Am 17.11.2012 09:59, schrieb :
On Saturday, November 17, 2012 6:38:38 AM UTC+1, FLARM wrote:
What you are suggesting is that when an aircraft is missing, anyone should be able to fire up their own homebuilt LFLA analysis tool with whatever data they have, then call SAR authorities to give them directions?

They would file that call with the calls from fortune-tellers and other nutters.

How sad you don't answer any of my questions. All this new post does is repeat how stupid the rest of the world must be compared to you, that nobody else will ever be clever enough to analyse LFLA as good as you do. That's not a good starting point for a serious discussion.

Why don't you publish your analysis tool under a free license? That not only allows authorities to respond faster to urgent situations without having to wait for you to wake up, but will also allow others to improve it, instead of starting from scratch. You do want to improve response times and SAR quality, don't you?

I guess we expect a software that delivers the coordinates or at least
the last known coordinates of plane to support SAR.
But nobody except the Flarm people ever saw how they get the
information. Is it an iterative process? Does the software deliver more
then one possible result and 'natural' intelligence has to make a
judgement? Nobody knows.
They announced a lot of features of PowerFlarm which is still not
available. I prefer they focus on this issues!
Bear

NB
Yes, Flarm people seem to be very arrogant. If they are not interested
in a proposed functionality the just ignore you.

And again yes, it was a terrible mistake to select Butterfly Avionics
GmbH as partner for PowerFlarm was a terrible mistake. The are not
professionals but a a messy company.