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

I have an Oudie 2 that does the "talking." If you look at some of my soaring videos on YouTube you can hear the Oudie2 "talking" fairly often. I'll try and find some and post links here.

Thanks for th correction Dave N. I thought it was native to the Flarm Brick/Core. It really should be. Perhaps a speaker option (or standard). Without the audio cues, I think it is a bit dicey trying to cross check location visually on the display. Again, I almost never look at the display anymore.

I am shocked if the LX(xxxx)and ClearNAV do not give audio cues. They don't?

At the very beginning of this video there are some audio calls from the Oudie via FLARM. If you watch the other videos in the series you will hear numerous others.

http://youtu.be/tW-YF-mePXk

FLARM or no FLARM (or Stealth Mode current or proposed Competition Mode), there have always been and will always be leeches. I am still completely unconvinced that a pilot can take advantage of a supposed strong thermal (or gaggle) identified solely by FLARM and outside of visual range. I would love to see some SEEYOU evidence of that (I would be impressed with even ONE example). So far, astonishingly after the dramatic statements up and down this thread, I have seen nothing in terms of a replay example. I just honestly do not believe that one can leech effectively outside of visual range. This is simply overhyped in my mind until I see real examples.

This debate comes down to people who don't like/want tech and people who can accept another variable (natural technology innovation) into the mix. I don't mind Flarm or competitors seeing me on their screen. Its fun to see how other pilots are doing around me to be honest. Its fun when I notice them being there when I had missed them visually. This experience is much like Condor (highly competitive by the way) with the visual range setting. Condor racers turn it off in the big races (Stealth Mode), but leave it on for the easier going nightly events (last I checked). For beginner and advanced Condor pilots alike, it is simple fun to see how the race is progressing (at least within mile or two) in real time (racing) rather than being alone and "sneaking around" by yourself all day only to see what happens in the evening (after calculating scoring for AAT, HAT's...you know the drill).. We are also talking on "the radio" with TeamSpeak (program for gaming chat).

My ONLY problem with FLARM is that an arms race may (has) develop(ed) with special antennas, amplifiers, tin foil hats (antenna covers intended to block signal), etc. The game is to maximize an unfair advantage for yourself and to maximize the disadvantage for competitors. As with all games, there will be prodigies (tech savvy) at this new variable (skill). No other soaring technology really allows such a large of a variance in the usability of the available information. A GPS logger works or it does not. Varios are, for the most part, all the same. There is really not much difference between a smart phone with XC Soar (free) and an LX 9000 ($5000). While I am still unconvinced that the information FLARM provides is highly actionable (tactical), you CAN modify level of value to you to your competitors. This is quite unique, quite unsportsmanlike and quite sad.

With FLARM, I have done some more research and there are some clear, inexpensive and easy methods to "stacking the deck" in ones favor. In other words, FLAT OUT CHEATING! This is a big red flag. All the little intangibles such as IDing competitors in the start area or tracking them add up. One can easily exploit this advantage. If necessary, we would all simply have to learn how to manage and eventually master these "techniques." No big deal, but unfortunate to people who don't want to manage another variable. For these reasons, I support Stealth Competition Mode.

That said, if assurances could be made that the potential of each Flarm was the same (impossible), I would be fine with leaving it alone and accepting the new technology. Its fun and fairly harmless if equally available. In general, I think it is dangerous to let the RC ban or limit anything more than they already have.......BUT...this one makes good sense.....for the 3-4 years before ADSB :-). Then it will be weapons free electronic "vision" again and we will not be able to "ban" it.

This is a another very difficult decision for the RC. Do we accept it now or hold out a few years? I will vote for COMPETITION MODE. I also vote for strict rules against tin foil :-) and any non approved equipment (antennas, amplifiers, trained pets with excellent vision, etc) in the cockpit.

Since you asked. Last day of Dannsville 2014 (avaialbe on the SSA Website). If you pick my file, UH, SM, XC, MS, and W3 at minimum, you can see that I made two critical decisions thanks to FLARM. First, I was able to see where a few guys were out of the gate and headed in that direction. Note: It was a very unusual task (don't go there - we know your feelings on MATs). There was a choice of 3 or 4 waypoints as the first turn. It was also very hazy with a crazy mixed cloudbase with some climbs going up much higher than the surrounding cloudbase. When I started, I was out of visual range of the others who had chosen Loon Lake as the first turn. So, that made Decision #1 easy (where to go first). I then picked up MS climbing via FLARM and made a beeline for him. Good climb, but wasn't happy where he was going after that. Good news - several gliders off to the right per FLARM. I'll go there since I already have tactical advantage (i.e. I won the Start Gate). Decision #2 helped by FLARM. From there, SM, XC, and I made up a very nice working group that did EXACTLY what good working groups do - one guy would lead out and the other would spread out. SM and I were in 18M span with XC in 15, so all XC had to do was to stay with us and not get dumped. He's way too good a pilot to get dumped, and he ended up winning the day (as he should).

So, there's a real-world example of where FLARM helped make some critical early decisions that got me connected with the pack and then helped me get connected with a good working group. The 4-5 minutes I gained put me in second for the day, just out of first.

Not earth-shattering stuff, but shaving off a few minutes several times in a contest is usually the difference between 1st and "just out of podium range."

P3

On Thursday, August 20, 2015 at 4:13:42 PM UTC-7, Papa3 wrote:

Took a look at this - thanks. Observations in-line.

Since you asked. Last day of Dannsville 2014 (avaialbe on the SSA Website). If you pick my file, UH, SM, XC, MS, and W3 at minimum, you can see that I made two critical decisions thanks to FLARM. First, I was able to see where a few guys were out of the gate and headed in that direction. Note: It was a very unusual task (don't go there - we know your feelings on MATs). There was a choice of 3 or 4 waypoints as the first turn. It was also very hazy with a crazy mixed cloudbase with some climbs going up much higher than the surrounding cloudbase. When I started, I was out of visual range of the others who had chosen Loon Lake as the first turn.

(It looks like everybody was in a thermal together, some headed out and you went back and too a couple of turns in another thermal and left three minutes later. When the others (UH, XC, SM) set course for the first turn you were 0.22 miles away, so you probably had a decent idea where they were headed - or could have known - without Flarm. On a hazy day whether you'd have been able to spot them visually (or get within the requisite 1.25 stealth miles) is not clear).

So, that made Decision #1 easy (where to go first). I then picked up MS climbing via FLARM and made a beeline for him. Good climb, but wasn't happy where he was going after that.

(Well, it was a good climb for MS, who was the first one in the thermal - 3..3 knots. The second glider in the thermal was SM, less than a mile in trail who got 3.8 knots. After that was 44, 1.7 miles behind MS, who only got 2..6 knots. You were 4.25 miles back and got there 4 minutes later. For your Flarm leeching prize you were awarded...1.4 knots and 269 feet of climb (this is all per SeeYou). You also made a 90-degree left turn to get to the next thermal that MS found 3.5 miles away. He got a 2.8 knot climb. 44 was Stealth mode leech distance behind and was awarded 2.4 knots. You were a full 3.75 miles behind and by the time you got to this thermal you were alerted to by the magic of Flarm you were able to achieve...1.4 knots. Had you gone straight and run into the same thermal as UH, XC and SM who knows what you'd have gotten - they achieved 1.4-1.6 knots, so a little bit better that you got with your Flarm-inspired deviation. It's not clear if the deviation was off course, or you just turned early - I didn't load the waypoints, or your flight claim).

Good news - several gliders off to the right per FLARM. I'll go there since I already have tactical advantage (i.e. I won the Start Gate). Decision #2 helped by FLARM.

(You had about 7 miles separation when you set out from the prior thermal. From that point on, you and the other three were on a converging course (does your Flarm get 7 miles or was that just happenstance? It was more or less the course you were on already). It looks like you deviated more steeply to meet up with them from about two miles apart, which probably cost you a fraction of a mile. It's not clear that Flarm did you any good on this as you would have met up anyway - at least with Stealth mode - if it was pea-soup hazy maybe you wouldn't have ever gotten an actual eyeball on anyone.)


From there, SM, XC, and I made up a very nice working group that did EXACTLY what good working groups do - one guy would lead out and the other would spread out. SM and I were in 18M span with XC in 15, so all XC had to do was to stay with us and not get dumped. He's way too good a pilot to get dumped, and he ended up winning the day (as he should).

(Loose team flying out on course has been common practice for generations, not really related to Flarm. We could invoke penalties for "team flying" anytime any gliders take two or more thermal in a row together - per their IGC files. It would be pretty easy. However, despite the "cheaty" nature of it, I think people kind of enjoy it. The "stay with the group and win on handicap" is harder than it seems, but even so there have been occasional calls to"legislate" it away).

So, there's a real-world example of where FLARM helped make some critical early decisions that got me connected with the pack and then helped me get connected with a good working group. The 4-5 minutes I gained put me in second for the day, just out of first.

(I'd have to load all the waypoints and the task, but it appears that the Flarm-related activities actually hurt you slightly (slower climbs that the non-leechers, by a good margin. It seems from the flight data that you actually earned your second by flying better on the non-leechy parts of your flight.

BTW, as I go through the "leechy" contest days people have sent me to look at, this is becoming a common theme. The first glider in a thermal pretty consistently gets the best climb. OTOH, followers - particularly as they get more than a mile or two behind - pretty consistently get substantially poorer climbs. I won't claim it as a universal truth but if you think for a minute how pilots decide whether to stop for a thermal they found versus one someone else is already climbing in you can start to see how the performance statistics would get skewed. Chasing someone else's thermal from more than a mile or two out is often a sucker's bet, and the worst part is you don't even know you were snookered until the flight is over and you can look at all the logs.

Veeery interestink.

9B

Hi Andy,

I think you missed the forest for the trees with your fine-grained analysis.. There were two or three very important decisions I made based on FLARM. Two of them worked out. Getting to the start gaggle (I'd been behind a wall of cloud a couple of miles away) and seeing where the start gaggle went (come fly NY in August some time - you'll understand what it means to "lose" somebody 3 miles out of the gate). The second was deviating very distinctly toward MS (90 degrees off my original course line). Again, whether it worked out better or worse doesn't matter - it put me into the general area of the other glider and I was able to bounce two climbs from/with him. That altitude is what let me hook back up with the rest of the fleet later on down track.

Everything after the above was pure visual/classic gaggle flying. It was wonderful. No FLARM required for that. I love a "good working group" of 3 or 4 gliders, but it's not clear that I would've been in that group if I hadn't had FLARM in the first place.

Sean asked for an example where someone used FLARM to achieve tactical results. Given that it was only my 5th day ever flying with it, I'm pretty happy that I was able to get any information out of it.

Off to sit in the back of a 2-33 in the sweltering heat for a few hours for some instructing duty. Yay.

P3





On Friday, August 21, 2015 at 2:19:19 AM UTC-4, Andy Blackburn wrote:
On Thursday, August 20, 2015 at 4:13:42 PM UTC-7, Papa3 wrote:

Took a look at this - thanks. Observations in-line.

Since you asked. Last day of Dannsville 2014 (avaialbe on the SSA Website). If you pick my file, UH, SM, XC, MS, and W3 at minimum, you can see that I made two critical decisions thanks to FLARM. First, I was able to see where a few guys were out of the gate and headed in that direction. Note: It was a very unusual task (don't go there - we know your feelings on MATs). There was a choice of 3 or 4 waypoints as the first turn. It was also very hazy with a crazy mixed cloudbase with some climbs going up much higher than the surrounding cloudbase. When I started, I was out of visual range of the others who had chosen Loon Lake as the first turn.

(It looks like everybody was in a thermal together, some headed out and you went back and too a couple of turns in another thermal and left three minutes later. When the others (UH, XC, SM) set course for the first turn you were 0.22 miles away, so you probably had a decent idea where they were headed - or could have known - without Flarm. On a hazy day whether you'd have been able to spot them visually (or get within the requisite 1.25 stealth miles) is not clear).

So, that made Decision #1 easy (where to go first). I then picked up MS climbing via FLARM and made a beeline for him. Good climb, but wasn't happy where he was going after that.

(Well, it was a good climb for MS, who was the first one in the thermal - 3.3 knots. The second glider in the thermal was SM, less than a mile in trail who got 3.8 knots. After that was 44, 1.7 miles behind MS, who only got 2.6 knots. You were 4.25 miles back and got there 4 minutes later. For your Flarm leeching prize you were awarded...1.4 knots and 269 feet of climb (this is all per SeeYou). You also made a 90-degree left turn to get to the next thermal that MS found 3.5 miles away. He got a 2.8 knot climb. 44 was Stealth mode leech distance behind and was awarded 2.4 knots. You were a full 3.75 miles behind and by the time you got to this thermal you were alerted to by the magic of Flarm you were able to achieve...1.4 knots. Had you gone straight and run into the same thermal as UH, XC and SM who knows what you'd have gotten - they achieved 1.4-1.6 knots, so a little bit better that you got with your Flarm-inspired deviation. It's not clear if the deviation was off course, or you just turned early - I didn't load the waypoints, or your flight claim).

Good news - several gliders off to the right per FLARM. I'll go there since I already have tactical advantage (i.e. I won the Start Gate). Decision #2 helped by FLARM.

(You had about 7 miles separation when you set out from the prior thermal.. From that point on, you and the other three were on a converging course (does your Flarm get 7 miles or was that just happenstance? It was more or less the course you were on already). It looks like you deviated more steeply to meet up with them from about two miles apart, which probably cost you a fraction of a mile. It's not clear that Flarm did you any good on this as you would have met up anyway - at least with Stealth mode - if it was pea-soup hazy maybe you wouldn't have ever gotten an actual eyeball on anyone.)


From there, SM, XC, and I made up a very nice working group that did EXACTLY what good working groups do - one guy would lead out and the other would spread out. SM and I were in 18M span with XC in 15, so all XC had to do was to stay with us and not get dumped. He's way too good a pilot to get dumped, and he ended up winning the day (as he should).

(Loose team flying out on course has been common practice for generations, not really related to Flarm. We could invoke penalties for "team flying" anytime any gliders take two or more thermal in a row together - per their IGC files. It would be pretty easy. However, despite the "cheaty" nature of it, I think people kind of enjoy it. The "stay with the group and win on handicap" is harder than it seems, but even so there have been occasional calls to"legislate" it away).

So, there's a real-world example of where FLARM helped make some critical early decisions that got me connected with the pack and then helped me get connected with a good working group. The 4-5 minutes I gained put me in second for the day, just out of first.

(I'd have to load all the waypoints and the task, but it appears that the Flarm-related activities actually hurt you slightly (slower climbs that the non-leechers, by a good margin. It seems from the flight data that you actually earned your second by flying better on the non-leechy parts of your flight.

BTW, as I go through the "leechy" contest days people have sent me to look at, this is becoming a common theme. The first glider in a thermal pretty consistently gets the best climb. OTOH, followers - particularly as they get more than a mile or two behind - pretty consistently get substantially poorer climbs. I won't claim it as a universal truth but if you think for a minute how pilots decide whether to stop for a thermal they found versus one someone else is already climbing in you can start to see how the performance statistics would get skewed. Chasing someone else's thermal from more than a mile or two out is often a sucker's bet, and the worst part is you don't even know you were snookered until the flight is over and you can look at all the logs.

Veeery interestink.

9B

On Friday, August 21, 2015 at 2:19:19 AM UTC-4, Andy Blackburn wrote:
On Thursday, August 20, 2015 at 4:13:42 PM UTC-7, Papa3 wrote:

Took a look at this - thanks. Observations in-line.

Since you asked. Last day of Dannsville 2014 (avaialbe on the SSA Website). If you pick my file, UH, SM, XC, MS, and W3 at minimum, you can see that I made two critical decisions thanks to FLARM. First, I was able to see where a few guys were out of the gate and headed in that direction. Note: It was a very unusual task (don't go there - we know your feelings on MATs). There was a choice of 3 or 4 waypoints as the first turn. It was also very hazy with a crazy mixed cloudbase with some climbs going up much higher than the surrounding cloudbase. When I started, I was out of visual range of the others who had chosen Loon Lake as the first turn.

(It looks like everybody was in a thermal together, some headed out and you went back and too a couple of turns in another thermal and left three minutes later. When the others (UH, XC, SM) set course for the first turn you were 0.22 miles away, so you probably had a decent idea where they were headed - or could have known - without Flarm. On a hazy day whether you'd have been able to spot them visually (or get within the requisite 1.25 stealth miles) is not clear).

So, that made Decision #1 easy (where to go first). I then picked up MS climbing via FLARM and made a beeline for him. Good climb, but wasn't happy where he was going after that.

(Well, it was a good climb for MS, who was the first one in the thermal - 3.3 knots. The second glider in the thermal was SM, less than a mile in trail who got 3.8 knots. After that was 44, 1.7 miles behind MS, who only got 2.6 knots. You were 4.25 miles back and got there 4 minutes later. For your Flarm leeching prize you were awarded...1.4 knots and 269 feet of climb (this is all per SeeYou). You also made a 90-degree left turn to get to the next thermal that MS found 3.5 miles away. He got a 2.8 knot climb. 44 was Stealth mode leech distance behind and was awarded 2.4 knots. You were a full 3.75 miles behind and by the time you got to this thermal you were alerted to by the magic of Flarm you were able to achieve...1.4 knots. Had you gone straight and run into the same thermal as UH, XC and SM who knows what you'd have gotten - they achieved 1.4-1.6 knots, so a little bit better that you got with your Flarm-inspired deviation. It's not clear if the deviation was off course, or you just turned early - I didn't load the waypoints, or your flight claim).

Good news - several gliders off to the right per FLARM. I'll go there since I already have tactical advantage (i.e. I won the Start Gate). Decision #2 helped by FLARM.

(You had about 7 miles separation when you set out from the prior thermal.. From that point on, you and the other three were on a converging course (does your Flarm get 7 miles or was that just happenstance? It was more or less the course you were on already). It looks like you deviated more steeply to meet up with them from about two miles apart, which probably cost you a fraction of a mile. It's not clear that Flarm did you any good on this as you would have met up anyway - at least with Stealth mode - if it was pea-soup hazy maybe you wouldn't have ever gotten an actual eyeball on anyone.)


From there, SM, XC, and I made up a very nice working group that did EXACTLY what good working groups do - one guy would lead out and the other would spread out. SM and I were in 18M span with XC in 15, so all XC had to do was to stay with us and not get dumped. He's way too good a pilot to get dumped, and he ended up winning the day (as he should).

(Loose team flying out on course has been common practice for generations, not really related to Flarm. We could invoke penalties for "team flying" anytime any gliders take two or more thermal in a row together - per their IGC files. It would be pretty easy. However, despite the "cheaty" nature of it, I think people kind of enjoy it. The "stay with the group and win on handicap" is harder than it seems, but even so there have been occasional calls to"legislate" it away).

So, there's a real-world example of where FLARM helped make some critical early decisions that got me connected with the pack and then helped me get connected with a good working group. The 4-5 minutes I gained put me in second for the day, just out of first.

(I'd have to load all the waypoints and the task, but it appears that the Flarm-related activities actually hurt you slightly (slower climbs that the non-leechers, by a good margin. It seems from the flight data that you actually earned your second by flying better on the non-leechy parts of your flight.

BTW, as I go through the "leechy" contest days people have sent me to look at, this is becoming a common theme. The first glider in a thermal pretty consistently gets the best climb. OTOH, followers - particularly as they get more than a mile or two behind - pretty consistently get substantially poorer climbs. I won't claim it as a universal truth but if you think for a minute how pilots decide whether to stop for a thermal they found versus one someone else is already climbing in you can start to see how the performance statistics would get skewed. Chasing someone else's thermal from more than a mile or two out is often a sucker's bet, and the worst part is you don't even know you were snookered until the flight is over and you can look at all the logs.

Veeery interestink.

9B

In many cases it is not all about a better climb, i.e. picking from a couple option to climb a bit faster, but about getting a climb at all, or at least going toward an area that is working.
At Dansville that day the real question out of the start was "will we get any climb at all, or end up at Avoca. Seeing others climbing ahead, and where, was a very big advantage.
Another less clear example is Elmira on day 6 this year. It was desperation start time with a big hole to cross somehow from low altitude. Those of us that got through the early part of the flight went to the blue more to the north. Others went to the really dark stuff more west. If they could have seen us climbing on Flarm, though poorly, I'm sure some would have come to us instead of lawn darting.
UH

Now we are having a good discussion! I think real world examples are good for everyone and if they show trends, a solid argument. I'm super busy at work, wedding tomorrow but I will look at these examples and put them on YouTube for the gang.

I will still try my best to disprove the tactical information presented by Flarm is high value or easily actionable, but I am open to the chance it is valuable. My reasoning for instituting stealth/comp mode is the variance in info available via cheating (a red flag)...not that it is really that helpful.

Sean

On Friday, August 21, 2015 at 5:56:05 AM UTC-7, wrote:
On Friday, August 21, 2015 at 2:19:19 AM UTC-4, Andy Blackburn wrote:
On Thursday, August 20, 2015 at 4:13:42 PM UTC-7, Papa3 wrote:

Took a look at this - thanks. Observations in-line.

Since you asked. Last day of Dannsville 2014 (avaialbe on the SSA Website). If you pick my file, UH, SM, XC, MS, and W3 at minimum, you can see that I made two critical decisions thanks to FLARM. First, I was able to see where a few guys were out of the gate and headed in that direction. Note: It was a very unusual task (don't go there - we know your feelings on MATs). There was a choice of 3 or 4 waypoints as the first turn. It was also very hazy with a crazy mixed cloudbase with some climbs going up much higher than the surrounding cloudbase. When I started, I was out of visual range of the others who had chosen Loon Lake as the first turn.

(It looks like everybody was in a thermal together, some headed out and you went back and too a couple of turns in another thermal and left three minutes later. When the others (UH, XC, SM) set course for the first turn you were 0.22 miles away, so you probably had a decent idea where they were headed - or could have known - without Flarm. On a hazy day whether you'd have been able to spot them visually (or get within the requisite 1.25 stealth miles) is not clear).

So, that made Decision #1 easy (where to go first). I then picked up MS climbing via FLARM and made a beeline for him. Good climb, but wasn't happy where he was going after that.

(Well, it was a good climb for MS, who was the first one in the thermal - 3.3 knots. The second glider in the thermal was SM, less than a mile in trail who got 3.8 knots. After that was 44, 1.7 miles behind MS, who only got 2.6 knots. You were 4.25 miles back and got there 4 minutes later. For your Flarm leeching prize you were awarded...1.4 knots and 269 feet of climb (this is all per SeeYou). You also made a 90-degree left turn to get to the next thermal that MS found 3.5 miles away. He got a 2.8 knot climb. 44 was Stealth mode leech distance behind and was awarded 2.4 knots. You were a full 3.75 miles behind and by the time you got to this thermal you were alerted to by the magic of Flarm you were able to achieve...1.4 knots. Had you gone straight and run into the same thermal as UH, XC and SM who knows what you'd have gotten - they achieved 1.4-1.6 knots, so a little bit better that you got with your Flarm-inspired deviation. It's not clear if the deviation was off course, or you just turned early - I didn't load the waypoints, or your flight claim).

Good news - several gliders off to the right per FLARM. I'll go there since I already have tactical advantage (i.e. I won the Start Gate). Decision #2 helped by FLARM.

(You had about 7 miles separation when you set out from the prior thermal. From that point on, you and the other three were on a converging course (does your Flarm get 7 miles or was that just happenstance? It was more or less the course you were on already). It looks like you deviated more steeply to meet up with them from about two miles apart, which probably cost you a fraction of a mile. It's not clear that Flarm did you any good on this as you would have met up anyway - at least with Stealth mode - if it was pea-soup hazy maybe you wouldn't have ever gotten an actual eyeball on anyone..)


From there, SM, XC, and I made up a very nice working group that did EXACTLY what good working groups do - one guy would lead out and the other would spread out. SM and I were in 18M span with XC in 15, so all XC had to do was to stay with us and not get dumped. He's way too good a pilot to get dumped, and he ended up winning the day (as he should).

(Loose team flying out on course has been common practice for generations, not really related to Flarm. We could invoke penalties for "team flying" anytime any gliders take two or more thermal in a row together - per their IGC files. It would be pretty easy. However, despite the "cheaty" nature of it, I think people kind of enjoy it. The "stay with the group and win on handicap" is harder than it seems, but even so there have been occasional calls to"legislate" it away).

So, there's a real-world example of where FLARM helped make some critical early decisions that got me connected with the pack and then helped me get connected with a good working group. The 4-5 minutes I gained put me in second for the day, just out of first.

(I'd have to load all the waypoints and the task, but it appears that the Flarm-related activities actually hurt you slightly (slower climbs that the non-leechers, by a good margin. It seems from the flight data that you actually earned your second by flying better on the non-leechy parts of your flight.

BTW, as I go through the "leechy" contest days people have sent me to look at, this is becoming a common theme. The first glider in a thermal pretty consistently gets the best climb. OTOH, followers - particularly as they get more than a mile or two behind - pretty consistently get substantially poorer climbs. I won't claim it as a universal truth but if you think for a minute how pilots decide whether to stop for a thermal they found versus one someone else is already climbing in you can start to see how the performance statistics would get skewed. Chasing someone else's thermal from more than a mile or two out is often a sucker's bet, and the worst part is you don't even know you were snookered until the flight is over and you can look at all the logs.

Veeery interestink.

9B

In many cases it is not all about a better climb, i.e. picking from a couple option to climb a bit faster, but about getting a climb at all, or at least going toward an area that is working.
At Dansville that day the real question out of the start was "will we get any climb at all, or end up at Avoca. Seeing others climbing ahead, and where, was a very big advantage.
Another less clear example is Elmira on day 6 this year. It was desperation start time with a big hole to cross somehow from low altitude. Those of us that got through the early part of the flight went to the blue more to the north. Others went to the really dark stuff more west. If they could have seen us climbing on Flarm, though poorly, I'm sure some would have come to us instead of lawn darting.
UH

If I take UH's and P3's observations together I think we come to an interesting group of insights.

First, there is growing evidence that typically Flarm leeching gives below-average climbs and is therefore a detriment to performing at the highest level on any given task. Many thermals are variable in strengths and leaders tend to find the strong bubbles (or they wouldn't stop to climb). Followers at more than a mile or so have increasing trouble finding the good part of the thermal.

Aside - Eric, as I look at your trace you caught the lead guys not because you used Flarm to find superior climbs (they were actually slightly weaker), but because you flew 3-4 miles less distance by cutting the first turn, which nearly exactly offset starting 3-4 miles behind them. I'm sure it was reassuring to find the pre-start gaggle, but it's not clear that you got any advantage from it - short of not landing out on a weak day, which is hard to prove would have happened since no one landed out on that leg that I could see.

Second, there is the case of desperation mode as UH points out. The "find any lift or land out" situation like Day 6 at HH. This is the situation where a Flarm target just might prevent you from lawn darting. For me it raises a question. Do we want to increase or decrease the probability that missing (or finding) one thermal on an iffy day determines who wins a contest? There are all sorts of provisions in the rules to devalue days like this, but it's no secret that the days where around half the field lands out are the ones that really make or break your position on the scoresheet. It also may partly explain why the HH results didn't map to the PRL rankings very well (UH made this point waaaaay up in this thread somewhere - random weather days scramble the scoreheeet, despite devaluation). I think this point has some merit - though the circumstances are VERY rare. What that means is Stealth mode increases the odds that the best pilots will get knocked out of contention for reasons that are beyond their control (finding a random thermal that everyone else misses). Is that a good thing or a bad thing for the fairness and enjoyment of sailplane racing? Put another way - do we want to decide races mostly in the air or increasingly via the landout?

More food for thought.

Off to Truckee to fly in the smoke of California wildfires.

9B

On Thursday, August 20, 2015 at 4:13:42 PM UTC-7, Papa3 wrote:
Good news - several gliders off to the right per FLARM. I'll go there since I already have tactical advantage (i.e. I won the Start Gate).

(Also, you didn't really catch them from your late start - they all flew three miles further to pick up a different first turn and you cut the corner off. For sure you got to see other pilots on Flarm and make decisions and that left the impression of gaining an advantage, but most of the Flarm-induced temptations you went for seem to have had a neutral to negative effect on overall performance. It's a bit hard to tell between neutral and negative because the part of the flight you didn't fly together as a working group had a different first turnpoint and the end result was different by only +/- 11 points - less than 1 mph).

9B