FLARM ethics

Le lundi 23 février 2015 18:53:17 UTC+1, pcool a écrit*:
I am afraid I posted to the wrong audience, because you dont even know that


I wish the Messr. Schumann and Suppards would just join hands and walk away,
far away from this forum. Maybe they can entertain each other with their
nonsense.

What a nonsense.

I fly with a Flarm from 2005 with no SD card facility, and it's easy enough:
After the deadline, the next occasion you see your glider, you do the update. Be it 3 days, 3 months or a year after the deadline.

Done.

If you have such a device installed, you know about the scheme. If you don't know to handle it, don't buy such a device, or stay away from gliding.

This concept has been working flawlessly for the last 11+ years. People like you are one reason why FLarm didn't want to sell their original device in the US.

snip People like you are one reason why FLarm didn't want to sell
their original device in the US./snip
Oh come on, now. I think you'll find that the original poster is from
Italy, not the US and the original Flarm didn't meet US Federal
Communications Commission requirements (not that I agree much with our
bloated government).
--
Dan Marotta

I think the real concern here is that during the month of March, updated flarms will apparently (according to another thread) not able to communicate with those which were not updated yet. This is surprising and concerning, at least I would expect this upgrade announcement will come with a clear warning, and also explains why the window for update is so short. It would be better if it was reduced to just one week...

Ramy

On Tuesday, February 24, 2015 at 9:50:36 AM UTC-8, Ramy wrote:
I think the real concern here is that during the month of March, updated flarms will apparently (according to another thread) not able to communicate with those which were not updated yet. This is surprising and concerning, at least I would expect this upgrade announcement will come with a clear warning, and also explains why the window for update is so short. It would be better if it was reduced to just one week...

Ramy

Yes, one reason to have a short transition is to reduce the incompatibility period, though one would think a better approach would be to have the new firmware retain the old protocols as well as the new ones and switch over on the expiration date automatically.

Andy, 9B

On Tuesday, 24 February 2015 18:18:49 UTC, Andy Blackburn wrote:
On Tuesday, February 24, 2015 at 9:50:36 AM UTC-8, Ramy wrote:
I think the real concern here is that during the month of March, updated flarms will apparently (according to another thread) not able to communicate with those which were not updated yet. This is surprising and concerning, at least I would expect this upgrade announcement will come with a clear warning, and also explains why the window for update is so short. It would be better if it was reduced to just one week...

Ramy

Yes, one reason to have a short transition is to reduce the incompatibility period, though one would think a better approach would be to have the new firmware retain the old protocols as well as the new ones and switch over on the expiration date automatically.

Andy, 9B

I suspect that some of the Flarm hardware is too limited to run two different protocols. Most people will probably install the new firmware before the first time they fly after it is released - and that is what should happen. Please pass on this message to any Flarm users you know. Certainly at an active gliding club like mine anyone who needs help to update will find more computer literate friends both equipped and willing to help.

PS We have to trust that the new firmware will work correctly on all Flarm compatible hardware! And keep looking out both before and after confirming that it does.

Mark Burton, London Gliding Club, UK

On Thursday, February 26, 2015 at 4:47:27 PM UTC-8, waremark wrote:

I suspect that some of the Flarm hardware is too limited to run two different protocols.

I confess I was thinking about the US where there is only PowerFLARM. Backward compatibility all the way to the original hardware creates some additional constraints in all likelihood.

9B