Why no "situational awareness" (collision avoidance) apps for cell phones?

Smart phones can talk to each other (through the cell system, duh) and they have substantial computing power. They have GPS so they know where they are, how high they are, and how fast they are going. We know they can output and receive that data in flight because we use them to track our gliders giving out our position, climb rate, and ground speed and we can view those tracks on the very same phone. I would guess that there's a smart phone in the cockpit of nearly every light aircraft flying. So, my question is: Why is there no situational awareness app for our phones? Yes, I know about the limitations of the cell system and the phones, especially in flight. I wouldn't expect a cell phone based system to perform in every category as well as the all singing, all dancing PowerFlarm. In it's favor, such an app could be nearly free compared to $2000 for a PowerFlarm setup. Considering the "installed base" of smart phones, the penetration of such an app could be very rapid and widespread, maybe even approaching near universal adoption. So what if it does not do everything that a PowerFlarm does? Even if it only provided a snapshot of the local traffic every 5 or even 10 second, the safety benefits (outside of racing gaggles) would far exceed PowerFlarm simply because of the potential for such rapid and widespread adoption. Everyone could finally see everyone.

C'mon, I know I ain't the first person, or even the 10,000th to have this idea. If I had any idea how to code an app, or the time to learn how. I'd give it a try myself.

WB (doped to the gills on cold meds and exhausted from a 950 mile drive, so forgive me if the above is gibberish)

On Wednesday, May 2, 2018 at 8:17:55 PM UTC-5, WB wrote:
Smart phones can talk to each other (through the cell system, duh) and they have substantial computing power. They have GPS so they know where they are, how high they are, and how fast they are going. We know they can output and receive that data in flight because we use them to track our gliders giving out our position, climb rate, and ground speed and we can view those tracks on the very same phone. I would guess that there's a smart phone in the cockpit of nearly every light aircraft flying. So, my question is: Why is there no situational awareness app for our phones? Yes, I know about the limitations of the cell system and the phones, especially in flight. I wouldn't expect a cell phone based system to perform in every category as well as the all singing, all dancing PowerFlarm. In it's favor, such an app could be nearly free compared to $2000 for a PowerFlarm setup. Considering the "installed base" of smart phones, the penetration of such an app could be very rapid and widespread, maybe even approaching near universal adoption. So what if it does not do everything that a PowerFlarm does? Even if it only provided a snapshot of the local traffic every 5 or even 10 second, the safety benefits (outside of racing gaggles) would far exceed PowerFlarm simply because of the potential for such rapid and widespread adoption. Everyone could finally see everyone.

C'mon, I know I ain't the first person, or even the 10,000th to have this idea. If I had any idea how to code an app, or the time to learn how. I'd give it a try myself.

WB (doped to the gills on cold meds and exhausted from a 950 mile drive, so forgive me if the above is gibberish)

In my opinion, the new GliderLink app which uses the inexpensive goTenna devices answers at least half of your expectations - the data and computing power of our cellphones while not being handicapped by poor cellular coverage. All this theoretically so far - but I should be getting my goTennas soon and will try the app out - and report.

On Wednesday, May 2, 2018 at 8:17:55 PM UTC-5, WB wrote:
Smart phones can talk to each other (through the cell system, duh) and they have substantial computing power. They have GPS so they know where they are, how high they are, and how fast they are going. We know they can output and receive that data in flight because we use them to track our gliders giving out our position, climb rate, and ground speed and we can view those tracks on the very same phone. I would guess that there's a smart phone in the cockpit of nearly every light aircraft flying. So, my question is: Why is there no situational awareness app for our phones? Yes, I know about the limitations of the cell system and the phones, especially in flight. I wouldn't expect a cell phone based system to perform in every category as well as the all singing, all dancing PowerFlarm. In it's favor, such an app could be nearly free compared to $2000 for a PowerFlarm setup. Considering the "installed base" of smart phones, the penetration of such an app could be very rapid and widespread, maybe even approaching near universal adoption. So what if it does not do everything that a PowerFlarm does? Even if it only provided a snapshot of the local traffic every 5 or even 10 second, the safety benefits (outside of racing gaggles) would far exceed PowerFlarm simply because of the potential for such rapid and widespread adoption. Everyone could finally see everyone.

C'mon, I know I ain't the first person, or even the 10,000th to have this idea. If I had any idea how to code an app, or the time to learn how. I'd give it a try myself.

WB (doped to the gills on cold meds and exhausted from a 950 mile drive, so forgive me if the above is gibberish)

OK. So now I see the earlier discussion about "Gliderlink". So folks are thinking about this. I hope the lack of much detailed discussion is because people are developing such apps and don't want to spill the beans. If that's so, then good on ya'.

On Wednesday, May 2, 2018 at 8:31:23 PM UTC-5, Tom BravoMike wrote:
On Wednesday, May 2, 2018 at 8:17:55 PM UTC-5, WB wrote:
Smart phones can talk to each other (through the cell system, duh) and they have substantial computing power. They have GPS so they know where they are, how high they are, and how fast they are going. We know they can output and receive that data in flight because we use them to track our gliders giving out our position, climb rate, and ground speed and we can view those tracks on the very same phone. I would guess that there's a smart phone in the cockpit of nearly every light aircraft flying. So, my question is: Why is there no situational awareness app for our phones? Yes, I know about the limitations of the cell system and the phones, especially in flight. I wouldn't expect a cell phone based system to perform in every category as well as the all singing, all dancing PowerFlarm. In it's favor, such an app could be nearly free compared to $2000 for a PowerFlarm setup. Considering the "installed base" of smart phones, the penetration of such an app could be very rapid and widespread, maybe even approaching near universal adoption. So what if it does not do everything that a PowerFlarm does? Even if it only provided a snapshot of the local traffic every 5 or even 10 second, the safety benefits (outside of racing gaggles) would far exceed PowerFlarm simply because of the potential for such rapid and widespread adoption. Everyone could finally see everyone.

C'mon, I know I ain't the first person, or even the 10,000th to have this idea. If I had any idea how to code an app, or the time to learn how. I'd give it a try myself.

WB (doped to the gills on cold meds and exhausted from a 950 mile drive, so forgive me if the above is gibberish)

In my opinion, the new GliderLink app which uses the inexpensive goTenna devices answers at least half of your expectations - the data and computing power of our cellphones while not being handicapped by poor cellular coverage. All this theoretically so far - but I should be getting my goTennas soon and will try the app out - and report.

Thanks for pointing out the Gliderlink discussion. I missed it while on the road and didn't scroll down far enough to see it. Looking forward to reading your experience with the Gliderlink app and the goTennas.

The computations to support collision avoidance between gliders sharing thermals have to be done very frequently, very fast, and without delay. That sort of computation is called 'real time computation and programming'. And I think that collision avoidance is actually 'HARD real time computing', computing that absolutely and positively must be completed in the allocated time (or somebody dies). This is probably not something that a highly experienced App developer can whip up in Python.

Do Android or Ios operating systems and the hardware that they run on (smartphones) even support real time computing? If somebody sends you a text while you're in a gaggle, does your collision avoidance app hiccup at a critical moment?

On Thursday, May 3, 2018 at 2:17:55 AM UTC+1, WB wrote:
Smart phones can talk to each other (through the cell system, duh) and they have substantial computing power. They have GPS so they know where they are, how high they are, and how fast they are going. We know they can output and receive that data in flight because we use them to track our gliders giving out our position, climb rate, and ground speed and we can view those tracks on the very same phone. I would guess that there's a smart phone in the cockpit of nearly every light aircraft flying. So, my question is: Why is there no situational awareness app for our phones? Yes, I know about the limitations of the cell system and the phones, especially in flight. I wouldn't expect a cell phone based system to perform in every category as well as the all singing, all dancing PowerFlarm. In it's favor, such an app could be nearly free compared to $2000 for a PowerFlarm setup. Considering the "installed base" of smart phones, the penetration of such an app could be very rapid and widespread, maybe even approaching near universal adoption. So what if it does not do everything that a PowerFlarm does? Even if it only provided a snapshot of the local traffic every 5 or even 10 second, the safety benefits (outside of racing gaggles) would far exceed PowerFlarm simply because of the potential for such rapid and widespread adoption. Everyone could finally see everyone.

C'mon, I know I ain't the first person, or even the 10,000th to have this idea. If I had any idea how to code an app, or the time to learn how. I'd give it a try myself.

WB (doped to the gills on cold meds and exhausted from a 950 mile drive, so forgive me if the above is gibberish)

Just at first thought:-

- It would have to be server based,as phones dont have peer-peer networking.. Server goes down.. no warnings.

- In most jurisdictions its illegal to use cellphones when airborne.

- Cellphone coverage is not 100% anywhere, especially in the US I think.

In reality, there is already a great system with all the bugs ironed out, and a large existing user base.. FLARM. Much better to get behind that and promote it.

On Wed, 02 May 2018 20:20:44 -0700, son_of_flubber wrote:

Do Android or Ios operating systems and the hardware that they run on
(smartphones) even support real time computing? If somebody sends you a
text while you're in a gaggle, does your collision avoidance app hiccup
at a critical moment?

Anything written in Python is most probably not fit for real-time
execution. Recent articles in The Register (UK-based IT industry news
website) shows that the "AI" boys may prototype algorithms using Python,
but they are translated to C for use - and these guys are using big iron,
not phones, to run their stuff.


--
Martin | martin at
Gregorie | gregorie dot org

Phones can't communicate with each other, they communicate with the cell
towers. This communication is designed to be one to one, not one to many
which is what is required. Also the Cell tower aerials are designed to
communicate with phones at grund level, not phones in the air. This means
that the phone gets unreliable above a few thousand feet.

There are two things that FLARM does, peer to peer communication of
position data and collision warning.

There are a number of other systems that provide peer to peer
communication, PilotAware, ADSB in/out and others. They provide
situational awareness but not collision warning.

FLARM is the only one that provides collision warning, to do that the
position data is analysed. The algorithms to do this are complex,
especially for gliders where they are circling rapidly and pilots don't
want continual warnings about gliders that are close but not an imminent
danger.

In theory it would be possible to separate the position data and collision
warning functions of FLARM. But most of the cost of FLARM is in the
collision warning. This software is difficult to write and maintain,
especially as it needs to work reliably and run on a fairly low performance
processor.

A phone would have the power to do this but the cost of the app to do this
would not be low. It could easily be several hundred dollars.

Chris

At 08:12 03 May 2018, Martin Gregorie wrote:
On Wed, 02 May 2018 20:20:44 -0700, son_of_flubber wrote:

Do Android or Ios operating systems and the hardware that they run on
(smartphones) even support real time computing? If somebody sends you
a
text while you're in a gaggle, does your collision avoidance app hiccup
at a critical moment?

Anything written in Python is most probably not fit for real-time
execution. Recent articles in The Register (UK-based IT industry news
website) shows that the "AI" boys may prototype algorithms using Python,
but they are translated to C for use - and these guys are using big iron,

not phones, to run their stuff.


--
Martin | martin at
Gregorie | gregorie dot org

On Thu, 03 May 2018 09:14:00 +0000, Chris Rowland wrote:

Phones can't communicate with each other, they communicate with the cell
towers.

.... which is why this new GliderLink system is using the goTenna radio
mesh system for its M:M radio link. The phone uses a 1:1 Bluetooth
connection to the Gotenna mesh transceiver, which operates on one of the
unlicensed bands. Like FLARM, the band used varies from country to
country.

This communication is designed to be one to one, not one to
many which is what is required. Also the Cell tower aerials are
designed to communicate with phones at grund level, not phones in the
air. This means that the phone gets unreliable above a few thousand
feet.

.... and even lower in some parts of the UK. I've had no bars at all at
3000 ft in a thermal over the centre of Huntingdon. I can only suppose
that, because the southern English counties can be regarded as optically
flat for RF purposes, the telcos provide as little vertical coverage as
possible to minimise their cell tower electricity bills.


--
Martin | martin at
Gregorie | gregorie dot org

It'll happen soon. The Flarm mafia won't be happy, some of them will probably refuse to get the app just to be rebels.