[Full Metal Jackass]

Do you insist on your passengers wearing nomex suits and crash helmets? Do you always route to avoid flying over water or other inhospitable terrain? Do you only take passengers in gin-clear CAVOK with no cross wind at expected landing sites? Do you have a certified CO detector in your aircraft? Do you carry a full medkit with defibrillator? Will you only carry passengers when you have a qualified pilot, preferably a CPL current on type, in the RHS?

What price do you put on your life and that of your passengers?

1) Do you insist on your passengers wearing nomex suits and crash helmets?

no, because I don't carry out aeros or manoeuvring which could require such equipment

2) Do you always route to avoid flying over water or other inhospitable terrain?

No, but when flying over either of the named, I file flight plans. I also take life jackets when crossing (e.g.) the North Sea from Rotterdam to Cambridge and increase my chances of rescue when making the crossing by looking for and flying toward shipping. I also have a McMurdo PLB.

3) Do you only take passengers in gin-clear CAVOK with no cross wind at expected landing sites?

No, but I know my limits and respect them. I have been known to turn away from my intended destination and land at an airfield with winds more aligned to the runway

4) Do you have a certified CO detector in your aircraft?

Certified? I don't know of any. But I do have an electrochemical CO detector installed.

5) Do you carry a full medkit with defibrillator?

why should I? I have a medical kit but weight and balance precludes loading a full emergency kit including the capability of performing open heart surgery

6) Will you only carry passengers when you have a qualified pilot, preferably a CPL current on type, in the RHS?

Strangely you should say that, 90% of my flights are made with one or more pilots in the aircraft, usually sharing legs so that will be a yes.

It's all about stacking the odds in your favour. Let's take your point 5 - medkit with defibrillator. How much would that cost, both in monetary terms and in terms of reduced weight and balance.

Now factor in to that the potential need for such an item. Does the risk level warrant the expenditure? That would be a clear NO. I am not saying you have to plan for every eventuality, instead weigh up the benefits against the cost.

And that is why I added Power Flarm to PAW - because the risk of a MAC is significantly higher than the chance of requiring a defibrillator in the air.....

[Paul_Sengupta]

90% of my flights are made with one or more pilots in the aircraft

What about the other 10%?!

[Full Metal Jackass]

90% of my flights are made with one or more pilots in the aircraft

What about the other 10%?!

I don't have passengers

[gaznav]

A wee point of order to the above - SkyEcho 2 is £349+VAT or £419 inc VAT + Shipping. Not £485 as mentioned by Paul above.

^in bold ^, point of order on the point of order

If I’m going to be Mr Picky then you could also add the annual PilotAware licence fee £13.40 inc VAT (after the first year) in the figures as well? Remembering that SkyEcho needs no licence fee from the manufacturer and if operated in an aircraft with an extant Radio Licence then needs no extra cash (nor FLARM either).

I think Flying Dutch was correct that all-in-all the prices are starting to fall into the same ball park. Which is £300-£450 for ‘through-life’ use.

[Nick]

I initially went for Power Flarm after a very close encounter with a Glider breaking cloud, about 300 metres in front of me. The surprise frightened the SH1.. T out of me. This was before PAw was thought of. My original Power Flarm is now in the third aeroplane. I would have gone for a cheaper solution if there had been one.

My comment "what value do you put on your life and that of your passengers?" Was really aimed at those who bury their head in the sand and expect everyone else to see and avoid them. "I should have added and other fliers".

We all have a responsibility to ourselves and each other.

Nick

[Tim Dawson]

Interestingly, we've just had someone tell us (on our own forum) that there's a new version of the Stratux software which receives and decodes FLARM, without the need to buy an external receiver or in fact buy anything from FLARM.

[gaznav]

Back to the ADS-B debate. How many of you know about the €1.6M Project GAINS (General Aviation Improved Navigation and Surveillance) – a two-year joint partnership project co-funded by SESAR Joint Undertaking (SJU) under the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme? These are SESAR’s main goals:



Project GAINS involves AOPA UK (who also chair the UK Electronic Conspicuity Working Group), FUNKE, TriG along with a couple of Air Traffic Management consultancies - Pildo Labs (http://pildo.com/?s=Project+gains) and Helios (http://www.askhelios.com/projects/sesar-to-adapt-sat-based-technologies-for-general-aviation-operations). More details in those links, but the industry partners are ones that have low power ADS-B capabilities already with Class 2 Mode S ES or prototype LPATs.

Now seeing as there is a plan to roll out over 900+ ADS-B ground stations across Europe by 2025 (as there is a plan to cease primary RADAR and Mode A), the CAA has gone on record to say ADS-B is their prefered solution for GA and also that NATS has invested $69M in space-based ADS-B technology, then surely ADS-B Out functionality is not to be sneered at and given the short-shrift that it is by some forumites? Having no ADS-B Out limits the market in my humble opinion.

Finally, there is a nice little presentation from AOPA here on Electronic Conspicuity in Europe that is well worth a scan through - the first few slides on head-on conflicts really shows why accuracy of the bearing information is key for airborne conflist avoidance with small aircraft.

https://www.iaopa.org/policies-and-positions/29assemblydocs/Session%202.3/Bob%20Darby%202018-03%20IAOPA%20presentation%20v4.pptx

Best, Gaz

[neilmurg]

...a plan to roll out over 900+ ADS-B ground stations across Europe by 2025 (as there is a plan to cease primary RADAR and Mode A)....Best, Gaz

Aaaaw, I'll only get 7 years use out of my PAw? More seriously, what's an ADS-B ground station? Is it UAT, which Europe hasn't gone for?
Regards - neilmurg
[edit]Of course, they're the replacements for the Radar heads and ground stations so that ATC can see the traffic, so, ADS-R then?[/edit]

[neilmurg]

Interestingly, we've just had someone tell us (on our own forum) that there's a new version of the Stratux software which receives and decodes FLARM

Link please, or thread title [edit]found it, Page 10 of Topic 'Stratux'; subforum 'Suggestions and Beta Disc..' [/edit]

[Paul_Sengupta]

Interestingly, we've just had someone tell us (on our own forum) that there's a new version of the Stratux software which receives and decodes FLARM, without the need to buy an external receiver or in fact buy anything from FLARM.

As I said further up the thread, it's not new, but it isn't much known about.

https://www.reddit.com/r/stratux/comments/6pa2nj/flarm_receiver_functionality/

They're apparently using the OGN code to decode Flarm on the unit. Don't know how happy Flarm would be if this came into wider use....!

(Gaz asked a while back why I have two Stratux units...I like to experiment! )

[stevelup]

I had a FLARM decoder working years ago - it's a trivial protocol and the encryption (if you can call it that) is incredibly weak. Bear in mind, it's designed to work on ancient 8 bit microcontrollers with absolutely zero horsepower.

The issue is, as you point out, the legality, not any technical barrier.

[Nick]

That is really good news. Just what I have been saying should be done for a long time. All systems "talking to each other" I wonder how it will work out in the end? The bottom end rising in price and the top end lowering perhaps?

Nick.

[nallen]

I had a FLARM decoder working years ago - it's a trivial protocol and the encryption (if you can call it that) is incredibly weak. Bear in mind, it's designed to work on ancient 8 bit microcontrollers with absolutely zero horsepower.

The issue is, as you point out, the legality, not any technical barrier.

Out of interest, is such decoding accessing the algorithms FLARM uses for collision alerts, or just the broadcast vectors?

[stevelup]

The collision algorithm is in the device firmware, and not revealed by decoding the signal.

The signal contains your address, Lat/Long, GPS alt in metres, speed in three dimensions and a couple of other bits.

Sending the speed in three 'dimensions' (vertical, N/S and E/W) reduces the processing power needed by the receiving devices which then don't need to calculate vectors for multiple targets.

It's well thought out and elegant, and it's frustrating that they have failed to engage with the wider world and just opened up their protocol. But hey ho.

[gaznav]

Well that is interesting too - I know some have said due to the low power signal and small antennae involved that airborne Classic FLARM reception is normally 3-5km, which worse-case given the normal gliding and light aircraft closure speed head-on is ~180kts (3 nm a minute or 5 km a minute) then 40 secs to 1 min of warning is pretty good if the direction/relative height is mega-accurate I can probably only see a head on glider from 3-5km anyway (if I’m lucky!).

I wonder if these are the “modules” that SkyEcho 2 is talking about - ie. software modules to enable reception of FLARM and PilotAware seeing as the reception protocols are freely available to view online and there is nothing legally required to receive signals on ETSI frequencies as far as I’m aware?