On Aug 13, 11:35*am, Darryl Ramm wrote:
On Aug 13, 11:00*am, Andy wrote:





The FLARM in US thread has taken so may twist and turns I decided to
start a new one.

I was prompted by a discussion on u.r.a.s to read the SGU FLARM trial
report again. *I had read it when it was first published but since
FLARM was not available in US at that time I quicky forgot about it.
It's worth a read:

http://flarm.net/news/SGU_Flarm_Report.pdf

I know that John, one of the trial participants, drops in on ras
sometimes and would ask him to comment whether there has been an
update to this report or whether any of the suggested software changes
were implemented. *I'm particularly interested in whether a usable
heading referenced display was ever developed.

The uras thread that brought me back to the SGU trial report was a
heated discussion on what to do when FLARM alerts to a head on
situation. * It seems that, despite the increased use of FLARM in UK,
there is no standardized training in how to respond to its indications
and alerts.

That thread can be found at

http://uras.gliderpilot.net/?op=s2&id=30079&vt=

Do FLARM user in other counties have any sort of standardized training
in FLARM use or is it generally a case of read the manual and go fly
with it?

How many manufacturers have a current FLARM product? *Do all FLARM
manufacturers use the same algorithms or will the system response in a
given situation be manufacturer dependent? *So far I'm only aware of
one manufacturer interested in the US market but it may be important
to know the answer when referencing reports of user experience with
other FLARM *systems.

Andy

All manufactures use the same core Flarm technology/protocol versions
etc. and will issue the same alerts. Flarm even has a fancy system
that will expire all firmware on a certain date, effectively allowing
them to update over-the-air protocols etc.

I think that reading that report is a good reminder in general that
even with a well designed simple UI that these systems are the sort of
things that at a minimum pilots need to spend time getting used to.

(And sorry to twist this thread as well but...) One thing missing in
that "other thread" is that if we are worried about mid-air collisions
in contests then Flarm has an important feature of being able to
disable "spying" on your competitors but still provides traffic alert
warnings. Even PCAS can help by looking at climb rates of nearby
gliders (yes I'm talking about you Ramy! :-)). Flarm and ADS-B could
potentially allow you to see all nearby gliders, their altitudes,
climb rates etc. And a UAT could receive FIS-B weather information.
All good stuff in many situations but some of that is going to be a
headache for contest rules folks and contest organizers in future. At
least Flarm devices with their contest mode handles the Flarm side of
that well today, although it will be interesting to see what happens
if some gliders have ADS-B data-out. I pity the poor guys on the rule
committee dealing with all this.

Darryl- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Soooo, aside from first needing to be anywhere NEAR Ramy, what is it I
need to 'spy' on him??