On Feb 25, 9:26*am, Dan wrote:
On Feb 25, 7:10*am, Andrzej Kobus wrote:









On Feb 24, 7:05*am, Andrzej Kobus wrote:

While aero-towing a Mode-C transponder equipped glider, and using
PowerFlarm and transponder in the tow plane, most of the time the
glider will show up on the PF as a threat aircraft. Since the PF
prioritizes threats, this precludes another more distant "intruder"
aircraft as being displayed as a threat.

Do you mean PF can only follow one Mode-C threat? This would be a
significant step down from what my PCAS can do. If this is true the PF
PCAS implementation is very poor. Could anyone who flew with PF
comment on this? How many transponder threats can PF follow?

Based on your statement, the same problem will occur in a gaggle of
gliders with transponders. You will have no choice but to disable the
PCAS or filter out codes 1202, but if you do that any glider without a
Flarm but with a transponder is not going to be visible to you. The
only way this problem can be solved is with Mod-S transponders. You
will then associate Mod-S code with a Flarm ID and filter out
transponder signals coming from a glider equipped with both.

Can anyone using PF comment on my question? Can you see more than one
transponder equipped aircraft at a time? *I found this in the manual:

"The nearest aircraft not equipped with ADSB-OUT or FLARM devices, but
is indicated as
a light green circle, in the example, that
target is 2400 ft below. The circle radius
gives a distance estimation based on signal
strength.
The green circle turns red when close. In the
example, the target is 200 ft above"

From the wording it looks like PF can only track one Transponder
equipped aircraft, which is pretty bad!

If you don't have any capability to track one Transponder, and now PF
gives you the capability to track the closest transponder equipped
aircraft, and tell you if he is higher/lower than you (and by how
much), and closing or opening, how can that possibly be a bad thing?

In addition, it does flarm/flarm collision warning, and eventually,
igc-format logging and logger approval (summerish according to the
PowerFLARM talk at the SSA Reno Convention). I expect that the
capability to see others' climb rates on some PDAs will make
recreational cross-country a lot less stressful too...

One man's opinion.

Dan

It is bad because my PCAS can track many transponder equipped aircraft
at the same time and give me this information for each one.

I am not talking about Flarm I am all for Flarm but the PCAS
implementation is not good if the PF can only track one transponder
equipped aircraft at a time.