A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Soaring
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

"Do It Yourself" airborne proximity warning device



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old December 24th 15, 09:13 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Linar Yusupov
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 18
Default "Do It Yourself" airborne proximity warning device

A new design which is primarily considered as add-on for the Argus project has been recently released.
It is an IoT bridge between FLARM and Wi-Fi consumer devices. Codename for the design is SoftRF.

Areas of application:
---------------------
- a two-way bridge between FLARM and other traffic awareness designs ;
- alternative to Raspberry Pi based Open Glider Network (OGN) receiver ;
- wireless adapter for a smartphone or tablet to receive/transmit traffic information by iOS/Android app ;
- lightweight traffic awareness transceiver to carry onboard an UAV.

For more details, please, read these PDF slides:
http://github.com/lyusupov/SoftRF/raw/master/SoftRF.pdf

Linar Yusupov.
  #32  
Old March 23rd 17, 01:39 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Linar Yusupov
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 18
Default "Do It Yourself" airborne proximity warning device


Dear soaring community!

I've recently released development update of the open SoftRF project.

Few highlights:
- transmit power is 10 mW, so operating range is similar to the "classic" FLARM has ;
- FLARM and SoftRF can see each other ;
- is compatible with Open Glider Network (OGN) ;
- most popular gliding software (SeeYou Mobile, XCSoar, ...) just works, "out of the box" ;
- on a hardware level, it has a DIY modular design with Arduino-style "shield".

Full document in PDF format can be downloaded from:
http://github.com/lyusupov/SoftRF/ra...-release-2.pdf

For more information, please, visit: http://github.com/lyusupov/SoftRF

With best regards,
Linar Yusupov.
  #33  
Old December 29th 17, 02:56 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Linar Yusupov
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 18
Default "Do It Yourself" airborne proximity warning device

With recent Fall'17 features upgrade, in addition to "Legacy" (FLARM AIR V6) radio protocol,
the SoftRF is now able to communicate using three other major ISM-band radio
collision avoidance "languages", such as:
- P3I Open (PilotAware) ;
- OGNTP (OGN tracker) ;
- FANET (Skytraxx)

Full compatibility "matrix" is availle he https://github.com/lyusupov/SoftRF#compatibility

One more new feature is support for Garmin GDL90 datalink format, which is widely used
on North America EFB software market (ForeFlight, Naviator, WingX,...).
For details, please, read this page: https://github.com/lyusupov/SoftRF/w...-compatibility

And SoftRF can now be integrated with RTL-SDR based ADS-B receivers, such as:
- airborne:
Stratux
PilotAware
- ground stations:
FlightRadar24
FlightAware
For example of integration, please, visit: https://github.com/lyusupov/SoftRF/w...%90B-receivers


  #34  
Old December 29th 17, 04:07 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 281
Default "Do It Yourself" airborne proximity warning device

Linar,

Thanks for the interesting github pointer.

I'm not quite up to date on the state of Flarm reverse engineering and interoperability. For example, does the SoftRf understand the Flarm Frequency hopping?

The whole Flarm proprietary thing seems wrong, but on the other hand it funds a somewhat working Flarm system. Given that it exists, the most likely path to an open system seems like ADSB and/or an open software load for the existing Flarm boxes.

I wonder if ADSB is a viable path for gliders. Has anybody looked at if the broadcast ADSB state vectors are suitable for feeding a collision detection algorithm like the one in Flarm?

-Stu

  #35  
Old January 2nd 18, 10:49 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Linar Yusupov
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 18
Default "Do It Yourself" airborne proximity warning device

Stu,

Â*For example, does the SoftRf understand the Flarm Frequency hopping?


At first, channel hopping (CH) is more "radio signal obstruction clearance" rather than "security" feature.
Second: CH is not a factor for major FLARM's EU market ( only 2 channels are in use ), but "is"
for North (65 channels) and South America / Australia (24 channels).

"FLARM-alike" OGN CH was implemented in March'17 by Pawel Jalocha - leading developer
of OGN tracker. According to this source ( http://wiki.glidernet.org/history ), he had
relations with Flarm Technology GmbH in past.
SoftRF had adopted OGN CH algorithm.

Is OGN CH equal to FLARM CH in North America?
There were no neither positive nor negative reports from NA's SoftRF
builders till today.
So you have a chance to be the first one who will answer this question.

Regards,
Linar.
  #36  
Old January 3rd 18, 11:19 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
vontresc
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 216
Default "Do It Yourself" airborne proximity warning device

On Tuesday, January 2, 2018 at 3:49:25 AM UTC-6, Linar Yusupov wrote:
Stu,

Â*For example, does the SoftRf understand the Flarm Frequency hopping?


At first, channel hopping (CH) is more "radio signal obstruction clearance" rather than "security" feature.
Second: CH is not a factor for major FLARM's EU market ( only 2 channels are in use ), but "is"
for North (65 channels) and South America / Australia (24 channels).

"FLARM-alike" OGN CH was implemented in March'17 by Pawel Jalocha - leading developer
of OGN tracker. According to this source ( http://wiki.glidernet.org/history ), he had
relations with Flarm Technology GmbH in past.
SoftRF had adopted OGN CH algorithm.

Is OGN CH equal to FLARM CH in North America?
There were no neither positive nor negative reports from NA's SoftRF
builders till today.
So you have a chance to be the first one who will answer this question.

Regards,
Linar.


Interesting project. Just out of curiosity, are you at all looking into supporting a dual band ADS-B receiver to handle both UAT and 1090 ADS-b in the states?

Peter
  #37  
Old January 4th 18, 04:30 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
SoaringXCellence
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 385
Default "Do It Yourself" airborne proximity warning device

Already exists:

Stratux.me

Build one for yourself for less than $150. parts on Amazon, have it in two days.

I've built two and might build another one pretty quick.

Mike
  #38  
Old January 6th 18, 09:04 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Wit Wisniewski
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10
Default "Do It Yourself" airborne proximity warning device

Folks, what we need is a system that warns of ANY aircraft that is about to come too close. The major flaw of most approaches is requiring that the other guy be properly equipped. It is not human nature for people to agree so there will always be many avoiders, contrarians, competitors, and folks too poor to comply even if they want to. Mutually inncompatible systems will proliferate and no single collaborative system will make more than a dent in the collision threat.

We as PICs should take upon ourselves the responsibility of not flying into someone and being aware of impending traffic - I mean beyond 'See and Avoid'.
A simple device that warns of impending collision would focus our attention to taking evasive action. It would not need to be very sophisticated, but some simple indication of direction would make it more effective.

Radar may be the most practical way. Detection at short distances does not require much power, nor equipment sophistication.

Some observations -

Flarm appears to be the best thought out existing system. PowerFlarm should be called Low-power Flarm because it operates as an unlicensed low power ISM band gadget. Range and reliability are limited due to lack of signal strength. IMHO, the FCC denied licensing of Flarm and refused to allocate spectrum to protect the inferior ADS-B already chosen for Nexgen.

PowerFlarm is priced out of reach for most glider operators. Clubs usually don't have it in their ships.

I live near a Class C airport. Only about 1/4 of the traffic I detect in the area is currently squittering ADS-B. Devices like Stratux don't yet show the majority of existing traffic.

IMHO, aircraft traveling too fast to see and be seen (maybe 175 Kn) should have active radar, to avoid anything from drones on up.

The brave new world of Software Defined Radio/Cognitive Radio is a godsend for quickly developing new technology, including radar. The open source community has embraced the technology!!!

Of my many close calls, only one was a glider, half were military, and about 3/4 came from behind me. I sure hate hearing engines from within a glider!


  #39  
Old January 6th 18, 09:16 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Darryl Ramm
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,403
Default "Do It Yourself" airborne proximity warning device

On Saturday, January 6, 2018 at 12:04:29 PM UTC-8, Wit Wisniewski wrote:

Radar may be the most practical way. Detection at short distances does not require much power, nor equipment sophistication.


Can I have some of whatever you are smoking?

Radar, as in what? Actual primary radar for collision avoidance? Please describe how this would not require much equipment sophistication. You planning on mounting phased array antennas where on the glider? Transmitting on what frequencies? Do you have a estimate on the development and FCC approval costs?
  #40  
Old January 6th 18, 09:45 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Mike Schumann[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 177
Default "Do It Yourself" airborne proximity warning device

On Saturday, January 6, 2018 at 2:04:29 PM UTC-6, Wit Wisniewski wrote:
Folks, what we need is a system that warns of ANY aircraft that is about to come too close. The major flaw of most approaches is requiring that the other guy be properly equipped. It is not human nature for people to agree so there will always be many avoiders, contrarians, competitors, and folks too poor to comply even if they want to. Mutually inncompatible systems will proliferate and no single collaborative system will make more than a dent in the collision threat.

We as PICs should take upon ourselves the responsibility of not flying into someone and being aware of impending traffic - I mean beyond 'See and Avoid'.
A simple device that warns of impending collision would focus our attention to taking evasive action. It would not need to be very sophisticated, but some simple indication of direction would make it more effective.

Radar may be the most practical way. Detection at short distances does not require much power, nor equipment sophistication.

Some observations -

Flarm appears to be the best thought out existing system. PowerFlarm should be called Low-power Flarm because it operates as an unlicensed low power ISM band gadget. Range and reliability are limited due to lack of signal strength. IMHO, the FCC denied licensing of Flarm and refused to allocate spectrum to protect the inferior ADS-B already chosen for Nexgen.

PowerFlarm is priced out of reach for most glider operators. Clubs usually don't have it in their ships.

I live near a Class C airport. Only about 1/4 of the traffic I detect in the area is currently squittering ADS-B. Devices like Stratux don't yet show the majority of existing traffic.

IMHO, aircraft traveling too fast to see and be seen (maybe 175 Kn) should have active radar, to avoid anything from drones on up.

The brave new world of Software Defined Radio/Cognitive Radio is a godsend for quickly developing new technology, including radar. The open source community has embraced the technology!!!

Of my many close calls, only one was a glider, half were military, and about 3/4 came from behind me. I sure hate hearing engines from within a glider!


In the US, the system you are looking for is ADS-B. Systems like Stratux show all existing ADS-B AND transponder equipped aircraft if you are within range of an ADS-B ground station and you are ADS-B OUT equipped. If you are flying within the vicinity of Class C airspace and you are not seeing the vast majority of GA traffic on your Stratux ADS-B receiver (except for gliders who are are not transponder equipped), you are either not ADS-B OUT equipped, or your system is not configured properly for the ground station TIS-B to work properly with your ADS-B IN equipment.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
"View Limiting Device" recommendations please [email protected] Instrument Flight Rules 27 February 4th 08 03:25 AM
Monday 073007 in Oshkosh - Going Home [01/10] - "Departing Oshkosh - Airborne Inaging DC3C.jpg" yEnc (0/1) Just Plane Noise[_2_] Aviation Photos 0 August 2nd 07 04:39 AM
Monday 073007 in Oshkosh - Going Home [01/10] - "Departing Oshkosh - Airborne Inaging DC3C.jpg" yEnc (1/1) Just Plane Noise[_2_] Aviation Photos 0 August 2nd 07 04:39 AM
New traffic warning device Loran Products 26 February 18th 04 01:14 AM
Plane with no stall warning device? Roy Smith General Aviation 23 February 17th 04 04:23 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:21 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.