This started as a comment about wider applicability of the technology
to the wider GA community.
AS ORIGINALLY DESIGNED the flarm units are not that suitable due to
reduced range and airframe shielding issues which Nigel himself
mentioned in a private email to me as a result of an earlier post of
mine on this group. To get good performance in these aircraft
external antennas are necessary. He also mentioned that there were
some issues with reduced performance due to airframe shielding on
carbon gliders. I wasn't aware that this was much of a problem in
gliders until he himself mentioned the new canopy antenna which would
hopefully address these issues, on this group. I find this somewhat
disappointing in view of the large numbers of Flarms sold in Europe
prior to their adoption here. Then again, head on in the Alps, wings
level, the airframe shielding is probably minimal and Flarm
performance most satisfactory against the primary collision threat.
Back to the GA aircraft.
Now pretty obviously a unit that just installs on top of the
instrument panel in a Cessa and plugs in to the cigarette lighter is
going to be more rapidly and widely adopted than one which requires
the services of an an avionics tech and some CASA paperwork. Likewise
for the commuter airline folks. Unfortunately it appears that the
simple installation won't work well in these cases and these
installations will be more complex and expensive. Pity.
Someone might like to get the German article I linked to translated.
My Google attempt resulted in only half the article being translated.
A couple of guys with Flarms got a nasty fright and could easily have
collided when flying in cross country in company.
Back when I flew contests everyone was very worried about the mid air
risk but on thinking about it the major worry was the thrashing
around in broken lift in large gaggles pre start where there
were too many gliders to keep track of. With the best will in the
world it was always possible for a potential collision to eventuate
and then someone taking evasive action could cause another. Apart
from the odd oaf who entered thermals by pointing his glider at one
already in it (we knew who they were, mostly), enroute wasn't such a
worry as the traffic density was lower and gliders ahead of you were
potential thermal markers so it was in everyone's interest to look
for these. In the 10 or 11 years of flying State and National level
FAI contests (7) I don't remember anyone actually having a mid air.
These were contests with up to 81 gliders. Maybe it was just a
statistical quiet period due to chance.
I'm finding the defensive reactions to any criticism of Flarm
fascinating. Reminds me of the reactions when human caused climate
change is questioned. A few years ago a social scientist was embedded
with a bunch of climate modellers for 5 years. They expressed high
confidence in their climate models *except* for the bit they were
each personally responsible for which they thought had uncertainties!
Something to do with a well documented techological phenomenon where
the people slightly further away from understanding the technology
have more faith in it than the inventors.
Mike
Borgelt Instruments - manufacturers of quality soaring instruments
phone Int'l + 61 746 355784
fax Int'l + 61 746 358796
cellphone Int'l + 61 428 355784
Int'l + 61 429 355784
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
website: www.borgeltinstruments.com
_______________________________________________
Aus-soaring mailing list
[email protected]
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
