FLARM in Stealth Mode at US 15M/Standard Nationals - Loved It!

True. In Stealth mode you also won't get speed, track and climb rate info and the altitude will be dithered. That makes it hard for your display device to do anything other than 1mi / 1000 ft traffic alerts - which is what LX does with Stealth off anyway.

I'll have to look up whether collision alarms are calculated and passed to the serial port some how for high closing rate threats outside the 2km limit for stealth target blanking. Even if that's teue it's not at all clear that an alarm would come with any traffic display, since no exceptions are mentioned in the spec for blanking this info outside 2km and not every target on a reciprocal heading generates a collision warning sonita possible for converging traffic to get down to 2km and change course towards you. Flarm extrapolates, but it doesn't anticipate maneuvering. My setup is 8-12 km for head-on, so normally I'd pick up a potential threat a lot further out from a visual scan, voice annunciation not withstanding. I think of gliders making a 180 at a turnpoint as a classic scenario. They're invisible, then they're 10+ seconds away and you have an alarm (but maybe not a target on the display until they close within 2km?).

9B

Andy,
Check out FIRMWARE RELEASE NOTES FLARM 6.02 Firmware. As I read it, for any determined threat even outside 2km and +/- 300m vertically you should get an alarm, relative position, relative altitude, climb rate,track and speed but no ID.
XC

On Sunday, August 9, 2015 at 7:45:17 AM UTC-4, Andy Blackburn wrote:
True. In Stealth mode you also won't get speed, track and climb rate info and the altitude will be dithered. That makes it hard for your display device to do anything other than 1mi / 1000 ft traffic alerts - which is what LX does with Stealth off anyway.

I'll have to look up whether collision alarms are calculated and passed to the serial port some how for high closing rate threats outside the 2km limit for stealth target blanking. Even if that's teue it's not at all clear that an alarm would come with any traffic display, since no exceptions are mentioned in the spec for blanking this info outside 2km and not every target on a reciprocal heading generates a collision warning sonita possible for converging traffic to get down to 2km and change course towards you. Flarm extrapolates, but it doesn't anticipate maneuvering. My setup is 8-12 km for head-on, so normally I'd pick up a potential threat a lot further out from a visual scan, voice annunciation not withstanding. I think of gliders making a 180 at a turnpoint as a classic scenario. They're invisible, then they're 10+ seconds away and you have an alarm (but maybe not a target on the display until they close within 2km?).

9B

Working to stem the tide of technology seems a bit like tilting at windmills. While mandating Stealth buys a bit more time for the "good old days" (a few years) as 9B has pointed out once ADSB happens it nullifies stealth.

Allowance of other electronics (i.e. smartphone/tablet based) makes stealth just the tip of the iceberg.

Maybe a good use of our intellectual effort is to ponder how to sharply reduce the competitive advantage of Flarm (or visual) leeching.

Perhaps the "latest start time" concept advanced by BB has use here? You can start late and use technology to catch up, but you pay a price for it.

9B's "leach tax" concept may have utility here also.

So I am advocating spending more time thinking about how to change the task to sharply decrease the utility of Flarm leeching rather than just debating stealth/nostealth, which seems to me is a relatively short-term instance of the the overall challenge.

QT

Have we totally given up and agreed that ADS-B will be required in gliders, too?

Also, isn't it possible to have the same stealth technology in glider ADS-B boxes? It seems as though all the logic has been worked out. As this thread started out saying the stealth mode really works well for collision avoidance.

I am not buying the arguments about enhancing situational awareness. These seem to be coming from folks who haven't tried stealth mode or are wanting to use FLARM to enhance/extend their vision and improve their soaring performance by using thermals others have found and cored. Do we want unlimited use of this to be part of contest soaring where we are trying to determine who are our champions?

As FLARM becomes meshed, that is each FLARM unit transmits all the data it receives to all other units in range and so on, each pilot will have the ability to see what is going on in the whole task area. Again, this quickly takes us to a point where contests are about who can gather the most information from others rather than who can best read the sky.

XC

Unfortunately, there is no single device you can look to to enforce stealth logic on ADS-B traffic (Garmin will not likely devote a lot of time to algorithms that make traffic invisible) plus even if there were you'd have to figure out how not to blank out fast jets where 2km is probably not appropriate.

Then there is the issue of monkeying with the FAA's traffic system.

It may or may not be required for gliders, but it certainly will be available and given its usefulness for power traffic avoidance, do we really want to ban it?

It's tough to be King Canute - lots of things to worry about.

9B

On Sunday, August 9, 2015 at 9:04:04 AM UTC-4, XC wrote:
Have we totally given up and agreed that ADS-B will be required in gliders, too?

Also, isn't it possible to have the same stealth technology in glider ADS-B boxes? It seems as though all the logic has been worked out. As this thread started out saying the stealth mode really works well for collision avoidance.

I am not buying the arguments about enhancing situational awareness. These seem to be coming from folks who haven't tried stealth mode or are wanting to use FLARM to enhance/extend their vision and improve their soaring performance by using thermals others have found and cored. Do we want unlimited use of this to be part of contest soaring where we are trying to determine who are our champions?

As FLARM becomes meshed, that is each FLARM unit transmits all the data it receives to all other units in range and so on, each pilot will have the ability to see what is going on in the whole task area. Again, this quickly takes us to a point where contests are about who can gather the most information from others rather than who can best read the sky.

XC

Requirement being presented would be ADSB out so the "system" can see you. It does not mean you have to have and use a display and use ADSB in, particularly in competition. Currently "out and in" would not be contest legal in the US as it is not a permitted 2 way communication.
FWIW
UH

You could set the ADS-B Horizontal and vertical ranges to zero in PowerFlarm. Unfortunately that wouldn't stop people from putting a Garmin ADS-B unit that communicates to IOS or Android devices via WiFi in, say, the tail fin battery box or some other not obvious location. Receivers are pretty cheap and easy.

Ultimately, on-demand inspections might be required.

9B