FLARM Statistics

Does anyone know of a source of any statistics that
might indicate the effectiveness or otherwise of FLARM
in reducing the rate collisions between FLARM fitted
gliders in those European countries in which it is
in widespread use?

Thanks in advance.

John Galloway

John

at the Cape Gliding Club at Worcester, South Africa, the majority of
gliders are FLARM equiped. A recent survey of the experience with Flarm
is to be found at
http://cgcdiary.blogspot.com/2006/09...lse-alarm.html
You will note that the perception of the pilots are very positive about
FLARM.

regards
Sven




John Galloway wrote:
Does anyone know of a source of any statistics that
might indicate the effectiveness or otherwise of FLARM
in reducing the rate collisions between FLARM fitted
gliders in those European countries in which it is
in widespread use?

Thanks in advance.

John Galloway

John Galloway schrieb:

Does anyone know of a source of any statistics that
might indicate the effectiveness or otherwise of FLARM
in reducing the rate collisions between FLARM fitted
gliders in those European countries in which it is
in widespread use?

Thanks in advance.

John Galloway


Not really statistical proof but all I have. Number of collisions in
Switzerland:

2002 and befo average about 2-3 gld/gld collisions per year, worst
year was about 5!
This is from memory.

The following is from here
http://www.segelflug.ch/d/6safety/pd...elle_97-06.pdf
2003: 2 (1 gld/gld and 1 cable)
2004: 3 (2 gld/gld and 1 cable)
2005: 1 gld/gld
2006: 0 AFAIK

Switzerland has a FLARM equipment rate of about 90%

Regards
Marcel

Addition to last post: the 2005 collision was the only one involving
FLARM-equipped gliders. They where thermalling together and both pilots
had seen the other one before.

Marcel

Dont forget Australia in your theory, John, takeup rates here have been most impressive.

bagger

At 07:06 10 October 2006, Mad wrote:

Addition to last post: the 2005 collision was the only
one involving
FLARM-equipped gliders. They where thermalling together
and both pilots
had seen the other one before.

Marcel


Very interesting.

Your data says a lot in favour of FLARM but this speaks
volumes about these two pilots...!

;o)

At 07:06 10 October 2006, Mad wrote:

Addition to last post: the 2005 collision was the only
one involving
FLARM-equipped gliders. They where thermalling together
and both pilots
had seen the other one before.

Marcel


Very interesting.

Your data says a lot in favour of FLARM but this speaks
volumes about these two pilots...!

;o)

Another interesting question for the US is what percentage of mid-airs are
between two gliders vs. between a glider and a powered aircraft.

Mike Schumann

"John Galloway" wrote in message
...
Does anyone know of a source of any statistics that
might indicate the effectiveness or otherwise of FLARM
in reducing the rate collisions between FLARM fitted
gliders in those European countries in which it is
in widespread use?

Thanks in advance.

John Galloway

I don't have any numbers but I heard of many more midairs between two
gliders or gliders with tow planes than between gliders and other
powered aircrafts. I'm afraid the White Mountains in Nevada are a
midair waiting to happen. On a good weekend you can have 20-50 gliders
flying in a very narrow band in both directions. It is very difficult,
almost impossible, to spot on time a glider flying straight and level
at closing speeds of over 200 knots, unless you know exactly when and
where to look. Remember, the moving targets we often spot easily are
not the threat, it is the one which don't move on the canopy which will
hit us. If we equip all gliders and tow planes with Flarm you will
significantly reduce midairs, as it has been proved in Europe and OZ.
One would wish that one of the local US manufactures of glider avionics
or an entrepreneur would have try to license flarm in US. If it is
possible to manufacture and sell TPAS like equipments in the US without
liability concerns, it should be possible to sell Flarms.

Just my humble opinion,

Ramy


Mike Schumann wrote:
Another interesting question for the US is what percentage of mid-airs are
between two gliders vs. between a glider and a powered aircraft.

Mike Schumann

"John Galloway" wrote in message
...
Does anyone know of a source of any statistics that
might indicate the effectiveness or otherwise of FLARM
in reducing the rate collisions between FLARM fitted
gliders in those European countries in which it is
in widespread use?

Thanks in advance.

John Galloway

Thanks for all these replies.

Below is a message I got from Swiss FLARM today:

==========================================
'Unfortunately it is impossible to do a correct (and
honest) statistic since there are simply too little
datapoints.

However, we can say that to the best of our knowledge
there have been no collisions with fatal outcomes between
Flarm equipped aircraft or between Flarm equipped aircraft
and obstacles. But, there have been multiple collisions
with fatalities this summer (French Alps) between aircraft
that did not carry Flarm.

Currently more than 5000 Flarm devices are in use worldwide.
No pilot has ever returned a (non defective) device
because he was not satisfied with it.

We are in the process of getting to know the UK situation,
but expect to become more visible and vocal within
days/weeks.'
==========================================

If, as we are told, only 10% of the gliders in the
Alps are FLARM free and they have had all the mid-air
fatalities then it is quite a significant finding,
albeit short term.

It was interesting to read on the board about the collision
in a thermal between two Swiss FLARM equipped gliders
who already knew of each other's presence. It just
goes to show that no matter whether a glider is spotted
by eyeball or FLARM you still have to avoid it. I
presume that was not a fatality.

I think that European clubs are fitting FLARMS in the
tugs because it is mentioned in some off-board messages
I have received. Apparently early on it gave false
alarms on tow but that this now has been addressed
in the updates.

Thanks,

John Galloway