PowerFLARM at Uvalde

Darryl Ramm wrote:
There was a lot there not to agree with, what in particular don't you
agree with?

He tried to close the dialog more diplomatically than I would, yet you
insist on repeating yourself.

That you attitude is selfish? (a likely short delay to you of a device
not fully feature equipped for the usage scenario you are most worried
about for important benefit to contest pilots and the wider contest
community?).

Fascinating. You appear to be blind to the selfishness of those contestants
who had ample time to pre-order the same units ahead of poster RWW, but did
not. Is there some reason you are unable to see the selfishness in _their_
actions?

That we don't need another mid-air/fatality at a contest?

Why are their necks more precious than his? Participating in a contest is a
voluntary decision and contestants are expected to prepare accordingly and
expect the associated risks. It is clear from the product diversion that
many did _not_ prepare by ordering promptly, so those who took the biggest
risk in pre-ordering earliest (but are not entered in this contest) are now
being penalized to favor those who couldn't be bothered. That's a
favoritism that is neither fair nor moral nor wise.

That FLARM should not have prioritized units for Uvalde? (OK we know
you disagree on that)

Those who choose to engage in riskier activities but not make prompt
advance preparation to mitigate that risk should not be rewarded at the
expense of those who enage in less risky activities yet still make such
prompt advance preparations.

Your position is actually immoral, not that of the other poster.

That getting Uvalde organizers and others early experience with
PowerFLARM is important for the world contest?

You'd better stop posting; as a neutral observer the above comes across as
unfettered arrogance.

That getting USA contest pilots exposure is important before next year
for input for rule changes?

Sigh. More arrogance. Maybe you should just tell any glider pilot who is
not entering contests to go to hell cause they're ruining the sport for all
the high-risk takers?

There is something wrong with how I describe current PowerFLARM
firmware features? Especially lack of PCAS and 1090ES audible alarms
(coming in a future firmware update)?

At this point he probably rightly concludes that as a non-contestant any
such upgrade is going first to you-know-who so why bother?

You disagree on current USA airliner 1090ES data-out carriage? - or do
you know if the airline traffic you are worried about have significant
1090ES data-out carriage?(its great to know if they do - can you share
which airlines/aircraft and their equipage levels?)
You think PCAS' short range and lack of direction information does not
makes it of limited use for airliner/fast traffic collision avoidance?
You disagree that transponders are important tools for airline
collision avoidance?
You disagree that transponders are the only technology that works/
interoperates with airline TCAS systems?
You disagree that if airliners are a serious/dominant concern you
should prioritize getting a transponder? (if I had airliners very
frequently fly over my glider port at 3-5k I would have installed a
transponder a long tine ago--have you?),

I didn't see anything in his response implying anything that deserved such
a rant built up of rhetorical questions. Suppose he had said he was worried
about other gliders in his area - wouldn't your attempts to belittle him
using technicalities all come to all halt?

On 7/27/11 5:56 PM, Jim Logajan wrote:
Darryl wrote:
[snip]

You disagree on current USA airliner 1090ES data-out carriage? - or do
you know if the airline traffic you are worried about have significant
1090ES data-out carriage?(its great to know if they do - can you share
which airlines/aircraft and their equipage levels?)
You think PCAS' short range and lack of direction information does not
makes it of limited use for airliner/fast traffic collision avoidance?
You disagree that transponders are important tools for airline
collision avoidance?
You disagree that transponders are the only technology that works/
interoperates with airline TCAS systems?
You disagree that if airliners are a serious/dominant concern you
should prioritize getting a transponder? (if I had airliners very
frequently fly over my glider port at 3-5k I would have installed a
transponder a long tine ago--have you?),

I didn't see anything in his response implying anything that deserved such
a rant built up of rhetorical questions. Suppose he had said he was worried
about other gliders in his area - wouldn't your attempts to belittle him
using technicalities all come to all halt?

No, not at all. But if he was worried about gliders in his area I would
have pointed out the limitations in that scenario - e.g. unless the
other gliders are carrying PowerFLARM he would have very limited or no
warning of them (especially there is no Mode-C PCAS support yet and no
audible alerts for any PCAS or ADS-B targets, and effectively no gliders
in the USA are 1090ES data-out equipped today).

What I did do was deliberately highlight the conflict between wanting a
PowerFLARM now for a particular use for which the PowerFLARM as
currently shipping does not really address well, prioritized over
contestants in a large contest, where the PowerFLARM as currently
shipping should be well suited.

The "technicalities" were not mentioned to belittle anybody, they are
absolutely core here as to why the whole argument why Uvlade contets
pilots should not be prioritized just made *no* sense to me, and why I
reacted so strongly. A large part of my reaction is my head spinning
about what I expect is a misunderstanding of current PowerFLARM firmware
features and the situation with airliner traffic. And FLARM/Urs has
posted this firmware information recently right here on r.a.s.
Unfortunately with all this collison avoidcance technology, the
technical details are important. If you don't think so please try
reading my many posts here on r.a.s. where I try to explain how
technologies like transponders, ADS-B and FLARM work and what they will
and won't get you. I really hope none of these technologies are though
of as magic boxes that just work (although flarm-flarm gets closest to
that for the glider on glider or glider on tow plane scenario). And my
advice to considering getting a transponder if concerned with airliner
traffic (instead of the PowerFLARM if both cannot be purchased) is an
absolutely serious suggestion that can significantly decrease risk of a
collision.

Prioritizing contestants at Uvlade is not needed just because pilots
there may not have ordered their PowerFLARM products, many did - early
on. It would be very unfortunate if some contest pilots there would miss
their order delivery because somebody else is a few places ahead of them
in the queue - this went through multiple dealers and given how it was
done I don't think anybody could ever unwind exactly who ordered what
when. And I think it is important the pilots at Uvlade who ordered early
and who have been active supporters of PowerFLARM etc. have the benefit
of as many other gliders in that contest fleet being PowerFLARM equipped.

I am not a contest pilot, but I've looked at too many mid-air accidents,
and lost a friend to a (non-contest) mid-air and I really want to see
this technology used now where it can provide the best safety
improvements to as many of our fellow glider pilots as possible. And
again, given expected shipping rates the inconvenience to the rest of us
should be pretty small.

Darryl

On Jul 27, 8:56*pm, Jim Logajan wrote:
Darryl Ramm wrote:
There was a lot there not to agree with, what in particular don't you
agree with?

He tried to close the dialog more diplomatically than I would, yet you
insist on repeating yourself.

Fascinating. I don't have a position on the whole FLARM question but
it's entertaining to follow along.

If you haven't ordered a PowerFLARM (which, I seem to recall, its
supporters insisted we mandate for U.S. contests this year because
they were certain they'd be available), you simply must. ASAP. Not to
is to be negligent regarding your life as well as others'. Unless you
aren't flying at Uvalde. Then let those guys have the gadgets first.
You should be willing to incur more risk for the sake of the common
good. Don't be so selfish. Personally, I try to avoid implying that
any one person's life is more or less important than any other life
(or lives), or that incurring a risk for a few weeks is OK compared to
being protected forever. At least to that person's face, figuratively
speaking. But maybe I simply don't have the same absolute conviction.

But wait, you aren't really increasing your risk by foregoing your new
PowerFLARM. It won't help you that much now anyway unless you're
flying with a bunch of FLARM-equipped gliders, right? And if YOU don't
have one, they don't either. It's only as good as PCAS. But...wasn't
that the most recent if-you-don't-buy-it-you're-negligent, must-have
gadget? Or was that a transponder? Doesn't matter, you should have
installed them both years ago. Shame on you. For penance, order two
PowerFLARMS now, take delivery when the promised new firmware is
released, and lend the other one to a contest pilot whose budget can't
quite accommodate another few thousand dollars of mandatory equipment
on top of everything else he's invested.

Oh, and install that transponder anyway. PowerFLARM isn't perfect,
it's just better. And if your panel won't accommodate all the added
"better but not best" hardware introduced every few years, order a new
glider while you're at it. We know you're rich, else you wouldn't be
flying sailplanes.

I'm reminded of the handwringing years ago over pilots flying heads
down and locked on their new GPS receivers, moving maps, flight
computers, etc. If it's a new gadget for SAFETY, though, not to worry.
Just switch it on and forget it. We know you'll have the mental
discipline not to be distracted while flying in a gaggle or at 110
kts. under a Uvalde cloud street.

By the way, the easiest way to avoid collisions at Uvalde is to set
courses that don't involve gliders converging head on from nearly
opposite directions. Relying on technology (e.g., PowerFLARM) to
shield us from risks like that is akin to driving around with an
unfastened seatbelt because the vehicle is equipped with airbags. I
don't think I've ever flown in an emptier sky.

In engineering school, we learned an expression: "First you draw the
curve, then you plot the points." To religion and politics, I would
add technology as an area of life where the true believers are
sometimes so zealous and certain that they lose the ability to reason
with perspective. iPhone vs. Android, anyone?

Chip Bearden
ASW 24 "JB"
USA

On 7/31/2011 8:46 AM, Chip Bearden wrote:
Personally, I try to avoid implying that
any one person's life is more or less important than any other life
(or lives), or that incurring a risk for a few weeks is OK compared to
being protected forever. At least to that person's face, figuratively
speaking. But maybe I simply don't have the same absolute conviction.

I don't recall anyone suggesting pilot A's life was worth more than
pilot B's, but only that 1) the Uvalde contest pilot's life was at much
greater risk for that 2 or 3 week period than most other pilots, even if
their FLARM was delayed for months), and 2) pilot A would get a much
larger benefit from FLARM because most of the other pilots near him
would also have FLARM, unlike pilot B.

It's only as good as PCAS. But...wasn't
that the most recent if-you-don't-buy-it-you're-negligent, must-have
gadget? Or was that a transponder? Doesn't matter, you should have
installed them both years ago. Shame on you.

And same for this: I do not think most people recommending PCAS or
transponders did it with religious fervor, but used a balanced,
risk-based approach to it, along the lines of "if you are being
surprised by transponder equipped aircraft, get one of each".


In engineering school, we learned an expression: "First you draw the
curve, then you plot the points." To religion and politics, I would
add technology as an area of life where the true believers are
sometimes so zealous and certain that they lose the ability to reason
with perspective. iPhone vs. Android, anyone?

FLARM is NOT new technology (nor are transponders), and we have years of
experience to base our opinions on.

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (change ".netto" to ".us" to
email me)