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

On Saturday, August 8, 2015 at 8:31:38 PM UTC-4, Andy Blackburn wrote:
Under stealth mode (at least at western TASs) you'll have about 10 seconds to figure out who should zig and who should zag - assuming the alarm happens at max stealth range, rather than because somebody you never saw coming made a turn in your direction.

25 seconds. Stealth mode doesn't reduce the range at which the anti-collision alerts happen. What appears to be true is that you won't see the targets on tactical display until the warning happens.

Evan Ludeman / T8

Hmmm...

Not according to the Flarm Dataport Specification 7.03 released on July 30, 2015 that says no target data is put onto the serial port for targets above 2 km in distance. At 17,000' and 110 kts IAS for two head-to-head targets that's a hair over 10 seconds.

9B

On Saturday, August 8, 2015 at 10:41:24 PM UTC-4, Andy Blackburn wrote:
Hmmm...

Not according to the Flarm Dataport Specification 7.03 released on July 30, 2015 that says no target data is put onto the serial port for targets above 2 km in distance. At 17,000' and 110 kts IAS for two head-to-head targets that's a hair over 10 seconds.

9B

I don't have that document (is it on the web anywhere?), but it sounds like you are looking at the description of the $PFLAA sentence (traffic data).

-Evan

It's the PRIV command spec for Stealth Mode

On Saturday, August 8, 2015 at 7:41:24 PM UTC-7, Andy Blackburn wrote:
Hmmm...

Not according to the Flarm Dataport Specification 7.03 released on July 30, 2015 that says no target data is put onto the serial port for targets above 2 km in distance. At 17,000' and 110 kts IAS for two head-to-head targets that's a hair over 10 seconds.

9B

Without the target data on the serial port, you will not get a voice enunciation of that target from your third party device.

What equipment do you have? It sounds really good. (This is to the pilot who says he hardly looks at a display).

I have LX 9000 and Butterfly display. I get voice warnings when I don't need them (I think I get them up to 1000 foot vertical seperation, not interested over 500 feet) and often don't get them when a glider is too close. The Butterfly does not show ID's (I was unable to get it to accept the Flarm database).

True. In Stealth mode you also won't get speed, track and climb rate info and the altitude will be dithered. That makes it hard for your display device to do anything other than 1mi / 1000 ft traffic alerts - which is what LX does with Stealth off anyway.

I'll have to look up whether collision alarms are calculated and passed to the serial port some how for high closing rate threats outside the 2km limit for stealth target blanking. Even if that's teue it's not at all clear that an alarm would come with any traffic display, since no exceptions are mentioned in the spec for blanking this info outside 2km and not every target on a reciprocal heading generates a collision warning sonita possible for converging traffic to get down to 2km and change course towards you. Flarm extrapolates, but it doesn't anticipate maneuvering. My setup is 8-12 km for head-on, so normally I'd pick up a potential threat a lot further out from a visual scan, voice annunciation not withstanding. I think of gliders making a 180 at a turnpoint as a classic scenario. They're invisible, then they're 10+ seconds away and you have an alarm (but maybe not a target on the display until they close within 2km?).

9B

Andy,
Check out FIRMWARE RELEASE NOTES FLARM 6.02 Firmware. As I read it, for any determined threat even outside 2km and +/- 300m vertically you should get an alarm, relative position, relative altitude, climb rate,track and speed but no ID.
XC

On Sunday, August 9, 2015 at 7:45:17 AM UTC-4, Andy Blackburn wrote:
True. In Stealth mode you also won't get speed, track and climb rate info and the altitude will be dithered. That makes it hard for your display device to do anything other than 1mi / 1000 ft traffic alerts - which is what LX does with Stealth off anyway.

I'll have to look up whether collision alarms are calculated and passed to the serial port some how for high closing rate threats outside the 2km limit for stealth target blanking. Even if that's teue it's not at all clear that an alarm would come with any traffic display, since no exceptions are mentioned in the spec for blanking this info outside 2km and not every target on a reciprocal heading generates a collision warning sonita possible for converging traffic to get down to 2km and change course towards you. Flarm extrapolates, but it doesn't anticipate maneuvering. My setup is 8-12 km for head-on, so normally I'd pick up a potential threat a lot further out from a visual scan, voice annunciation not withstanding. I think of gliders making a 180 at a turnpoint as a classic scenario. They're invisible, then they're 10+ seconds away and you have an alarm (but maybe not a target on the display until they close within 2km?).

9B

Working to stem the tide of technology seems a bit like tilting at windmills. While mandating Stealth buys a bit more time for the "good old days" (a few years) as 9B has pointed out once ADSB happens it nullifies stealth.

Allowance of other electronics (i.e. smartphone/tablet based) makes stealth just the tip of the iceberg.

Maybe a good use of our intellectual effort is to ponder how to sharply reduce the competitive advantage of Flarm (or visual) leeching.

Perhaps the "latest start time" concept advanced by BB has use here? You can start late and use technology to catch up, but you pay a price for it.

9B's "leach tax" concept may have utility here also.

So I am advocating spending more time thinking about how to change the task to sharply decrease the utility of Flarm leeching rather than just debating stealth/nostealth, which seems to me is a relatively short-term instance of the the overall challenge.

QT

On Sunday, August 9, 2015 at 1:27:50 AM UTC-4, jfitch wrote:
On Saturday, August 8, 2015 at 7:41:24 PM UTC-7, Andy Blackburn wrote:
Hmmm...

Not according to the Flarm Dataport Specification 7.03 released on July 30, 2015 that says no target data is put onto the serial port for targets above 2 km in distance. At 17,000' and 110 kts IAS for two head-to-head targets that's a hair over 10 seconds.

9B

Without the target data on the serial port, you will not get a voice enunciation of that target from your third party device.

Not correct in all cases.
My Clearnav, with PF in Stealth, calls conflicts with audible "traffic 12 o'clock high". Some other combinations may not do this.
With this setup, as I used in Elmira, there is zero reason to look in the cockpit for any info from Flarm.
For ME, this is the perfect combination of adding additional safety to my scan, and having no tactical affect on the flight.
UH