PowerFlarm at Region 9 Contest

On Wednesday, June 12, 2013 2:26:35 PM UTC-4, Doug Mueller wrote:
NOTAMS do not mean closure of Airspace. It is only notification

that something is going on. If CD's dont do that they are doing a

dis service to the aviation community. I also believe they are

requested to do it by the AIM but I will check on that.



At 18:07 12 June 2013, unclhank wrote:

On Wednesday, June 12, 2013 1:33:28 PM UTC-4, Doug

Mueller wrote:

Another comment for contest racers. As long as it is a

sanctioned

contest=

and the contest directors have notified the FAA of the event,

the

airspace=

should be protected with the issuance of NOTAM's for all

aircraft. High

le=

vel airspace will be routed accordingly and Flarm would be all

that is

need=

ed and a transponder not be necessary. I tend to fly like Dan

M does and

do=

not care for contests. But I have every intention of being a

good general

=

aviation steward much like Dan M and commend him for trying

to postpone

tha=

t inevitable day. In full disclosure, I have a Portable Flarm and

I will

be=

installing a transponder shortly in my ship. Kudos to anyone in

the

commun=

ity that has Dan M's mindset. Doug



Just imagine the response when some CD calls and asks for a

NOTAM

"protecti=

ng" airspace over an area of 100 miles by 150 miles. The

laughter would be

=

deafening.

It is possible and common to temporarily close an airport to

permit grid

an=

d launch, but that is about all one can do.

UH



At Perry one year we had a task that was kinda near the Columbia
class C airspace. I dialed over to their approach frequency to
see if there was anything coming my way. Listening to the
conversations pilots were having with approach, they definitely
knew there was a glider contest going on, but they had no idea
what a glider contest was! (They referred to it as a "regatta".)

Matt

On Wednesday, June 12, 2013 2:46:25 PM UTC-4, K wrote:
On Wednesday, June 12, 2013 12:07:08 PM UTC-6, wrote: Just imagine the response when some CD calls and asks for a NOTAM "protecting" airspace over an area of 100 miles by 150 miles. The laughter would be deafening. It is possible and common to temporarily close an airport to permit grid and launch, but that is about all one can do. UH Actually this is not all one can do. Further, a CD can only "Issue" a local notam (with the concent of an airport manager). ATC can issue Notams for glider , balloon, model rockets and any other activity as they see fit. Kind of like the old days when you had to report towing activity in a control zone. Why do you find this amusing?

Many contest organizers do make their activity known to ATC or maybe the closest local tower. It certainly is a good idea. My comment was mostly aimed at the idea that this provides "protection". It may well be that at sites that work closely with their local ATC, traffic may be diverted. I know that where I fly in southeastern New York that if we called Boston Center and asked them to steer jets going into Newark around us, the response would simply be turn on your transponder and stay out of the way.
Fortunately they are still pretty high going over us.
UH

On Jun 12, 2:19 pm, Doug Mueller wrote:
Hi John, I applaud you for wanting to learn more. It is often an overlooked
or forgotten concept in soaring. Most pilots who get their PPL in gliders
think thats all there is to know aside from badge flying and contest prep.
If one was to pursue a
powered rating they would quickly realize the short sided philosophy. There
are commercially available courses out there offered by Jeppeson and by
King courses to name a couple on airspace. By looking at airspace use by
the IFR pilot you
can come to the conclusions you have already with VOR's. Although VOR's are
going to the wayside, it would be good to understand the Lat Long structure
of GPS. In the IFR world, due to airspace consolidation, aircraft are now
flying along
GPS coordinate system waypoints. There are preferential National Airspace
routing system wayponts in the continental United States. Airspace highways
for transcontinental flight if you will. Airspace is the most often
misunderstood concept
even in powered flight. It can get you in the most trouble as well. It is
understandable that emphasis is not placed on airspace in the glider
ratings but for the pilots wishing to persue X-C flight, it becomes
critically important to understand. In
the interest of safety I would be glad to answer any questions you might
have if you use this public forum so all could read and understand. Doug

Doug,

Thanks for the offer. The problem with doing such learning via RAS is
that we need more than words only because of the complexity of the
topic and the need to refer to Sectionals, TACs and Approach Plates.
In my case, it also involves learning the proper terminology before
writing! So I think I'm going to have to stick to face to face
conversations.

However, I would like to ask about the King or Jeppesen courses that
you mentioned. I would suspect that commercial courses would be geared
towards obtaining an IFR rating, and as such would be way over the top
for my needs. What I'm looking for instead is knowledge covering IFR
flight paths below 10,000 feet, with emphasis on safely conducting a
VFR flight that cannot maintain alititude while sharing class E
airspace with IFR traffic, particularly in the vicinity (say, 20
miles) of a class B or C boundary. Ideally, I'd like to come away with
the ability to mark up a sectional chart (and in future my moving map
airspace file) with areas to stay away from in my non-altitude
maintaining glider, given that PHL, EWR and JFK are using approaches
X, Y and Z today.

You mentioned the GPS coordinate system waypoints, which is another
complication for me. Some, but not all, are marked on sectionals. This
makes it difficult to take information from an approach plate and
transfer the data to a sectional. I've found that some approaches (for
example, see the one going into EWR that goes through SWEET at 7,000
feet) is marked on the NY TAC, but not marked on a sectional. There
are others (such as the ones that use SPUDS or BUNTS going into PHL)
that aren't marked on either the sectional or the PHL TAC, and don't
have airways associated with them, either. The IFR traffic is
expecting 8,000 feet at these points outside the class B, and
descending to 5,000 feet to points just inside the class B. I'm still
trying to make a map so I can stay away from these approach paths, and
getting more confused...

-John, Q3

John, if you would like, give me an area that you normally fly in and I
will see about building a cup file that would house the approach fixes in
the surrounding areas you fly. I have never done it before but I think I
can pull it off if you wish to try. Contact me via email
at canav8 at cox dot net and I will try to help. Doug

Alan wrote:
In article
writes:
On Tuesday, June 11, 2013 6:56:35 PM UTC-7, mike wrote:

PowerFlarm works best if most gliders use it. Offering not to fly when more=
than a few glider are airborne or promising not to climb in the areas of g=
ood lift, while generous offers, strain credulity a bit.=20

I expect a fair amount of sincere rationalizing between now and broad Flarm=
adoption in the US. It's a free country, but I will continue to encourage =
as many of my soaring friends to voluntarily adopt Flarm as I can. 100% ado=
ption at contests is the short-term goal.

Is Flarm still a closed (secret) protocol on the transmitted signal? If
it is, opening it up for others to implement it (if desired), and to make
the standard public, might go a long way to acceptance by removing the
monopoly of the manufacturer.

That comment suggests a bit of a gap in understanding of how the economy
works and how innovation is funded. First, Flarm is licensed to multiple
manufacturers today - including Butterfly who makes PowerFlarm. Second, the
pace of adoption would have to be dramatically increased to justify broader
licensing in such a limited market. This is especially true in hardware
businesses where gross margins are narrower and elasticity response to the
likely small change in street price would be unlikely to make up for the
drop in profit margin and revenues from subdividing of the market.

9B

On Wednesday, 12 June 2013 15:25:13 UTC-6, Doug Mueller wrote:
John, if you would like, give me an area that you normally fly in and I

will see about building a cup file that would house the approach fixes in

the surrounding areas you fly. I have never done it before but I think I

can pull it off if you wish to try. Contact me via email

at canav8 at cox dot net and I will try to help. Doug

During the 2011 15 Nationals in Logan UT I contacted ATC in SLC each day after we had the task defined. I would send them an email with the task area and then follow up with a telephone call. They would put a NOTAM out each day with the broad task area and to watch out for glider traffic.

The day we sent the fleet to the Teton's by Jackson Hole I contacted the tower there. They do not have a radar at Jackson and rely on SLC but they do verbally let pilots, coming to and departing from, know of the situation of gliders in the area.

Takes some digging to find the right folks to speak with. BTW a big kudo to Mark Keene for assisting with the initial discussions with ATC, nice to have a commercial pilot speak the speak with ATC.

Ron Gleason

On Tuesday, June 11, 2013 12:00:13 AM UTC-5, Mike the Strike wrote:
My first near mid-air with a glider some years ago involved a run down a cloud street - I was returning and a colleague was outbound. We were in radio contact and knew of the potential conflict. When we met, I saw a brief flash of wing and as I started climbing and turning, he passed 20 feet under my wing without ever seeing me. Replaying our igc files showed that we were both cruising around 85 to 90 knots IAS and had a closing speed of close to 250mph. I saw him at a distance of a mile, or about 12 seconds before we passed. Flarm would have helped.



I was one of the PowerFlarm skeptics, but have now seen the benefits. Gliders not so equipped are likely to become pariahs, firstly being excluded from competition and later from clubs or FBOs. I would not be surprised if insurance companies also weighed in by offering discounts to Flarm-equipped gliders.



I would lump pilots who moan about mandated safety devices with motorcyclists who like the freedom to ride without a helmet, except the pilot may kill one of his buddies too.



Mike

I will not install a power flarm or transponder in my KA6CR. too expensive.

Dale

Son,

It's not my mission or desire to discourage anyone from using Flarm. Nor do
I equate it with guns. I just get riled up at someone telling me what I
must do to share his sky.

I've stated over and over again that I performed my own analysis of cost,
benefit, useability and functionality for the type of flying that I do and
some folks continue to try to convince me that it's best if I get one.

Some day I might get one. Probably not. I encourage everyone who wants a
Flarm to buy, borrow, or rent one. If all of you will stop telling me that
I need one to fly in the same sky as you, I'll stop beating my drum.

I expect delivery of my Zaon MRX tomorrow or Friday. That should alert me
to any transponder equipped aircraft in my vicinity and my transponder
should alert Flarm guys to me.

"son_of_flubber" wrote in message
...
It's a near miracle that a group of "middle-age+" people have quickly
adopted an expensive new technology like PowerFlarm. The people in the
racing community that have helped ease this along deserve a lot of credit.
This is rare and true leadership in the community interest. Congratulation
and thank you.

On Wednesday, June 12, 2013 10:27:18 AM UTC-4, Dan Marotta wrote:

...I only care about the bandying about of such terms as
compulsory and mandatory. Those of us who truly care about our freedoms
understand that if we give an inch, those who want to impose their wills
will take the proverbial mile. I won't give that inch. I'll make my own
decisions.

Dan, you are making it sound like some of the leaders in the racing
community wants to take away your guns. Fine, don't install PowerFlarm.
But PLEASE STOP mixing the rhetoric of "gun rights" with the PowerFlarm.
You are discouraging anyone who owns guns and anyone who listens to gun
rights rhetoric from acquiring PowerFlarm. That is how persuasion works.
There are a lot of people on the fence about PowerFlarm and you are
influencing them. You are leading the charge in the opposite direction.
PowerFlarm is not a handgun.

Here is why I would politely ask you to stop beating your drum. YOU MAY BE
WRONG ABOUT POWERFLARM. PowerFlarm may be the right decision for someone
else who is on the fence. Please consider switching your drum beat to
something like, "I considered adopting PowerFlarm and I decided that it is
not for me because of how and when I fly. BUT you should make that decision
for yourself. PowerFlarm may save YOUR life. Lots of people think it is a
wise investment and I may be wrong, but I've chosen to take my chances. In
general, I don't like bells and whistles, so it kinda makes sense that I
would reject PowerFlarm."

If you can't go that far, how about switching to something neutral like
"PowerFlarm is not for me." Surely you have something better to do than
lead the charge against PowerFlarm.

Very nicely reasoned argument, Doug. I'd only add that "day" has already
come - way back in 1978 when a collision between a Cessna on an instrument
training flight and a B-727 on arrival, both under ATC control, had a
mid-air. All souls were lost in both aircraft and a few on the ground, as
well.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PSA_Flight_182


"Doug Mueller" wrote in message
...
John, I would like to share this with you and the entire glider community.
FWIW. I fly transport category aircraft for a living. I fly gliders and
small prop jobs for a hobby. I cannot over emphasis how critical
transponder usage is in this day and age. The airspace system has seen
huge
pressure to condense for the number of airspace users. For example a
transport category aircraft is separated from another aircraft by only
1000
ft vertically above Flight Level 290(29000ft.)
The terminal airspace that is a 25 mile radius of a major airport is
overflowing and the Air Traffic Controllers are now spilling aircraft over
into other airspaces. Your EWR example is a perfect case.
In the lower altitudes of the controlled D airspace below 18000 along
airways and terminal areas, the transports rely on TCAS because we are
generally travelling anywhere from 4 to 9 miles per minute. I am a trained
general aviator and my head is outside of the cockpit 75% of the time. For
whatever reason sitting in the transport I can never see traffic with the
use of my own eyes before TCAS spots the traffic. It is probably because
of
my focal length is geared to looking farther down the road at 4 to 9 miles
per minute. When I get a TCAS alert I change my focal range to look for
traffic that is within 5 miles of my aircraft. At the speeds I fly I have
approximately 30 seconds to 1 minute to acquire visual contact before I
fly
past the vfr target. I have flown in and out of RENO and a lot up and down
the CA coast. Looking for gliders in the owns valley has always been a
challenge. I have not seen one yet. I have seen them on TCAS but have
never
visually acquired one.
The day is coming when a glider or a small aircraft will collide with a
transport. The day that happens all gliders and GA aircraft will be
grounded since the transport industry is an economic contributor and will
not be punished or the incident. All General Aviators have a
responsibility
to try to postpone that day. The transponder is a simple solution to
postponing that day. You can be part of the problem or part of the
solution. I wanna keep having the freedom to fly my glider. Thanks for
listening. Doug


At 14:12 12 June 2013, John Carlyle wrote:
A few months ago I would have agreed with John Cochrane and just let it
go
=
when he said: "Transponders lets the FAA and airliners avoid me. That's
ve=
ry important where I fly since Midway approach seems to love to blast
airli=
ners through 20 miles of congested class E airspace right over our club
at
=
4000'. But now I know that there is more to it.=20

I fly near the Class B airspace of PHL and EWR, and have been using a
trans=
ponder for 5 years. For 4 of those years I've been pleased, as I've seen
so=
me airliners (mostly commuters but a few big guys, too) make slight
course
=
diversions to avoid me while I was thermalling. Clearly they saw me on
thei=
r TCAS. But in late March I found out that EWR ATC either filtered out
my
=
1202 squawk or just ignored it, as suddenly I found myself 500 feet below
a=
747 doing 250 kt. Turned out I was inadvertently flying under an
approach
=
path to EWR outside the Class B airspace (I certainly won't be flying
near
=
it again)! I'm sure the 747 saw me on his TCAS, but have since found out
th=
at he would only deviate if he'd gotten a RA, otherwise he'd be in
trouble
=
with ATC.=20

There are two lessons I learned from this. First, a PowerFLARM and a
transp=
onder won't prevent you from getting way too close to other traffic, even
i=
f they are under ATC control and have TCAS. Second, if you are a VFR
pilot
=
flying outside Class B airspace, you need to educate yourself on likely
app=
roach and departure routes that lie outside the Class B, and be very
alert
=
and careful if you get near them.=20

-John, Q3

John,

You've got some pretty good ideas there. If you're an AOPA member (there
are other ways, of course), you can get approach plates for the airports of
interest and take the coordinates of such things as Initial Approach Fix to
put into your data file. That's where the approach to the airport will
begain. Note that there are normally many approaches to an airport. There
are many other things such as terminal VORs but too many to discuss this
way. You would be best served to talk with an instrument rated pilot about
your ideas. Preferably he's also a glider pilot!

Do you need to be flying around instrument runways?


"John Carlyle" wrote in message
...
Doug,

I firmly agree that transponders are a necessity for gliders flying in
busy airspace. Having recently installed PowerFLARM, too, I think that
it is very useful for helping me be more aware of traffic. But that's
not really enough for a glider only rated pilot like myself. I think
it's critical for VFR only trained pilots like me to get educated on
how IFR traffic flows through VFR airspace.

A few years ago I learned the hard way that VOR stations have
increased traffic levels, so I put their locations into my waypoint
database so I'd know when to increase my vigilance. Now I know that
there are low level approach routes outside Class B airspace (I
previously thought IFR approaches were either inside the Class B or
over 10,000 feet), I'm trying to figure out how to mark their location
in my airspace file. Another thing I'm doing is picking the brains of
some fellow glider pilots who are ATP rated, to try and find out if
there are some other nasty surprises out there.

It would be great if there was some AOPA or FAA course that would make
flying VFR around IFR traffic learning more formalized. Have I missed
something?

-John, Q3


On Jun 12, 11:26 am, Doug Mueller wrote:
John, I would like to share this with you and the entire glider
community.
FWIW. I fly transport category aircraft for a living. I fly gliders and
small prop jobs for a hobby. I cannot over emphasis how critical
transponder usage is in this day and age. The airspace system has seen
huge
pressure to condense for the number of airspace users. For example a
transport category aircraft is separated from another aircraft by only
1000
ft vertically above Flight Level 290(29000ft.)
The terminal airspace that is a 25 mile radius of a major airport is
overflowing and the Air Traffic Controllers are now spilling aircraft
over
into other airspaces. Your EWR example is a perfect case.
In the lower altitudes of the controlled D airspace below 18000 along
airways and terminal areas, the transports rely on TCAS because we are
generally travelling anywhere from 4 to 9 miles per minute. I am a
trained
general aviator and my head is outside of the cockpit 75% of the time.
For
whatever reason sitting in the transport I can never see traffic with the
use of my own eyes before TCAS spots the traffic. It is probably because
of
my focal length is geared to looking farther down the road at 4 to 9
miles
per minute. When I get a TCAS alert I change my focal range to look for
traffic that is within 5 miles of my aircraft. At the speeds I fly I have
approximately 30 seconds to 1 minute to acquire visual contact before I
fly
past the vfr target. I have flown in and out of RENO and a lot up and
down
the CA coast. Looking for gliders in the owns valley has always been a
challenge. I have not seen one yet. I have seen them on TCAS but have
never
visually acquired one.
The day is coming when a glider or a small aircraft will collide with a
transport. The day that happens all gliders and GA aircraft will be
grounded since the transport industry is an economic contributor and will
not be punished or the incident. All General Aviators have a
responsibility
to try to postpone that day. The transponder is a simple solution to
postponing that day. You can be part of the problem or part of the
solution. I wanna keep having the freedom to fly my glider. Thanks for
listening. Doug