As a non-contest-participating but
thoroughly-enamored-with-just-about-all-facets-of-soaring sailplane pilot, I'm
enjoying this particular thread for multiple reasons.

By way of trying to more clearly illustrate a point I'll make below, I've
taken the liberty of rearranging (and editing for brevity's sake) the order of
the two posts below, because the rational engineer in me kinda choked on what
seems to me a gross misrepresentation/oversimplification of a reasoned and
thoughtfully expressed point of view. So count me as someone who has no
problem with agreeing to disagree, but who does have a problem with
misrepresentation of a another's view along the way to expressing one's own
opinion.

On 8/20/2015 12:08 PM, Sean Fidler wrote:
On Thursday, August 20, 2015 at 11:56:06 AM UTC-4,
wrote:
I like the idea of a tool to help me have a better flight. If tactical
use of Flarm helps me get home I am all for it -

I hope we use FLARM as intended which was to avoid collisions (with
glider or obstacles) and not as an electronic substitute for skill and
judgement. EXACTLY!

The two most recent postings in this overly long thread (yeah, I admit
I've contributed my share) perfectly illustrate the conflict: whether in
contests to limit FLARM to collision avoidance (a function it performs
very well) or to allow using it to ease the challenge of getting around
course as fast as possible. Many have expressed opinions, which seem to
vary according to how "traditionalist" we are and--without implying
anything negative either way--how serious we are about soaring
competition.

We faced a similar question a few decades ago: whether to allow--and then
mandate the use of--GPS devices for navigation and flight logging.

Did that decision change what was necessary to excel at the highest
levels?
Major snip

One thing hasn't changed: I'm still clearly in the "limit FLARM to
safety" camp. But as I consider the small fields at the Elmira Nationals
and the shorter current entry lists for my two favorite fall contests
(New Castle and Fairfield), I wonder if making it easier for pilots to
compete is something we should at least consider as a valid parameter.

Chip Bearden ASW 24 "JB" U.S.A.

FLARM or no FLARM (or Stealth Mode current or proposed Competition Mode),
there will still be leeches.
Snip

This debate really comes down to people who don't like/want change and
people who can accept another variable (natural technology innovation) into
the mix.
Snip

Sean

For the record, I've never met either of the above posters (and after this
whiny post, both may hope to keep things that way!)...

Geez Louise, Sean, do you REALLY imagine JB's argument comes down to his view
on change? (I, for one, don't. Were I to attempt to put words in JB's mouth
I'd probably say something like: "This debate really comes down to people who
wish to limit the use of FLARM to the vision 'sold to the gliding community by
FLARM's creators,' and those who would like to use ALL of its
presently-perceived capabilities.")

Respectfully,
Bob W.