The truth about Flarm Stealth and Competition definition...

Well, I would certainly consider anti-Flarm countermeasures to be unsportsmanlike in the extreme. However, unless Flarm use is mandated in that contest, then supressing one's Flarm signal or turning it off altogether would not be actionable under the rules. And, as Ron said, how would we know with certainty that someone was screwing around with their Flarm signal?

I know we gotta have rules, and situations arise where mandates are justified, but the idea of more rules and mandates generally sets my teeth on edge..

On Monday, 4 January 2016 17:42:19 UTC-7, WB wrote:
Well, I would certainly consider anti-Flarm countermeasures to be unsportsmanlike in the extreme. However, unless Flarm use is mandated in that contest, then supressing one's Flarm signal or turning it off altogether would not be actionable under the rules. And, as Ron said, how would we know with certainty that someone was screwing around with their Flarm signal?

I know we gotta have rules, and situations arise where mandates are justified, but the idea of more rules and mandates generally sets my teeth on edge.

Craig, aas Bill points out even if FLARM is mandatory is it mandatory that logs from the PF unit is turned in? Not every PF unit is able to produce a valid IGC file and many folks have other primary loggers. Even if a scorer gets all PF generated files how are they checked to determine if blockage has occurred? Scoring programs such as SeeYou Competition and SSA WINSCORE automatically determines if a airspace violation has occurred so are you advocating that these solution be upgraded to check PF files? Or do pilots turn in perceived blind gliders?