IGC to replace FLARM ? ?

The budget of 20.000€ for design, development and procurement of
IGC owned glider tracking system for use in WGC’s. Standards for the
system are still to be determined but will focus on safety, fairness and
transparency

Not allow organizers of the championships to mandate a particular
FLARM mode, in order to restore the basic proximity warning function
of the device. Intention is to develop own fully secured tracking
function with a possibility of time delay.

The Stewards group to involve software experts and analysts in
discussions on possible use of the safety proximity tool at the future
IGC championships.

https://www.fai.org/sites/default/fi...c_bureau_2018-
2_decisions_final.pdf
..

GOOGLE
Decisions from IGC Bureau Meeting
Paris, 6 and 7 October 2018

"Intention is to develop own fully secured tracking function with a
possibility of time delay."

It will be tricky to have open access to the hardware and software and also controlled, secure access to the tactical information.

I could see an open source/open hardware system with a mechanical seal protecting some internal private keys and the decryption engine that uses them.

Everybody would broadcast position protected by a public/private key pair. CD puts the private key required to decrypt along with an approved software load into a standard, sealable receiver engine.

It would be nice to allow the contestant to play with everything, but I think secure will require at least some small part of the receive engine to be sealed.

On Sunday, November 11, 2018 at 10:25:00 AM UTC-5, wrote:
"Intention is to develop own fully secured tracking function with a
possibility of time delay."

It will be tricky to have open access to the hardware and software and also controlled, secure access to the tactical information.

I could see an open source/open hardware system with a mechanical seal protecting some internal private keys and the decryption engine that uses them.

Everybody would broadcast position protected by a public/private key pair.. CD puts the private key required to decrypt along with an approved software load into a standard, sealable receiver engine.

It would be nice to allow the contestant to play with everything, but I think secure will require at least some small part of the receive engine to be sealed.

My informed source says the time delay (10 minutes or so) would be used instead of encryption. The time delay can be built into the transmitter. Thus nothing in any receiver could foil it. There would not be an incentive for the pilot to change anything in their transmitter, unless they want to be leached on. I wonder though whether that would create an incentive to start 10 minutes after the best pilots?

Isn't Europe, like the US, on track to require ADSB-out soon? You'll know instantly where everyone is within 100 miles, flarm or no flarm. Putting the knowing where people are genie back in the bottle seems like a hard task.

John Cochrane

Why put in place a delayed tracking solution besides instant OGN tracking? This is pointless. FLARM is mandatory in contests. Anyone who is interested may use existing FLARM-based OGN tracking infrastructure and circumvent whatever time delay is implemented in separate transmitters.

At 18:35 13 November 2018, wrote:
On Sunday, November 11, 2018 at 10:25:00 AM UTC-5,
wrote:
"Intention is to develop own fully secured tracking function
with a
possibility of time delay."
=20
It will be tricky to have open access to the hardware and
software and
al=
so controlled, secure access to the tactical information.
=20
I could see an open source/open hardware system with a
mechanical seal
pr=
otecting some internal private keys and the decryption engine
that uses
the=
m.
=20
Everybody would broadcast position protected by a
public/private key
pair=
.. CD puts the private key required to decrypt along with an
approved
softw=
are load into a standard, sealable receiver engine.
=20
It would be nice to allow the contestant to play with
everything, but I
t=
hink secure will require at least some small part of the receive
engine to
=
be sealed.

My informed source says the time delay (10 minutes or so)
would be used
ins=
tead of encryption. The time delay can be built into the
transmitter.
Thu=
s nothing in any receiver could foil it. There would not be an
incentive
f=
or the pilot to change anything in their transmitter, unless they
want to
b=
e leached on. I wonder though whether that would create an
incentive to
st=
art 10 minutes after the best pilots?


10 minute delay ? I thought the idea of FLARM was for safety,
perhaps they are they expecting messages such as:
“there was a glider 2 miles out on a collision course 10 minutes
ago, the fact that you are reading this message suggests that you
saw and avoided it without my help ! Have a nice day�
Sounds rather like something the late Douglas Adams would come
up with.

On Tuesday, November 13, 2018 at 2:00:06 PM UTC-8, Benedict Smith wrote:
At 18:35 13 November 2018, wrote:
On Sunday, November 11, 2018 at 10:25:00 AM UTC-5,
wrote:
"Intention is to develop own fully secured tracking function
with a
possibility of time delay."
=20
It will be tricky to have open access to the hardware and
software and
al=
so controlled, secure access to the tactical information.
=20
I could see an open source/open hardware system with a
mechanical seal
pr=
otecting some internal private keys and the decryption engine
that uses
the=
m.
=20
Everybody would broadcast position protected by a
public/private key
pair=
.. CD puts the private key required to decrypt along with an
approved
softw=
are load into a standard, sealable receiver engine.
=20
It would be nice to allow the contestant to play with
everything, but I
t=
hink secure will require at least some small part of the receive
engine to
=
be sealed.

My informed source says the time delay (10 minutes or so)
would be used
ins=
tead of encryption. The time delay can be built into the
transmitter.
Thu=
s nothing in any receiver could foil it. There would not be an
incentive
f=
or the pilot to change anything in their transmitter, unless they
want to
b=
e leached on. I wonder though whether that would create an
incentive to
st=
art 10 minutes after the best pilots?


10 minute delay ? I thought the idea of FLARM was for safety,
perhaps they are they expecting messages such as:
“there was a glider 2 miles out on a collision course 10 minutes
ago, the fact that you are reading this message suggests that you
saw and avoided it without my help ! Have a nice day�
Sounds rather like something the late Douglas Adams would come
up with.

Aren't we confusing tracking capability with collision avoidance capability?
This appears to be a move to build a new "live" tracking mechanism. Latency is an option often used for contest tracking.
Jim

On 11/13/18 11:42 AM, John Cochrane wrote:
Isn't Europe, like the US, on track to require ADSB-out soon? You'll know instantly where everyone is within 100 miles, flarm or no flarm. Putting the knowing where people are genie back in the bottle seems like a hard task.

John Cochrane


Are you aware there's no 2020 mandate for gliders in the U.S.?

On Tuesday, 13 November 2018 22:46:43 UTC+2, wrote:
Why put in place a delayed tracking solution besides instant OGN tracking? This is pointless. FLARM is mandatory in contests. Anyone who is interested may use existing FLARM-based OGN tracking infrastructure and circumvent whatever time delay is implemented in separate transmitters.

You are right. As long as there is flarm in the glider it can be tracked real time from ground, no matter what. I guess using new tracking system would mean that pilots switch off their flarms in competitions. This is a problem that has so far only bad solutions.