FLARM Range

[[email protected]]

Hi Andy

Very interesting, what parameters in the cfg File were changed? Do you have the cfg before and after for comparison?

Ueli

[Andy Blackburn[_3_]]

On Monday, June 15, 2015 at 1:02:24 PM UTC-7, wrote:
> Hi Andy
>
> Very interesting, what parameters in the cfg File were changed? Do you have the cfg before and after for comparison?
>
> Ueli

I was pretty surprised as I didn't think the config file would have , but there are some small differences in parameters that should not have any effect that I would predict. There was a change in the protocol from 6 to 7 - apparently that is important but I just put it in by rote copying as I have not read the spec. I didn't keep track of the config file from last year as I tried a lot of things to get PCAS nuisance alarms to go away. It was either this file ('Before', below) or one pretty close to it.

Before:

$PFLAC,DEFAULTS
$PFLAC,S,ACFT,1
$PFLAC,S,XPDR,2
$PFLAC,S,ID,AA8E2F
$PFLAC,S,NMEAOUT1,61
$PFLAC,S,BAUD1,2
$PFLAC,S,PCASPFLAU1,1
$PFLAC,S,NMEAOUT2,61
$PFLAC,S,BAUD2,2
$PFLAC,S,PCASPFLAU2,1
$PFLAC,S,THRE,1
$PFLAC,S,PCASRANGE,7500
$PFLAC,S,PCASVRANGE,600
$PFLAC,S,ADSBRANGE,65535
$PFLAC,S,ADSBVRANGE,65535
$PFLAC,S,RANGE,65535
$PFLAC,S,VRANGE,2000
$PFLAC,S,LOGINT,2
$PFLAC,S,PILOT,Andy Blackburn
$PFLAC,S,COPIL,
$PFLAC,S,GLIDERID,N78AB
$PFLAC,S,GLIDERTYPE,ASW-27B
$PFLAC,S,COMPID,9B
$PFLAC,S,COMPCLASS,15M
$file,dump


After:

$PFLAC,S,DEF
$PFLAC,S,NMEAOUT2,71
$PFLAC,S,BAUD2,2
$PFLAC,S,PCASPFLAU2,1
$PFLAC,S,NMEAOUT1,71
$PFLAC,S,BAUD1,2
$PFLAC,S,PCASPFLAU1,1
$PFLAC,S,RANGE,65535
$PFLAC,S,VRANGE,2000
$PFLAC,S,ADSBRANGE,65535
$PFLAC,S,ADSBVRANGE,2000
$PFLAC,S,PCASRANGE,2000
$PFLAC,S,PCASVRANGE,300
$PFLAC,S,MODEC,0
$PFLAC,S,OWNMODEC,0
$PFLAC,S,PCASCALIBRATION,30
$PFLAC,S,XPDR,2
$PFLAC,S,MODESALT,0
$PFLAC,S,PCASBEEP,1
$PFLAC,S,PCASPFLAU1,0
$PFLAC,S,PCASPFLAU2,0
$PFLAC,S,AUDIOOUT,0
$PFLAC,S,AUDIOVOLUME,100
$PFLAC,S,ID,AA8E2F
$PFLAC,S,ACFT,1
$PFLAC,S,PILOT,Andy Blackburn
$PFLAC,S,LOGINT,2
$PFLAC,S,GLIDERID,N78AB
$PFLAC,S,GLIDERTYPE,ASW-27B
$PFLAC,S,COMPCLASS,15 Meter
$PFLAC,S,COMPID,9B
$PFLAC,S,PRIV,0
$PFLAC,S,NOTRACK,0

Go figure.

It works now and it clearly didn't before - every flight showed range of ~1km immediately after changing to FW v6 and every flight since reconfig has shown the same range I had last year, prior to FW v6 upgrade (~8.5 km). The comparison I posted was two consecutive days at a contest flying with the same 17 gliders, so while there are always subtle differences in who you are flying close to and at what combinations of angles, it's about as close to a controlled experiment as you are going to get.

I have heard talk and read posts from other pilots reporting range problems after upgrading to FW v6, so I thought I'd post what worked for me.

Andy
9B

[John Carlyle]

Just to muddy the waters further, I got 50% increase in range running my same config file (with the exception of changing to protocol 7 from 6) with the new firmware AND a new PowerFlarm Core. All antennas were identical, just the hardware, firmware and protocol change were made.

-John, Q3

On Monday, June 15, 2015 at 8:58:50 PM UTC-4, Andy Blackburn wrote:
> I was pretty surprised as I didn't think the config file would have , but there are some small differences in parameters that should not have any effect that I would predict. There was a change in the protocol from 6 to 7 - apparently that is important but I just put it in by rote copying as I have not read the spec. I didn't keep track of the config file from last year as I tried a lot of things to get PCAS nuisance alarms to go away. It was either this file ('Before', below) or one pretty close to it.
>
--> bigsnip
>
> It works now and it clearly didn't before - every flight showed range of ~1km immediately after changing to FW v6 and every flight since reconfig has shown the same range I had last year, prior to FW v6 upgrade (~8.5 km). The comparison I posted was two consecutive days at a contest flying with the same 17 gliders, so while there are always subtle differences in who you are flying close to and at what combinations of angles, it's about as close to a controlled experiment as you are going to get.
>
> I have heard talk and read posts from other pilots reporting range problems after upgrading to FW v6, so I thought I'd post what worked for me.
>
> Andy
> 9B

[Ramy[_2_]]

On Monday, June 15, 2015 at 7:26:32 PM UTC-7, John Carlyle wrote:
> Just to muddy the waters further, I got 50% increase in range running my same config file (with the exception of changing to protocol 7 from 6) with the new firmware AND a new PowerFlarm Core. All antennas were identical, just the hardware, firmware and protocol change were made.
>
> -John, Q3
>
> On Monday, June 15, 2015 at 8:58:50 PM UTC-4, Andy Blackburn wrote:
> > I was pretty surprised as I didn't think the config file would have , but there are some small differences in parameters that should not have any effect that I would predict. There was a change in the protocol from 6 to 7 - apparently that is important but I just put it in by rote copying as I have not read the spec. I didn't keep track of the config file from last year as I tried a lot of things to get PCAS nuisance alarms to go away. It was either this file ('Before', below) or one pretty close to it.
> >
> --> bigsnip
> >
> > It works now and it clearly didn't before - every flight showed range of ~1km immediately after changing to FW v6 and every flight since reconfig has shown the same range I had last year, prior to FW v6 upgrade (~8.5 km). The comparison I posted was two consecutive days at a contest flying with the same 17 gliders, so while there are always subtle differences in who you are flying close to and at what combinations of angles, it's about as close to a controlled experiment as you are going to get.
> >
> > I have heard talk and read posts from other pilots reporting range problems after upgrading to FW v6, so I thought I'd post what worked for me.
> >
> > Andy
> > 9B

In my case I suspect the reduction was due to *adding* a Flarm B antenna. I did not put it in optimal place, so perhaps it made things worse. It definitly did not improve coverage in the blind spot, while (I suspect) may have reduced coverage in the best direction. The reduction wasnt nearly as bad as Andy described, only about 30%. After removing the B antenna, I am now getting pretty much the same reception as before during the 3 flights I made since, averaging 7km. However these flights were made in different locations and with different gliders, so not exactly a controlled experiment, but I dont feel like I have a problem now. I did not change the config file and dont see anything in my config file that I think needs to be changed. Andy you mention changing protocol 6 to 7, but I assume you refer to the firmware and not configuration right?

Ramy

[Andy Blackburn[_3_]]

On Monday, June 15, 2015 at 10:13:51 PM UTC-7, Ramy wrote:
> On Monday, June 15, 2015 at 7:26:32 PM UTC-7, John Carlyle wrote:
> > Just to muddy the waters further, I got 50% increase in range running my same config file (with the exception of changing to protocol 7 from 6) with the new firmware AND a new PowerFlarm Core. All antennas were identical, just the hardware, firmware and protocol change were made.
> >
> > -John, Q3
> >
> > On Monday, June 15, 2015 at 8:58:50 PM UTC-4, Andy Blackburn wrote:
> > > I was pretty surprised as I didn't think the config file would have , but there are some small differences in parameters that should not have any effect that I would predict. There was a change in the protocol from 6 to 7 - apparently that is important but I just put it in by rote copying as I have not read the spec. I didn't keep track of the config file from last year as I tried a lot of things to get PCAS nuisance alarms to go away. It was either this file ('Before', below) or one pretty close to it.
> > >
> > --> bigsnip
> > >
> > > It works now and it clearly didn't before - every flight showed range of ~1km immediately after changing to FW v6 and every flight since reconfig has shown the same range I had last year, prior to FW v6 upgrade (~8.5 km). The comparison I posted was two consecutive days at a contest flying with the same 17 gliders, so while there are always subtle differences in who you are flying close to and at what combinations of angles, it's about as close to a controlled experiment as you are going to get.
> > >
> > > I have heard talk and read posts from other pilots reporting range problems after upgrading to FW v6, so I thought I'd post what worked for me.
> > >
> > > Andy
> > > 9B
>
> In my case I suspect the reduction was due to *adding* a Flarm B antenna. I did not put it in optimal place, so perhaps it made things worse. It definitly did not improve coverage in the blind spot, while (I suspect) may have reduced coverage in the best direction. The reduction wasnt nearly as bad as Andy described, only about 30%. After removing the B antenna, I am now getting pretty much the same reception as before during the 3 flights I made since, averaging 7km. However these flights were made in different locations and with different gliders, so not exactly a controlled experiment, but I dont feel like I have a problem now. I did not change the config file and dont see anything in my config file that I think needs to be changed. Andy you mention changing protocol 6 to 7, but I assume you refer to the firmware and not configuration right?
>
> Ramy

The reference to Protocol 7 (vs 6) is in the NMEAOUT commands:

$PFLAC,S,NMEAOUT2,71

and

$PFLAC,S,NMEAOUT1,71

I'm going to have to look up what it refers to in the spec. Now I'm wondering if something got corrupted when I did the firmware upgrade or if the existing config file somehow got overwritten.

The degradation in range was immediate, obvious and was resolved just as quickly and obviously with a new config file. That new file didn't try to change anything in the setup, though may have had some subtle differences in instructions. Because of my installation, the original config file was hand-built with advice from Flarm tech support, not downloaded off of the tool, so it's possible that something I was allowed to do in the old firmware stopped working in v6.

Gremlins...

9B

[Papa3[_2_]]

I've found FLARM to be really frustrating to work with because it hasn't always been obvious what various configuration "do". That includes both the basic configuration and especially settings required to operate with various displays. I've RTFM, but the Manual is a little quiet on the Config File.

Is there another document that has more detail on configuration file values/settings?



On Tuesday, June 16, 2015 at 6:19:39 AM UTC-4, Andy Blackburn wrote:
> On Monday, June 15, 2015 at 10:13:51 PM UTC-7, Ramy wrote:
> > On Monday, June 15, 2015 at 7:26:32 PM UTC-7, John Carlyle wrote:
> > > Just to muddy the waters further, I got 50% increase in range running my same config file (with the exception of changing to protocol 7 from 6) with the new firmware AND a new PowerFlarm Core. All antennas were identical, just the hardware, firmware and protocol change were made.
> > >
> > > -John, Q3
> > >
> > > On Monday, June 15, 2015 at 8:58:50 PM UTC-4, Andy Blackburn wrote:
> > > > I was pretty surprised as I didn't think the config file would have , but there are some small differences in parameters that should not have any effect that I would predict. There was a change in the protocol from 6 to 7 - apparently that is important but I just put it in by rote copying as I have not read the spec. I didn't keep track of the config file from last year as I tried a lot of things to get PCAS nuisance alarms to go away. It was either this file ('Before', below) or one pretty close to it.
> > > >
> > > --> bigsnip
> > > >
> > > > It works now and it clearly didn't before - every flight showed range of ~1km immediately after changing to FW v6 and every flight since reconfig has shown the same range I had last year, prior to FW v6 upgrade (~8.5 km). The comparison I posted was two consecutive days at a contest flying with the same 17 gliders, so while there are always subtle differences in who you are flying close to and at what combinations of angles, it's about as close to a controlled experiment as you are going to get.
> > > >
> > > > I have heard talk and read posts from other pilots reporting range problems after upgrading to FW v6, so I thought I'd post what worked for me..
> > > >
> > > > Andy
> > > > 9B
> >
> > In my case I suspect the reduction was due to *adding* a Flarm B antenna. I did not put it in optimal place, so perhaps it made things worse. It definitly did not improve coverage in the blind spot, while (I suspect) may have reduced coverage in the best direction. The reduction wasnt nearly as bad as Andy described, only about 30%. After removing the B antenna, I am now getting pretty much the same reception as before during the 3 flights I made since, averaging 7km. However these flights were made in different locations and with different gliders, so not exactly a controlled experiment, but I dont feel like I have a problem now. I did not change the config file and dont see anything in my config file that I think needs to be changed. Andy you mention changing protocol 6 to 7, but I assume you refer to the firmware and not configuration right?
> >
> > Ramy
>
> The reference to Protocol 7 (vs 6) is in the NMEAOUT commands:
>
> $PFLAC,S,NMEAOUT2,71
>
> and
>
> $PFLAC,S,NMEAOUT1,71
>
> I'm going to have to look up what it refers to in the spec. Now I'm wondering if something got corrupted when I did the firmware upgrade or if the existing config file somehow got overwritten.
>
> The degradation in range was immediate, obvious and was resolved just as quickly and obviously with a new config file. That new file didn't try to change anything in the setup, though may have had some subtle differences in instructions. Because of my installation, the original config file was hand-built with advice from Flarm tech support, not downloaded off of the tool, so it's possible that something I was allowed to do in the old firmware stopped working in v6.
>
> Gremlins...
>
> 9B

[JS]

At least the new online configuration tool, link below, has SOME "hover over" information on parameters. Certainly not all information you might want.
I built a new file last night, and used communication protocol v7 per Andy's suggestion. Reading Andy's "before and after" I realised there are a lot of new parameters available in the version 6 firmware which are not set if you use the file from previous versions.
Perhaps many of us have been using the old config file.
Jim

http://flarm.com/support/tools-software/

[Andy Blackburn[_3_]]

On Tuesday, June 16, 2015 at 6:40:50 AM UTC-7, Papa3 wrote:
>
> Is there another document that has more detail on configuration file values/settings?

You can read the FLARM Dataport Specification. Here is a link to v6.

http://www.ediatec.ch/pdf/FLARM_DataportManual_v6.00E.pdf

To get v7, you need to send request to: . It's technical and mostly targeted at developers. Apparently, there is a Configuration Manual in the works.

Here is link to an annotated configuration file that helps explain some key things. Any line beginning with a # is commented out and won't be executed by your FLARM.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0Bw1ChKkWEYLNV01zLTk5bkxxZTQ&authuser=0

9B

[jfitch]

On Tuesday, June 16, 2015 at 9:19:36 AM UTC-7, Andy Blackburn wrote:
> On Tuesday, June 16, 2015 at 6:40:50 AM UTC-7, Papa3 wrote:
> >
> > Is there another document that has more detail on configuration file values/settings?
>
> You can read the FLARM Dataport Specification. Here is a link to v6.
>
> http://www.ediatec.ch/pdf/FLARM_DataportManual_v6.00E.pdf
>
> To get v7, you need to send request to: . It's technical and mostly targeted at developers. Apparently, there is a Configuration Manual in the works.
>
> Here is link to an annotated configuration file that helps explain some key things. Any line beginning with a # is commented out and won't be executed by your FLARM.
>
> https://drive.google.com/open?id=0Bw1ChKkWEYLNV01zLTk5bkxxZTQ&authuser=0
>
> 9B

In the V6 dataport manual, it says that anything set to 71 is going to revert to 1 at the next power up.

[Andy Blackburn[_3_]]

On Tuesday, June 16, 2015 at 9:41:53 AM UTC-7, jfitch wrote:

> In the V6 dataport manual, it says that anything set to 71 is going to revert to 1 at the next power up.

Apparently that's different for the new v7 Protocol - but I have not seen the new spec. Also apparently the protocol that needs to be used may depend on the device that's connected -- and some devices configure the protocol themselves.

Wheeeee! Fun!

9B

[Papa3[_2_]]

Fun - Exactly!! The marked up config file supplied as an example doesn't actually relate to some of the options in the updated Configuration Tool.

I spent hours at Mifflin trying to get Karl Striedieck's Flarm Core to speak with his FlarmView. Tried bare-bones "default" and multiple other variations, but it never seemed to work completely. Part of the problem was several variables changing at once (Powerflarm software version update, config file update, Flarmview update).

On Tuesday, June 16, 2015 at 3:25:56 PM UTC-4, Andy Blackburn wrote:
> On Tuesday, June 16, 2015 at 9:41:53 AM UTC-7, jfitch wrote:
>
> > In the V6 dataport manual, it says that anything set to 71 is going to revert to 1 at the next power up.
>
> Apparently that's different for the new v7 Protocol - but I have not seen the new spec. Also apparently the protocol that needs to be used may depend on the device that's connected -- and some devices configure the protocol themselves.
>
> Wheeeee! Fun!
>
> 9B

[Andy Blackburn[_3_]]

On Tuesday, June 16, 2015 at 1:04:41 PM UTC-7, Papa3 wrote:
> Fun - Exactly!! The marked up config file supplied as an example doesn't actually relate to some of the options in the updated Configuration Tool.
>

Yeah. Between what's in the (now 1 version behind) Dataport Specification, the (partly out of date) commented FLARMCFG.TXT file, some undocumented configuration commands I got last year and the (hopefully) upcoming Configuration Manual, I hope to get a better handle on this. Obviously not all of those things are going to be 100% consistent. The interplay between PowerFLARM firmware and the various device firmware updates also makes it pretty challenging without some inside knowledge - or known good configurations - to work with.

It's a pretty sophisticated piece of technology. I'm thankful it works as well as it does.

9B