WinPilot ADV & PRO 9.0b Flarm

[Richard[_1_]]

WinPilot 9.0b Flarm

FLARM: Added ability to track several other gliders in the vicinity
that also carry FLARM on board. WinPilot can now show wisually 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.



Richard
www.craggyaero.com

[[email protected]]

Hi Richard
the official Winpilot website is still winpilot.com?
Because I can't find 9.0b version...

thanks

Rocco Caruso
Aero Gazette
www.gazette.aero

[Tim Taylor]

On Feb 4, 4:30 pm, wrote:
> Hi Richard
> the official Winpilot website is still winpilot.com?
> Because I can't find 9.0b version...
>
> thanks
>
> Rocco Caruso
> Aero Gazettewww.gazette.aero

http://winpilot.com/Beta.asp

[Gary Emerson]

Richard wrote:
> WinPilot 9.0b Flarm
>
> FLARM: Added ability to track several other gliders in the vicinity
> that also carry FLARM on board. WinPilot can now show wisually 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.
>
>
>
> Richard
> www.craggyaero.com
>
>

Don't the rules prohibit any thermal detection system that has a range
beyond the wingtip of the glider?? Seems like any system that provides
location and climb rate is violating the INTENT of the rule.

I completely agree that proximity detection is a benefit to safety, but
I'll bet that unless the software programmers elect to limit the data
that could be used to a competitive advantage on their own that we'll
ultimately see new rules come into play that will force that requirement.

[Paul Remde]

Hi,

I think we will see a lot of software and hardware in the near future that
will allow us to see the climb rates of gliders in our area. The rules
committee will have to figure out how to deal with that. I don't see how
they can tell a pilot not to use their favorite soaring software or their
FLARM (or similar device).

Telling them not to use their FLARM would be like asking for a lawsuit
should they get into an accident. I don't think any contest manager would
ever do that.

Also, it could be argued that seeing climb rates of nearby gliders is a
safety enhancement because it can help you avoid a landout - given than
landout is less safe then landing at an airport.

It will be very interesting to see how this develops.

Check out the image on my SeeYou page of the new FLARM radar. I think it is
really cool! But I'm a techno-nerd...
http://www.cumulus-soaring.com/seeyou.htm

Certainly this is not much of an issue in the USA at this time because very
few gliders are using FLARM here. But in a year or 2 we may have low cost
ADS-B units that will offer the same functionality in SeeYou and other
software.

Like all new technologies I'm sure that some pilots will embrace it and
others will not want themselves or others to use it. But I'm pretty certain
that it is going to happen. I think it will increase the level of safety and
fun.

Good Soaring,

Paul Remde

"Gary Emerson" > wrote in message
...
> Richard wrote:
>> WinPilot 9.0b Flarm
>>
>> FLARM: Added ability to track several other gliders in the vicinity
>> that also carry FLARM on board. WinPilot can now show wisually 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.
>>
>>
>>
>> Richard
>> www.craggyaero.com
>>
>>
>
> Don't the rules prohibit any thermal detection system that has a range
> beyond the wingtip of the glider?? Seems like any system that provides
> location and climb rate is violating the INTENT of the rule.
>
> I completely agree that proximity detection is a benefit to safety, but
> I'll bet that unless the software programmers elect to limit the data that
> could be used to a competitive advantage on their own that we'll
> ultimately see new rules come into play that will force that requirement.

[Bill Daniels]

Paul makes sense.

Contest rules are about maintaining a level playing field and managing
safety not judging the merits of new technology. It may make sense to go
slow with rule changes until it's available to everyone and the relative
benefits and liabilities are better known - but that probably won't take too
long.

I agree, it will be interesting to watch how it develops.

Bill D


"Paul Remde" > wrote in message
news:2J_pj.16823$9j6.1063@attbi_s22...
> Hi,
>
> I think we will see a lot of software and hardware in the near future that
> will allow us to see the climb rates of gliders in our area. The rules
> committee will have to figure out how to deal with that. I don't see how
> they can tell a pilot not to use their favorite soaring software or their
> FLARM (or similar device).
>
> Telling them not to use their FLARM would be like asking for a lawsuit
> should they get into an accident. I don't think any contest manager would
> ever do that.
>
> Also, it could be argued that seeing climb rates of nearby gliders is a
> safety enhancement because it can help you avoid a landout - given than
> landout is less safe then landing at an airport.
>
> It will be very interesting to see how this develops.
>
> Check out the image on my SeeYou page of the new FLARM radar. I think it
> is really cool! But I'm a techno-nerd...
> http://www.cumulus-soaring.com/seeyou.htm
>
> Certainly this is not much of an issue in the USA at this time because
> very few gliders are using FLARM here. But in a year or 2 we may have low
> cost ADS-B units that will offer the same functionality in SeeYou and
> other software.
>
> Like all new technologies I'm sure that some pilots will embrace it and
> others will not want themselves or others to use it. But I'm pretty
> certain that it is going to happen. I think it will increase the level of
> safety and fun.
>
> Good Soaring,
>
> Paul Remde
>
> "Gary Emerson" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Richard wrote:
>>> WinPilot 9.0b Flarm
>>>
>>> FLARM: Added ability to track several other gliders in the vicinity
>>> that also carry FLARM on board. WinPilot can now show wisually 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.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Richard
>>> www.craggyaero.com
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Don't the rules prohibit any thermal detection system that has a range
>> beyond the wingtip of the glider?? Seems like any system that provides
>> location and climb rate is violating the INTENT of the rule.
>>
>> I completely agree that proximity detection is a benefit to safety, but
>> I'll bet that unless the software programmers elect to limit the data
>> that could be used to a competitive advantage on their own that we'll
>> ultimately see new rules come into play that will force that requirement.
>
>

[Edward Lockhart[_2_]]

Paul,

I'd be very interested to hear more about these ADS-B
units.
Do you have some solid facts and how much are you allowed
to tell us?

cheers,
Edward

At 14:54 05 February 2008, Paul Remde wrote:
>Hi,
>
>I think we will see a lot of software and hardware
>in the near future that
>will allow us to see the climb rates of gliders in
>our area. The rules
>committee will have to figure out how to deal with
>that. I don't see how
>they can tell a pilot not to use their favorite soaring
>software or their
>FLARM (or similar device).
>
>Telling them not to use their FLARM would be like asking
>for a lawsuit
>should they get into an accident. I don't think any
>contest manager would
>ever do that.
>
>Also, it could be argued that seeing climb rates of
>nearby gliders is a
>safety enhancement because it can help you avoid a
>landout - given than
>landout is less safe then landing at an airport.
>
>It will be very interesting to see how this develops.
>
>Check out the image on my SeeYou page of the new FLARM
>radar. I think it is
>really cool! But I'm a techno-nerd...
>http://www.cumulus-soaring.com/seeyou.htm
>
>Certainly this is not much of an issue in the USA at
>this time because very
>few gliders are using FLARM here. But in a year or
>2 we may have low cost
>ADS-B units that will offer the same functionality
>in SeeYou and other
>software.
>
>Like all new technologies I'm sure that some pilots
>will embrace it and
>others will not want themselves or others to use it.
> But I'm pretty certain
>that it is going to happen. I think it will increase
>the level of safety and
>fun.
>
>Good Soaring,
>
>Paul Remde
>
>'Gary Emerson' wrote in message
...
>> Richard wrote:
>>> WinPilot 9.0b Flarm
>>>
>>> FLARM: Added ability to track several other gliders
>>>in the vicinity
>>> that also carry FLARM on board. WinPilot can now show
>>>wisually 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.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Richard
>>> www.craggyaero.com
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Don't the rules prohibit any thermal detection system
>>that has a range
>> beyond the wingtip of the glider?? Seems like any
>>system that provides
>> location and climb rate is violating the INTENT of
>>the rule.
>>
>> I completely agree that proximity detection is a benefit
>>to safety, but
>> I'll bet that unless the software programmers elect
>>to limit the data that
>> could be used to a competitive advantage on their
>>own that we'll
>> ultimately see new rules come into play that will
>>force that requirement.
>
>
>

[Paul Remde]

Hi Edward,

Good question. Some people think it makes sense to bring FLARM to the USA.
It is a great product and more than 9000 are in use around the world.
However, many feel that FLARM will never gain acceptance in the USA because
ADS-B devices may be available soon which would make the FLARM devices
obsolete - at least in the USA.

There are currently no products available for us that use ADS-B receivers
and transmitters - unless you count the large and heavy $9000 unit from
Garmin. Some feel they will never exist in small, low cost packages.
However, an organization called Mitre (U.S. government funded I think)
created a small device that is an ADS-B transmitter for very low cost. They
don't plan to build the units, they plan to hand off or license the design
to manufacturers. I think the unit was designed for use in remotely piloted
and autonomous aircraft flying in US airspace. Someone from Mitre will be
giving an overview at the meeting at the SSA Convention (see below for
details).

However, there are many hurdles. The Mitre box is a transmitter only - not
a receiver - at least at this time. We need a unit that both transmits and
receives. I think FLARM's approach with a very simple user interface is
fantastic and I am encouraging manufacturers to built units like the FLARM
but using ADS-B. (Technically speaking FLARM is an ADS-B device, but it
doesn't match USA ADS-B design.) FLARM may even built an ADS-B version - I
really don't know. One reason for the meeting at the SSA Convention is to
bring together people from Mitre and companies that may be interested in
building units in the short term. Urs Rothacher from FLARM will be at the
meeting as will Jason Clemens - the creator of the Zaon MRX. Another
purpose of the meeting is to bring technology minded glider pilots up to
speed on the potential for these devices. Another purpose is to have a
crowd of glider pilots at the meeting to encourage manufacturers to build
these units.

Another potential hurdle is that the FAA may require that the units use
aviation certified GPS units and that the unit be certificated (I'm not sure
of the terminology) which would cost - a LOT. Our hope is that we can get
something FLARM like (low cost, simple, small, low power drain) out into the
hands of thousands of glider pilots and power plane pilots quickly - hoping
that the FAA will then accept them as a tremendous safety enhancer. Very
few people will buy $9000 units but many would buy $800 to $1500 units - I
think. Of course, the lower the cost the better. If we are talking about
equipping tens of thousands of general aviation planes then we may be able
to get the cost down into the range of the Zaon MRX at about $500 - which
would be even better.

My dream is that is 1 to 2 years from now many glider pilots will be
voluntarily using low cost ADS-B transmitter/receiver units. They will show
nearby traffic where you are AND they will allow you to see nearby traffic -
not only traffic that has an ADS-B transmitter. If you are near a radar
controlled airport with ADS-B transmitting you would also see all traffic
that has a transponder because they broadcast that information to ADS-B
receivers - cool! Then we can start promoting the benefits to general
aviation and ultra-light pilots through AOPA magazine and Sport Aviation
(EAA) magazine, etc. so that eventually small planes will start using the
technology voluntarily. To be honest - I sincerely hope that the FAA
mandates it in 10 years so I can see ALL traffic. I imagine I'm in the
minority on that wish. I hate mandates, but I love improved safety and it
will only work for us if everyone embraces it.

I think that is extremely exciting. Every report I've heard from FLARM and
Zaon MRX users is that there is much more traffic out there than they
realized and they like being warned about it. I want to know where other
traffic is! I want every other airplane to know where my glider is! The
icing on the cake is that I may be able to see on the moving map on my PDA
or flight computer nearby traffic and even their current climb rates. Of
course, we don't want everyone flying around with their heads down in the
cockpit - so we will need to be careful about how it is implemented. I
believe that ADS-B has greater range than FLARM so we may be able to see
gliders in thermals 10 miles ahead of us. I think that would be wonderful.

If you think this is interesting I encourage you to join us for the "FLARM /
ADS-B in the USA - A Meeting of Minds" meeting on Wednesday, February 13th
in the Albuquerque Convention Center. It would make a better impression on
future manufacturers if we get a big turnout of interested glider pilots.

Good Soaring,

Paul Remde

"Edward Lockhart" > wrote in message
...
> Paul,
>
> I'd be very interested to hear more about these ADS-B
> units.
> Do you have some solid facts and how much are you allowed
> to tell us?
>
> cheers,
> Edward
>
> At 14:54 05 February 2008, Paul Remde wrote:
>>Hi,
>>
>>I think we will see a lot of software and hardware
>>in the near future that
>>will allow us to see the climb rates of gliders in
>>our area. The rules
>>committee will have to figure out how to deal with
>>that. I don't see how
>>they can tell a pilot not to use their favorite soaring
>>software or their
>>FLARM (or similar device).
>>
>>Telling them not to use their FLARM would be like asking
>>for a lawsuit
>>should they get into an accident. I don't think any
>>contest manager would
>>ever do that.
>>
>>Also, it could be argued that seeing climb rates of
>>nearby gliders is a
>>safety enhancement because it can help you avoid a
>>landout - given than
>>landout is less safe then landing at an airport.
>>
>>It will be very interesting to see how this develops.
>>
>>Check out the image on my SeeYou page of the new FLARM
>>radar. I think it is
>>really cool! But I'm a techno-nerd...
>>http://www.cumulus-soaring.com/seeyou.htm
>>
>>Certainly this is not much of an issue in the USA at
>>this time because very
>>few gliders are using FLARM here. But in a year or
>>2 we may have low cost
>>ADS-B units that will offer the same functionality
>>in SeeYou and other
>>software.
>>
>>Like all new technologies I'm sure that some pilots
>>will embrace it and
>>others will not want themselves or others to use it.
>> But I'm pretty certain
>>that it is going to happen. I think it will increase
>>the level of safety and
>>fun.
>>
>>Good Soaring,
>>
>>Paul Remde
>>
>>'Gary Emerson' wrote in message
...
>>> Richard wrote:
>>>> WinPilot 9.0b Flarm
>>>>
>>>> FLARM: Added ability to track several other gliders
>>>>in the vicinity
>>>> that also carry FLARM on board. WinPilot can now show
>>>>wisually 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.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Richard
>>>> www.craggyaero.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Don't the rules prohibit any thermal detection system
>>>that has a range
>>> beyond the wingtip of the glider?? Seems like any
>>>system that provides
>>> location and climb rate is violating the INTENT of
>>>the rule.
>>>
>>> I completely agree that proximity detection is a benefit
>>>to safety, but
>>> I'll bet that unless the software programmers elect
>>>to limit the data that
>>> could be used to a competitive advantage on their
>>>own that we'll
>>> ultimately see new rules come into play that will
>>>force that requirement.
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>

[Paul Remde]

I just realized that my reply had a subject that didn't match the message so
I'm re-posting with a more appropriate subject.
Paul Remde

"Paul Remde" > wrote in message
news:C12qj.17036$9j6.2310@attbi_s22...
> Hi Edward,
>
> Good question. Some people think it makes sense to bring FLARM to the
> USA. It is a great product and more than 9000 are in use around the world.
> However, many feel that FLARM will never gain acceptance in the USA
> because ADS-B devices may be available soon which would make the FLARM
> devices obsolete - at least in the USA.
>
> There are currently no products available for us that use ADS-B receivers
> and transmitters - unless you count the large and heavy $9000 unit from
> Garmin. Some feel they will never exist in small, low cost packages.
> However, an organization called Mitre (U.S. government funded I think)
> created a small device that is an ADS-B transmitter for very low cost.
> They don't plan to build the units, they plan to hand off or license the
> design to manufacturers. I think the unit was designed for use in
> remotely piloted and autonomous aircraft flying in US airspace. Someone
> from Mitre will be giving an overview at the meeting at the SSA Convention
> (see below for details).
>
> However, there are many hurdles. The Mitre box is a transmitter only -
> not a receiver - at least at this time. We need a unit that both
> transmits and receives. I think FLARM's approach with a very simple user
> interface is fantastic and I am encouraging manufacturers to built units
> like the FLARM but using ADS-B. (Technically speaking FLARM is an ADS-B
> device, but it doesn't match USA ADS-B design.) FLARM may even built an
> ADS-B version - I really don't know. One reason for the meeting at the
> SSA Convention is to bring together people from Mitre and companies that
> may be interested in building units in the short term. Urs Rothacher from
> FLARM will be at the meeting as will Jason Clemens - the creator of the
> Zaon MRX. Another purpose of the meeting is to bring technology minded
> glider pilots up to speed on the potential for these devices. Another
> purpose is to have a crowd of glider pilots at the meeting to encourage
> manufacturers to build these units.
>
> Another potential hurdle is that the FAA may require that the units use
> aviation certified GPS units and that the unit be certificated (I'm not
> sure of the terminology) which would cost - a LOT. Our hope is that we
> can get something FLARM like (low cost, simple, small, low power drain)
> out into the hands of thousands of glider pilots and power plane pilots
> quickly - hoping that the FAA will then accept them as a tremendous safety
> enhancer. Very few people will buy $9000 units but many would buy $800 to
> $1500 units - I think. Of course, the lower the cost the better. If we
> are talking about equipping tens of thousands of general aviation planes
> then we may be able to get the cost down into the range of the Zaon MRX at
> about $500 - which would be even better.
>
> My dream is that is 1 to 2 years from now many glider pilots will be
> voluntarily using low cost ADS-B transmitter/receiver units. They will
> show nearby traffic where you are AND they will allow you to see nearby
> traffic - not only traffic that has an ADS-B transmitter. If you are near
> a radar controlled airport with ADS-B transmitting you would also see all
> traffic that has a transponder because they broadcast that information to
> ADS-B receivers - cool! Then we can start promoting the benefits to
> general aviation and ultra-light pilots through AOPA magazine and Sport
> Aviation (EAA) magazine, etc. so that eventually small planes will start
> using the technology voluntarily. To be honest - I sincerely hope that the
> FAA mandates it in 10 years so I can see ALL traffic. I imagine I'm in
> the minority on that wish. I hate mandates, but I love improved safety
> and it will only work for us if everyone embraces it.
>
> I think that is extremely exciting. Every report I've heard from FLARM
> and Zaon MRX users is that there is much more traffic out there than they
> realized and they like being warned about it. I want to know where other
> traffic is! I want every other airplane to know where my glider is! The
> icing on the cake is that I may be able to see on the moving map on my PDA
> or flight computer nearby traffic and even their current climb rates. Of
> course, we don't want everyone flying around with their heads down in the
> cockpit - so we will need to be careful about how it is implemented. I
> believe that ADS-B has greater range than FLARM so we may be able to see
> gliders in thermals 10 miles ahead of us. I think that would be
> wonderful.
>
> If you think this is interesting I encourage you to join us for the "FLARM
> / ADS-B in the USA - A Meeting of Minds" meeting on Wednesday, February
> 13th in the Albuquerque Convention Center. It would make a better
> impression on future manufacturers if we get a big turnout of interested
> glider pilots.
>
> Good Soaring,
>
> Paul Remde
>
> "Edward Lockhart" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Paul,
>>
>> I'd be very interested to hear more about these ADS-B
>> units.
>> Do you have some solid facts and how much are you allowed
>> to tell us?
>>
>> cheers,
>> Edward
>>
>> At 14:54 05 February 2008, Paul Remde wrote:
>>>Hi,
>>>
>>>I think we will see a lot of software and hardware
>>>in the near future that
>>>will allow us to see the climb rates of gliders in
>>>our area. The rules
>>>committee will have to figure out how to deal with
>>>that. I don't see how
>>>they can tell a pilot not to use their favorite soaring
>>>software or their
>>>FLARM (or similar device).
>>>
>>>Telling them not to use their FLARM would be like asking
>>>for a lawsuit
>>>should they get into an accident. I don't think any
>>>contest manager would
>>>ever do that.
>>>
>>>Also, it could be argued that seeing climb rates of
>>>nearby gliders is a
>>>safety enhancement because it can help you avoid a
>>>landout - given than
>>>landout is less safe then landing at an airport.
>>>
>>>It will be very interesting to see how this develops.
>>>
>>>Check out the image on my SeeYou page of the new FLARM
>>>radar. I think it is
>>>really cool! But I'm a techno-nerd...
>>>http://www.cumulus-soaring.com/seeyou.htm
>>>
>>>Certainly this is not much of an issue in the USA at
>>>this time because very
>>>few gliders are using FLARM here. But in a year or
>>>2 we may have low cost
>>>ADS-B units that will offer the same functionality
>>>in SeeYou and other
>>>software.
>>>
>>>Like all new technologies I'm sure that some pilots
>>>will embrace it and
>>>others will not want themselves or others to use it.
>>> But I'm pretty certain
>>>that it is going to happen. I think it will increase
>>>the level of safety and
>>>fun.
>>>
>>>Good Soaring,
>>>
>>>Paul Remde
>>>
>>>'Gary Emerson' wrote in message
...
>>>> Richard wrote:
>>>>> WinPilot 9.0b Flarm
>>>>>
>>>>> FLARM: Added ability to track several other gliders
>>>>>in the vicinity
>>>>> that also carry FLARM on board. WinPilot can now show
>>>>>wisually 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.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Richard
>>>>> www.craggyaero.com
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Don't the rules prohibit any thermal detection system
>>>>that has a range
>>>> beyond the wingtip of the glider?? Seems like any
>>>>system that provides
>>>> location and climb rate is violating the INTENT of
>>>>the rule.
>>>>
>>>> I completely agree that proximity detection is a benefit
>>>>to safety, but
>>>> I'll bet that unless the software programmers elect
>>>>to limit the data that
>>>> could be used to a competitive advantage on their
>>>>own that we'll
>>>> ultimately see new rules come into play that will
>>>>force that requirement.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>

[Marc Ramsey]

Paul Remde wrote:
> My dream is that is 1 to 2 years from now many glider pilots will be
> voluntarily using low cost ADS-B transmitter/receiver units. They will show
> nearby traffic where you are AND they will allow you to see nearby traffic -
> not only traffic that has an ADS-B transmitter. If you are near a radar
> controlled airport with ADS-B transmitting you would also see all traffic
> that has a transponder because they broadcast that information to ADS-B
> receivers - cool!

The situation is a bit more complicated than the dream, unfortunately.
Two aircraft equipped with ADS-B transceivers of the same type (UAT or
1090ES) will detect each other when within proximity, right now,
anywhere in the US. The ability to obtain traffic advisories for
aircraft equipped with the other form of ADS-B, or using Mode C or S
transponders, is dependent on the existence of a network of ground
stations. These ground stations are already in place along the coast
from New York down to Florida, in Alaska, and a few other random places.
The contracts to complete the system were just awarded last fall, it
will be 10+ years before all of the ground stations are in place.

So, for the next few years, an ADS-B transceiver will be nothing more
than an expensive underutilized FLARM-like device in most areas of the
US. That said, if we don't start pushing for what we want, right now,
we probably won't be happy with what we can get when the network is
complete in 2020 or so...

Marc

[Paul Remde]

Hi Marc,

The maps I've seen of the rollout of the ADS-B ground stations will be much
sooner than you imply.

And even without the ground stations a batch of gliders with ADS-B units
would see and avoid (hopefully) each other - similar to FLARM.

But I'm sure (sincerely) that you know more about this than I do. I hope
you'll join us for the meeting.

Paul Remde

"Marc Ramsey" > wrote in message
...
> Paul Remde wrote:
>> My dream is that is 1 to 2 years from now many glider pilots will be
>> voluntarily using low cost ADS-B transmitter/receiver units. They will
>> show nearby traffic where you are AND they will allow you to see nearby
>> traffic - not only traffic that has an ADS-B transmitter. If you are
>> near a radar controlled airport with ADS-B transmitting you would also
>> see all traffic that has a transponder because they broadcast that
>> information to ADS-B receivers - cool!
>
> The situation is a bit more complicated than the dream, unfortunately. Two
> aircraft equipped with ADS-B transceivers of the same type (UAT or 1090ES)
> will detect each other when within proximity, right now, anywhere in the
> US. The ability to obtain traffic advisories for aircraft equipped with
> the other form of ADS-B, or using Mode C or S transponders, is dependent
> on the existence of a network of ground stations. These ground stations
> are already in place along the coast from New York down to Florida, in
> Alaska, and a few other random places. The contracts to complete the
> system were just awarded last fall, it will be 10+ years before all of the
> ground stations are in place.
>
> So, for the next few years, an ADS-B transceiver will be nothing more than
> an expensive underutilized FLARM-like device in most areas of the US.
> That said, if we don't start pushing for what we want, right now, we
> probably won't be happy with what we can get when the network is complete
> in 2020 or so...
>
> Marc

[Bill Daniels]

2 years or 10 years means it's probably not a great idea to buy a Mode S
transponder. ADS-B is a great technology and the sooner it's available, the
better.

Bill D


"Paul Remde" > wrote in message
news:bZ3qj.17165$9j6.13971@attbi_s22...
> Hi Marc,
>
> The maps I've seen of the rollout of the ADS-B ground stations will be
> much sooner than you imply.
>
> And even without the ground stations a batch of gliders with ADS-B units
> would see and avoid (hopefully) each other - similar to FLARM.
>
> But I'm sure (sincerely) that you know more about this than I do. I hope
> you'll join us for the meeting.
>
> Paul Remde
>
> "Marc Ramsey" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Paul Remde wrote:
>>> My dream is that is 1 to 2 years from now many glider pilots will be
>>> voluntarily using low cost ADS-B transmitter/receiver units. They will
>>> show nearby traffic where you are AND they will allow you to see nearby
>>> traffic - not only traffic that has an ADS-B transmitter. If you are
>>> near a radar controlled airport with ADS-B transmitting you would also
>>> see all traffic that has a transponder because they broadcast that
>>> information to ADS-B receivers - cool!
>>
>> The situation is a bit more complicated than the dream, unfortunately.
>> Two aircraft equipped with ADS-B transceivers of the same type (UAT or
>> 1090ES) will detect each other when within proximity, right now, anywhere
>> in the US. The ability to obtain traffic advisories for aircraft
>> equipped with the other form of ADS-B, or using Mode C or S transponders,
>> is dependent on the existence of a network of ground stations. These
>> ground stations are already in place along the coast from New York down
>> to Florida, in Alaska, and a few other random places. The contracts to
>> complete the system were just awarded last fall, it will be 10+ years
>> before all of the ground stations are in place.
>>
>> So, for the next few years, an ADS-B transceiver will be nothing more
>> than an expensive underutilized FLARM-like device in most areas of the
>> US. That said, if we don't start pushing for what we want, right now, we
>> probably won't be happy with what we can get when the network is complete
>> in 2020 or so...
>>
>> Marc
>
>

[Gary Emerson]

I didn't suggest that they couldn't use FLARM as a collision avoidance
aid, but if I had to take a guess, rules could come into play that might
prohibit the use of software that provides certain data that is derived
from FLARM or other products.

There is no doubt that FLARM is a great safety product, it's the extra
data that comes into play that is an issue with competitive advantage.
Specifically, precise location and climb rate.

One might even see pilots electing to NOT use FLARM simply because they
don't want other people leaching off them.



Paul Remde wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I think we will see a lot of software and hardware in the near future that
> will allow us to see the climb rates of gliders in our area. The rules
> committee will have to figure out how to deal with that. I don't see how
> they can tell a pilot not to use their favorite soaring software or their
> FLARM (or similar device).
>
> Telling them not to use their FLARM would be like asking for a lawsuit
> should they get into an accident. I don't think any contest manager would
> ever do that.
>
> Also, it could be argued that seeing climb rates of nearby gliders is a
> safety enhancement because it can help you avoid a landout - given than
> landout is less safe then landing at an airport.
>
> It will be very interesting to see how this develops.
>
> Check out the image on my SeeYou page of the new FLARM radar. I think it is
> really cool! But I'm a techno-nerd...
> http://www.cumulus-soaring.com/seeyou.htm
>
> Certainly this is not much of an issue in the USA at this time because very
> few gliders are using FLARM here. But in a year or 2 we may have low cost
> ADS-B units that will offer the same functionality in SeeYou and other
> software.
>
> Like all new technologies I'm sure that some pilots will embrace it and
> others will not want themselves or others to use it. But I'm pretty certain
> that it is going to happen. I think it will increase the level of safety and
> fun.
>
> Good Soaring,
>
> Paul Remde
>
> "Gary Emerson" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Richard wrote:
>>> WinPilot 9.0b Flarm
>>>
>>> FLARM: Added ability to track several other gliders in the vicinity
>>> that also carry FLARM on board. WinPilot can now show wisually 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.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Richard
>>> www.craggyaero.com
>>>
>>>
>> Don't the rules prohibit any thermal detection system that has a range
>> beyond the wingtip of the glider?? Seems like any system that provides
>> location and climb rate is violating the INTENT of the rule.
>>
>> I completely agree that proximity detection is a benefit to safety, but
>> I'll bet that unless the software programmers elect to limit the data that
>> could be used to a competitive advantage on their own that we'll
>> ultimately see new rules come into play that will force that requirement.
>
>

[Henryk Birecki]

Gary Emerson > wrote:

>I didn't suggest that they couldn't use FLARM as a collision avoidance
>aid, but if I had to take a guess, rules could come into play that might
>prohibit the use of software that provides certain data that is derived
>from FLARM or other products.
>
>There is no doubt that FLARM is a great safety product, it's the extra
>data that comes into play that is an issue with competitive advantage.
>Specifically, precise location and climb rate.
>
>One might even see pilots electing to NOT use FLARM simply because they
>don't want other people leaching off them.
>

As far as I understand this some information can be turned off in
FLARM by appropriate privacy setting. In addidtion on can set FLARM so
that it randomly switches glider ID, so that "flight following" is not
that easy.

Some food for thought: GPS_LOG deals with leaching by recording in the
IGC file whether or not FLARM climb rate display is enabled. These
records are secured by file signature. Of course to use something like
that, IGC would have to give up on the loggers and go to PDA
implementation. No I do not want to start this discussion :).

Cheers,
Henryk Birecki


>
>Paul Remde wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I think we will see a lot of software and hardware in the near future that
>> will allow us to see the climb rates of gliders in our area. The rules
>> committee will have to figure out how to deal with that. I don't see how
>> they can tell a pilot not to use their favorite soaring software or their
>> FLARM (or similar device).
>>
>> Telling them not to use their FLARM would be like asking for a lawsuit
>> should they get into an accident. I don't think any contest manager would
>> ever do that.
>>
>> Also, it could be argued that seeing climb rates of nearby gliders is a
>> safety enhancement because it can help you avoid a landout - given than
>> landout is less safe then landing at an airport.
>>
>> It will be very interesting to see how this develops.
>>
>> Check out the image on my SeeYou page of the new FLARM radar. I think it is
>> really cool! But I'm a techno-nerd...
>> http://www.cumulus-soaring.com/seeyou.htm
>>
>> Certainly this is not much of an issue in the USA at this time because very
>> few gliders are using FLARM here. But in a year or 2 we may have low cost
>> ADS-B units that will offer the same functionality in SeeYou and other
>> software.
>>
>> Like all new technologies I'm sure that some pilots will embrace it and
>> others will not want themselves or others to use it. But I'm pretty certain
>> that it is going to happen. I think it will increase the level of safety and
>> fun.
>>
>> Good Soaring,
>>
>> Paul Remde
>>
>> "Gary Emerson" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> Richard wrote:
>>>> WinPilot 9.0b Flarm
>>>>
>>>> FLARM: Added ability to track several other gliders in the vicinity
>>>> that also carry FLARM on board. WinPilot can now show wisually 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.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Richard
>>>> www.craggyaero.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Don't the rules prohibit any thermal detection system that has a range
>>> beyond the wingtip of the glider?? Seems like any system that provides
>>> location and climb rate is violating the INTENT of the rule.
>>>
>>> I completely agree that proximity detection is a benefit to safety, but
>>> I'll bet that unless the software programmers elect to limit the data that
>>> could be used to a competitive advantage on their own that we'll
>>> ultimately see new rules come into play that will force that requirement.
>>
>>

[John Galloway[_1_]]

European pilots and Flarm are very aware of the issues
regarding use of Flarm data in contests. Version 4
mandatory update software will be released at the end
of February and I guess it will include updates to
the privacy functionality.

John Galloway


At 09:06 06 February 2008, Henryk Birecki wrote:
>Gary Emerson wrote:
>
>>I didn't suggest that they couldn't use FLARM as a
>>collision avoidance
>>aid, but if I had to take a guess, rules could come
>>into play that might
>>prohibit the use of software that provides certain
>>data that is derived
>>from FLARM or other products.
>>
>>There is no doubt that FLARM is a great safety product,
>>it's the extra
>>data that comes into play that is an issue with competitive
>>advantage.
>>Specifically, precise location and climb rate.
>>
>>One might even see pilots electing to NOT use FLARM
>>simply because they
>>don't want other people leaching off them.
>>
>
>As far as I understand this some information can be
>turned off in
>FLARM by appropriate privacy setting. In addidtion
>on can set FLARM so
>that it randomly switches glider ID, so that 'flight
>following' is not
>that easy.
>
>Some food for thought: GPS_LOG deals with leaching
>by recording in the
>IGC file whether or not FLARM climb rate display is
>enabled. These
>records are secured by file signature. Of course to
>use something like
>that, IGC would have to give up on the loggers and
>go to PDA
>implementation. No I do not want to start this discussion
>:).
>
>Cheers,
>Henryk Birecki
>
>
>>
>>Paul Remde wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I think we will see a lot of software and hardware
>>>in the near future that
>>> will allow us to see the climb rates of gliders in
>>>our area. The rules
>>> committee will have to figure out how to deal with
>>>that. I don't see how
>>> they can tell a pilot not to use their favorite soaring
>>>software or their
>>> FLARM (or similar device).
>>>
>>> Telling them not to use their FLARM would be like
>>>asking for a lawsuit
>>> should they get into an accident. I don't think any
>>>contest manager would
>>> ever do that.
>>>
>>> Also, it could be argued that seeing climb rates of
>>>nearby gliders is a
>>> safety enhancement because it can help you avoid a
>>>landout - given than
>>> landout is less safe then landing at an airport.
>>>
>>> It will be very interesting to see how this develops.
>>>
>>> Check out the image on my SeeYou page of the new FLARM
>>>radar. I think it is
>>> really cool! But I'm a techno-nerd...
>>> http://www.cumulus-soaring.com/seeyou.htm
>>>
>>> Certainly this is not much of an issue in the USA
>>>at this time because very
>>> few gliders are using FLARM here. But in a year or
>>>2 we may have low cost
>>> ADS-B units that will offer the same functionality
>>>in SeeYou and other
>>> software.
>>>
>>> Like all new technologies I'm sure that some pilots
>>>will embrace it and
>>> others will not want themselves or others to use it.
>>> But I'm pretty certain
>>> that it is going to happen. I think it will increase
>>>the level of safety and
>>> fun.
>>>
>>> Good Soaring,
>>>
>>> Paul Remde
>>>
>>> 'Gary Emerson' wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> Richard wrote:
>>>>> WinPilot 9.0b Flarm
>>>>>
>>>>> FLARM: Added ability to track several other gliders
>>>>>in the vicinity
>>>>> that also carry FLARM on board. WinPilot can now show
>>>>>wisually 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.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Richard
>>>>> www.craggyaero.com
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Don't the rules prohibit any thermal detection system
>>>>that has a range
>>>> beyond the wingtip of the glider?? Seems like any
>>>>system that provides
>>>> location and climb rate is violating the INTENT of
>>>>the rule.
>>>>
>>>> I completely agree that proximity detection is a benefit
>>>>to safety, but
>>>> I'll bet that unless the software programmers elect
>>>>to limit the data that
>>>> could be used to a competitive advantage on their
>>>>own that we'll
>>>> ultimately see new rules come into play that will
>>>>force that requirement.
>>>
>>>
>
>

[Frank[_1_]]

Richard,

Nice to have the new functionality, but have any of the outstanding
bugs in 8 and earlier versions been fixed, like the ones we have been
discussing here for some time?

Frank(TA)


On Feb 4, 3:27*pm, Richard > wrote:
> WinPilot 9.0b *Flarm
>
> FLARM: Added ability to track several other gliders in the vicinity
> that also carry FLARM on board. WinPilot can now show wisually 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.
>
> Richardwww.craggyaero.com