On Saturday, August 8, 2015 at 12:51:17 PM UTC-4, Ron Gleason wrote:
On Saturday, 8 August 2015 10:28:15 UTC-6, Andy Blackburn wrote:
Seems like many of the procedures to enforce turning Flarm on and off or adjusting range are the same or similar to enforcing stealth mode, the primary difference being in one case you are ensuring they don't have too much range and in the other you are ensuring they don't have too little - log files, Flarm ground stations, etc have been proposed for both.

Also worth pondering - in a world with ADS-B we will ultimately end up in a world were stealth mode is effectively voluntary - like today only more so.

9B
If the SSA Competition Rules Committee or Competition Committee decides that stealth mode is required at some level of contests and a rule is implemented the enforcement of the rule *MUST* be automated, just like airspace violations are checked within WINSCORE or SeeYou Competition.

Please do not put yet another level of burden on contest organizers.

This was contemplated several years ago. In discussing what I called "US Stealth", I asked Urs at Flarm if the Flarm device could be put into Stealth and locked for a predetermined time so that a single verification, presumably during the practice period, could be done. He indicated that this was quite feasible. If Stealth in competition takes off, obviously scorers all over will want this quickly. This also avoids the problem of not being able to supply a complying log because of a failure.
UH