"most of flarm units in europe do not have the capability to be
reprogrammed with a memory card"

"Most" - really?? Do you have numbers to back that up?

and:

"Most people do not even know what the heck this means.
I fear these people that may fly around for weeks, or months, with a
non-working flarm."

What nonsense. At e.g. a typical UK club like mine there are always
people with the know how who are happy to help the few who need
some assistance with a Flarm upgrade.

John Galloway


At 17:53 23 February 2015, pcool wrote:
I am afraid I posted to the wrong audience, because you dont even
know that

most of flarm units in europe do not have the capability to be
reprogrammed

with a memory card.
You have to use a PC with a rs232 serial cable, to connect to the
RJ45 plug

of the Flarm unit.
Most people do not even know what the heck this means.
I fear these people that may fly around for weeks, or months, with
a
non-working flarm.
The collision avoidance works on the principle of cooperation, as
with
Flarm
here.
If you dont have a working unit, my working unit will not work too.
If I crash against a glider and the pilot says "my flarm did not say
anything.." and we discover it was not updated, you bet your
home, wife and

kids that I shall sue the swiss company all the way. What they are
doing is

criminal.

There are only two reasons why we dont have the firmware now,
with a
blackout pending in 45 days.
A) Firmware is not yet ready and debugged. If this is the case,
since we
are
talking of SAFETY, the best thing to do is to postpone by some
months the
entire matter.
B) Firmware is ready, but flarm is dealing with its Tracking server
and
currently it is negotiating with the people of OGN and their network
of
receive stations round the world that will be soon obscured at the
end of
march. Yes, this is the missing point. Nothing to do with safety.

But let's calm down please, no reason to argue..


wrote in message
news:ec848c20-2b1e-4fe8-9456-
...

On Sunday, February 22, 2015 at 2:24:44 PM UTC-6, Mike
Schumann wrote:
On Sunday, February 22, 2015 at 12:36:15 PM UTC-5, Andy
Blackburn wrote:
Any device used for collision avoidance will have some of its
critical
capabilities dependent on both aircraft in a potential collision
situation having the same algorithms on board or chaos (or
worse) might

ensue. Making the update mandatory and taking non-updated
units out of
service is the only way to ensure safe and reliable
performance of the
entire system.

You might quibble a bit about the lead time, but updating the
firmware
is really not very complicated. I tried a different firmware
version
(or
different config file) practically every day at the 15m nationals
last
year as I was trying to work out a PCAS problem and a
interface issue
with my LX 9000. All you need is the firmware and a memory
stick.

It's not that hard.

It will all work out in the end.

Remain calm.

9B

It is NOT impossible to design system upgrades so that they are
backward
compatible with older units that are still in use. It is probably
much
more convenient for FLARM to use this approach so they don't
need to deal

with the complexity of having multiple different device versions
that
need
to talk to each other. These kind of shortcuts make one
question whether

FLARM really has the potential to be a VERY niche product for a
small
subset of the aviation market.

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.

I wish the Messr. Schumann and Suppards would just join hands
and walk
away,
far away from this forum. Maybe they can entertain each other
with their
nonsense.