FLARM ethics

On jan 28th Flarm has announced that all of their devices need an update.
(see www.flarm.com)
This update has to be downloaded and installed before the end of march.
This update will be available "by early march", leaving max 3 weekends for
install at the airfield.
This update was "announced in 2011" and "is part of the flarm maintenance
concept".

What kind of "maintenance concept" is this?
They should announce on jan 28 a mandatory update due by JUNE 30th, not
MARCH 31!
And give people time enough time to update (at least 3 MONTHS BEFORE), not a
few days before.
We are talking about a collision avoidance system which is installed aboard:
airplanes, gliders, helicopters, and also paragliders.

Where is the firmware to update? Why if it is not available we must download
it "sometime in march" and run to the airfield to update all aircrafts?
Why FLARM cannot SCHEDULE after 4 YEARS a delivery date for the firmware,
and leave people at least 6 MONTHS for example to update it?

I have never seen in my life a company delivering a software with a time
bomb inside, announcing it like this. And this software is a collision
avoidance system.
They keep changing the "press release", so I copy and attach it to let you
understand what we are talking about.

... and the best part is the Tracking Server which is most probably the real
reason beyond all of this. But you have to figure it out yourself to
undestand why.



As of Feb 22: Press release on www.flarm.com

Scheduled and mandatory firmware update to all FLARM and PowerFLARM devices;
New TrackingServer

Baar, Switzerland – January 28, 2015 – FLARM Technology today announced that
a scheduled and mandatory firmware update is soon to be released for all
FLARM devices. The update is required for all FLARM-compatible designs. It
includes classic FLARM, PowerFLARM and FLARM manufactured by LXNAV, LX
Navigation, Garrecht/AIR Avionics, Triadis, Ediatec, Flytec/Bräuniger,
OzFlarm and others.

The update will be released by early March 2015 on www.flarm.com at no cost.
It includes safety features that increase the effectiveness and robustness
of collision warnings, further decreasing nuisance alarms, for example by
taking into account wind. It also includes new features to alert about
temporary danger areas such as skydiver drop zones, RC plane- and UAV zones.
Position and message encoding with newly introduced optional no-tracking
setting will address privacy for ground-based tracking solutions while
improving performance and system integrity. Some regions will see a change
in operating frequency, to improve range. The new obstacle database now
handles additional obstacle areas and types. Old obstacle database versions
are obsolete and will no longer work. Obstacle database and functionality
extension licenses can be purchased from shop.flarm.com.

This scheduled update has been announced with the last major firmware update
in 2011, and is part of the FLARM system maintenance concept since FLARM was
introduced to the market in 2004.

If the free FLARM update is not applied, the device will no longer be
operational and stop to operate after March 31, 2015.

Every FLARM device must be updated to the latest firmware and obstacle
database version at least once per year, which should be part of the regular
aircraft maintenance program. Failure to do so may render the device fully
or partially inoperable.

FLARM TrackingServer
In spring 2015, FLARM Technology will introduce a scalable TrackingServer
service, connecting FLARM ground stations and 3rd party receivers. This will
enable tracking of participating aircraft, for example during competitions
and by permitting flying clubs to track their own aircraft. It will fully
support the new no-tracking setting and existing FLARM “Stealth Mode� for
full global privacy. Search & Rescue operations (SAR) will have fast and
comprehensive access to the data. TrackingServer is designed to combine
various sources of tracking data such as FLARM radio packages (raw and
dataport), smart phone tracking, SPOT, FlarmNet and other sources, with its
core data and service accessible for everybody at no cost. FLARM ground
stations and airborne systems will eventually rebroadcast data received from
other sources to ensure maximal coverage regardless of the technology used,
using FLARM’s innovative, patented mesh-technology. FLARM Technology
welcomes other data sources and service enablers to collaborate with
TrackingServer.

Chill. All this means is that if you want Flarm capability after March 31 and haven't updated, you should do so on your next trip to the airfield, whether it's April or June. You'll not get to the airfield after 3/31 and find that your entire panel has melted down...

Marc

On Saturday, February 21, 2015 at 5:51:58 PM UTC-8, pcool wrote:
On jan 28th Flarm has announced that all of their devices need an update.
(see www.flarm.com)
This update has to be downloaded and installed before the end of march.
This update will be available "by early march", leaving max 3 weekends for
install at the airfield.
This update was "announced in 2011" and "is part of the flarm maintenance
concept".

What kind of "maintenance concept" is this?
They should announce on jan 28 a mandatory update due by JUNE 30th, not
MARCH 31!
And give people time enough time to update (at least 3 MONTHS BEFORE), not a
few days before.
We are talking about a collision avoidance system which is installed aboard:
airplanes, gliders, helicopters, and also paragliders.

Where is the firmware to update? Why if it is not available we must download
it "sometime in march" and run to the airfield to update all aircrafts?
Why FLARM cannot SCHEDULE after 4 YEARS a delivery date for the firmware,
and leave people at least 6 MONTHS for example to update it?

I have never seen in my life a company delivering a software with a time
bomb inside, announcing it like this. And this software is a collision
avoidance system.
They keep changing the "press release", so I copy and attach it to let you
understand what we are talking about.

.. and the best part is the Tracking Server which is most probably the real
reason beyond all of this. But you have to figure it out yourself to
undestand why.



As of Feb 22: Press release on www.flarm.com

Scheduled and mandatory firmware update to all FLARM and PowerFLARM devices;
New TrackingServer

Baar, Switzerland - January 28, 2015 - FLARM Technology today announced that
a scheduled and mandatory firmware update is soon to be released for all
FLARM devices. The update is required for all FLARM-compatible designs. It
includes classic FLARM, PowerFLARM and FLARM manufactured by LXNAV, LX
Navigation, Garrecht/AIR Avionics, Triadis, Ediatec, Flytec/Bräuniger,
OzFlarm and others.

The update will be released by early March 2015 on www.flarm.com at no cost.
It includes safety features that increase the effectiveness and robustness
of collision warnings, further decreasing nuisance alarms, for example by
taking into account wind. It also includes new features to alert about
temporary danger areas such as skydiver drop zones, RC plane- and UAV zones.
Position and message encoding with newly introduced optional no-tracking
setting will address privacy for ground-based tracking solutions while
improving performance and system integrity. Some regions will see a change
in operating frequency, to improve range. The new obstacle database now
handles additional obstacle areas and types. Old obstacle database versions
are obsolete and will no longer work. Obstacle database and functionality
extension licenses can be purchased from shop.flarm.com.

This scheduled update has been announced with the last major firmware update
in 2011, and is part of the FLARM system maintenance concept since FLARM was
introduced to the market in 2004.

If the free FLARM update is not applied, the device will no longer be
operational and stop to operate after March 31, 2015.

Every FLARM device must be updated to the latest firmware and obstacle
database version at least once per year, which should be part of the regular
aircraft maintenance program. Failure to do so may render the device fully
or partially inoperable.

FLARM TrackingServer
In spring 2015, FLARM Technology will introduce a scalable TrackingServer
service, connecting FLARM ground stations and 3rd party receivers. This will
enable tracking of participating aircraft, for example during competitions
and by permitting flying clubs to track their own aircraft. It will fully
support the new no-tracking setting and existing FLARM "Stealth Mode" for
full global privacy. Search & Rescue operations (SAR) will have fast and
comprehensive access to the data. TrackingServer is designed to combine
various sources of tracking data such as FLARM radio packages (raw and
dataport), smart phone tracking, SPOT, FlarmNet and other sources, with its
core data and service accessible for everybody at no cost. FLARM ground
stations and airborne systems will eventually rebroadcast data received from
other sources to ensure maximal coverage regardless of the technology used,
using FLARM's innovative, patented mesh-technology. FLARM Technology
welcomes other data sources and service enablers to collaborate with
TrackingServer.

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

Assuming you're in North America and the flarm is a PowerFLARM, they have given prior notice. The PowerFLARM CORE manual version 3.40, June 16, 2014, page 23 says:

"Mandatory firmware update
In order to allow global changes of the FLARM system, every FLARM/PowerFLARM software has a fixed expiry date. Firmware update before the expiry date is mandatory for continued operation. The next such date is March 31, 2015. All FLARM/PowerFLARM devices will start warning about imminent expiry 60 days prior to the expiry date."

In the table of contents, it says "Mandatory firmware update........23".

I'm sure the Portable manual has a similar warning.

The flarm.com webpage has this:

"The ability to update the whole network without being limited by constraints of the past is one of the key features of FLARM and has allowed it to adapt to rapidly expanding requirements. Many parts of aircraft require scheduled maintenance; this is not a concept which is new to aviation."

It should be pointed out as well that this is not the first mandatory update - I did a search on ras and found in Feb 22, 2011 from the FLARM team:

"When is the next scheduled service update due? Since its creation
FLARM has maintained scheduled updates, initially in a one year cycle,
in 2006 a two year cycle, and last time in 2008 a three year cycle. As
the technology matures, we further extend this period to now four
years, i.e. version 5 expires on March 1, 2015. This is more
convenient for some users, but slows down the innovation cycle,
possibly delaying the use in new applications."

I look forward to the next update... but I wish there were an opportunity to test it a bit before the Pan American Gliding Championship starting a day or two later.

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.

25,000 devices and rising rapidly is one heck of a "very niche
product" in a market comprising mainly gliding. Flarm, in all its
varied applications, must on of the most widely adopted proprietary
products in the history of gliding - I suspect it will be in the top spot.

Flarm comprises a communication protocol as well as a glider
collision prediction algorithm. For a safety device it would be
bonkers not to have all units not using the most developed examples
of both - especially when updating the firmware is so simple. We in
Europe have been easily coping with Flarm mandatory and optional
updates for several.

John Galloway




At 20:24 22 February 2015, Mike Schumann wrote:


It is NOT impossible to design system upgrades so that they are
backward
co=
mpatible 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
t=
he complexity of having multiple different device versions that
need to
tal=
k to each other. These kind of shortcuts make one question
whether FLARM
r=
eally has the potential to be a VERY niche product for a small
subset of
th=
e aviation market.

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

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

So easy to understand why Flarm would not sell into North America for so
many years...

At 22:18 22 February 2015, John Galloway wrote:
25,000 devices and rising rapidly is one heck of a "very niche
product" in a market comprising mainly gliding. Flarm, in all its
varied applications, must on of the most widely adopted proprietary
products in the history of gliding - I suspect it will be in the top
spot.

Flarm comprises a communication protocol as well as a glider
collision prediction algorithm. For a safety device it would be
bonkers not to have all units not using the most developed examples
of both - especially when updating the firmware is so simple. We in
Europe have been easily coping with Flarm mandatory and optional
updates for several.

John Galloway




At 20:24 22 February 2015, Mike Schumann wrote:


It is NOT impossible to design system upgrades so that they are
backward
co=
mpatible 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
t=
he complexity of having multiple different device versions that
need to
tal=
k to each other. These kind of shortcuts make one question
whether FLARM
r=
eally has the potential to be a VERY niche product for a small
subset of
th=
e aviation market.

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

On Sunday, February 22, 2015 at 12:24:44 PM UTC-8, Mike Schumann wrote:
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.

Please - anyone with a little knowledge of systems or control theory can tell you that maintaining full backward compatibility, while possible, is a boat anchor in terms of system performance. The Flarm folks made a prudent tradeoff to maintain overall system integrity and performance while enabling periodic improvements in algorithms that depend critically on timing. I, for one, am glad they made that choice.

This UAT ADS-R and TIS-B argument is growing increasingly tiresome. There's virtually no UAT-Out traffic out there when compared to Flarm and 1090ES-Out and certainly not when compared to what shows up on PowerFLARM's PCAS.

The numbers of aircraft equipped with different types of equipment, what equipment can see aircraft equipped with what other equipment and the scenarios where variously equipped aircraft come into proximity with each other has been analyzed in detail and the unavoidable conclusion is that the LAST piece of gear glider pilots should consider is ADS-B UAT Out - after PowerFLARM, after a transponder (preferably Mode S) and, maybe 5-10 years from now, after upgrading to 1090ES Out. It remains to be seen whether significant numbers of aircraft are going to equip with UAT Out in the GA community since 1090ES Out is the single standard for Europe and for anything that flies in Class A in the US. It may just steamroll UAT Out.

I agree with Kirk - misrepresentation of facts about systems that are important to safety is irresponsible. These arguments have been discredited on the facts and rejected overwhelmingly by the soaring community, the marketplace and the leadership of the SSA.

9B

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.