Thread: FLARM ethics
View Single Post
  #7  
Old February 22nd 15, 11:11 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
kirk.stant
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,260
Default FLARM ethics

On Sunday, February 22, 2015 at 2:24:44 PM UTC-6, Mike Schumann wrote:

Couple that with POWERFLARM's inability to see UAT equipped ADS-B OUT equipped aircraft, either directly or via TIS-B retransmission from an ADS-B ground station, raises some big questions on whether or not they have really thought thru the whole collision avoidance picture in the US, where the threat is not just other gliders, but also GA and airline traffic.


OK, this is getting old.

ONCE AGAIN: Since every aircraft that has ADS-B out (1090ES or UAT) also HAS to have a legacy mode C or mode S transponder, PowerFLARM TODAY can see EVERY ADS-B equipped aircraft, plus gliders/towplanes with PF.

And if you can't avoid an aircraft that shows up as approximate range and an exact altitude relative to you, then how the heck have you survived until now in the VFR see-and-avoid environment?

Get your damn facts straight. We all know you (for some odd reason) hate PF.. But spreading false information about a valuable safety device is borderline criminal.

Now, if you can tell me what combination of hardware - TODAY - can be installed in my glider and provide the SAME level of situational awareness and traffic alerts as my PF can, and at a competitive price, then please do.

Kirk
66