Another mid-air (UK)

On Wednesday, August 6, 2014 9:26:53 AM UTC-5, Dan Marotta wrote:
Kindly explain to me how Flarm or Power Flarm prevented someone from

flying into wires. Do they mount them on the towers on either side of

the flight path? I flew at Nephi last week (in a Flarm-equipped ship)

and saw and heard *nothing*. Does that mean there were no other gliders

nearby?

Dan, if you actually knew something about FLARM you would realize what a stupid statement that is. Obstacle avoidance (for Europe/Alps) is one of the big features of FLARM. As far as not seeing other gliders? Did YOU see any other gliders? So yes, probably any other gliders were either not FLARM equipped, out of range, or just NOT THERE!


Those making the most stringent arguments for Flarm seem only to

denigrate the intelligence of those who choose not to use it while, on

other threads, complain about such things as antennae placement, blind

spots (below and behind), software, displays, false alerts, no alerts,

etc. I'll bet they also drive hybrid cars and lobby for wind energy and

against nuclear energy.

No, I drive an old Jeep Cherokee, and have had NO problem with my PFLARM installation since day one. Have all three antennas, see Mode A/C/S transponders (that would be you), other FLARMs, and ADS-B airliners all the time. Where I fly locally there is one other PF and when we fly together, I get warnings of towplane activity, VFR traffic along I-70, airliners going into STL, and when he is near, NR on the PF - with an occasional collision warning when we get frisky during thermalling. No false alerts that I can tell. By your logic, fighters should not be using RADAR because it still does not detect everything from all aspects at all altitudes in all directions! FLARM is a SENSOR that does something humans are very poor at - detecting small airplanes in a big sky. And to me, the argument that pilots will look out less because of a PF and are therefore more dangerous is absurd - most of the time most pilots aren't scanning correctly and don't see traffic that a PF will detect easily - it's that Big Sky at work again!

And as to buying unfinished technology - who actually believes he can

beat Kawa by buying an ASG-29 or a JS-1?

ALL TECHNOLOGY IS UNFINISHED. And isn't Kawa flying a Diana 2, which is no-**** an unfinished glider!

Hey, if you like flying around blissfully unaware of who is around you, go ahead; at least PF will see your Mode S and give a warning. Me, I enjoy knowing who is sharing my airspace.

And what was it they said about most pilots shot down during WW1 & 2? Oh - yeah - they never saw the plane that shot them down. So much for See and Avoid!

Cheers!

Kirk
66

Gee... All this meanness. If I agree with you will you stop calling names?

Look, bottom line is this: I'm not convinced that the technology has
matured enough yet and I only pipe up on these threads when some kool
aide drinker starts calling us non users names. Be assured - I'm not
the only one, I'm simply the one who's not afraid to call the emperor
naked. Please try to deal with the fact that not everyone agrees with
you; that doesn't mean we're any more or less intelligent, only of
different backgrounds and experiences.

I will now bow out. Flame away.

Dan Marotta

On 8/6/2014 11:29 AM, kirk.stant wrote:
On Wednesday, August 6, 2014 9:26:53 AM UTC-5, Dan Marotta wrote:
Kindly explain to me how Flarm or Power Flarm prevented someone from

flying into wires. Do they mount them on the towers on either side of

the flight path? I flew at Nephi last week (in a Flarm-equipped ship)

and saw and heard *nothing*. Does that mean there were no other gliders

nearby?
Dan, if you actually knew something about FLARM you would realize what a stupid statement that is. Obstacle avoidance (for Europe/Alps) is one of the big features of FLARM. As far as not seeing other gliders? Did YOU see any other gliders? So yes, probably any other gliders were either not FLARM equipped, out of range, or just NOT THERE!


Those making the most stringent arguments for Flarm seem only to

denigrate the intelligence of those who choose not to use it while, on

other threads, complain about such things as antennae placement, blind

spots (below and behind), software, displays, false alerts, no alerts,

etc. I'll bet they also drive hybrid cars and lobby for wind energy and

against nuclear energy.
No, I drive an old Jeep Cherokee, and have had NO problem with my PFLARM installation since day one. Have all three antennas, see Mode A/C/S transponders (that would be you), other FLARMs, and ADS-B airliners all the time. Where I fly locally there is one other PF and when we fly together, I get warnings of towplane activity, VFR traffic along I-70, airliners going into STL, and when he is near, NR on the PF - with an occasional collision warning when we get frisky during thermalling. No false alerts that I can tell. By your logic, fighters should not be using RADAR because it still does not detect everything from all aspects at all altitudes in all directions! FLARM is a SENSOR that does something humans are very poor at - detecting small airplanes in a big sky. And to me, the argument that pilots will look out less because of a PF and are therefore more dangerous is absurd - most of the time most pilots aren't scanning correctly and don't see traffic that a PF will detect easily - it's that Big Sky at work again!

And as to buying unfinished technology - who actually believes he can

beat Kawa by buying an ASG-29 or a JS-1?
ALL TECHNOLOGY IS UNFINISHED. And isn't Kawa flying a Diana 2, which is no-**** an unfinished glider!

Hey, if you like flying around blissfully unaware of who is around you, go ahead; at least PF will see your Mode S and give a warning. Me, I enjoy knowing who is sharing my airspace.

And what was it they said about most pilots shot down during WW1 & 2? Oh - yeah - they never saw the plane that shot them down. So much for See and Avoid!

Cheers!

Kirk
66

Intelligence aside, we are irritated since the non believers are risking our lives.

Ramy

At 04:39 07 August 2014, Ramy wrote:
Intelligence aside, we are irritated since the non believers are risking
our lives.

Ramy


As a uk pilot let me put some background to this .
It's a comp that is proud of the fact that it can put 50 or 60 sailplanes
in the
air in well under a hour.
I flew there in the similar comp about 12 years ago,and while I completed
the
week I decided that it was outside my comfort zone and have not been back.
I was a very early user of flarm,probably because I lost 2 friends to a mid
air.
Other than including the flarm display in my scan I don't real look at it
unless
I get a bleep .
If I am in a gaggle I reduce my cockpit scan ,because by far the most
important thing is monitoring the rest of the circus plus the joining
gliders
that do not alway arrive at the bottom.,some will try and bounce the
thermal
arriving at mid hight at speed,pulling up and going back on track .
Dangerous you say ,that's comp pilots for you.
Flarm is great for spotting the distant glider before it becomes a problem

,once in a gaggle it's just a distraction.

At 06:40 07 August 2014, Jonathon May wrote:


As a uk pilot let me put some background to this .
It's a comp that is proud of the fact that it can put 50 or 60
sailplanes
in the
air in well under a hour.
I flew there in the similar comp about 12 years ago,and while
I completed
the
week I decided that it was outside my comfort zone and have
not been back.
I was a very early user of flarm,probably because I lost 2
friends to a mid
air.
Other than including the flarm display in my scan I don't real
look at it
unless
I get a bleep .
If I am in a gaggle I reduce my cockpit scan ,because by far
the most
important thing is monitoring the rest of the circus plus the
joining
gliders
that do not alway arrive at the bottom.,some will try and
bounce the
thermal
arriving at mid hight at speed,pulling up and going back on
track .
Dangerous you say ,that's comp pilots for you.
Flarm is great for spotting the distant glider before it becomes
a problem

,once in a gaggle it's just a distraction.


Swiss FLARM have said right from the start that see and avoid
rather than FLARM is the most important safety measure in
concentric gaggles. I support nearly everything that you say
but would like to look more at your last comment about FLARM
being *just* a distraction in gaggles:

Every alert received equals one given. You are confident of
your look out in thermal gaggles so you find receiving FLARM
alerts there a distraction. Fair enough - I don't react
specifically to each individual alert in a busy gaggle either.
But are you just as confident of other pilots' look out - the ones
that you are simultaneously giving the FLARM alerts to? The
ones that may be in your blind spot? Would you prefer that
they get FLARM alerts in gaggles as a wake up call to look out
all around or do you think that they will be so distracted by
them that their see and avoid will be compromised?

I don't think there is a definite right or wrong answer but I very
much prefer to give and receive alerts to keep us all on our toes
and also to help me to fly so as not to give alerts to others.

John Galloway