Is FLARM helpful?

Links?


On Monday, November 30, 2015 at 4:45:05 AM UTC-5, Jim White wrote:
XC, I am afraid the future is nigh. Andrej of Naviter and Erasim of LXNav
have both stated that it is their intention to integrate this intelligence
into their instruments. The scenario is that the instrument will feed data
into SeeYou Cloud in real time and recover useful data on thermals, hot
spots, winds etc. down track for the benefit of the so equipped pilot.

It's about quality of sport, so it's about rules.

I could perhaps have chosen better examples from cycling. The UCI has absolutely torturous rules on what constitutes an acceptable bicycle and they even specify the fit of rider to bike (and it varies from event to event). Recumbents would rule the day on time trials over flat courses (and the difference would not be small)... but guess what? They aren't allowed. About a million more examples from motorsports, sailboat racing and yes, even soaring (even the "open" class has rules).

T8

On Monday, November 30, 2015 at 12:02:18 AM UTC-5, Jonathan St. Cloud wrote:
Just to be clear the abuse of banned drugs is not a technological advance..

On Sunday, November 29, 2015 at 8:05:23 PM UTC-8, Tango Eight wrote:
On Sunday, November 29, 2015 at 10:24:01 PM UTC-5, Jonathan St. Cloud wrote:

I cannot think of one argument against technology (other than pervasive government spying on its citizens) that did not end up n the wrong side of history.

Oh good grief, how about: anabolics, EPO, PFCs and other performance enhancing drugs. They've basically destroyed competition cycling (that's my opinion, anyway) and the regulatory bodies still haven't figured out how to clean up the sport for real.

I think Sean's being a bit a(f)larmist (sorry), but there's no doubt that the "fish finder" changes things tactically and it's not wrong to look ahead and think about where creative minds can push this technology.

T8

They spoke at the BGA conference in March on this topic. I do not know
whether there is anything written.

Jim


At 11:10 30 November 2015, Tango Eight wrote:
Links?


On Monday, November 30, 2015 at 4:45:05 AM UTC-5, Jim White wrote:
XC, I am afraid the future is nigh. Andrej of Naviter and Erasim of
LXNav
have both stated that it is their intention to integrate this
intelligence
into their instruments. The scenario is that the instrument will feed
data
into SeeYou Cloud in real time and recover useful data on thermals, hot

spots, winds etc. down track for the benefit of the so equipped pilot.

On Monday, November 30, 2015 at 4:45:05 AM UTC-5, Jim White wrote:
XC, I am afraid the future is nigh. Andrej of Naviter and Erasim of LXNav
have both stated that it is their intention to integrate this intelligence
into their instruments. The scenario is that the instrument will feed data
into SeeYou Cloud in real time and recover useful data on thermals, hot
spots, winds etc. down track for the benefit of the so equipped pilot.

The LX9000 can already display Metars.

If allowed in competition this will mean that we shall all need to buy
into this expensive technology in order to compete.

Which brings me to drugs in sport. Whereas gliders are pretty easy to
scrutineer, people are not. I have often thought it would be fun to have a
truly 'open' class for the 100 metres. Anything goes: steroids,
amphetamines, opioids, and prosthetics. We would then see how fast man
can go and what man is prepared to do to win.

Jim


At 01:24 30 November 2015, XC wrote:
What I am referring to when I say that FLARM has the potential to suck
the
=
adventure out of the sport is the year when the FLARMs are netted
together.=
Each FLARM will receive and relay all the information it has to other
unit=
s. Soon displays will be developed to show the strength of all the
thermals=
gliders are currently using in the whole task area. Next displays will
log=
all the thermals and lift bands for the whole day and color code the
prefe=
rred hot spots. After that the data will be archived and pilots will be
abl=
e to analyze where they want to go given the forecast wind conditions and
l=
ift strength from their arm chair the night before. This scenario seems
to
=
be misaligned with the true spirit of the sport.

I suggest we get a handle on what our sport is all about before we lose
it.=
The idea of soaring as an unlimited technological frontier is nonsense.
Fr=
om the first day soaring has been about motor-less flight.

XC

Wow! Such a beautiful and exciting sport. Tough to watch it reduced to a video game due to lack of forethought.

XC

This is not exactly true. the LXNav 90XX can be equipped with a wifi module. Now try getting a data link via wifi above 2,500 AGL.

I like to fly long distance flights, would love to have XM weather on my LXNav!

The progression of change remains ever present, clocks that bind will be left to rust.



On Monday, November 30, 2015 at 1:45:05 AM UTC-8, Jim White wrote:

The LX9000 can already display Metars.

Hotspot your phone and you have your wifi signal via the 2G/3G/4G network at all ridge and thermic flight altitudes.

I love my LX9070 and being able to email my .igc file from my glider *after* flight. I don't like the use of internet-enabled devices *during* flight and feel that unless you're messaging loved ones your ETA for dinner, it's a form of cheating.

CJ

At 16:35 30 November 2015, wrote:
Hotspot your phone and you have your wifi signal via the 2G/3G/4G network
at all ridge and thermic flight altitudes.

I love my LX9070 and being able to email my .igc file from my glider
*after* flight. I don't like the use of internet-enabled devices
*during*
flight and feel that unless you're messaging loved ones your ETA for
dinner, it's a form of cheating.

CJ

Perish the thought that you would be texting your friends and loved ones
instead of looking out....maybe 'hiya my flm dis got pln t of gldrs onit'

Cold Northern days... Another thread right down the toilet.
Jim

On Monday, November 30, 2015 at 5:27:51 AM UTC-8, XC wrote:
On Monday, November 30, 2015 at 4:45:05 AM UTC-5, Jim White wrote:
XC, I am afraid the future is nigh. Andrej of Naviter and Erasim of LXNav
have both stated that it is their intention to integrate this intelligence
into their instruments. The scenario is that the instrument will feed data
into SeeYou Cloud in real time and recover useful data on thermals, hot
spots, winds etc. down track for the benefit of the so equipped pilot.

The LX9000 can already display Metars.

If allowed in competition this will mean that we shall all need to buy
into this expensive technology in order to compete.

Which brings me to drugs in sport. Whereas gliders are pretty easy to
scrutineer, people are not. I have often thought it would be fun to have a
truly 'open' class for the 100 metres. Anything goes: steroids,
amphetamines, opioids, and prosthetics. We would then see how fast man
can go and what man is prepared to do to win.

Jim


At 01:24 30 November 2015, XC wrote:
What I am referring to when I say that FLARM has the potential to suck
the
=
adventure out of the sport is the year when the FLARMs are netted
together.=
Each FLARM will receive and relay all the information it has to other
unit=
s. Soon displays will be developed to show the strength of all the
thermals=
gliders are currently using in the whole task area. Next displays will
log=
all the thermals and lift bands for the whole day and color code the
prefe=
rred hot spots. After that the data will be archived and pilots will be
abl=
e to analyze where they want to go given the forecast wind conditions and
l=
ift strength from their arm chair the night before. This scenario seems
to
=
be misaligned with the true spirit of the sport.

I suggest we get a handle on what our sport is all about before we lose
it.=
The idea of soaring as an unlimited technological frontier is nonsense.
Fr=
om the first day soaring has been about motor-less flight.

XC

Wow! Such a beautiful and exciting sport. Tough to watch it reduced to a video game due to lack of forethought.

XC

My considered opinion on this is fivefold:

1) You can do most of this today without use of Flarm or a data connection to the ground. WinPilot has offered aggregate heat maps of thermal locations and strengths based on any number of uploaded IGC tracks, filtered for time of day, time of year, sun angle, wind direction, etc for a decade or so. Nobody I know uses it. You also can - with a little effort - upload BlipMap data to you flight computer to see where you are versus forecasted (not historical, which is far less helpful when things are changing). I've been doing it on paper for years. Once in a while it helps on convergence days.

2) The incremental benefit of seeing the local area outside a mile or two - all the way out to the entire contest area doesn't matter very much at all and it won't - probably not ever. Most of the time, trying to track and use Flarm thermals hurts your speed. Traditional leeching is hard enough to do, and is of limited value. The data strongly suggest that the further back you trail the less value there is and it pretty quickly turns negative. As previously mentioned - an analysis of thermal leeching shows consistently weaker climbs for glider more than a few minutes behind. You could maybe get a super-computer to try to come up with an estimate but subtle differences in the scene out the window (clouds, ripples on ponds, tree leaves turning up and showing a different color on a ridge line, haze domes, dust devils, cloud shadows, cirrus decks, sun on rocks, wind changes, prior experiences with all of the above) all matter so much and don't make it into the hypothetical heat map. It is out of date the minute it is produced. Everything I ever learned about analytics, optimization and feedback systems and every single contest day I've scrutinized tells me this problem has way too little signal and way too much noise for anyone to benefit - even if you know every thermal in use or recently in used over the entire course.


3) Even a God-map of previously used thermals over the entire course did provide useful information that made more than a handful of points difference in a race it doesn't materially change the role of the pilot - which is to make tactical decisions about what course to fly and what thermals to take versus pass up - all based on highly variable, uncertain and time-sensitive information about not what is going on right now but what is likely to be going at some time and place in the future that you can actually get to in time for it to matter. More information is just information - more historical information, particularly about choices pilots made about which course to fly or thermal to take is mostly irrelevant but I see no harm in pilots trying to use it. It doesn't turn glider flying int a video game any more than a variometer or GPS do. The decision-making gets richer, not more robotic. The "head in the cockpit" argument is also bunk. Any pilot who doesn't understand how to do an instrument scan shouldn't be flying no matter what - but particularly looking at a display that is filled with a radar scope of where all the other gliders are hardly seems worse than looking outside trying to pick up maybe half or less of them with the naked eye.

4) For the odd situation where situational data does provide useful information, it mostly evens out what most pilots I know think of as unfair advantages - and outcomes that the current scoring formulae devalue. On a ridge day, you will be able to discover that - well - that the ridge is working, and on a wave day you'll be able to discover the location of the wave so that the one or two pilots who stumble into it or have local knowledge won't run away with the day when everyone else gets stuck or slow, unless of course we want more random variation and local knowledge to determine the order of the scoresheet. I'm more for an even playing field but I know others hold local secrets close and lobby to have Nationals held where they fly a lot - at least in part so they can gain some edge.

5) More pilots report that they prefer having more situational awareness - both for enjoyment and peace of mind - than pilots report the want less - by about 2 to 1. Pilots who don't fly contests report having some information about other pilots' locations makes them more likely to race, and the reverse is also true without this information they are less likely to try racing - OLC becomes too appealing. Given that, I'm much more in favor of waiting to see if some dire miscarriage of justice results from all of these new innovations that mostly can be available on pretty inexpensive mass-produced consumer devices that most of us already carry in our pockets.

I realize change is disquieting, particularly if you think you have some advantage under the status quo, but I don't think that's inherently a reason to try to hold back the tides of change.

My 2c.

9B

On Monday, November 30, 2015 at 1:09:44 PM UTC-5, Andy Blackburn wrote:
On Monday, November 30, 2015 at 5:27:51 AM UTC-8, XC wrote:
On Monday, November 30, 2015 at 4:45:05 AM UTC-5, Jim White wrote:
XC, I am afraid the future is nigh. Andrej of Naviter and Erasim of LXNav
have both stated that it is their intention to integrate this intelligence
into their instruments. The scenario is that the instrument will feed data
into SeeYou Cloud in real time and recover useful data on thermals, hot
spots, winds etc. down track for the benefit of the so equipped pilot.