Email: Info from the RC Chair on FLARM, Stealth and Nephi

This is where we are as of today for 2016 FLARM-related rules that will be recommended to the SSA BOD (note that rules are proposed by the RC and approved by the SSA BOD - this year at the Greenville convention):

1. For National Contests:
* Organizers may request a waiver to require the use of FLARM, otherwise carrying a FLARM is at the pilots' option
* Regardless of whether a FLARM is mandatory or optional in a National Contest, if a FLARM is used it must be operated in Competition (i.e. the expected derivative of the current Stealth mode)

2. For Regional Contests
* Organizers may request a waiver to require the use of FLARM, otherwise carrying a FLARM is at the pilots' option
* Unless specified by the contest organizer, there are no restrictions wrt FLARM mode
..
3. Nephi National Contest
Note that the Rules Committee makes recommendations on waivers to the Contest Committee Chair (John Good). The final decision on waivers rests with the Contest Committee Chair.
* Nephi requested and was granted a waiver to require FLARM, consistent with the RC recommendation
* Nephi also requested that Stealth mode for FLARMS be left as a individual pilot selecton - this request was denied, also consistent with the RC recommendation
* Nephi has indicated that they plan to renew their request for Stealth to be a pilot option


Background:

* There is currently significant resistance to non-Stealth FLARM in contests at the international level, spearheaded by the BGA and IGC. The short (and not comprehensive) summary is that experience to date and concerns about the tactical use of FLARM data for competitive advantage are viewed as negatives by the various groups.

* The current implementation of Stealth has a number of aspects that also give rise to safety concerns, including:
* Negative safety Impact of its use wrt stakeholders not part of a contest
* Perceived limitations on threat detection / annunciation especially in high speed closure situations

* The USA has joined with the BGA et al. to work with FLARM to address these issues

* It is hoped that in time for the 2016 season, FLARM will announce, develop, test and release a derivative of Stealth mode (i.e. "Competition" mode) that will sufficiently address the above concerns in all material ways

* In late January, the Rules Committee plans to review the situation and make a final recommendation to the SSA BOD.

Why does the RC support the use of Competition ("son of Stealth") mode, mandatory at National contests?

1. First, FLARM represents a significant improvement in the ability to detect and avoid traffic conflicts. Even though mid-air collisions are not even close to the top of the list of what causes injury/death in competitive soaring that does not mean we should ignore the benefits FLARM provides. The RC is on record as strongly encouraging the voluntary adoption of FLARM..

2. The introduction into competition and use (at least availability) of electronic tactical data for competitive purposes is a major change. As with virtually all major rules changes, they are tried first at the regional level before being deployed at the national level. Coupled with similar concerns expressed by other national organizations (e.g. BGA) and the possible restriction at the WGC level restriction on use of FLARM data for tactical purposes is a conservative approach.

3. Anecdotal reports are surfacing that there is significant "heads-down" time being spent by pilots analyzing tactical data. This is seen as a negative safety influence. Additional anecdotal reports of FLARMS being disabled in flight to avoid tracking is also a negative safety influence.