PowerFLARM updates and installation notes

For a product specifically designed for gliders, the designers don't
seem to have paid much attention to the form factor of either the
brick or the antenna as relates to gliders. Maybe a shorter antenna
with less gain would be better than a long antenna with no place to
install properly. Also (Darryl may correct me on this) a dual antenna
configuration on the brick (not the dipole) will be very directional,
with most of the signal radiating fore an aft of the plane of the
antennas. So be careful how you orient them. I will eventually get
flarm, but this is just another reason to wait until the bugs are
shaken out. Incorrect polarization of the butterfly display is
another one.

Obscuring the antenna, especially its forward view with a fat head is probably not a good idea. Get those antennas up front on top of the glareshield....

Darryl

Thanks, Darryl... I'll assume that you're not calling me a fat-head

I won't disagree with the criticisms leveled by RAS56, and I have noticed with irritation while waiting for tow the two rubber duckie antenna sticking up in my field of view (even though I focus beyond them in flight) are unsightly. But after only three flights with Power FLARM I have to say it has alerted three times on traffic I had not seen, one of which could well have been a collision threat. That is to say, the glider was off to my right at my altitude and apparently decided to try my thermal. The PF got my attention and I found the threat in mere seconds and was able to turn out of the way. We'll never know if I would have seen it without the PF, of course, but I'm happy with the alert. That said, I'd still like to see the antenna put somewhere other than the to of my glareshield.

Hi All - I've added more installation info:
http://powerflarm.us/powerflarm-installation-notes/

Also, a few pilots have posted notes about their
PowerFLARM experiences (and we encourage you to
do likewise) he
http://powerflarm.us/2012/05/powerfl...and-elswehere/

Hope you find these helpful,
Best Regards, Dave "YO electric"

Hey Ras56:

My guess is that you haven't been present to hear the god-awful wailing of a woman who has just been told that her husband was killed in a mid-air. Trust me, it's worth a lot of battery drain and lousy documentation and ugly antennas to not have that experience again. Get a PowerFlarm.

On Friday, June 1, 2012 3:18:55 PM UTC-7, RAS56 wrote:
Hmmm...let's see now.

Months behind schedule.

Expensive.

Compared to what? Amortized over several years? Compered to one or more deaths in mid-air collisions? Installing ADS-B data-out? Writing off a glider in an accident? Full cost of attending one contest? Cost of a season of tows?

Very picky about installation.

Features that don't work or aren't turned on yet.

That was always expected and is a very good thing vs. waiting for some arbitrary 'feature complete' product. We need the primary flarm-flarm collision avoidance deployed as widely as possible in the USA fleet now, especially in key contests and at busy glider locations and especially to have experience with this before key events like the World contest in Texas. Having extra features like IGC logging is a nice to have, but not something ever to hold the product up for.

Documentation and manuals that may leave you with more questions than
answers.

I agree the product documentation could be better, but it you have questions ask them and hopefully they will get answered. Web site content including the stuff Dave recently put up is a big help.

Programming and continual updating required.

That is a good thing with any advanced technology product and software/firmware/(and even protocol) fixes and feature updates is something that Flarm has managed fairly well over their history, the other extreme is you have no updates or vendor support and a dead product.

Primary tech support located in another continent.

Oops except you have...

Product experts like Dave Nadler hand holding folks at contests. And Dave has experience as a early/beta tester and data-port software developer and is able to get to whoever he needs at Flarm. As experience grows folks seem to be helping each other out with install related things.

Board level repairs and mods are done in the USA.

Folks like Rex Mayes (and maybe other folks) manufacturing installation mounts/kits and supporting them in the USA.

The CEO of FLARM lives in the USA. Some work is done here (if nothing else Urs looks at issues himself), some overseas.

Given all that I don't care where a developer is located, as long as they are good and have access to the data and tools they need and are focused on the right thing.


Another battery draw.

Yes no surprise these advanced technology products run on electricity. But its another battery draw that should be easily manageable for most gliders. As with any new device, you have to look at the total power consumption. If it does turn out to be a problem then adding/upgrading batteries or adding solar panels are options.

My retired-USAF-Avionics-tech Dad's advice given to me years ago
circling in my head to "never drive, buy or fly the "A" model of
anything mechanical, electrical or both."

There are ten thousand of Flarm products flying world wide. While PowerFLARM is a significant technology step it is built on a very solid foundation. The company and their partners like Butterfly has very impressive history at developing advanced technology and shipping products.

One of the reasons PowerFLARM has been delayed is the development of the brick unit, which was in response to feedback from USA glider pilots. Again seeing that happen is a good thing, even though all of us wish they had been here sooner. Other delays have been less expected but its clear FLARM is has been busy working issues like range concerns.

And finally there is a rental program for portable units up and running in the USA (that is impressive to see), for folks not sure this seems a great way of trying out the technology. But yes getting the portable unit installed for a one off rental does take some work. Nothing comes for free.


-Insert your own concern here-

WOW! Who wouldn't want one???

I don't know, but hundreds of USA glider pilots seem to understand delivering advanced new technology products can unfortunately involve delays and hassles at times and still want to get their hands on a PowerFLARM as soon as they can.

I've got a "Brick" model (it DOES kinda make you wonder if it's
appropriately named, no?) reserved in my name...but right now I'm 90%
certain I'll forgo the promised discount, cancel my order and wait for
Version B, C, D...or whatever when all the bugs are finally worked out
and everything is turned on and operational. For the time being, I'll
start using the Zaon PCAS that I just ordered for less than 1/3 the cost
of the PF to at least keep me clear of the squawkers.

Sure wish the version used in Europe could just have been used here.
Understand that was not in the cards for the USA, still...the
hassle-factor of this device has crossed my (admittedly low) pain
threshold and I believe I'll join the late bloomers and technology
Luddites.

Unfortunately the exiting Flarm devices just were not an option due to lack of FCC certification.

Darryl

On Jun 3, 11:45*pm, Steve Koerner wrote:
Hey Ras56:

My guess is that you haven't been present to hear the god-awful wailing of a woman who has just been told that her husband was killed in a mid-air. *Trust me, it's worth a lot of battery drain and lousy documentation and ugly antennas to not have that experience again. *Get a PowerFlarm.

I second that. Collisions are mercifully rare, and the chances are
that any individual pilot will not have one, but the tiny chance that
it will happen, multiplied by the awfulness of the event, if it does,
makes it a hazard worth taking steps to avoid.

Another point is that “the best is the enemy of the good”. I am a
strong advocate of both Flarm and PCAS, but I do not regard either as
a perfect solution. They are, however, good enough for the time being,
and the best that I could reasonably afford and in practice install in
my UK glider at the time, and will serve until the best, or at least
something better, is available.

I do not know the long-term USA collision fatality rate. I do
understand that it is not the most common type of fatal accident in
the USA. But there have been several recent high-profile collisions,
including some fatal that I have seen reported on this forum.

In the UK, when I started working on this topic, it was one of the
three big killers of glider pilots. I hope with the introduction of
Flarm, our reduced incidence of the past two years in fatal collisions
will prove to be more than a temporary downward blip, but it is too
early to tell. What we do know is that more than a quarter of UK
gliders now have Flarm, and the percentage is still increasing. I hope
it does the same in the USA.

Chris N

On Jun 1, 6:18*pm, RAS56 wrote:

WOW! Who wouldn't want one???

The pilot that hasn't tried one.

-Evan Ludeman / T8

Folks,

I am glad there are those who want to slog thru the teething problems of a newly introduced electronic device...frankly, I know I'm just not one of them. Honestly with the type of glider flying I do, my risk of mid-air is exceedingly low and is much more likely due to some kind of powered traffic than another glider (a threat which a currently installed PF unit would still do me absolutely no good and which I've decided to address with the PCAS)

But c'mon now...for those of us who don't like to spend our time off upside down in our cockpits chasing wires, fussing with antennas, seeing if maybe the re-programming took "this" time or wondering if I just "smoked" my new gizmo in an install error ...if the list of problems I ticked off had come from a product issued by someone like say Microsoft (it did sound amazingly similar to my complaints about the buggy Windows ME platform) the howling by users about a product brought a little too early in development to market would have been long and loud and justified.

Kudos to all who are trying to sort through all the teething problems and help find a system that's easy to install, use and maintain, especially Mr. Nadler.

Still, Mr. Nadler cannot make housecalls to all of us who won't trek to a contest and/or are probably less technologically savvy types than many early adapters. So...those of us like me will patiently wait for the "B" model of PF to show up that will bear the fruit of what to me on the outside appears to be having current users doing too much "in the field" operational testing and evaluation on.

Now, to the bawling spouse...I agree, one of those is too many!! But interestingly, in my flying career (encompassing 35+ years of GA, military and airline) I have lost a number of friends and peers in accidents over the years. Mid-airs have been on the very low side of where those losses occurred....Pilot error and mechanical failure has been a much, much greater threat...but if PF someday helps drive down the few that happen in glider flying (and primarily in the even smaller segment flying contests)...Great! Then maybe the community can turn its attention to the other very-worthy-of-attention-reasons that flying a glider has a 1 in 2000 chance of killing you...vs. only a 1 in 6000 chance of it happening on the drive to the airport. Not just focusing on stopping the mid-airs.

http://www.streckenflug.at/news/tom_knauff_a_ten.pdf

PowerFlarm someday in all it's glory will be a great product if it delivers all that's promised...and when it does, I'll likely purchase and install one. But for now, for me, in it's current incarnation...it's a "pass".

Regards to all,

RAS56

On Sunday, June 3, 2012 6:51:34 PM UTC-7, RAS56 wrote:
Folks,

I am glad there are those who want to slog thru the teething problems of a newly introduced electronic device...frankly, I know I'm just not one of them. Honestly with the type of glider flying I do, my risk of mid-air is exceedingly low and is much more likely due to some kind of powered traffic than another glider (a threat which a currently installed PF unit would still do me absolutely no good and which I've decided to address with the PCAS)

Its perfectly fine to prefer not to want to adopt new technology, even if I think you were inflating the concerns/issues, and of course its great to make decisions based on your own risk assessments, and you have have more experience than many pilots and therefore likely knowledgeable on doing that. But its another thing to make these decisions that may be clouded by technical confusion, and there seems some confusion here, of maybe you can clarify/explain what you meant about PCAS.

PowerFLARM does PCAS today -- so your claim that a "a threat which a currently installed PF unit would still do me absolutely no good" does not make sense--a PowerFLARM would perform the same PCAS functions as whatever PCAS only unit you have decided to install instead. And you get all the other benefits (or in an extreme case of early adopter concern you could even decide to ignore/disable Flarm now, which I'd not recommend, and just use it as PCAS (with another benefit of 1090ES data-in also working today so you get high-precision directional information about 1090ES data-out adopters like many airliners (and PowerFLARM deduplicates that so you also don't get a non-directional PCAS threat for the same target).

Darryl