Is FLARM helpful?

At 16:45 29 November 2015, jfitch wrote:
A diametrically opposed false alarm in a thermal suggests wind in
the 30 - 60 knot range. I have not seen good thermal development
in those
conditions, even in extremely strong western desert conditions. I
have flown in
gaggles of 10 - 15 gliders near the same altitude in the same
thermal and have
never had such a false alarm.

Sigh! You have combined two unrelated things that I have
mentioned:
(1) having "collision warnings about a glider opposite me in the
thermal"
(2) "Flarm direction is often significantly different from the true
direction (occasionally diametrically opposite), as it is track-based,
not heading-based"

Pay attention at the back!
J.

On Friday, November 20, 2015 at 5:35:10 PM UTC-8, Casey Cox wrote:
Has anyone been thankful that they have had FLARM?

And do the same people have a transponder?

How many people fly with FLARM or Transponder?

Let's hear about the close calls, or potential close calls, or even the peace of mind of awareness.

PowerFlarm helped me avoid a mid air at the Truckee FAI contest this year. I was going north on the Pine Nuts looking for lift. I know I was being followed by another glider behind and above but wasn't sure of exactly where.. I turned right in strong lift, came around 180 degrees climbing as I turned, and the flarm went nuts. I was banking into a head-on with the pilot following me. I turned hard right, and he turned hard right. Sweaty palms were the only negative outcome.

Buy one and install it this winter. If not for your benefit, then for the other guy.

Matt

On Sunday, November 29, 2015 at 1:00:06 PM UTC-8, James Metcalfe wrote:
At 16:45 29 November 2015, jfitch wrote:
A diametrically opposed false alarm in a thermal suggests wind in
the 30 - 60 knot range. I have not seen good thermal development
in those
conditions, even in extremely strong western desert conditions. I
have flown in
gaggles of 10 - 15 gliders near the same altitude in the same
thermal and have
never had such a false alarm.

Sigh! You have combined two unrelated things that I have
mentioned:
(1) having "collision warnings about a glider opposite me in the
thermal"
(2) "Flarm direction is often significantly different from the true
direction (occasionally diametrically opposite), as it is track-based,
not heading-based"

Pay attention at the back!
J.

It seemed as though (2) was being offered as an explanation for (1). If not because of the difference between track and heading, then why? I am still curious why you get these and I don't (nor anyone else I know), and never have, aren't you? Perhaps we can learn something here. My experience is all with PowerFlarm, different algorithm? Better GPS? All the warnings I have ever gotten in thermals where someone right ahead or right behind, or turning the other direction.

What I am referring to when I say that FLARM has the potential to suck the adventure out of the sport is the year when the FLARMs are netted together. Each FLARM will receive and relay all the information it has to other units. Soon displays will be developed to show the strength of all the thermals gliders are currently using in the whole task area. Next displays will log all the thermals and lift bands for the whole day and color code the preferred hot spots. After that the data will be archived and pilots will be able to analyze where they want to go given the forecast wind conditions and lift strength from their arm chair the night before. This scenario seems to be misaligned with the true spirit of the sport.

I suggest we get a handle on what our sport is all about before we lose it. The idea of soaring as an unlimited technological frontier is nonsense. From the first day soaring has been about motor-less flight.

XC

Was not aware soaring had a mission statement. Ever heard of sustainer engines, self launch gliders. Did you know jets are now used in gliders, this doesn't violate your sense of the "adventure". They even make gliders with electric sustainers with folded propellers.

Maybe individuals should not on their own accord set what they want for the entire sport. Did you know winglets were the forefront of technology when they were developed for gliders?

Maybe the marketplace is a better arbiter of what is acceptable and what is not. To stand in the way of technology is to stand in the way of progress.. Imagine the same argument made when transitioning from wood and fabric to glass. Remember the film virus GPS debate? Not even sure they make film now.

I cannot think of one argument against technology (other than pervasive government spying on its citizens) that did not end up n the wrong side of history.

Galio, had the same push back from the catholic church, who to this day are against the use of safe sex. Not to offend anyone's sense or sensibility just wanted to make a point. By way of fun disclosure I was raised Catholic.



On Sunday, November 29, 2015 at 5:24:05 PM UTC-8, XC wrote:
What I am referring to when I say that FLARM has the potential to suck the adventure out of the sport is the year when the FLARMs are netted together. Each FLARM will receive and relay all the information it has to other units. Soon displays will be developed to show the strength of all the thermals gliders are currently using in the whole task area. Next displays will log all the thermals and lift bands for the whole day and color code the preferred hot spots. After that the data will be archived and pilots will be able to analyze where they want to go given the forecast wind conditions and lift strength from their arm chair the night before. This scenario seems to be misaligned with the true spirit of the sport.

I suggest we get a handle on what our sport is all about before we lose it. The idea of soaring as an unlimited technological frontier is nonsense. From the first day soaring has been about motor-less flight.

XC

On Sunday, November 29, 2015 at 10:24:01 PM UTC-5, Jonathan St. Cloud wrote:

I cannot think of one argument against technology (other than pervasive government spying on its citizens) that did not end up n the wrong side of history.

Oh good grief, how about: anabolics, EPO, PFCs and other performance enhancing drugs. They've basically destroyed competition cycling (that's my opinion, anyway) and the regulatory bodies still haven't figured out how to clean up the sport for real.

I think Sean's being a bit a(f)larmist (sorry), but there's no doubt that the "fish finder" changes things tactically and it's not wrong to look ahead and think about where creative minds can push this technology.

T8

On Sunday, November 29, 2015 at 10:24:01 PM UTC-5, Jonathan St. Cloud wrote:
Was not aware soaring had a mission statement. Ever heard of sustainer engines, self launch gliders. Did you know jets are now used in gliders, this doesn't violate your sense of the "adventure". They even make gliders with electric sustainers with folded propellers.

Maybe individuals should not on their own accord set what they want for the entire sport. Did you know winglets were the forefront of technology when they were developed for gliders?

Maybe the marketplace is a better arbiter of what is acceptable and what is not. To stand in the way of technology is to stand in the way of progress. Imagine the same argument made when transitioning from wood and fabric to glass. Remember the film virus GPS debate? Not even sure they make film now.

I cannot think of one argument against technology (other than pervasive government spying on its citizens) that did not end up n the wrong side of history.

Galio, had the same push back from the catholic church, who to this day are against the use of safe sex. Not to offend anyone's sense or sensibility just wanted to make a point. By way of fun disclosure I was raised Catholic.



On Sunday, November 29, 2015 at 5:24:05 PM UTC-8, XC wrote:
What I am referring to when I say that FLARM has the potential to suck the adventure out of the sport is the year when the FLARMs are netted together. Each FLARM will receive and relay all the information it has to other units. Soon displays will be developed to show the strength of all the thermals gliders are currently using in the whole task area. Next displays will log all the thermals and lift bands for the whole day and color code the preferred hot spots. After that the data will be archived and pilots will be able to analyze where they want to go given the forecast wind conditions and lift strength from their arm chair the night before. This scenario seems to be misaligned with the true spirit of the sport.

I suggest we get a handle on what our sport is all about before we lose it. The idea of soaring as an unlimited technological frontier is nonsense.. From the first day soaring has been about motor-less flight.

XC

Of course I am aware of the different sustainer options that available today. Please, I am trying have a real discussion about the sport here.

I am speaking of sailplane racing. We do not have a mission statement to use a boring corporate term. Said another way, we have no one leading the discussion on what is in-bounds and out-of-bounds for our sport. In which ways are we competing?

All sports have parameters. Okay sustainers are acceptable now. This has benefits but has driven up costs...what does that do for the future and enjoyability of the sport? No one is asking these questions.

There are plenty of arguments against technology in sports that have proven good. Wooden bats for pro baseball. They saved building bigger and bigger stadiums, preserved the validity of records, and are much harder to hit with thereby providing greater differentiation in hitter skills. They are trying to limit the use of steroids in sports (somewhat trying!?)

Fishing is the best example. What if we used every technology available to catch fish? You have your bass fishermen zooming all over the lake with big motors and fish finders yanking as many fish out as they can and you have fly fishermen standing in a creek with a fly rod. Or you can use nets or dynamite. Each of these methods yields a different looking sport. If everyone gets together to catch and compare fish yet anything goes, the comparison of skills is meaningless and dull.

I would suggest that we measure a pilots ability to read the sky and efficiently use it without the use of outside information. I understand GPS is an outside signal and is acceptable, but pulling up information on the internet or phoning a friend (maybe a super great glider pilot) on the ground with a bank of computer screens seems out-of-bounds. Hey, that's just my opinion. The consensus in the end may be different but let's get to a consensus on what we are about.

XC

Just to be clear the abuse of banned drugs is not a technological advance.

On Sunday, November 29, 2015 at 8:05:23 PM UTC-8, Tango Eight wrote:
On Sunday, November 29, 2015 at 10:24:01 PM UTC-5, Jonathan St. Cloud wrote:

I cannot think of one argument against technology (other than pervasive government spying on its citizens) that did not end up n the wrong side of history.

Oh good grief, how about: anabolics, EPO, PFCs and other performance enhancing drugs. They've basically destroyed competition cycling (that's my opinion, anyway) and the regulatory bodies still haven't figured out how to clean up the sport for real.

I think Sean's being a bit a(f)larmist (sorry), but there's no doubt that the "fish finder" changes things tactically and it's not wrong to look ahead and think about where creative minds can push this technology.

T8

One scenario which may cause constant false alarms which I experienced once with powerflarm is when the other pilot did not configure his powerflarm correctly and as a result was operating as a power plane. This will result in proximity based alert and constant false alarms to every one flying with him until he configured his unit correctly.

Ramy

XC, I am afraid the future is nigh. Andrej of Naviter and Erasim of LXNav
have both stated that it is their intention to integrate this intelligence
into their instruments. The scenario is that the instrument will feed data
into SeeYou Cloud in real time and recover useful data on thermals, hot
spots, winds etc. down track for the benefit of the so equipped pilot.

The LX9000 can already display Metars.

If allowed in competition this will mean that we shall all need to buy
into this expensive technology in order to compete.

Which brings me to drugs in sport. Whereas gliders are pretty easy to
scrutineer, people are not. I have often thought it would be fun to have a
truly 'open' class for the 100 metres. Anything goes: steroids,
amphetamines, opioids, and prosthetics. We would then see how fast man
can go and what man is prepared to do to win.

Jim


At 01:24 30 November 2015, XC wrote:
What I am referring to when I say that FLARM has the potential to suck
the
=
adventure out of the sport is the year when the FLARMs are netted
together.=
Each FLARM will receive and relay all the information it has to other
unit=
s. Soon displays will be developed to show the strength of all the
thermals=
gliders are currently using in the whole task area. Next displays will
log=
all the thermals and lift bands for the whole day and color code the
prefe=
rred hot spots. After that the data will be archived and pilots will be
abl=
e to analyze where they want to go given the forecast wind conditions and
l=
ift strength from their arm chair the night before. This scenario seems
to
=
be misaligned with the true spirit of the sport.

I suggest we get a handle on what our sport is all about before we lose
it.=
The idea of soaring as an unlimited technological frontier is nonsense.
Fr=
om the first day soaring has been about motor-less flight.

XC