Flarm with Firmware 1.20 update

Like to share my observations flying with a portable flarm with just
installed updated firmware 1.20 which displays Mode C transponders. My son
purchase the unit last summer for the FAI contest at Ulvalde. He was
impressed with its operation. I have had 2 long flights in Florida in the
last week after borrowing his unit to fly in Florida this winter. The unit
has just been received back from Flarm after installation of all available
updates, (new antennas and whatever else the factory needed to correct on
the new US units) and must say, I am impressed. The system seems to operate
as adveritised. The disappointing point is that no other gliders flying at
Seminole are using a Flarm at this time. Operation of the unit is basically
idiot proof as you simply turn the unit on, let it boot up and fly, no long
setup required. I have had numerous hits on the unit but not one audible
warning for a take action inflight avoidance required. I have had visual
contact with numerous transponder equipped aircraft that have been
displayed on the flarm screen. The distane and altitude depiction of the
traffic aircraft seems to be absolutely correct.
With collisions being a major risk of flying gliders, I would recommend all
pilots consider installation of Flarm. Frankly, I want Flarm to be
mandatory in all Gliders, I hope all of you do too. Look at it this way,
this Flarm is progress, trust me.

That all sounds great except for the "mandatory" part. STAY THE HELL OUT OF
MY COCKPIT!


"Robert Fidler" wrote in message
.com...
Like to share my observations flying with a portable flarm with just
installed updated firmware 1.20 which displays Mode C transponders. My son
purchase the unit last summer for the FAI contest at Ulvalde. He was
impressed with its operation. I have had 2 long flights in Florida in the
last week after borrowing his unit to fly in Florida this winter. The
unit
has just been received back from Flarm after installation of all available
updates, (new antennas and whatever else the factory needed to correct on
the new US units) and must say, I am impressed. The system seems to
operate
as adveritised. The disappointing point is that no other gliders flying at
Seminole are using a Flarm at this time. Operation of the unit is
basically
idiot proof as you simply turn the unit on, let it boot up and fly, no
long
setup required. I have had numerous hits on the unit but not one audible
warning for a take action inflight avoidance required. I have had visual
contact with numerous transponder equipped aircraft that have been
displayed on the flarm screen. The distane and altitude depiction of the
traffic aircraft seems to be absolutely correct.
With collisions being a major risk of flying gliders, I would recommend
all
pilots consider installation of Flarm. Frankly, I want Flarm to be
mandatory in all Gliders, I hope all of you do too. Look at it this way,
this Flarm is progress, trust me.

I'll admit to being one of the ones with a faulty unit from Uvalde and
disappointed that I was not able to see it in action. Before I sent
my unit back for the repairs I installed the ADS-B firmware and was
VERY impressed. It is easy and intuitive to use and I have high hopes
for whenever I get mine back. To me, it is an obvious addition to my
cockpit. I'm not rich, but I look at it this way: I spent $1500 for a
parachute that I hope never to use. If I ever do have to use it, it
will most likely be AFTER a mid-air. The way I see it, if I spend
$1500 on a unit that allows me to never use my parachute, that's a
pretty good deal.

Mandate ME? Never! Mandate the rest of you so I can see you?
Hmmmm.....

Derek

On Jan 25, 9:54*am, "Dan Marotta" wrote:
That all sounds great except for the "mandatory" part. *STAY THE HELL OUT OF
MY COCKPIT!

If it would keep YOUR cockpit out of MY cockpit - then yes, it should
be mandatory!

Just like parachutes are mandatory at contests, or radios, or ELTs,
etc.

Heck, it should be mandatory for anything that flies!

Ok, now, seriously. Relax. No one wants the feds to mandate it -
look at what they are trying with ADS-B and how messed up that program
is!

In a perfect world, the FAA would just GIVE a PowerFLARM to every
pilot when he got his license!

That word "mandatory" sure presses a lot of buttons!

Kirk
66

Yes, words like "mandatory" do press my buttons. It seems that we give up
our rights bit by bit - "it's such a little thing, and it'll make everyone
safer". But once you give up a little, it's not hard to be asked for more
and near impossible to get back what you've lost. Tried to carry nail
clippers on an airliner lately?

Why don't we all try to look outside rather than spend our soaring
experience staring at color moving maps and relying on some other electronic
doo-dad to keep us from running into each other? So... If your Flim-FLARM
makes you invulnerable to collisions, why don't you give your parachute
away?

I was amazed to hear that serious consideration was given to cancelling a
contest because GPS might have been unavailable due to testing. Why not
"mandate" that everyone keep their camera mounts so that we don't "have to"
cancel a contest? Why not "mandate" that we can't have a contest without
sufficient observers at the turn points to verify that the gliders actually
flew over?

Though I may sound ****ed, I'm not - I'm just disappointed in the attitude
that everything can be fixed with electronics and regulations and that Big
Brother will protect us from the boogie man.

I wish winter would end.

"kirk.stant" wrote in message
...
On Jan 25, 9:54 am, "Dan Marotta" wrote:
That all sounds great except for the "mandatory" part. STAY THE HELL OUT
OF
MY COCKPIT!

If it would keep YOUR cockpit out of MY cockpit - then yes, it should
be mandatory!

Just like parachutes are mandatory at contests, or radios, or ELTs,
etc.

Heck, it should be mandatory for anything that flies!

Ok, now, seriously. Relax. No one wants the feds to mandate it -
look at what they are trying with ADS-B and how messed up that program
is!

In a perfect world, the FAA would just GIVE a PowerFLARM to every
pilot when he got his license!

That word "mandatory" sure presses a lot of buttons!

Kirk
66

On Thu, 26 Jan 2012 08:57:08 -0700, Dan Marotta wrote:

I was amazed to hear that serious consideration was given to cancelling
a contest because GPS might have been unavailable due to testing.

Scoring.

Under current rules scoring flights is probably impossible if GPS is
being interfered with. Yes, I know you can use cameras for turnpoints but
they don't work too well for assessing airspace violations or minimum
height finishes: for that you need a logger to provide a continuous
trace.



--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org |

* * |
"
Maybe I'm wrong (it's happened before), but it's my understanding that
FLARM
only works with other FLARM-equipped aircraft. Maybe it was
originally that
way and has since been corrected, but, if my assumption is correct,
how
would it prevent a collision with an airliner?"

PowerFLARM as is being sold in the US and Canada certanly detects
other FLARM-equiped aircraft as in Europe and elsewhere. However
PowerFLARM also detects ADS-B, Mode-A and Mode-S equipped aircraft, so
can give a warning against impending doom from "regular" aircraft
traffic. You don't look at the thing unless it's screaming at you,
then it tells you at a glance which way to look for your traffic. Of
course you still need to be looking out the window for those people
who have mandated themselves off the grid...

Cheers,

Derek

On Jan 25, 7:54*am, "Dan Marotta" wrote:
That all sounds great except for the "mandatory" part. *STAY THE HELL OUT OF
MY COCKPIT!


Mandatory" is no stranger to aviation, so the gub'ment will not be
staying out of our cockpits

If we were not putting innocent lives at risk I could more easily see
your point. As an example, with some air space exeptions, transponder
use is not mandatory for gliders in the US. We've had one mid-air and
several close calls involving non-transponder equipped gliders near
Minden. Transponder use, though fairly high here , is not universal.
The specter of a glider vs airliner mid-air is unthinkable and would
doubtless devastate soaring. "Mandatory" would most certainly follow
such an accident . . . should it be implemented before rather than
after?

Some regulations are (I'll be kind) clueless and excessive, but some
are for the overall good. When on balance the benefit to society
outweighs the individual right to freedom, I have no problem with
"mandatory". At least so long as it's reasonable, effective, and the
least intrusive to get the job done.

I don't think there's much risk of PowerFlarm being mandated by the
FAA . . . ever. It's too practical, inexpensive, and sensible for a
government program. It works. Well. If you don't have one on order
yet, please do yourself and all your fellow pilots a favor and do it..
It's best to see what your are missing.

bumper

bumper

I am not asking the FAA to mandate this. It needs to happen sooner. I am EXPECTING intelligent glider pilots (and glider operations) to buy them out of respect for themselves and out of respect for their fellow pilots.

I am expecting unintelligent and stubborn pilots to resist, downplay and make excuses as to why they do not need flarm.

Once the next needless collision accident happens, with flarm commercially available, unfortunately, the late adopters will finally understand.

Sean

Many of your points are valid for your area of operation. Where I fly, we
see a couple of power planes on a busy day. We are, however, under the
arrival route to ABQ and so we see a lot more airline, military, and large
general aviation traffic at or above around 12,000 MSL. That's why, even
though not required, I installed a Mode-S transponder. ATC is not
interested in talking to me unless I go into the Class A or C areas but it's
my hope that they'll tell their clients about my presence. I'm not
confident of that happening, so I'll keep looking outside.

Equipment which I would agree is beneficial to everyone in your area doesn't
make a lot of sense to me where I fly. To me, it's like requiring east
coast fliers to carry desert survival equipment. When I lived in Alaska
back in the 70s, it was mandatory for GA pilots to be armed (gasp!), and to
have food, axd, knife, etc. Try that in New york!

Maybe I'm wrong (it's happened before), but it's my understanding that FLARM
only works with other FLARM-equipped aircraft. Maybe it was originally that
way and has since been corrected, but, if my assumption is correct, how
would it prevent a collision with an airliner?

As I said in another post, there's no place to put it in my cockpit anyway
whthout blocking my view outside.

"bumper" wrote in message
...
On Jan 25, 7:54 am, "Dan Marotta" wrote:
That all sounds great except for the "mandatory" part. STAY THE HELL OUT
OF
MY COCKPIT!


Mandatory" is no stranger to aviation, so the gub'ment will not be
staying out of our cockpits

If we were not putting innocent lives at risk I could more easily see
your point. As an example, with some air space exeptions, transponder
use is not mandatory for gliders in the US. We've had one mid-air and
several close calls involving non-transponder equipped gliders near
Minden. Transponder use, though fairly high here , is not universal.
The specter of a glider vs airliner mid-air is unthinkable and would
doubtless devastate soaring. "Mandatory" would most certainly follow
such an accident . . . should it be implemented before rather than
after?

Some regulations are (I'll be kind) clueless and excessive, but some
are for the overall good. When on balance the benefit to society
outweighs the individual right to freedom, I have no problem with
"mandatory". At least so long as it's reasonable, effective, and the
least intrusive to get the job done.

I don't think there's much risk of PowerFlarm being mandated by the
FAA . . . ever. It's too practical, inexpensive, and sensible for a
government program. It works. Well. If you don't have one on order
yet, please do yourself and all your fellow pilots a favor and do it..
It's best to see what your are missing.

bumper

bumper