FLARM Statistics

"Ramy" wrote in message
oups.com...
I think you would get a very different reaction now, that it's been
discovered that the sky is not that big after all, not even on a
weekday over Minden nor over the remote Amazonas rainforest. I'll be
the first one in line to replace my volkslogger with a flarm. The cost
should be minimal.

Ramy


Ramy,

I'm not so sure. Mid-air awareness has probably risen some. However, the
Minden incident would not have been averted by Flarm, nor would the SA
mid-air between two jets. And because of the far flung "wide open spaces" in
the US, there are but few places, such as the Whites in NV, where glider
density comes close to the Alps (though I've not been there).

To make something universally acceptable in the US, if it only works between
gliders it'll have to be cheap and small. Such a device would be much better
received if it warns of both power and glider threats. The bigger
catastrophic risk at Minden is that an airliner and glider will try to
occupy the same airspace. Many of us worry about that and transponders seem
the best answer for now.

--
bumper ZZ (reverse all after @)
"Dare to be different . . . circle in sink."
Quiet Vent kit & MKII yaw string

bumper wrote:


To make something universally acceptable in the US, if it only works between
gliders it'll have to be cheap and small. Such a device would be much better
received if it warns of both power and glider threats.

I hope some clever person will modify a Zaon MRX by adding another,
perhaps externally mounted, RF "front end" that transmits an ID code and
the altitude every few seconds, then listens for other units. The
estimated distance (based on the strength of the received signal) of the
"threat" is displayed along with the transponder derived "threats". The
developer would have to do some reverse engineering on the MRX to gain
access to the altitude signal (or just use another pressure sensor) and
to mix the info into data stream to the logic/display, but could end up
with a small, cheap enough, add-on to the MRX. Ta da! Transponder and
glider proximity alerts in (maybe) one small box.

Or, a person even more clever might convince Zaon to do it instead.


--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA
Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

"Transponders in Sailplanes" on the Soaring Safety Foundation website
www.soaringsafety.org/prevention/articles.html

"A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation" at www.motorglider.org

"Eric Greenwell" wrote in message
news:U3iXg.5681$ic1.2059@trndny06...
bumper wrote:


To make something universally acceptable in the US, if it only works
between gliders it'll have to be cheap and small. Such a device would be
much better received if it warns of both power and glider threats.

I hope some clever person will modify a Zaon MRX by adding another,
perhaps externally mounted, RF "front end" that transmits an ID code and
the altitude every few seconds, then listens for other units. The
estimated distance (based on the strength of the received signal) of the
"threat" is displayed along with the transponder derived "threats". The
developer would have to do some reverse engineering on the MRX to gain
access to the altitude signal (or just use another pressure sensor) and to
mix the info into data stream to the logic/display, but could end up with
a small, cheap enough, add-on to the MRX. Ta da! Transponder and glider
proximity alerts in (maybe) one small box.

Or, a person even more clever might convince Zaon to do it instead.


--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA
Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

"Transponders in Sailplanes" on the Soaring Safety Foundation website
www.soaringsafety.org/prevention/articles.html

"A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation" at www.motorglider.org

Or, a "clever" person could design something akin to Garmin's RINO (a GPS
that is able to send it's position and/or acquire the position of other
nearby units - up to 23 nm in the air). Unfortunately, the FCC did not allow
Garmin to program the RINO to send/receive automatically - - one has to push
the side button to send position to all other units within range. The
"RINO", at $150 US, still remains a useful tool for buddy or team soaring.
(RINO will display other units range, bearing, and altitude. When your
buddy's info is updated on your display, your unit will "chime" and this
reminds you to push the button on your unit to send him your position. It's
also possible to "poll" other RINOs within range for their current
position - - though this takes more button pushes and so is not so
convenient while flying.)

Think about it though, if Garmin can use Family Radio Service (FRS or GMRS)
band to send / receive position, then why the h__l can't the FCC allow the
use of this radio band, even if limited to less power/range, to be used in
an automatic position reporting mode. The equipment would be cheap,
portable, low-power consuming and would display other threat aircraft on a
moving map display w/ GPS altitude.

Sounds just like a poor man's ADS-B, but with less range, doesn't it?
--
bumper ZZ (reverse all after @)
"Dare to be different . . . circle in sink."
Quiet Vent kit & MKII Yaw String

I suspect if these units could transmit in auto mode, the frequency would
become completely unusable.

Mike Schumann

"bumper" wrote in message
...


"Eric Greenwell" wrote in message
news:U3iXg.5681$ic1.2059@trndny06...
bumper wrote:


To make something universally acceptable in the US, if it only works
between gliders it'll have to be cheap and small. Such a device would be
much better received if it warns of both power and glider threats.

I hope some clever person will modify a Zaon MRX by adding another,
perhaps externally mounted, RF "front end" that transmits an ID code and
the altitude every few seconds, then listens for other units. The
estimated distance (based on the strength of the received signal) of the
"threat" is displayed along with the transponder derived "threats". The
developer would have to do some reverse engineering on the MRX to gain
access to the altitude signal (or just use another pressure sensor) and
to mix the info into data stream to the logic/display, but could end up
with a small, cheap enough, add-on to the MRX. Ta da! Transponder and
glider proximity alerts in (maybe) one small box.

Or, a person even more clever might convince Zaon to do it instead.


--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA
Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

"Transponders in Sailplanes" on the Soaring Safety Foundation website
www.soaringsafety.org/prevention/articles.html

"A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation" at www.motorglider.org

Or, a "clever" person could design something akin to Garmin's RINO (a GPS
that is able to send it's position and/or acquire the position of other
nearby units - up to 23 nm in the air). Unfortunately, the FCC did not
allow Garmin to program the RINO to send/receive automatically - - one has
to push the side button to send position to all other units within range.
The "RINO", at $150 US, still remains a useful tool for buddy or team
soaring. (RINO will display other units range, bearing, and altitude. When
your buddy's info is updated on your display, your unit will "chime" and
this reminds you to push the button on your unit to send him your
position. It's also possible to "poll" other RINOs within range for their
current position - - though this takes more button pushes and so is not so
convenient while flying.)

Think about it though, if Garmin can use Family Radio Service (FRS or
GMRS) band to send / receive position, then why the h__l can't the FCC
allow the use of this radio band, even if limited to less power/range, to
be used in an automatic position reporting mode. The equipment would be
cheap, portable, low-power consuming and would display other threat
aircraft on a moving map display w/ GPS altitude.

Sounds just like a poor man's ADS-B, but with less range, doesn't it?
--
bumper ZZ (reverse all after @)
"Dare to be different . . . circle in sink."
Quiet Vent kit & MKII Yaw String

It would make a lot more sense if someone would engineer a low cost ADSB
compliant transceiver that would interface with a PDA. Then eveyone could
go nuts developing software that would be able to identify not only gliders
but also power aircraft. Once the FAA starts installing the necessary
ground equipment, we'll even be able to see Mode C transponder equiped
aircraft using the ADSB version of TIS.

Mike Schumann

"Eric Greenwell" wrote in message
news:U3iXg.5681$ic1.2059@trndny06...
bumper wrote:


To make something universally acceptable in the US, if it only works
between gliders it'll have to be cheap and small. Such a device would be
much better received if it warns of both power and glider threats.

I hope some clever person will modify a Zaon MRX by adding another,
perhaps externally mounted, RF "front end" that transmits an ID code and
the altitude every few seconds, then listens for other units. The
estimated distance (based on the strength of the received signal) of the
"threat" is displayed along with the transponder derived "threats". The
developer would have to do some reverse engineering on the MRX to gain
access to the altitude signal (or just use another pressure sensor) and to
mix the info into data stream to the logic/display, but could end up with
a small, cheap enough, add-on to the MRX. Ta da! Transponder and glider
proximity alerts in (maybe) one small box.

Or, a person even more clever might convince Zaon to do it instead.


--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA
Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

"Transponders in Sailplanes" on the Soaring Safety Foundation website
www.soaringsafety.org/prevention/articles.html

"A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation" at www.motorglider.org

Mike Schumann wrote:
It would make a lot more sense if someone would engineer a low cost ADSB
compliant transceiver that would interface with a PDA. Then eveyone could
go nuts developing software that would be able to identify not only gliders
but also power aircraft. Once the FAA starts installing the necessary
ground equipment, we'll even be able to see Mode C transponder equiped
aircraft using the ADSB version of TIS.

The ground equipment is already in place along the east coast from New
York down to Florida, Alaska, Oregon, and a few other scattered places.
It's much cheaper than upgrading radar equipment, but suffers from the
classic chicken and egg problem.

In principle, a simple low power ADS-B transceiver (to be precise a UAT)
need be no more complicated or expensive to manufacture than a FLARM
unit. In practice, however, the certification costs alone are something
over a million dollars for a device which currently has a tiny market.
If the FAA really wants to kick start use of ADS-B in this country, they
need to take a serious look at simplifying or subsidizing the
certification process.

Marc

They are already doing that with Light Sport Aircraft. Do those rules apply
to avionics? I would suspect that the FAA would be very receptive to a
proposal that would drastically increase the visibility of gliders and other
airborne vehicles that are currently flying around without transponders.

Mike Schumann

"Marc Ramsey" wrote in message
...
Mike Schumann wrote:
It would make a lot more sense if someone would engineer a low cost ADSB
compliant transceiver that would interface with a PDA. Then eveyone
could go nuts developing software that would be able to identify not only
gliders but also power aircraft. Once the FAA starts installing the
necessary ground equipment, we'll even be able to see Mode C transponder
equiped aircraft using the ADSB version of TIS.

The ground equipment is already in place along the east coast from New
York down to Florida, Alaska, Oregon, and a few other scattered places.
It's much cheaper than upgrading radar equipment, but suffers from the
classic chicken and egg problem.

In principle, a simple low power ADS-B transceiver (to be precise a UAT)
need be no more complicated or expensive to manufacture than a FLARM unit.
In practice, however, the certification costs alone are something over a
million dollars for a device which currently has a tiny market. If the FAA
really wants to kick start use of ADS-B in this country, they need to take
a serious look at simplifying or subsidizing the certification process.

Marc

I read great ideas on this thread, but is there anyone who is listening
who can do something about it or is it all academic? I know that the US
soaring population has soaring instruments manufactures, soaring
software developers and FAA contacts which may be able to do something
about it. Sounds like the OZ's developed their own flarm, why can't we?

Ramy

Mike Schumann wrote:
They are already doing that with Light Sport Aircraft. Do those rules apply
to avionics? I would suspect that the FAA would be very receptive to a
proposal that would drastically increase the visibility of gliders and other
airborne vehicles that are currently flying around without transponders.

Mike Schumann

"Marc Ramsey" wrote in message
...
Mike Schumann wrote:
It would make a lot more sense if someone would engineer a low cost ADSB
compliant transceiver that would interface with a PDA. Then eveyone
could go nuts developing software that would be able to identify not only
gliders but also power aircraft. Once the FAA starts installing the
necessary ground equipment, we'll even be able to see Mode C transponder
equiped aircraft using the ADSB version of TIS.

The ground equipment is already in place along the east coast from New
York down to Florida, Alaska, Oregon, and a few other scattered places.
It's much cheaper than upgrading radar equipment, but suffers from the
classic chicken and egg problem.

In principle, a simple low power ADS-B transceiver (to be precise a UAT)
need be no more complicated or expensive to manufacture than a FLARM unit.
In practice, however, the certification costs alone are something over a
million dollars for a device which currently has a tiny market. If the FAA
really wants to kick start use of ADS-B in this country, they need to take
a serious look at simplifying or subsidizing the certification process.

Marc

Ramy wrote:
I read great ideas on this thread, but is there anyone who is listening
who can do something about it or is it all academic? I know that the US
soaring population has soaring instruments manufactures, soaring
software developers and FAA contacts which may be able to do something
about it. Sounds like the OZ's developed their own flarm, why can't we?

ADS-B is not academic in the US, I and others are working on a proposal
to the FAA to accelerate deployment in the Reno area. You are welcome
to contact me privately, to find out what is up, or come to the PASCO
Safety Seminar where I'll be making a presentation.

I don't think the population and distribution of gliders in the US is
sufficient to support development of an indigenous FLARM-like system.
If you'd like to prove me wrong, and you (or someone else) can provide
funding, I can arrange to get some prototypes built in short order.
Otherwise, ADS-B is the best bet for the long term.

Marc

OzFlarm is built in Australia by RF Developments Pty Ltd
http://www.rf-developments.com/ , who describe it :
"OzFlarm is an exciting new technology based on the tried and proven FLARM
collision awareness system developed by FLARM Technology in Switzerland."

So far as I know the only other manufacturer, also building under licence
from FLARM in Switzerland http://www.flarm.com/index_en.html is LX
Navigation in Slovenia Europe http://www.lxnavigation.si/ . LX are
represented in the UK by LX Avionics Ltd http://www.lxavionics.co.uk/ , so
far as I know SwissFlarm and OzFlarm are not represented in the UK.

I understand that some 5,000 Flarm units in total have been supplied
world-wide so far.

W.J. (Bill) Dean (U.K.).
Remove "ic" to reply.

"Ramy" wrote in message
ups.com...

I read great ideas on this thread, but is there anyone who is listening
who can do something about it or is it all academic? I know that the US
soaring population has soaring instruments manufactures, soaring
software developers and FAA contacts which may be able to do something
about it. Sounds like the OZ's developed their own flarm, why can't we?

Ramy