PowerFlarm for ADSB source?

i should have also added:

with FLARM, the aircraft move slowly, and they are all VFR, so having relative position and altitude from a non-certified, low-res source is still fundamentally useful for improving see-and-avoid (although not necessarily for IFR separation)

On Tuesday, February 24, 2015 at 10:36:13 AM UTC-5, Bob Pasker wrote:
I wonder if the reason for requiring high-resolution TSO'd GPSs is that ADS-B will be used for IFR separation and for fast-moving aircraft, so high-resolution position and updates is an absolute requirement, a la fast-scan radar.

On Tuesday, February 24, 2015 at 7:40:38 AM UTC-8, Bob Pasker wrote:
i should have also added:

with FLARM, the aircraft move slowly, and they are all VFR, so having relative position and altitude from a non-certified, low-res source is still fundamentally useful for improving see-and-avoid (although not necessarily for IFR separation)

On Tuesday, February 24, 2015 at 10:36:13 AM UTC-5, Bob Pasker wrote:
I wonder if the reason for requiring high-resolution TSO'd GPSs is that ADS-B will be used for IFR separation and for fast-moving aircraft, so high-resolution position and updates is an absolute requirement, a la fast-scan radar.

I believe Darryl. It's not the position resolution that is the issue. My consumer GPSs seem to do a pretty good job of resolution within a few meters. For ATC, when you are doing 5-mile separation, what's a few meters of resolution? It seems the TSO requirements that can't be met by consumer GPS is reliability (as in, is it producing a valid position at all) and error detection/reporting (can you tell when you are not producing a valid position at all and let the rest of us know).

Bob Pasker wrote:
i should have also added:

with FLARM, the aircraft move slowly, and they are all VFR, so having
relative position and altitude from a non-certified, low-res source is
still fundamentally useful for improving see-and-avoid (although not
necessarily for IFR separation)

On Tuesday, February 24, 2015 at 10:36:13 AM UTC-5, Bob Pasker wrote:
I wonder if the reason for requiring high-resolution TSO'd GPSs is that
ADS-B will be used for IFR separation and for fast-moving aircraft, so
high-resolution position and updates is an absolute requirement, a la fast-scan radar.

FLARM GPS *is* high resolution and highly accurate if it was not FLARM
could not possibly work. That separation between gliders in a thermal is
way less than what the FAA cares about using in the NAS. Some of the more
subtle GPS technical challenges were handled because FLARM knew what they
were doing, only worked with specific very well understood (to them) GPS
chipsets etc. Note that you never get to drive a FLARM with any old
external GPS source, but they provide a NEMA output as a convenience...

... and thank the FLARM folks for showing what is possible and helping the
FAA even get to TSO-C199. Now if anything ever comes from that we will have
to wait and see...

thanks for the clarification. regarding "one more time," I had not seen your earlier messages.