Author Topic: FL*RM Integration - Beta Testers  (Read 47676 times)

exfirepro

Re: FL*RM Integration - Beta Testers
« Reply #15 on: August 02, 2016, 10:28:32 pm »
Julian,

I can understand your concern, you have just spent £1300+ buying and fitting a PowerFlarm Core to your aircraft which won't be able to see all those who have instead gone down the cheaper PilotAware route. Been there got the tee-shirt and sent it back due to problems I don't want to go into here. That won't however stop me going down the FlarmMouse route if I choose to do so.

Unfortunately, trying to justify your expenditure by making PAW seem much more expensive than it actually is won't help you see PAW equipped aircraft. Your financial argument quickly falls apart because most of us these days already choose to run some form of tablet based navigation system, irrespective of whether or not we choose to install an aircraft avoidance or awareness system, so you really can't justify taking the cost of the navigation system or tablet into account. Many PFC users in fact spend a fair bit more specifically to present data from their systems visually onto SD or their favoured tablet based Nav system.

What Lee is trying to do at the request of PAW and Flarm users is come up with a workable solution without illegally decoding Flarm's Collision Avoidance Protocols, which will allow Flarm users to see us for a minimal cost if they already run a tablet based Nav system and allow us to legally see them at minimum extra cost if we choose to do so.

I don't mean to be offensive or negative in any way, but as Keith says we all have a choice - yours is no more right or wrong than anyone else's - just different.

I for one will continue to await developments

Regards

Peter

« Last Edit: August 03, 2016, 09:28:46 am by exfirepro »

AlanB

Re: FL*RM Integration - Beta Testers
« Reply #16 on: August 02, 2016, 11:35:58 pm »
I chose the PowerFlarm route in the end and it works very well for me as I operate in an area with lots of glider activity.

Out of the box, fitted new batteries and works first time. Self contained with no trailing antennae cables.

I have a built in GPS in the aircraft which does not have WiFi but happily feeds the Transponder so I have ADS-B out as well. A tablet with the associated software would be additional expense for me and a device i don't need.

Bottom line is people have a choice and you pays your money.

Each to their own.
Europa XS Mode-S ADS-B out enabled.

exfirepro

Re: FL*RM Integration - Beta Testers
« Reply #17 on: August 03, 2016, 08:36:34 am »
Hi Alan,

Well said. My point was that Lee is trying to give those who have already made their choice an opportunity to combine systems at a minimum cost. I did try PFC but due to a weird fault it just didn't work the way it should, so I felt I had to bale out before the 'warranty' expired and I might have been left holding a very expensive baby. It won't stop me going down the FlarmMouse route to let me see local gliders once Lee gets things fully sorted.

Regards

Peter
« Last Edit: August 03, 2016, 09:25:50 am by exfirepro »

Keithvinning

Re: FL*RM Integration - Beta Testers
« Reply #18 on: August 03, 2016, 08:54:22 am »
Quote
A tablet with the associated software would be additional expense for me and a device i don't need

I thought that you said in an earlier post that you use an IPAD and RunwayHD, so adding these to the cost is surely not at all fair in your cost roll up comparison

Quote
I fly an Europa with a AVMAP EK V as my main GPS display and I also had the PilotAware running with a GPS Dongle and therefore providing the GPS position information and traffic alert to RunwayHD on an iPAD.



gvpsj

Re: FL*RM Integration - Beta Testers
« Reply #19 on: August 25, 2016, 11:47:57 am »
Morning All, Where are we now with FLARM and PAW integration? I have all the bits for both ready for an upgrade when I have time - and I have am now looking at a medically induced period where I can get on with upgrading things. I do not have the comprehensive computer skills but the hardware. How many aerials will be needed now? So far I am looking at 4 GPS (Skymap 3, Kanard, PAW, FLARM - SkyDemon on the Nexus 7 is internal) Dipoles for FLARM and PAW etc and it's getting to be a bit crowded and will need some complicated knitting to fit the all in to a reasonable planed area. Can the PAW and FLARM collection be combined? Will the helpful little FLARM indicator still be able to be used? Time on my hands but would like to plan and layout components soon.

Admin

Re: FL*RM Integration - Beta Testers
« Reply #20 on: August 25, 2016, 01:04:10 pm »
This is still in beta, but basically you need a USB-RS232 dongle such as a PL2303, this needs the RX/TX connected to the TX/RX respectively of the FLARM mouse RS232 Serial connector

The PAW usb port needs setting to 'Flarm-in', and the specific baud rate.
Using the flarm in means you do not require a GPS dongle as flarm will suppy GPS data with its traffic data.

At some point soon we will try to produce an appplication note

Thx
Lee

exfirepro

Re: FL*RM Integration - Beta Testers
« Reply #21 on: August 25, 2016, 06:30:49 pm »
This is still in beta, but basically you need a USB-RS232 dongle such as a PL2303, this needs the RX/TX connected to the TX/RX respectively of the FLARM mouse RS232 Serial connector

Lee

Hi Lee,

Would this lead work? It was previously recommended in the forum for connecting PAW to a transponder to provide ADSB out?

http://shop.clickandbuild.com/cnb/shop/ftdichip?productID=97&op=catalogue-product_info-null&prodCategoryID=293

I like the fact that it comes with the chip built into the USB end and a decent length cable with bare wires at the other end to fit an appropriate data plug for the FlarmMouse. This version has an 'additional voltage output' of '0v', but also comes in alternative versions with 3.3V or 5V alternative voltages. A bit pricier than others though.

Regards

Peter

Admin

Re: FL*RM Integration - Beta Testers
« Reply #22 on: August 25, 2016, 06:48:09 pm »
I think someone else has used one of these to connect to their transponder
May have been Andy Fell - wobblewing

Thx
Lee

Deker

Re: FL*RM Integration - Beta Testers
« Reply #23 on: August 25, 2016, 08:16:02 pm »
This is still in beta, but basically you need a USB-RS232 dongle such as a PL2303, this needs the RX/TX connected to the TX/RX respectively of the FLARM mouse RS232 Serial connector
The PAW usb port needs setting to 'Flarm-in', and the specific baud rate.
Using the flarm in means you do not require a GPS dongle as flarm will suppy GPS data with its traffic data.
Lee

Hi Lee,

Does the latest release 20160820 have the Flarm beta test function?
I fly with buddy who has powerflarm portable. I believe that RS232 is output via the rear RJ45 connector and would like to give it a try.

Thanks,
Deker.
 

Admin

Re: FL*RM Integration - Beta Testers
« Reply #24 on: August 25, 2016, 08:54:24 pm »
Hi Lee,

Does the latest release 20160820 have the Flarm beta test function?
I fly with buddy who has powerflarm portable. I believe that RS232 is output via the rear RJ45 connector and would like to give it a try.

Thanks,
Deker.

Yes it does
Thx
Lee

ianfallon

Re: FL*RM Integration - Beta Testers
« Reply #25 on: September 01, 2016, 05:24:09 pm »
Just a thought:- This would also be an expensive way to get FLARM targets? I think a PF mouse is £450? OGN are allowed to decode the Flarm signal and display it on the internet cant we just decode and display without transmitting anything in the same way OGN do? I honestly cant see why Flarm would object as PAW will not have the capability required by a Glider?

Not sure I can see an answer to this. i.e. whether FLARM can be decoded (only decode, not encode) like OGN do ?

Deker

Re: FL*RM Integration - Beta Testers
« Reply #26 on: September 01, 2016, 06:02:59 pm »
Just a thought:- This would also be an expensive way to get FLARM targets? I think a PF mouse is £450? OGN are allowed to decode the Flarm signal and display it on the internet cant we just decode and display without transmitting anything in the same way OGN do? I honestly cant see why Flarm would object as PAW will not have the capability required by a Glider?
Not sure I can see an answer to this. i.e. whether FLARM can be decoded (only decode, not encode) like OGN do ?

I think it is an agreement between OGN and Flarm that decoding is "tolerated" as the OGN is only used on the ground.
As soon as you put a decoder in an aircaft, then Flarm demand "their pound of flesh".
Deker

Admin

Re: FL*RM Integration - Beta Testers
« Reply #27 on: September 01, 2016, 06:08:46 pm »
I think it is an agreement between OGN and Flarm that decoding is "tolerated" as the OGN is only used on the ground.
As soon as you put a decoder in an aircaft, then Flarm demand "their pound of flesh".
Deker

If this is truly the case, who do they go after if I were to put one in my plane ?
OGN or me ?
This sounds so vague and without foundation.

Thx
Lee

Deker

Re: FL*RM Integration - Beta Testers
« Reply #28 on: September 01, 2016, 07:25:25 pm »
I think it is an agreement between OGN and Flarm that decoding is "tolerated" as the OGN is only used on the ground.
As soon as you put a decoder in an aircaft, then Flarm demand "their pound of flesh".
Deker
If this is truly the case, who do they go after if I were to put one in my plane ?
OGN or me ?
This sounds so vague and without foundation.
Thx
Lee

Hi Lee,

I might of read it on Flyer Forum, so could be just a rumor / opinion.
I was thinking more of the consequences of a commercial operator putting a decode only device on the market for airborne use.

Cheers
Deker.

exfirepro

Re: FL*RM Integration - Beta Testers
« Reply #29 on: September 02, 2016, 02:37:44 am »
The point about using the flarmMouse is that you own the device which you have legally bought from FLARM or one of its licensed developers as a fully licensed FLARM unit and are therefore legally decoding received FLARM signals and merely using PilotAware as a 'conduit' to  present them to your nav device - in the same way FLARM themselves advocate by using a 'Butterfly' (now marketted as 'Air Connect') RS232 to WiFi converter.

As you have bought the decoding licence from FLARM (albeit through a 3rd party developer), they would be hard pushed to prosecute you for using it in the way it is intended. Just my opinion of course.

WRT using an OGN feed in the plane, I would view this in the same way I do FR24 - connection difficulties, time delays and positional innacuracies make this a definite 'No No' for me! I want my traffic notifications to be 100% reliable!

Regards

Peter
« Last Edit: October 01, 2016, 06:12:18 pm by exfirepro »