A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Soaring
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

IGC to replace FLARM ? ?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old November 11th 18, 10:05 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Jock Proudfoot
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 72
Default IGC to replace FLARM ? ?

The budget of 20.000€ for design, development and procurement of
IGC owned glider tracking system for use in WGC’s. Standards for the
system are still to be determined but will focus on safety, fairness and
transparency

Not allow organizers of the championships to mandate a particular
FLARM mode, in order to restore the basic proximity warning function
of the device. Intention is to develop own fully secured tracking
function with a possibility of time delay.

The Stewards group to involve software experts and analysts in
discussions on possible use of the safety proximity tool at the future
IGC championships.

https://www.fai.org/sites/default/fi...c_bureau_2018-
2_decisions_final.pdf
..

Ads
  #2  
Old November 11th 18, 03:03 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Jock Proudfoot
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 72
Default IGC to replace FLARM ? ?

GOOGLE
Decisions from IGC Bureau Meeting
Paris, 6 and 7 October 2018

  #3  
Old November 11th 18, 04:24 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 60
Default IGC to replace FLARM ? ?

"Intention is to develop own fully secured tracking function with a
possibility of time delay."

It will be tricky to have open access to the hardware and software and also controlled, secure access to the tactical information.

I could see an open source/open hardware system with a mechanical seal protecting some internal private keys and the decryption engine that uses them.

Everybody would broadcast position protected by a public/private key pair. CD puts the private key required to decrypt along with an approved software load into a standard, sealable receiver engine.

It would be nice to allow the contestant to play with everything, but I think secure will require at least some small part of the receive engine to be sealed.
  #4  
Old November 13th 18, 07:35 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 230
Default IGC to replace FLARM ? ?

On Sunday, November 11, 2018 at 10:25:00 AM UTC-5, wrote:
"Intention is to develop own fully secured tracking function with a
possibility of time delay."

It will be tricky to have open access to the hardware and software and also controlled, secure access to the tactical information.

I could see an open source/open hardware system with a mechanical seal protecting some internal private keys and the decryption engine that uses them.

Everybody would broadcast position protected by a public/private key pair.. CD puts the private key required to decrypt along with an approved software load into a standard, sealable receiver engine.

It would be nice to allow the contestant to play with everything, but I think secure will require at least some small part of the receive engine to be sealed.


My informed source says the time delay (10 minutes or so) would be used instead of encryption. The time delay can be built into the transmitter. Thus nothing in any receiver could foil it. There would not be an incentive for the pilot to change anything in their transmitter, unless they want to be leached on. I wonder though whether that would create an incentive to start 10 minutes after the best pilots?

  #5  
Old November 13th 18, 07:42 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
John Cochrane[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 314
Default IGC to replace FLARM ? ?

Isn't Europe, like the US, on track to require ADSB-out soon? You'll know instantly where everyone is within 100 miles, flarm or no flarm. Putting the knowing where people are genie back in the bottle seems like a hard task.

John Cochrane
  #6  
Old November 13th 18, 09:46 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 55
Default IGC to replace FLARM ? ?

Why put in place a delayed tracking solution besides instant OGN tracking? This is pointless. FLARM is mandatory in contests. Anyone who is interested may use existing FLARM-based OGN tracking infrastructure and circumvent whatever time delay is implemented in separate transmitters.
  #7  
Old November 13th 18, 10:45 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
Benedict Smith
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 29
Default IGC to replace FLARM ? ?

At 18:35 13 November 2018, wrote:
On Sunday, November 11, 2018 at 10:25:00 AM UTC-5,

wrote:
"Intention is to develop own fully secured tracking function

with a
possibility of time delay."
=20
It will be tricky to have open access to the hardware and

software and
al=
so controlled, secure access to the tactical information.
=20
I could see an open source/open hardware system with a

mechanical seal
pr=
otecting some internal private keys and the decryption engine

that uses
the=
m.
=20
Everybody would broadcast position protected by a

public/private key
pair=
.. CD puts the private key required to decrypt along with an

approved
softw=
are load into a standard, sealable receiver engine.
=20
It would be nice to allow the contestant to play with

everything, but I
t=
hink secure will require at least some small part of the receive

engine to
=
be sealed.

My informed source says the time delay (10 minutes or so)

would be used
ins=
tead of encryption. The time delay can be built into the

transmitter.
Thu=
s nothing in any receiver could foil it. There would not be an

incentive
f=
or the pilot to change anything in their transmitter, unless they

want to
b=
e leached on. I wonder though whether that would create an

incentive to
st=
art 10 minutes after the best pilots?


10 minute delay ? I thought the idea of FLARM was for safety,
perhaps they are they expecting messages such as:
“there was a glider 2 miles out on a collision course 10 minutes
ago, the fact that you are reading this message suggests that you
saw and avoided it without my help ! Have a nice day”
Sounds rather like something the late Douglas Adams would come
up with.

  #8  
Old November 13th 18, 11:16 PM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
JS[_5_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 347
Default IGC to replace FLARM ? ?

On Tuesday, November 13, 2018 at 2:00:06 PM UTC-8, Benedict Smith wrote:
At 18:35 13 November 2018, wrote:
On Sunday, November 11, 2018 at 10:25:00 AM UTC-5,

wrote:
"Intention is to develop own fully secured tracking function

with a
possibility of time delay."
=20
It will be tricky to have open access to the hardware and

software and
al=
so controlled, secure access to the tactical information.
=20
I could see an open source/open hardware system with a

mechanical seal
pr=
otecting some internal private keys and the decryption engine

that uses
the=
m.
=20
Everybody would broadcast position protected by a

public/private key
pair=
.. CD puts the private key required to decrypt along with an

approved
softw=
are load into a standard, sealable receiver engine.
=20
It would be nice to allow the contestant to play with

everything, but I
t=
hink secure will require at least some small part of the receive

engine to
=
be sealed.

My informed source says the time delay (10 minutes or so)

would be used
ins=
tead of encryption. The time delay can be built into the

transmitter.
Thu=
s nothing in any receiver could foil it. There would not be an

incentive
f=
or the pilot to change anything in their transmitter, unless they

want to
b=
e leached on. I wonder though whether that would create an

incentive to
st=
art 10 minutes after the best pilots?


10 minute delay ? I thought the idea of FLARM was for safety,
perhaps they are they expecting messages such as:
“there was a glider 2 miles out on a collision course 10 minutes
ago, the fact that you are reading this message suggests that you
saw and avoided it without my help ! Have a nice day”
Sounds rather like something the late Douglas Adams would come
up with.


Aren't we confusing tracking capability with collision avoidance capability?
This appears to be a move to build a new "live" tracking mechanism. Latency is an option often used for contest tracking.
Jim
  #9  
Old November 14th 18, 05:06 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
kinsell
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 127
Default IGC to replace FLARM ? ?

On 11/13/18 11:42 AM, John Cochrane wrote:
Isn't Europe, like the US, on track to require ADSB-out soon? You'll know instantly where everyone is within 100 miles, flarm or no flarm. Putting the knowing where people are genie back in the bottle seems like a hard task.

John Cochrane


Are you aware there's no 2020 mandate for gliders in the U.S.?
  #10  
Old November 14th 18, 07:29 AM posted to rec.aviation.soaring
krasw
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 445
Default IGC to replace FLARM ? ?

On Tuesday, 13 November 2018 22:46:43 UTC+2, wrote:
Why put in place a delayed tracking solution besides instant OGN tracking? This is pointless. FLARM is mandatory in contests. Anyone who is interested may use existing FLARM-based OGN tracking infrastructure and circumvent whatever time delay is implemented in separate transmitters.


You are right. As long as there is flarm in the glider it can be tracked real time from ground, no matter what. I guess using new tracking system would mean that pilots switch off their flarms in competitions. This is a problem that has so far only bad solutions.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
trying to work out how you connect the flarm view 57 to mini box flarm running a V7 and Oudie Michael Marshall[_2_] Soaring 3 April 10th 16 04:13 AM
trying to work out how you connect the flarm view 57 to mini box flarm running a V7 and Oudie Michael Marshall[_2_] Soaring 0 April 8th 16 08:57 PM
Information for all users of Flarm, OEM FLARM supplier and Flarm PowerFlarm [email protected] Soaring 28 March 12th 16 05:31 AM
Flarm IGC files on non-IGC certified Flarm? Movses Soaring 21 March 16th 15 10:59 PM
IFR GPS replace DME / ADF? [email protected] Instrument Flight Rules 21 May 15th 06 03:13 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:57 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2018 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.