PowerFlarm at Uvalde?

[snip]

Who said anyone was "highly disturbed"? I didn't.

OK you said "very disturbing". I am highly disturbed at all the
melodrama.

Can you cite any other GPS based gliding equipment that requires the
GPS
antenna to be installed more than 30cm from any other GPS antenna?

Classic FLARM product documentation for years has talked about 25cm
separation. So hopefully this type of spec is not a surprise to many
folks who have been interested in FLARM for a while. And there are
thousands and thousands of classic FLARM systems flying and those pilots
have managed to live with 25cm separation specs and the very occasional
need to jigger things around to reduce any interference issues.

The Flarm transmitter is ~1Ghz (~915 MHz in the USA). GPS receivers are
very sensitive and operate on 1.2/1.5 GHz and when you mix these things
together in a close environment there is just always going to be some
chance of interference. And I am not as worried about the engineering of
FLARM products as much as I am that of other systems that might suffer
interference. There are many shoddy/badly designed and installed devices
out there in the wild wild west of glider cockpit avionics.

The need in the USA for a permanently attached FLARM antenna was the
FCC's requirement not something FLARM wanted to do.

give a rat's arse about the compass but I do care that my other GPS
receivers (currently 3 of them behind or on the panel) continue to
work and
there are reports from Uvalde of interference to other GPS based
equipment.

Sure FLARM is covering their arse. If there are problems of
interference
with other equipment the first question will be "Did you meet the
antenna
separation requirements?"

Just install the unit, in the unlikely event you do have interference
issues move the GPS antennas and fix it. FLARM just cannot engineer a
transmitter that is guaranteed not to interfere with any random GPS or
other electronic product out there. And the first response from any
vendor in that type environment (where they have no control over the
engineering and installation of the other boxes) had to be to tell users
to first try separating the antennas.

I expect many pilots may well replace one existing GPS receiver as they
want the FLARM enhanced NMEA data. That obviously does not remove need
for other receivers or backup receivers but if you do happen to end up a
having problems and have three existing GPSAnyhow just install the unit,
in the unlikely chance you do have interference issues move the GPSs
antennas and fix it. FLARM just cannot engineer a transmitter that is
guaranteed not to interfere with any random GPS or other electronic
product out there. And the first response from any vendor in that type
environment (where they have no control over the engineering of the
other boxes) had to be to tell users to first try separating the
antennas.

if you do happen to end up with problems and really have three existing
receivers and a fourth in the FLARM it may be time to clean up/simplify
your avionics!

Why would anyone buy a piece of equipment knowing that they could not
meet
the installation requirements? Why would anyone build equipment with
strict antenna separation requirements and then make the radiating
antenna
non removable thus preventing it's relocation?

PowerFLARM has to work with closer antenna separation that 30cm. If
it
cannot, it needs a design change. If it can, the user manual needs to
be
revised.

The user manual could better explain the reasons these limits are there.


Darryl

On Aug 10, 6:26*pm, Darryl Ramm wrote:

The need in the USA for a permanently attached FLARM antenna was the
FCC's requirement not something FLARM wanted to do.

How did you arrive at that conclusion?

The documentation on file at FCC clearly indicates that the reason the
antenna is locked into position is that the connector type is not FCC
approved. It is my conclusion that FLARM chose this compromise to
avoid the delay of changing to an approved connector.

https://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/eas/GetApp...tml?id=1491689

As Andy points out, perhaps this is one of the reasons for the delay
on the "brick" version. If the "brick" doesn't come with antenna
connectors on the back, there won't be much point. Perhaps a retrofit
of the approved connector can be done on the set-top boxes... We can
hope.

I went with the "brick" as soon as it became a concept, knowing
PowerFLARM is taller than the OzFLARM and how little I like anything
above the glare shield - compass, mirror, top of IPAQ, Plastic Jesus,
etc.

Many people install the OzFLARM or Swiss FLARM in a cutout at the top
of the panel, making the top of the unit flush with or under the glare
shield. An LS-6 I sometimes fly (VH-KYL, in which Brad Edwards won 15m
at Uvalde Worlds 20 years ago) has it under the glare shield.

Any of the Australian competitors at Uvalde will have input on the use
of FLARM, as they have flown many "FLARM mandatory" contests.

Steve, don't let the authorities see the quick disconnnect on the
stick-on antenna. Likely non-approved.
Jim

On 8/12/11 6:46 AM, Andy wrote:
On Aug 10, 6:26 pm, Darryl wrote:

The need in the USA for a permanently attached FLARM antenna was the
FCC's requirement not something FLARM wanted to do.

How did you arrive at that conclusion?

The documentation on file at FCC clearly indicates that the reason the
antenna is locked into position is that the connector type is not FCC
approved. It is my conclusion that FLARM chose this compromise to
avoid the delay of changing to an approved connector.

To be clear (maybe to other readers) it is not an "FCC approved
connector" in that sense like they are using some cheap connector now
and need a technically better one, they require a connector that
prevents the user swapping the antenna for another non-approved one
(i.e. one different than the device passes FCC tests with). Its CFR 47
Sec. 15.203 - that rule exists because of the concern about users
substituting higher gain antennas and exceeding the radiated power and
other specs within the IMS band (in this case). The whole
fixed/removable antenna comes up in other FCC approved/unregulated
consumer devices e.g. with consumer FRS vs. licensed GMRS radios. In
most consumer (e.g. non-licensed user) devices this usually results in
the antenna or cable being permanently attached to the device. Some of
the FCC enforcement/interpretation of this stuff gets a bit head-scratching.

Darryl

On Aug 12, 2:01*pm, Darryl Ramm wrote:
On 8/12/11 6:46 AM, Andy wrote:

On Aug 10, 6:26 pm, Darryl *wrote:

The need in the USA for a permanently attached FLARM antenna was the
FCC's requirement not something FLARM wanted to do.

How did you arrive at that conclusion?
The documentation on file at FCC clearly indicates that the reason the
antenna is locked into position is that the connector type is not FCC
approved. It is my conclusion that FLARM chose this compromise to
avoid the delay of changing to an approved connector.

To be clear (maybe to other readers) it is not an "FCC approved
connector" in that sense like they are using some cheap connector now
and need a technically better one, they require a connector that
prevents the user swapping the antenna for another non-approved one
(i.e. one different than the device passes FCC tests with). Its CFR 47
Sec. 15.203 - that rule exists because of the concern about users
substituting higher gain antennas and exceeding the radiated power and
other specs within the IMS band (in this case). The whole
fixed/removable antenna comes up in other FCC approved/unregulated
consumer devices e.g. with consumer FRS vs. licensed GMRS radios. In
most consumer (e.g. non-licensed user) devices this usually results in
the antenna or cable being permanently attached to the device. Some of
the FCC enforcement/interpretation of this stuff gets a bit head-scratching.

Darryl

So how is this going to work with a brick version, will there be an
external antenna or will the brick come with fixed internal or fixed
external antenna that limits our ability to put the brick where we
have space?

On 8/12/11 4:23 PM, Andrzej Kobus wrote:
On Aug 12, 2:01 pm, Darryl wrote:
On 8/12/11 6:46 AM, Andy wrote:

On Aug 10, 6:26 pm, Darryl wrote:

The need in the USA for a permanently attached FLARM antenna was the
FCC's requirement not something FLARM wanted to do.

How did you arrive at that conclusion?
The documentation on file at FCC clearly indicates that the reason the
antenna is locked into position is that the connector type is not FCC
approved. It is my conclusion that FLARM chose this compromise to
avoid the delay of changing to an approved connector.

To be clear (maybe to other readers) it is not an "FCC approved
connector" in that sense like they are using some cheap connector now
and need a technically better one, they require a connector that
prevents the user swapping the antenna for another non-approved one
(i.e. one different than the device passes FCC tests with). Its CFR 47
Sec. 15.203 - that rule exists because of the concern about users
substituting higher gain antennas and exceeding the radiated power and
other specs within the IMS band (in this case). The whole
fixed/removable antenna comes up in other FCC approved/unregulated
consumer devices e.g. with consumer FRS vs. licensed GMRS radios. In
most consumer (e.g. non-licensed user) devices this usually results in
the antenna or cable being permanently attached to the device. Some of
the FCC enforcement/interpretation of this stuff gets a bit head-scratching.

Darryl

So how is this going to work with a brick version, will there be an
external antenna or will the brick come with fixed internal or fixed
external antenna that limits our ability to put the brick where we
have space?

I don't think FLARM has got into specifics on this.

The Flarm transmitter antennas that the FCC really care about are not
"internal" on any FLARM unit (they have to point vertical, are too
large, and need to be clear of the components inside the box. They are
external--typically mounted on the case and outside the USA today there
are options for using a coax cable for remote mounting that antenna.

FLARM know what people have asked for/need here and I expect them to
have something that is remote installable. Small companies may not be
able to justify paying the setup/tooling costs for a custom RF connector
and matching antenna assembly. With different packaging of the brick
itself one option _may_ be a permanently fixed but "serviceable" antenna
coax connection. The sort of thing that comes "permanently" attached to
the unit but can be replaced/swapped for a longer one etc. by a
qualified installer able to open the box--and using standard connectors
inside the box.

Like I said, some of the FCC interpretation of this stuff can be a bit
head-scratching. So who knows exactly what Flarm will do, I have no
idea. I will worry about the exact details on how to instal my brick
once I see the final product announced/approved.

There are should be no issue with GPS receiver antennas or the 1090ES
receiver antenna, and the logical thing there is just have them be
external and removable using standard connectors (MCX, SMA, ...)

Looking forward to getting my brick...

Darryl

On Aug 12, 6:46*am, Andy wrote:

That link to the single document does not seem to work. The following
should allow the complete document set to be viewed.

http://tinyurl.com/3m3mjx8

Andy

On 12/08/2011 23:46, Andy wrote:

The need in the USA for a permanently attached FLARM antenna was the
FCC's requirement not something FLARM wanted to do.

How did you arrive at that conclusion?

The documentation on file at FCC clearly indicates that the reason the
antenna is locked into position is that the connector type is not FCC
approved. It is my conclusion that FLARM chose this compromise to
avoid the delay of changing to an approved connector.

Absolutely. Actually, they tried to do it with bits of string and super
glue but too many people like you noticed (you are SO sharp!) and the
impedance was a bit high.

And then...total disaster! It has to be 30cm from all your other
antennae - AND THE COMPASS! If they were honest, trustworthy folks,
they would have made it a proper 12 inches instead of these uppity,
foreign "cm" things. You were right all along.

You'll also find that the current Power Flarms are just paper models
with a clockwork mechanism inside giving random target information that
they hope will fool most people until they can all go off on a holiday
to the Virgin Islands with their ill-gotten gains.

For God's sake give it a rest! Pick, pick. Pick, pick. Pick, pick, pick.

NOTHING Flarm ever does will make you happy. The thousands of satisfied
users all around the world who've had no trouble making it work for 5
years and think it's a brilliant piece of kit are a complete figment of
Flarm's imagination used only for marketing purposes in the USA to suck
in poor, innocent victims like you.

Take my advice. DON'T BUY ONE! You'll never regret it.

Just stop writing about something you clearly dislike intensely, have no
interest in and will never buy - and give us all a break.

Darryl - please - stop replying to his inane posts! It just encourages him.

GC

On Aug 16, 12:36*am, GC wrote:

Just stop writing about something you clearly dislike intensely, have no
interest in and will never buy

You are wrong about all of this. I have 2 on order.