OGN

I think there are some interesting issues here.

First off, I'm a supporter of Flarm. I have one, I think it's great, I encourage other people to get one.

But. Flarm has a defacto monopoly on glider anti-collision systems. No one can enter that market unless they conform to the Flarm protocol, for obvious reasons. And monopolies tend to behave in certain ways - they don't innovate, and they try to stamp on competition. It isn't Flarm that developed a glider tracking system - it's OGN. And Flarm's statement that they will only cooperate with OGN if it doesn't develop it's tracker is pure monopoly behaviour. Understandable, but not necessarily desirable. So whilst the OGN tracker doesn't particularly interest me, I don't think that Flarm should be allowed to stop it happening.

The privacy debate is an interesting one. I don't think it's as black and white as some make out. There isn't an absolute right to privacy - it's balanced by other things. If I walk down the street, I can't stop people taking photos of me, or CCTV recording where I am. If I fly using a transponder, people will see where I am (and to John Galloway's point about OGN using Flarm transmissions against Flarm's will, I ask if Flight Radar 24 needs the permission of transponder manufacturers such as Trig and Becker before they listen to transponder emissions. I don't think so.) In its last version OGN made a credible attempt to address the privacy issue - if you didn't put your details on Flarmnet, you weren't identified. If you used stealth mode, you weren't shown. Yes, there was a record of flights deep in the system which could be dug out, but then, there is in Flarm's system. And I don't think the fact that Flarm transmissions are encrypted is relevant, there are thousands of devices out there which turn those encrypted transmissions into clear text - and it's not OGN receivers, it's Flarms.

I don't think OGN can be criticised for using Flarmnet. That was a database published, without any Terms and Conditions in pretty much clear text, which allowed people to be identified when in the air, which is what OGN used it for. I suspect its rapid growth in the last year was due to, not in spite of, OGN (certainly at my club there were many entries). And when Flarmnet (funded by Flarm) objected, OGN stopped using it and set up their own.

But in any case, if that isn't enough, I think that OGN can address privacy concerns. Flarm has implemented a privacy bit - and OGN should respect this - and throw away any packets which have it set (providing it's opt out). It should not even keep them for S&R purposes - if you don't want to be tracked, we won't track you - at all. In addition, the new OGN database has a setting for 'I don't want to be tracked'. So there's two ways for those that don't want to be tracked not to be. And you'll only be identified if you put your details on that database. I've just added mine.

But what about the future? Well, I'd encourage OGN to keep going, and I'll actively support it - I think the collective, open nature of the venture is what a lot of gliding is about. I'd encourage Flarm to co-operate with it, without making unreasonable demands. If it implements the proposed tracking server, great - that may well work - though there are some technical concerns about the approach. In any case, I suspect that a new OGN client will come along soon, independent of Flarm the company - so there will be a couple of ways of achieving the same object. But that ought to get us back to the position of being able to build an even better tracking network, whilst allowing those who don't want to be tracked not to be.

Paul