mode S. What I am saying is that eliminating all mid air collisions will not make soaring statistically safer by any significant amount. If you eliminate the 15 or so mid air hits from the NTSB database, you will still find about 700 more ways to crash a glider. If you have a limited budget, spend it on some stall/spin training.

[Andy[_1_]]

> Perhaps because the collision of a glider with a mode C target is extremely rare? My PowerFlarm installation never shows any mode C targets, but I'm not losing a lot of sleep over it.

But if you had read the original post you would have known that I'm using my PF portable in a Piper PA28.

Also, I fly in a very high density training area (KDVT). My risk of hitting, or being hit by, another airplane is very much greater than the risk of being involved with a glider.

I also believe that anyone flying a glider in this area is at much higher risk of being involved in a collision with an airplane than with another glider. That is based on over 25 years experience flying gliders in the area and more near misses with airplanes than I care to remember.


Andy

[jfitch]

On Friday, August 9, 2013 10:39:10 AM UTC-7, Andy wrote:
> > Perhaps because the collision of a glider with a mode C target is extremely rare? My PowerFlarm installation never shows any mode C targets, but I'm not losing a lot of sleep over it.
>
>
>
> But if you had read the original post you would have known that I'm using my PF portable in a Piper PA28.
>
>
>
> Also, I fly in a very high density training area (KDVT). My risk of hitting, or being hit by, another airplane is very much greater than the risk of being involved with a glider.
>
>
>
> I also believe that anyone flying a glider in this area is at much higher risk of being involved in a collision with an airplane than with another glider. That is based on over 25 years experience flying gliders in the area and more near misses with airplanes than I care to remember.
>
>
>
>
>
> Andy

I did read your first post. However you then asked "Why would anyone part with a ZAON MRX that does reliably detect mode C targets at own altitude?" in a later post, referring to one being used in a glider. That is what I was replying to. Overall, throughout the USA, glider to airplane mid air collisions have been rare unless there are high numbers not reported to the NTSB which seems unlikely.

[Mike the Strike]

Had a number of aircraft fly near me today - a military KC135 (I think), a light twin, a Boeing 767 inbound for Tucson and a SWA 737. I saw all of them pass by me within a couple of miles and PowerFlarm never made a peep or displayed anything! This seems quite different form its performance on gliders.

Mike

[son_of_flubber]

On Wednesday, August 7, 2013 7:15:05 PM UTC-4, wrote:
> I have not actually used my chute except as a seat cushion. I wonder if it's actually a beta test version...

You cannot update a parachute with a USB stick.

[[email protected]]

On Saturday, August 10, 2013 12:40:32 AM UTC-4, Mike the Strike wrote:
> Had a number of aircraft fly near me today - a military KC135 (I think), a light twin, a Boeing 767 inbound for Tucson and a SWA 737. I saw all of them pass by me within a couple of miles and PowerFlarm never made a peep or displayed anything! This seems quite different form its performance on gliders.
>
>
>
> Mike

Mike, I flew today in a busy area and I would have to say the PCAS worked Okay, not as good as MRX but I got all warnings I needed to get. If only the thing could stop beeping on my own transponder I would be happy. It seems the display constantly shows me my own transponder with +/- (0 to 50 feet or so). I got used to that the only time it freaks me out is when it beeps twice.

[[email protected]]

_of_flubber
On Wednesday, August 7, 2013 7:15:05 PM UTC-4, wrote:
> I have not actually used my chute except as a seat cushion. I wonder if it's actually a beta test version...

You cannot update a parachute with a USB stick.

That's true, however, I am pretty sure Strong knew the chute had a reasonable chance of working as advertised when they sold it. No updates necessary.

[Dan Marotta]

Please describe your PCAS (especially the brand). My ZAON MRX does not
alert on my own transponder. And it does a good job of alerting to other
traffic, some of which I never see.

Is this possibly a configuration issue?

> wrote in message
...
On Saturday, August 10, 2013 12:40:32 AM UTC-4, Mike the Strike wrote:
> Had a number of aircraft fly near me today - a military KC135 (I think), a
> light twin, a Boeing 767 inbound for Tucson and a SWA 737. I saw all of
> them pass by me within a couple of miles and PowerFlarm never made a peep
> or displayed anything! This seems quite different form its performance on
> gliders.
>
>
>
> Mike

Mike, I flew today in a busy area and I would have to say the PCAS worked
Okay, not as good as MRX but I got all warnings I needed to get. If only the
thing could stop beeping on my own transponder I would be happy. It seems
the display constantly shows me my own transponder with +/- (0 to 50 feet or
so). I got used to that the only time it freaks me out is when it beeps
twice.

[AK[_2_]]

PowerFlarm PCAS. ZAON works perfectly!

On Monday, August 12, 2013 10:40:08 AM UTC-4, Dan Marotta wrote:
> Please describe your PCAS (especially the brand). My ZAON MRX does not
>
> alert on my own transponder. And it does a good job of alerting to other
>
> traffic, some of which I never see.
>
>
>
> Is this possibly a configuration issue?
>
>

>
>
> On Saturday, August 10, 2013 12:40:32 AM UTC-4, Mike the Strike wrote:
>
> > Had a number of aircraft fly near me today - a military KC135 (I think), a
>
> > light twin, a Boeing 767 inbound for Tucson and a SWA 737. I saw all of
>
> > them pass by me within a couple of miles and PowerFlarm never made a peep
>
> > or displayed anything! This seems quite different form its performance on
>
> > gliders.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Mike
>
>
>
> Mike, I flew today in a busy area and I would have to say the PCAS worked
>
> Okay, not as good as MRX but I got all warnings I needed to get. If only the
>
> thing could stop beeping on my own transponder I would be happy. It seems
>
> the display constantly shows me my own transponder with +/- (0 to 50 feet or
>
> so). I got used to that the only time it freaks me out is when it beeps
>
> twice.

[[email protected]]

On Sunday, August 11, 2013 6:29:13 PM UTC-7, wrote:
> On Saturday, August 10, 2013 12:40:32 AM UTC-4, Mike the Strike wrote:
>
> > Had a number of aircraft fly near me today - a military KC135 (I think), a light twin, a Boeing 767 inbound for Tucson and a SWA 737. I saw all of them pass by me within a couple of miles and PowerFlarm never made a peep or displayed anything! This seems quite different form its performance on gliders.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Mike
>
>
>
> Mike, I flew today in a busy area and I would have to say the PCAS worked Okay, not as good as MRX but I got all warnings I needed to get. If only the thing could stop beeping on my own transponder I would be happy. It seems the display constantly shows me my own transponder with +/- (0 to 50 feet or so). I got used to that the only time it freaks me out is when it beeps twice.

If I understand your post correctly and it is the MRX alerting you to your own transponder, I had that issue as well and it does freak you out. Send the MRX back to ZAON. It has a flaky altitude transducer. They replaced mine for free long after the warranty ran out. Their service is fantastic.

BV

[[email protected]]

No, let me be clear. ZAON works 100% without issues. PowerFlarm PCAS capability works well for detection of transponder equipped traffic, however it constantly shows some +/- a few feet as a target (my own transponder). That is not a problem as when a real traffic shows up PowerFlarm flips over to the new target. The only irritating thing is the two beeps from time to time to alert me to my own transponder. Let me tell you this sound was designed to alert you so it drives me crazy. Over a 4.5 hour flight I heard it maybe 20 times. It is seldom enough to alert me unnecessary and not often enough to turn it off. During a different flight it was more common.

Full disclosure. I did not upgrade to the latest version (this is one before the latest) as I was turned off by the may not alert you to traffic at the same altitude or a similar statement from Flarm folks.



On Monday, August 12, 2013 6:19:49 PM UTC-4, wrote:
> On Sunday, August 11, 2013 6:29:13 PM UTC-7, wrote:
>
> > On Saturday, August 10, 2013 12:40:32 AM UTC-4, Mike the Strike wrote:
>
> >
>
> > > Had a number of aircraft fly near me today - a military KC135 (I think), a light twin, a Boeing 767 inbound for Tucson and a SWA 737. I saw all of them pass by me within a couple of miles and PowerFlarm never made a peep or displayed anything! This seems quite different form its performance on gliders.
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > Mike
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Mike, I flew today in a busy area and I would have to say the PCAS worked Okay, not as good as MRX but I got all warnings I needed to get. If only the thing could stop beeping on my own transponder I would be happy. It seems the display constantly shows me my own transponder with +/- (0 to 50 feet or so). I got used to that the only time it freaks me out is when it beeps twice.
>
>
>
> If I understand your post correctly and it is the MRX alerting you to your own transponder, I had that issue as well and it does freak you out. Send the MRX back to ZAON. It has a flaky altitude transducer. They replaced mine for free long after the warranty ran out. Their service is fantastic..
>
>
>
> BV

[Ramy]

On Monday, August 12, 2013 5:47:02 PM UTC-7, wrote:
> No, let me be clear. ZAON works 100% without issues. PowerFlarm PCAS capability works well for detection of transponder equipped traffic, however it constantly shows some +/- a few feet as a target (my own transponder). That is not a problem as when a real traffic shows up PowerFlarm flips over to the new target. The only irritating thing is the two beeps from time to time to alert me to my own transponder. Let me tell you this sound was designed to alert you so it drives me crazy. Over a 4.5 hour flight I heard it maybe 20 times. It is seldom enough to alert me unnecessary and not often enough to turn it off. During a different flight it was more common.
>
>
>
> Full disclosure. I did not upgrade to the latest version (this is one before the latest) as I was turned off by the may not alert you to traffic at the same altitude or a similar statement from Flarm folks.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Monday, August 12, 2013 6:19:49 PM UTC-4, wrote:
>
> > On Sunday, August 11, 2013 6:29:13 PM UTC-7, wrote:
>
> >
>
> > > On Saturday, August 10, 2013 12:40:32 AM UTC-4, Mike the Strike wrote:
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > Had a number of aircraft fly near me today - a military KC135 (I think), a light twin, a Boeing 767 inbound for Tucson and a SWA 737. I saw all of them pass by me within a couple of miles and PowerFlarm never made a peep or displayed anything! This seems quite different form its performance on gliders.
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > Mike
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > Mike, I flew today in a busy area and I would have to say the PCAS worked Okay, not as good as MRX but I got all warnings I needed to get. If only the thing could stop beeping on my own transponder I would be happy. It seems the display constantly shows me my own transponder with +/- (0 to 50 feet or so). I got used to that the only time it freaks me out is when it beeps twice.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > If I understand your post correctly and it is the MRX alerting you to your own transponder, I had that issue as well and it does freak you out. Send the MRX back to ZAON. It has a flaky altitude transducer. They replaced mine for free long after the warranty ran out. Their service is fantastic.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > BV

I assume you configured it correctly and indicated that you have transponder on board, correct?
Will be good to get some feedback from Flarm folks but I wouldn't worry too much about the same altitude warning. As I said I didnt notice this issue and suspect it may be only a theoretical situation where both aircrafts altitude remains exactly the same and does not drift relatively to each other. Our altitude changes all the time so this may not be a real issue. This is just my guess though.

Ramy

[Ramy]

On Monday, August 12, 2013 6:17:53 PM UTC-7, Ramy wrote:
> On Monday, August 12, 2013 5:47:02 PM UTC-7, wrote:
>
> > No, let me be clear. ZAON works 100% without issues. PowerFlarm PCAS capability works well for detection of transponder equipped traffic, however it constantly shows some +/- a few feet as a target (my own transponder). That is not a problem as when a real traffic shows up PowerFlarm flips over to the new target. The only irritating thing is the two beeps from time to time to alert me to my own transponder. Let me tell you this sound was designed to alert you so it drives me crazy. Over a 4.5 hour flight I heard it maybe 20 times. It is seldom enough to alert me unnecessary and not often enough to turn it off. During a different flight it was more common.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Full disclosure. I did not upgrade to the latest version (this is one before the latest) as I was turned off by the may not alert you to traffic at the same altitude or a similar statement from Flarm folks.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > On Monday, August 12, 2013 6:19:49 PM UTC-4, wrote:
>
> >
>
> > > On Sunday, August 11, 2013 6:29:13 PM UTC-7, wrote:
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > On Saturday, August 10, 2013 12:40:32 AM UTC-4, Mike the Strike wrote:
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > Had a number of aircraft fly near me today - a military KC135 (I think), a light twin, a Boeing 767 inbound for Tucson and a SWA 737. I saw all of them pass by me within a couple of miles and PowerFlarm never made a peep or displayed anything! This seems quite different form its performance on gliders.
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > Mike
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > Mike, I flew today in a busy area and I would have to say the PCAS worked Okay, not as good as MRX but I got all warnings I needed to get. If only the thing could stop beeping on my own transponder I would be happy. It seems the display constantly shows me my own transponder with +/- (0 to 50 feet or so). I got used to that the only time it freaks me out is when it beeps twice.
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > If I understand your post correctly and it is the MRX alerting you to your own transponder, I had that issue as well and it does freak you out. Send the MRX back to ZAON. It has a flaky altitude transducer. They replaced mine for free long after the warranty ran out. Their service is fantastic.
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > BV
>
>
>
> I assume you configured it correctly and indicated that you have transponder on board, correct?
>
> Will be good to get some feedback from Flarm folks but I wouldn't worry too much about the same altitude warning. As I said I didnt notice this issue and suspect it may be only a theoretical situation where both aircrafts altitude remains exactly the same and does not drift relatively to each other. Our altitude changes all the time so this may not be a real issue. This is just my guess though.
>
>
>
> Ramy

Oops, just re-read your post and noticed you stated it is configured correctly, so please ignore the first sentence :-)

Ramy

[son_of_flubber]

On Monday, August 12, 2013 8:47:02 PM UTC-4, wrote:

> Full disclosure. I did not upgrade to the latest version (this is one before the latest)

In the future it would be helpful to mention this fact at the top of your first post that mentions a problem that you're having.

[Eric Greenwell[_4_]]

Mike the Strike wrote, On 8/9/2013 9:40 PM:
> Had a number of aircraft fly near me today - a military KC135 (I
> think), a light twin, a Boeing 767 inbound for Tucson and a SWA 737.
> I saw all of them pass by me within a couple of miles and PowerFlarm
> never made a peep or displayed anything! This seems quite different
> form its performance on gliders.

What are your PF settings for distance and relative altitude detection?
Are they the same as you use with your MRX?

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (change ".netto" to ".us" to
email me)
- "Transponders in Sailplanes - Feb/2010" also ADS-B, PCAS, Flarm
http://tinyurl.com/yb3xywl

[[email protected]]

On Tuesday, August 20, 2013 10:35:51 AM UTC-4, Eric Greenwell wrote:
> Mike the Strike wrote, On 8/9/2013 9:40 PM:
>
> > Had a number of aircraft fly near me today - a military KC135 (I
>
> > think), a light twin, a Boeing 767 inbound for Tucson and a SWA 737.
>
> > I saw all of them pass by me within a couple of miles and PowerFlarm
>
> > never made a peep or displayed anything! This seems quite different
>
> > form its performance on gliders.
>
>
>
> What are your PF settings for distance and relative altitude detection?
>
> Are they the same as you use with your MRX?
>
>
>
> --
>
> Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (change ".netto" to ".us" to
>
> email me)
>
> - "Transponders in Sailplanes - Feb/2010" also ADS-B, PCAS, Flarm
>
> http://tinyurl.com/yb3xywl

The PowerFlarm distances were all maximum allowed. I don't remember what they were. I find the PCAS function of PowerFlarm (Brick) works as well as ZAON. The only issue I have is the annoyance of false alarms. I have to say that position of the PF PCAS antenna is important. Until I put it on the glare shield my experience was not good. I actually did some testing and move antenna around to see impact of the antenna position and I got to a conclusion that it needs to be mounted on the glare shield for proper service. That is also where my ZAON antenna was mounted. If someone has an issue with PCAS the first thing I would suggest would be to put an antenna on top of the glare shield and see if it improves warnings.

If I could only get these annoyances out of the cockpit I would be satisfied. Yes, my transponder mod S is properly configured in the file. From time to time the false warnings disappear for some time but not for long. I get messages in a log file "Failed to detect own transponder" or something like that. The log file is polluted with these messages.

AK