ADS-B equiped glider in USA Contests.

What will the rules committee will have to say now that we can see ADS-B equiped gliders and their data on PowerFlarm at 20 to 30 NM.

Richard

On Tuesday, January 29, 2019 at 4:43:03 PM UTC-8, Richard Pfiffner wrote:
What will the rules committee will have to say now that we can see ADS-B equiped gliders and their data on PowerFlarm at 20 to 30 NM.

Richard

Or at 50 or more miles...

14 CFR 91.225 requires an aircraft with ADS-B Out installed to operate it at all times. So...

On Tuesday, January 29, 2019 at 6:50:16 PM UTC-6, Darryl Ramm wrote:
On Tuesday, January 29, 2019 at 4:43:03 PM UTC-8, Richard Pfiffner wrote:
What will the rules committee will have to say now that we can see ADS-B equiped gliders and their data on PowerFlarm at 20 to 30 NM.

Richard

Or at 50 or more miles...

14 CFR 91.225 requires an aircraft with ADS-B Out installed to operate it at all times. So...

And does that only apply to certified gliders...

The requirements of paragraph (b) of this section do not apply to any aircraft that was not originally certificated with an electrical system, or that has not subsequently been certified with such a system installed, including balloons and gliders.

On Tuesday, January 29, 2019 at 5:43:03 PM UTC-7, Richard Pfiffner wrote:
What will the rules committee will have to say now that we can see ADS-B equiped gliders and their data on PowerFlarm at 20 to 30 NM.

Richard

The RC has been aware of the capabilities of ADS-B for as long as I can recall. If you go back and read some of the RC Meeting minutes over the past 5-6 years you will find regular discussion of ADS-B capabilities along with topics like Flarm and Flarm Stealth or Competition modes. The current posture of the RC is to be very cautious about restrictions on technology - this is particularly true about FAA mandated or regulated safety equipment.

Certainly there is lots of discussion across the global soaring community about how technology may be used tactically in competition at what that might mean for the fairness and enjoyment of glider racing. Speaking personally, I'd be very wary about attempting to restrict information available to pilots - particularly when that information overlaps with what might be relevant to safety of flight.

Lastly, I'd argue (my personal view, not a formal position of the RC), that the primary tactical usefulness of position, altitude or rate of climb information is over distance and time horizons that could be taken advantage of by a competitor. For the most part that is at distances of less than 10 miles, or around the limit of Flarm today. The existence of ADS-B, therefore, makes the idea of banning Flarm or mandating Stealth mode less likely, but in and of itself doesn't confer much in the way of new useful information.. Put another way, I probably don't care that much to know that you found a great thermal 30-50 miles from my position. It might make some marginal difference in knowing where the pack is going on a sketchy day, but I'm not sure I see that as a big deal or necessarily a bad thing if it reduces handouts. The bigger competitive issue globally is about mass gaggles and close-in leeching. That's only partially a technology problem. Start procedures and scoring formulae also figure prominently,

King Canute tried to order the tide not to rise. It didn't work out.

Andy Blackburn
9B
Chair, SSA Competition Rules Committee

(Opinions expressed here are my own)

On Wednesday, January 30, 2019 at 1:05:48 PM UTC-8, wrote:
On Tuesday, January 29, 2019 at 5:43:03 PM UTC-7, Richard Pfiffner wrote:
What will the rules committee will have to say now that we can see ADS-B equiped gliders and their data on PowerFlarm at 20 to 30 NM.

Richard

The RC has been aware of the capabilities of ADS-B for as long as I can recall. If you go back and read some of the RC Meeting minutes over the past 5-6 years you will find regular discussion of ADS-B capabilities along with topics like Flarm and Flarm Stealth or Competition modes. The current posture of the RC is to be very cautious about restrictions on technology - this is particularly true about FAA mandated or regulated safety equipment.

Certainly there is lots of discussion across the global soaring community about how technology may be used tactically in competition at what that might mean for the fairness and enjoyment of glider racing. Speaking personally, I'd be very wary about attempting to restrict information available to pilots - particularly when that information overlaps with what might be relevant to safety of flight.

Lastly, I'd argue (my personal view, not a formal position of the RC), that the primary tactical usefulness of position, altitude or rate of climb information is over distance and time horizons that could be taken advantage of by a competitor. For the most part that is at distances of less than 10 miles, or around the limit of Flarm today. The existence of ADS-B, therefore, makes the idea of banning Flarm or mandating Stealth mode less likely, but in and of itself doesn't confer much in the way of new useful information. Put another way, I probably don't care that much to know that you found a great thermal 30-50 miles from my position. It might make some marginal difference in knowing where the pack is going on a sketchy day, but I'm not sure I see that as a big deal or necessarily a bad thing if it reduces handouts. The bigger competitive issue globally is about mass gaggles and close-in leeching. That's only partially a technology problem. Start procedures and scoring formulae also figure prominently,

King Canute tried to order the tide not to rise. It didn't work out.

Andy Blackburn
9B
Chair, SSA Competition Rules Committee

(Opinions expressed here are my own)

Nice answer Andy.

Amusingly I did hear second-hand reports that seeing an ADS-B Out equipped glider at great distance via PowerFLARM 1090ES-in was annoying some pilots in contest situations. I have no clue why, maybe it was their display showing targets at the edge of the display and the range was unclear or was it frustration that the other aircraft was so far ahead, or just climbing better?

But hey if having ADS-B Out annoys other contest pilots it may be a great competition ploy :-) Folks with Trig transponder today that "annoying gizmo" only costs you a few hundred dollars (but please, if you do this, for overall safety do a TABS or 2020 Compliant install, not any old NMEA GPS driving the Trig transponder).

The reality is that the increasing number of ADSB aircrafts nowadays will literally clutter your screen and audio alerts if you don’t reduce the range to something like 5 miles and 1000 feet altitude range so you only get alerts from aircrafts in the vicinity. At least when flying near the Bay Area I found I have to limit the ADSB range, so no much of improved range over flarm.

Ramy

What Ramy says.Â* I've got the alert ranges turned down on my Flarm. Why
bother with distant traffic?Â* I haven't done that on my iPad yet in the
C-180 and the screen gets really cluttered around airports.

I have to take care of that...

On 2/2/2019 6:46 PM, Ramy wrote:
The reality is that the increasing number of ADSB aircrafts nowadays will literally clutter your screen and audio alerts if you don’t reduce the range to something like 5 miles and 1000 feet altitude range so you only get alerts from aircrafts in the vicinity. At least when flying near the Bay Area I found I have to limit the ADSB range, so no much of improved range over flarm.

Ramy

--
Dan, 5J

On Saturday, February 2, 2019 at 7:46:19 PM UTC-6, Ramy wrote:
The reality is that the increasing number of ADSB aircrafts nowadays will literally clutter your screen and audio alerts if you don’t reduce the range to something like 5 miles and 1000 feet altitude range so you only get alerts from aircrafts in the vicinity. At least when flying near the Bay Area I found I have to limit the ADSB range, so no much of improved range over flarm.

Ramy

A related question: When towing behind Keith E.'s 182 at Parowan my PFLarm sounded a new and totally annoying alarm. It turned out to be the ADS-B out signal from that towplane. While I could silence the alarm by pushing the appropriate button, it came back after a minute or so. How are we going to deal with that when in a busy thermal with 10 other ADS-B out transmitting gliders?
Herb

On Sunday, February 3, 2019 at 11:06:22 AM UTC-5, wrote:
...When towing behind Keith E.'s 182 at Parowan my PFLarm sounded a new and totally annoying alarm. It turned out to be the ADS-B out signal from that towplane. While I could silence the alarm by pushing the appropriate button, it came back after a minute or so. How are we going to deal with that when in a busy thermal with 10 other ADS-B out transmitting gliders?

Doesn't Powerflarm filter out the spurious ADS-B proximity warnings when BOTH aircraft have Powerflarm (and 1+ aircraft have ADS-B-out)?

On Sunday, February 3, 2019 at 8:41:53 AM UTC-8, son_of_flubber wrote:
On Sunday, February 3, 2019 at 11:06:22 AM UTC-5, wrote:
...When towing behind Keith E.'s 182 at Parowan my PFLarm sounded a new and totally annoying alarm. It turned out to be the ADS-B out signal from that towplane. While I could silence the alarm by pushing the appropriate button, it came back after a minute or so. How are we going to deal with that when in a busy thermal with 10 other ADS-B out transmitting gliders?

Doesn't Powerflarm filter out the spurious ADS-B proximity warnings when BOTH aircraft have Powerflarm (and 1+ aircraft have ADS-B-out)?

Yes, that would require PowerFLARM in the tow plane. ADS-B alone is quite noisy.
Jim