"Don Johnstone" ha scritto nel messaggio
...
At 03:18 17 November 2010, Paul Remde wrote:
Well done.

The first is that the use of STEALTH mode degrades the performance of an
instrument which is designed to enhance flight safety. While it is fine
for an individual pilot to make a decision to do that I am extremely
uncomfortable with requiring someone to degrade a unit and therefore
safety. I am pretty sure that even a British court would take a very dim
view of that were there to be an accident. Whether a court would find me
personally liable I have no way of knowing and given the only way of
finding out I prefer to remain ignorant.

No, FLARM units are always transmitting correct position each other. Only
the PDA output is degraded.
But if you are close each other, output is no more degraded concerning
nearby traffic. It is well thought.

The other concern is that the requirement is un-enforcable. FLARM is an
open technology and while it is possible to check an instrument installed
in the glider it is not possible to check and undeclared FLARM unit
carried by the pilot, searching pilots before they get into their glider
is not likely to ever be acceptable. It is comparatively easy to have a
non--stealth unit available. A rule that cannot be enforced should never
be made.

Flarm is not open technology. It is proprietary technology, and no company
except FLARM in switzerland can do it.
All other companies on the market bought licences from flarm. No US company
will be allowed to market its own traffic advisor,
unless they buy it from flarm. It is called monopoly , and in this case it
is about your safety.
A couple of years ago, the IGC had decided to adopt a public protocol for
traffic informations, but nothing happened so far.

paolo