I think this was a very wise decision. I am pleased to hear that Flarms potential will not be artificially de-tuned for 2016.

Personally, would like to see objective, factual data on how Flarm is being utilized to gain an "unfair advantage" and to win (or finish "undeservedly" high in the standings) US contests (not world championships and major European events) before this conversation topic is brought up again. This debate about what soaring should and should not be (for some) really needs to be fully supported with objective evidence of Flarm being "unfair."

In other words, is this really a problem.

I think the spirited debate here was healthy. Clearly it had value. We know the way the players think.

If Flarm "unfairness" cannot be clearly proven, it does not make any sense to them/us to spend the tremendous effort required to determine requirements/test/implement the "safety/fairness balance" of an admittedly imperfect US Flarm safety system (which only has a 60-70% adoption at current). Especially with our sport now well past the dawn of FAA ADSB mandates.

Sean
7T