On Tuesday, August 5, 2014 5:26:11 AM UTC-5, son_of_flubber wrote:

Just as motorists are more careful around cyclists that are not wearing helmets (and less careful near those wearing helmets), the question is whether the change in pilot behavior with PFLARM is, looking at the whole picture, more or less safe. The answer to that is going to be clearer in situations where all pilots have PFLARM, and less clear where only some pilots have PFLARM.

Do you have a cite for your statement that motorists are more careful around cyclist that are not wearing helmets and less near those without? That sounds like an urban myth/total BS to me! Most motorist HATE cyclist and by the time they can even see whether there is a helmet or not it's too late.

In the context where only some pilots have PFLARM, I'd fly as if no pilots had PFLARM.

So how do you fly now? Do YOU have FLARM?

In a galaxy far far away where all pilots have PFLARM, pilots are going to be less vigilant when they expect that they are far far away from other gliders (same as PFLARMless pilots are sometime less vigilant here on Earth).. In that case, having PFLARM is not going to make pilots even less vigilant, but it will reduce the risk of a midair where and when one is least expected.

Well, in that galaxy, they speak French.

Anyone who thinks See and Avoid (unaided by technology) works is a fool. The Big Sky Theory works better. Most of the time. I personally don't like those odds.

Technology (PFlarm, transponders, ADS-B, PCAS, TCAS, etc) is a necessary evil.

Kirk
66