I've installed the PF Brick unit in my plane so far. *I fly in a busy area
(three class C airports within ~50 miles, plus lots of military traffic)
so a transponder is on the wish list. *I also fly contests so FLARM was
a really good idea. *At least with PF I get warnings about traffic.

Matt

Now this is the thinking that really gets my attention. Someone who
flies in crowded and busy airspace with the majority of the traffic
using transponders chooses to install a Flarm before installing a
transponder.
Why? Flarm is cool and transponders are not?

Remember the glider/Hawker collision at Minden? Glider had a
transponder but it was not turned on. Would a Flarm in the glider
(turned on) have made any difference? Several approach routes for
Reno go right over Minden and go right over the mountain ridges we
like to hang out on. I would argue that these types of areas would
make a transponder the primary instrument of choice.

These discussions will go nowhere. We all will rationalize our
personnal point of view. The fact remains that transponders are the
primary instrument for identifying traffic (along with eyeballs
looking OUTSIDE the cockpit) in the United States. If I were emperor,
all aircraft in the United States would be required to have a
transponder and a PCAS/ADSB device. I bet if that were the law there
would be combination units, kind of like the Flarm.

OK. Burn me.

Guy