On Oct 25, 6:10*am, Mike Schumann
wrote:
On 10/25/2010 12:46 AM, Eric Greenwell wrote:



On 10/24/2010 7:10 AM, Mike Schumann wrote:
I think it's pretty clear - Mike admits that when PowerFlarm gets FCC
approval he will unequivocally support it as the optimal solution for
gliders. His arguments to-date have been uniformly based on
PowarFlarm's pending approval.

Mike, are you going to change your argument or be consistent?

9B

When the product is FCC approved, and you can get a datasheet and a
manual then we can have a discussion on the pluses and minuses. I am
open minded to any solution that not only addresses glider on glider
threats, but also glider / GA and glider / airliners threats.

It's not like PowerFlarm is a completely new, untested concept, or that
the people bringing it to market are unknown ciphers. They've done this
before, to the tune of 10,000+ installations, and it's reasonable to
assume they'll do it again, so there is simply no point not to have the
discussion NOW. Your recalcitrance on this makes you look very
unreasonable, and casts doubt your arguments, deserved or not.

I'm not opposed to having a discussion about future products. *I've
participated in these before. *My objection is in misrepresenting future
products as things that currently exist, while simultaneously
disparaging products that currently do exist as being "future" products.

--
Mike Schumann- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Mike, You (and others of course) are invited to the PASCO safety
seminar this Saturday in Oakland http://www.pacificsoaring.org/board/...Flyer-2010.pdf
to see the PowerFlarm in your own eyes and ask Urs Rothacher, the
PoweFlarm designer, any question you may still have.

Ramy