If You've Flown a FLARM Stealth Contest, Vote Here

I'm a bit late to this interesting discussion, but here goes anyway:

I've only flown one contest with Flarm - Moriarty in 2013. Stealth not used, and I REALLY liked the situational awareness that Flarm provided - especially in head-on situations under cloud streets.

Not having flown at contests where leeching was a problem, I personally don't see the need for stealth at the local or regional level. At the national level, we should be doing whatever the rest of the world does (if we are serious about racing).

But here is a thought: Those of you who are so hard-on about limiting the range of Flarm displays, what about the advantage of young, 20-15 eyes vs old, not so perfect eyes looking through corrective lenses? Right there you have the potential for a significant difference in detection range of other gliders of interest. So, in the pursuit of "fairness", should we artificially limit all contestants to the same visual acuity?

Binoculars in the cockpit, anybody? I can see pilots wearing flip-down goggles, using them to scan for someone to leech... 8^)

So, I would be OK with a "Racing" mode ("Stealth" is a poor name, IMO) that would limit the display range to something useful for situational awareness and strip out altitude and callsign. At the risk of complexity, the display range could be either selectable (by the CD) or based on closure rate/direction of approach - more in head-on situations, less in side or rear situations, for example.

But really, I think this will all become moot when cheap ADS-B is available and common...

PS: Leaching is the loss or extraction of certain materials from a carrier into a liquid (usually, but not always a solvent) (Wikipedia). I sincerely hope it hasn't gotten that bad in contests!

Cheers,

Kirk
66

On Sunday, December 13, 2015 at 10:21:54 AM UTC-8, Dan Marotta wrote:
Isn't there some guy in the upper midwest who's running a grand prix
task?* Wonder who that could be...*





On 12/13/2015 10:12 AM, Sean Fidler
wrote:



We don't do Grand Prix in the US (wildly popular in the rest of the world) and I have not heard of anyone trying to run a Grand Prix task even though the rules now allow it. Assigned tasks are, again, as rare as a purple unicorn with a golden horn in the USA.




--

Dan, 5J

There is a local Gran Prix style contest every year at Truckee for the last 10 years. It is three times around a close in course of about 40 miles, with a simultaneous start. It is handicapped by locating a far turnpoint further away for faster gliders, thus at each lap crossing the start/finish line all gliders are even. Points are awarded for each start finish lap position, with double points for the last lap. It is a blast.

One of the rules is that at each turnpoint, pilots must announce so that everyone always knows where everyone else is, including the spectators. You know if you if you have gained or lost every few minutes. You leech off of other gliders, and your own thermals found on the previous lap as much as possible. It is much more like real racing, than typical glider racing which is in effect a time trial.

At 06:18 12 December 2015, WaltWX wrote:
Responding to Gary Ittner's take on stealth with FLARM...

My concern with using "stealth" mode is the uncertainty of
whether or not
w=
e are losing a safety factor by using FLARM. I respect Gary's
experience
an=
d judgement and am willing to change my mind if we only had
some
definitive=
analysis on the performance of stealth vs non-stealth mode
regarding the
s=
afety of collision avoidance. My concern is primarily midair
safety... not
=
the competitiveness change to the sport, recognizing that seeing
fellow
com=
petitors within a 3-5sm range does change things.

Why can't FLARM Inc step in and provide an analysis of an entire
contest
us=
ing the FLARM data in the igc files? It certainly would be more
convincing
=
to see a replay of competition days from various glider pilots
Flarmview
di=
splay... comparing that to the reality of where the glider targets
are
actu=
ally located.

I recognize that would be a research and comprehensive data
analysis
projec=
t... quite valuable to add to this discussion.

Walt Rogers WX

At the beginning of the 2015 Competition Season in the UK Stealth
mode was mandated for some competitions. A discussion raged on
urasb about this subject.
The requirement to mandate stealth was withdrawn.
It was shown that STEALTH mode does reduce situational
awareness and therefore must reduce safety. It then becomes an
argument as to whether this is acceptable in a competition
environment for the competitors.
This however was not the main reason why the mandate was
withdrawn. The setting of STEALTH mode also effects gliders flying
in non STEALTH mode, it reduces their situational awareness. Pilots
flying in gliders not in the competition also had their situational
awareness degraded and that can never be acceptable.
For STEALTH mode to be "acceptable" the setting of it has to have
no effect on a unit which is not operating in STEALTH mode and as I
understand it that is not an easy fix.

Thats funny Mr. St. Cloud. Funny indeed. ;-)

That sounds like fun jfitch! Sounds like a ton of fun and great for handicaps. Truckee is a beautiful place too.

On Sunday, December 13, 2015 at 3:12:09 PM UTC-6, jfitch wrote:
On Sunday, December 13, 2015 at 10:21:54 AM UTC-8, Dan Marotta wrote:
Isn't there some guy in the upper midwest who's running a grand prix
task?* Wonder who that could be...*





On 12/13/2015 10:12 AM, Sean Fidler
wrote:



We don't do Grand Prix in the US (wildly popular in the rest of the world) and I have not heard of anyone trying to run a Grand Prix task even though the rules now allow it. Assigned tasks are, again, as rare as a purple unicorn with a golden horn in the USA.




--

Dan, 5J

There is a local Gran Prix style contest every year at Truckee for the last 10 years. It is three times around a close in course of about 40 miles, with a simultaneous start. It is handicapped by locating a far turnpoint further away for faster gliders, thus at each lap crossing the start/finish line all gliders are even. Points are awarded for each start finish lap position, with double points for the last lap. It is a blast.

One of the rules is that at each turnpoint, pilots must announce so that everyone always knows where everyone else is, including the spectators. You know if you if you have gained or lost every few minutes. You leech off of other gliders, and your own thermals found on the previous lap as much as possible. It is much more like real racing, than typical glider racing which is in effect a time trial.

During this year's Region 4 S contest (New Castle) we all had PFlarm, standard mode. I seemed to be the only dummy who put his call sign into the config file resulting in being easily identified. If you prefer to only show your position, climb rate only connected to your Flarm ID, just skip putting your call sign out for all to see. Stealth Mode for the meek, there you have it. Remembering Flarm ID's in a large contest is near impossible, at least for me.
Herb, J7 (still squawking my call sign, btw.)

I made this point earlier in the discussion and received a comment something to the effect of 'impossible". Well it is not, as there is an Aux-power glider meet in Parowan over lapping the time frame of the Nationals at Nephi. Last time I flew out of Parowan I flew up to SLC so I know the task areas overlap. Again, liability issues.

On Sunday, December 13, 2015 at 4:45:10 PM UTC-8, Don Johnstone wrote:

At the beginning of the 2015 Competition Season in the UK Stealth
mode was mandated for some competitions. A discussion raged on
urasb about this subject.
The requirement to mandate stealth was withdrawn.
It was shown that STEALTH mode does reduce situational
awareness and therefore must reduce safety. It then becomes an
argument as to whether this is acceptable in a competition
environment for the competitors.
This however was not the main reason why the mandate was
withdrawn. The setting of STEALTH mode also effects gliders flying
in non STEALTH mode, it reduces their situational awareness. Pilots
flying in gliders not in the competition also had their situational
awareness degraded and that can never be acceptable.
For STEALTH mode to be "acceptable" the setting of it has to have
no effect on a unit which is not operating in STEALTH mode and as I
understand it that is not an easy fix.

Quite apart from the liability issues of crippling a device which it is
alleged warns you of an imminent collision and enables you to avoid
at situation where you even get close, I have great difficulty in
understanding the logic of the pro STEALTH lobby.
You buy an expensive piece of kit which purports to warn you of an
imminent collision. This unit also displays the location and velocity
of other units in your vicinity enabling you to avoid getting close to
a situation where a collision becomes a possibility and you then
want to reduce the effectiveness of the unit? I get that it enables
you to see if other gliders are doing better than you or vice versa
but you knew that when you purchased the unit in the first place,
so why did you do that? If the benefits are outweighed by the
disadvantages why bother?
All the information you need about FLARM is on their website,
including the recommendation that STEALTH mode is not used.
Quite why FLARM created the mode in the first place is another
different question.
For the avoidance of any doubt, I have e-mails from Urban Mäder,
Chief Technical Officer at FLARM who confirms that if one unit has
STEALTH mode selected then all other units, in any mode, receive a
downgraded data set from that unit.
Logically, having that information, any responsible organisation
should mandate that on no account should STEALTH mode be used.


At 20:16 14 December 2015, Jonathan St. Cloud wrote:
I made this point earlier in the discussion and received a comment
somethin=
g to the effect of 'impossible". Well it is not, as there is an Aux-
power
=
glider meet in Parowan over lapping the time frame of the
Nationals at
Neph=
i. Last time I flew out of Parowan I flew up to SLC so I know the
task
are=
as overlap. Again, liability issues.

On Sunday, December 13, 2015 at 4:45:10 PM UTC-8, Don
Johnstone wrote:

At the beginning of the 2015 Competition Season in the UK
Stealth=20
mode was mandated for some competitions. A discussion raged
on=20
urasb about this subject.
The requirement to mandate stealth was withdrawn.
It was shown that STEALTH mode does reduce situational=20
awareness and therefore must reduce safety. It then becomes
an=20
argument as to whether this is acceptable in a competition=20
environment for the competitors.=20
This however was not the main reason why the mandate
was=20
withdrawn. The setting of STEALTH mode also effects gliders
flying=20
in non STEALTH mode, it reduces their situational awareness.
Pilots=20
flying in gliders not in the competition also had their
situational=20
awareness degraded and that can never be acceptable.
For STEALTH mode to be "acceptable" the setting of it has to
have=20
no effect on a unit which is not operating in STEALTH mode and
as I=20
understand it that is not an easy fix.

At 07:22 15 December 2015, Don Johnstone wrote:
For the avoidance of any doubt, I have e-mails from Urban Mäder,
Chief Technical Officer at FLARM who confirms that if one unit has
STEALTH mode selected then all other units, in any mode, receive a
downgraded data set from that unit.

No one is going to take your word for that Don. Publish the emails - or are
they secret?

I read the FLARM published information differently and I quote from the
FTD14 document:

'Stealth mode. Instructs all receiving FLARM devices that the received data
must not be made accessible (...to display devices) in real-time full
precision, except for the purpose of collision warning.'

This does NOT say that the transmitted data is degraded. You would appear
to be promulgating a myth.

On Tuesday, December 15, 2015 at 4:15:16 AM UTC-8, Jim White wrote:
At 07:22 15 December 2015, Don Johnstone wrote:
For the avoidance of any doubt, I have e-mails from Urban Mäder,
Chief Technical Officer at FLARM who confirms that if one unit has
STEALTH mode selected then all other units, in any mode, receive a
downgraded data set from that unit.

No one is going to take your word for that Don. Publish the emails - or are
they secret?

I read the FLARM published information differently and I quote from the
FTD14 document:

'Stealth mode. Instructs all receiving FLARM devices that the received data
must not be made accessible (...to display devices) in real-time full
precision, except for the purpose of collision warning.'

This does NOT say that the transmitted data is degraded. You would appear
to be promulgating a myth.

Whether the information is not transmitted, not received, or simply not provided for display is of identical consequence, operationally.