PowerFLARM leeching comments

In article , BobW
wrote:

On 10/17/2012 7:35 PM, Craig R. wrote:
Time to state the obvious. After reading the comments in many of the recent
PowerFLARM threads, many folks want to use PowerFLARM for ³leeching². Many
are asking for programs to expand and simplify the use of that data. While
that information is a byproduct of the important aspect of PF collision
avoidance data, I think it has hidden issues.

"Moffat-esque philosophy" snipped...


Obviously, I¹m setting myself up for major flaming here (GPS, computers,
programming, etc will be brought up).

WARNING: Attempted humor nearby. Read no further if suffering from high blood
pressure and prone to knee-jerk anger.

Craig you sub-human scum. How DARE you bring up in a public forum an aspect
of
human nature that at least one multiple world champion/elitist has publicly
previously excoriated over a period of 35+ years (and apparently to little
effect)?!? === :-) ===

But seriously, funnily enough I, too, have been wondering how long before
someone pointed out this aspect of this part of the PFlarm discussion. All
this "sub-par range-angst" over non-collision-worthy distant sailplane
targets...leech targets, if you will.

Realistically, the genie is out of the bottle, and SOMEone will develop
widgetry to improve and make more accessible to Joe Average Pilot the ability
to electronically leech far beyond the contest leeching Moffat so heartily
detests. Kids can you spell: "c-a-n o-f w-o-r-m-s"?

Talk about unintended consequences!

It certainly should be an interesting - unending - discussion.

Bob W.

P.S. For a good time, read Chapter 11, "Leeches" beginning on p. 103 of
George
Moffat's "Winning II".



Thanks to Craig and Bob for finally saying what many are thinking (at
least many of the folks I fly with). IT'S A LEECH BOX! Certainly, there
are those who are promoting Flarm out of genuine concern for safety.
But, it seems to me that there are some who wave the flag of safety but
really want a leech-box. It is too bad Flarm here in the US is so much
more expensive than the original European Flarm.

I am certainly in favor of safety devices. My Libelle is equipped with a
PCAS unit. However, I just cannot afford close to $2k for FLARM.
Especially when it seems that the US version is still apparently an
early "beta test" version. And, no, I don't have a "super vario" or a
purpose built navigation system. So no one should bother with "if you
can afford xyz, then you can afford Flarm".

On Thursday, October 18, 2012 8:25:22 AM UTC-7, WB wrote:
In article wrote: On 10/17/2012 7:35 PM, Craig R. wrote: Time to state the obvious. After reading the comments in many of the recent PowerFLARM threads, many folks want to use PowerFLARM for �leeching�. Many are asking for programs to expand and simplify the use of that data. While that information is a byproduct of the important aspect of PF collision avoidance data, I think it has hidden issues. "Moffat-esque philosophy" snipped... Obviously, I�m setting myself up for major flaming here (GPS, computers, programming, etc will be brought up). WARNING: Attempted humor nearby. Read no further if suffering from high blood pressure and prone to knee-jerk anger. Craig you sub-human scum. How DARE you bring up in a public forum an aspect of human nature that at least one multiple world champion/elitist has publicly previously excoriated over a period of 35+ years (and apparently to little effect)?!? === :-) === But seriously, funnily enough I, too, have been wondering how long before someone pointed out this aspect of this part of the PFlarm discussion. All this "sub-par range-angst" over non-collision-worthy distant sailplane targets...leech targets, if you will. Realistically, the genie is out of the bottle, and SOMEone will develop widgetry to improve and make more accessible to Joe Average Pilot the ability to electronically leech far beyond the contest leeching Moffat so heartily detests. Kids can you spell: "c-a-n o-f w-o-r-m-s"? Talk about unintended consequences! It certainly should be an interesting - unending - discussion. Bob W. P.S. For a good time, read Chapter 11, "Leeches" beginning on p. 103 of George Moffat's "Winning II". Thanks to Craig and Bob for finally saying what many are thinking (at least many of the folks I fly with). IT'S A LEECH BOX! Certainly, there are those who are promoting Flarm out of genuine concern for safety. But, it seems to me that there are some who wave the flag of safety but really want a leech-box. It is too bad Flarm here in the US is so much more expensive than the original European Flarm. I am certainly in favor of safety devices. My Libelle is equipped with a PCAS unit. However, I just cannot afford close to $2k for FLARM. Especially when it seems that the US version is still apparently an early "beta test" version. And, no, I don't have a "super vario" or a purpose built navigation system. So no one should bother with "if you can afford xyz, then you can afford Flarm".

This was covered in the recent Contest Pilots opinion Poll. I would suspect that the rules committee will follow the responses and act appropiately. Europe does not mandate stealth in their contest and I don't believe the World Championships did either.

Richard
www.craggyaero.com

I do not think that flarm will make that good of a leaching tool. Read Dave Leonard's excellent analysis of flying at the worlds. http://leonardzl.dyndns.org/uvalde/
They were trying to team fly and talking with each other and it was still very difficult to find each other.

ASW27BV

On Thursday, October 18, 2012 12:22:26 PM UTC-4, (unknown) wrote:
I do not think that flarm will make that good of a leaching tool. Read Dave Leonard's excellent analysis of flying at the worlds. http://leonardzl.dyndns.org/uvalde/ They were trying to team fly and talking with each other and it was still very difficult to find each other. ASW27BV

From another flarm thread:
All in all, I am very happy with the brick/9000 combination in my glider. I was able to see targets on the map out to about 10 miles and I found it particularly useful during the start period in Uvalde to keep track of the locations of the various start gaggles across the 10 km start line.

Dave Springford
www.foxonecorp.com