OGN

[John Galloway]

So, as I understand it, the current situation with the Open Glider
Network is that:

It relies on tracking Flarm collision data against Flarm's wishes.

It relies on using the Flarmnet database (which is encoded so that
the database can't be downlosded and be easily human readable)
against their wishes.

It relies on a free-to-OGN network of ground receivers that have been
voluntarily set up and funded by glider pilots (including myself who
has funded one) to receive Flarm transmissions.

Now the OGN want to sell us commercial transmitters

Hmmmm.

Flarm radar has been extremely useful and fun in the last year in
Europe but we glider pilots collectively own the vital ingredient which
is the ground receiver network and I for one wont be buying a tracker
from the OGN in those circumstances.

John Galloway

[Peter Scholz]

What's the source about OGN trying to sell us commercial transmitters? I
cannot confirm this.

In my understanding, there are ongoing negociations between OGN
programmers and FLARM representatives to find a solution for decoding
Flarm data packets that satisfy all participants - Flarm Company, OGN
activists, pilots not wanting their data published on the internet.

IMHO this might still take a while, and until then there will be no OGN
service available.

You might refer to the OGN tracker service, but this is only an
alternative signal source for OGN, I guess not many pilots will add
hardware fjust for the purpose of beeing able to be tracked. OGN success
lives and dies with the ability to use Flarm signals.
--
Peter Scholz
ASW24 JE

[Wolf Aviator]

O my dear god...

What FLARM has to say about how what I do with device I bought?

OGN were using OPEN (until now) flarmnet DB, so they do not rely on it
anymore. The data in this database was put voluntarly by pilots to be
visible, then flarmnet (founded by FLARM), just decided that it is their DB
and explicitely said that OGN is not welcomed. They took this action in
name of all those who put their data in. All of them are ok with this?

John, I founded 3 stations, helped quite significantly with one more
(donating my antenna and time), and I am setting up another one soon too. I
am not expecting for medal though.

People involved in OGN developed software without which your hardware is no
god for tracking. Found good source of cheap good quality antennas, and
involved in making orders from China. No big deal, just put your money
first, deal with the order, collect money later and distribute among
people. Their time has no value for you?

And then FLARM is changing a protocol and encryption for sole purpose
making OGN useless and make you to force use their tracking server (when
they make it eventually), and you blame OGN?

Question for FLARM owners: how many of you are happy that FLARM company is
making things this way: either you update software or you device which you
paid not such small amount for a archaic hardware which is inside or your
device is useless?

FLARM radar were extremely useful, you say, but hey, no what flarm did good
for it? Just don't say they made a device, because it is not a rocked
science. Have you heard about DSX?

And then OGN proposed their open protocol and made a device using this
protocol. Whoever will make a device using this protocol is not is not
forcing you to buy it by any means. Just accept the blackout.

Or wait, you know what you can do? Buy PowerFlarm for 700 euro + VAT and be
happy with 15km maybe 20km range. TV dongle (R820T chip) sensitivity is
superior to nRF905.

John, OGN didn't switched FLARM protocol to make some people create OGN
tracker and use it for tracking.

Anyway, what price are they going to ask? What do you think?

Oh you can say, I'll wait for FLARM to make their software for my receiver
and they will make their tracking server and be happy that some community
project just died. Be happy with limited range, be happy with closed
protocol, be happy with 700 euro device (+VAT), be happy with that there is
no alternative, be happy with dubious "anti-collision" on 8 bit
architecture which is in pre PowerFlarm devices. How many packets per
second those old FLARMs are able to cope? DSX claims that their device with
16 bit microcontroller running at 25MHz is able to cope with up to 50
tracks. Do you think 8bit microcontroller with slower clock can do better
job?

Oh, BTW, you can make your own tracker. The protocol is open, so there is
no need for buying anything from anyone.

Here are my two cents.


Regards
Wolf
http://youtu.be/aQUB7erVIKw

[Wolf Aviator]

In my opinion, OGN success lives and dies with people supporting certain
ideas. This is what happens when you support monopolistic, closed
solutions. You don't need to buy so called OGN tracker, you can build one
on your own.

Or try to convince FLARM to open their protocol :) LOL
Regards
Wolf
http://youtu.be/aQUB7erVIKw

[Tango Whisky]

I am one of those who is quite happy that the FlarmNet database was shut down. I did register (years ago) so that I can meet buddies in the air or know on which frequency the guy opposite me in the thermal would be. I did NOT register to be tracked by anybody sitting in front of a screen.
So when I learned about OGN, I deleted my entry into FlarmNet - pitty, though. If OGN would have provided an opt-in, everything would have been fine - but they didn't. They even didn't provide a opt-out (other than what I did, or switching to stealth and deal with reduced warning modes). Noboday actual knows who "they" are. If only one of them disrespects the stealth flag, you can't avoid being tracked.

Now Flarm has decided to put that on a reliable track, and that's fine with me.

[thomas...@gmail.com]

On Friday, 20 March 2015 16:28:29 UTC+1, Tango Whisky wrote:
>They even didn't provide a opt-out (other than what I did, or switching to stealth and deal with reduced warning modes).

Even the "privacy options" OGN did provide were only respected on the surface. OGN distributed the complete data of everything they received in the full network to anyone who connected to their data stream with an alternate client including full precision data of FLARMs set to stealth mode.

Many pilots would have stopped using the FLARM under these circumstances. I consider the reaction of FLARM Technology quite accommodating given that the primary function of FLARMs (collision prevention) would be significantly impaired if the usage percentage drops.

[andrea.s...@gmail.com]

I'm one of the guys behind Flarm.
Please stop the nonsense.

The update that happens now has been scheduled and announced for the last 4 years, not due to OGN.

However, due to issues caused by OGN (such as tracking privacy) as well as issues experienced by OGN (such as range ambiguity), the update contains additional elements, some of which can make the combination-OGN more powerful, in both technical and legal terms.

We think OGN is largely a cool thing, and we have reasons to believe OGN+Flarm can fruitfully cooperate, to the benefit of gliding. If some conditions are met, such as OGN accepts the FlarmTrackingServer for decoding, and OGN dies not engage in an aircraft tracker. And OGN is learning that not anything goes.

OGN will have a problem without Flarm. Flarm may have a problem without OGN. Some know that.

Flarm focussed on the update that was published days ago, and is currently busy with the related support for 25k+ units spread over >30 hardware designs. This work is not done when a release is published.

Flarm will refocus on the TrackingServer next week again to make this happening for OGN.

Let us work, and enjoy gliding.

[Tim Newport-Peace]

At 21:28 20 March 2015, andrea.s...@gmail.com wrote:
>I'm one of the guys behind Flarm.
>Please stop the nonsense.
>
>The update that happens now has been scheduled and announced for the last
4 years, not due to OGN.
>
>However, due to issues caused by OGN (such as tracking privacy) as well as
issues experienced by OGN (such as range ambiguity), the update contains
additional elements, some of which can make the combination-OGN more
powerful, in both technical and legal terms.
>
>We think OGN is largely a cool thing, and we have reasons to believe
OGN+Flarm can fruitfully cooperate, to the benefit of gliding. If some
conditions are met, such as OGN accepts the FlarmTrackingServer for

decoding, and OGN does not engage in an aircraft tracker. And OGN is

learning that not anything goes.
>
>OGN will have a problem without Flarm. Flarm may have a problem without

OGN.. Some know that.

>
>Flarm focussed on the update that was published days ago, and is currently
busy with the related support for 25k+ units spread over 30 hardware
designs. This work is not done when a release is published.
>
>Flarm will refocus on the TrackingServer next week again to make this
happening for OGN.
>
>Let us work, and enjoy gliding.
>

Thanks Andrea, agree with all that.

[John Galloway]

[John Galloway]

[John Galloway]

I did not intentionally repost this message - it seems to have
reposted itself the next time I logged into RAS via gliderpilot.net on
my smart phone. Apologies.

[Tim Newport-Peace]

At 05:56 21 March 2015, John Galloway wrote:

Which is just as well, as OGN won't sell you one!

OGN needs to distance itself from any Tracker other than Flarm itself, to
ensure the co-operation of Flarm.

Personally I see Tracker as a solution looking for a problem.

[wojciec...@gmail.com]

> Which is just as well, as OGN won't sell you one!
>

Well, just to clarify- "OGN" is not selling anything to anyone. Apart from ideas and inspiration to do cool things (I hope :) ) And OGN is not forcing anyone to use one and only one solution (as some other companies do).

> OGN needs to distance itself from any Tracker other than Flarm itself, to
> ensure the co-operation of Flarm.

Don't see any reason for that. OGN has never said it was purly "FLARM's toy". FLARM could have had done it years ago, did not take its chance. It's difficult to imagine that so many people would voluntarily sacrifice their time and money in the name of building (for free!) a highly distributed network which would then only be bound to one commercial company.

OGN proposes a platform, on which FLARM can be very important player, but not the only one. And many of the OGN members (me included) strongly believe in openness of the protocols - and that is what OGN now proposes under "OGNTP".

>
> Personally I see Tracker as a solution looking for a problem.

In which sense? Nobody forces you to build/have/fly with one.

Cheers
Wojtek

[Tim Newport-Peace]

At 11:42 21 March 2015, wojciec...@gmail.com wrote:
>> Which is just as well, as OGN won't sell you one!

>>=20

>Well, just to clarify- "OGN" is not selling anything to anyone. Apart
from

>=

>ideas and inspiration to do cool things (I hope :) ) And OGN is not

>forcing=

> anyone to use one and only one solution (as some other companies do).
>
>> OGN needs to distance itself from any Tracker other than Flarm itself,
to
>> ensure the co-operation of Flarm.
>Don't see any reason for that. OGN has never said it was purly "FLARM's

>toy=

>". FLARM could have had done it years ago, did not take its chance. It's

>di=

>fficult to imagine that so many people would voluntarily sacrifice their

>ti=

>me and money in the name of building (for free!) a highly distributed

>netwo=

>rk which would then only be bound to one commercial company.

>=20

Andrea states quite clearly:
/*

We think OGN is largely a cool thing, and we have reasons to believe
OGN+Flarm can fruitfully cooperate, to the benefit of gliding. If some
conditions
are met, such as OGN accepts the FlarmTrackingServer for decoding, and OGN
does not engage in an aircraft tracker. And OGN is learning that not
anything goes.

*/

So it it comes to a choice between tracking Flarm (of which there are
Thousands) or tracking your device (of which there are very few), the
choice is obvious.

And if Flarm does cease co-operating with OGN, I can see Tracking Receivers
being switched off as there will be virtually nothing to track.

[Martin Gregorie]

On Sat, 21 Mar 2015 12:33:33 +0000, Tim Newport-Peace wrote:

> And if Flarm does cease co-operating with OGN, I can see Tracking
> Receivers being switched off as there will be virtually nothing to
> track.
>

It seems that the main cause of the rift has been that some OGN members
have caused the problem by refusing to honour 'stealth', i.e. privacy,
settings on the grounds that they can do whatever they like with every
bit picked up by their received and that the pilots who own the FLARM
unit being tracked have no right to say what anybody else can do with the
messages it emits.

To me this is a spurious as the Creative Commons people's view that a
creator has no rights over his work. The way forward is for OGN to get
its beans in a row and fully implement the privacy elements of the FLARM
protocol: no ifs, buts or exceptions.


--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org |

[Benedict Smith]

At 11:42 21 March 2015, wojciec...@gmail.com wrote:

>> Which is just as well, as OGN won't sell you one!

>>=20

>Well, just to clarify- "OGN" is not selling anything to anyone. Apart
from

>=

>ideas and inspiration to do cool things (I hope :) ) And OGN is not

>forcing=

> anyone to use one and only one solution (as some other companies do).
>
>> OGN needs to distance itself from any Tracker other than Flarm itself,
to
>> ensure the co-operation of Flarm.
>Don't see any reason for that. OGN has never said it was purly "FLARM's

>toy=

>". FLARM could have had done it years ago, did not take its chance. It's

>di=

>fficult to imagine that so many people would voluntarily sacrifice their

>ti=

>me and money in the name of building (for free!) a highly distributed

>netwo=

>rk which would then only be bound to one commercial company.

>=20

>OGN proposes a platform, on which FLARM can be very important player,
but

>n=

>ot the only one. And many of the OGN members (me included) strongly

>believe=

> in openness of the protocols - and that is what OGN now proposes under

>"OG=
>NTP".
>
>>=20

>> Personally I see Tracker as a solution looking for a problem.
>

>In which sense? Nobody forces you to build/have/fly with one.=20
>
>Cheers
>Wojtek
>
>
I am looking forward to the OGN tracker, I already have most of the parts
and am just waiting for a couple of other bits to arrive from China, it is
truly
low cost and in no way competes with FLARMS offering, it is is a pure
tracking/logging solution, and does not ofer any collision warning so I
cannot
see why FLARM are so set against it (unless they are planning to offer a
similar device?)
Being community developed it will be something that can quickly change to
add features that pilots want in much the same way that projects such as
XCsoar develop and grow based on what people want to see.
I feel it is wrong to be blackmailed with threats by a commercial business

who only offer a closed system and seem determined to prevent innovation
from anyone else.
Ben.

[pcool]

OGN was tracking Flarms using cheap devices reprogrammed using the Flarm
protocol. OGN did it using the 2008 Flarm protocol published on the usenet.
Now that Flarm has changed the protocol, OGN will either need to reverse
engineering the new flarm firmware (legal in germany, illegal in many other
part of the world) or wait until someone else will do it for them.
At the same time, Flarm will propose to OGN to have all the OGN nodes
transmitting the received data to their servers, where they will be
decrypted, checked for authorization and retransmitted to OGN server.
Flarm will so get full control of all OGN stations. Flarm would enter the
tracking market with an existing network not even financed for hardware.
Only alternative, shutting down everything. Flarm will benefit of OGN
software which is opensource in any case.
There is only one winner in either cases, and it is not OGN.
Unless OGN can break the new radio protocol, of course, in such case it
would be a real smash.
only my vision!
p


wrote in message
news:72ec0d6f-21dc-43a0...@googlegroups.com...

[Paul Ruskin]

I think there are some interesting issues here.

First off, I'm a supporter of Flarm. I have one, I think it's great, I encourage other people to get one.

But. Flarm has a defacto monopoly on glider anti-collision systems. No one can enter that market unless they conform to the Flarm protocol, for obvious reasons. And monopolies tend to behave in certain ways - they don't innovate, and they try to stamp on competition. It isn't Flarm that developed a glider tracking system - it's OGN. And Flarm's statement that they will only cooperate with OGN if it doesn't develop it's tracker is pure monopoly behaviour. Understandable, but not necessarily desirable. So whilst the OGN tracker doesn't particularly interest me, I don't think that Flarm should be allowed to stop it happening.

The privacy debate is an interesting one. I don't think it's as black and white as some make out. There isn't an absolute right to privacy - it's balanced by other things. If I walk down the street, I can't stop people taking photos of me, or CCTV recording where I am. If I fly using a transponder, people will see where I am (and to John Galloway's point about OGN using Flarm transmissions against Flarm's will, I ask if Flight Radar 24 needs the permission of transponder manufacturers such as Trig and Becker before they listen to transponder emissions. I don't think so.) In its last version OGN made a credible attempt to address the privacy issue - if you didn't put your details on Flarmnet, you weren't identified. If you used stealth mode, you weren't shown. Yes, there was a record of flights deep in the system which could be dug out, but then, there is in Flarm's system. And I don't think the fact that Flarm transmissions are encrypted is relevant, there are thousands of devices out there which turn those encrypted transmissions into clear text - and it's not OGN receivers, it's Flarms.

I don't think OGN can be criticised for using Flarmnet. That was a database published, without any Terms and Conditions in pretty much clear text, which allowed people to be identified when in the air, which is what OGN used it for. I suspect its rapid growth in the last year was due to, not in spite of, OGN (certainly at my club there were many entries). And when Flarmnet (funded by Flarm) objected, OGN stopped using it and set up their own.

But in any case, if that isn't enough, I think that OGN can address privacy concerns. Flarm has implemented a privacy bit - and OGN should respect this - and throw away any packets which have it set (providing it's opt out). It should not even keep them for S&R purposes - if you don't want to be tracked, we won't track you - at all. In addition, the new OGN database has a setting for 'I don't want to be tracked'. So there's two ways for those that don't want to be tracked not to be. And you'll only be identified if you put your details on that database. I've just added mine.

But what about the future? Well, I'd encourage OGN to keep going, and I'll actively support it - I think the collective, open nature of the venture is what a lot of gliding is about. I'd encourage Flarm to co-operate with it, without making unreasonable demands. If it implements the proposed tracking server, great - that may well work - though there are some technical concerns about the approach. In any case, I suspect that a new OGN client will come along soon, independent of Flarm the company - so there will be a couple of ways of achieving the same object. But that ought to get us back to the position of being able to build an even better tracking network, whilst allowing those who don't want to be tracked not to be.

Paul

[Bob Kuykendall]

Disruptive technology disruption FTW! Ima go get some popcorn.

Bob K.

[John DeRosa OHM Ω http://aviation.derosaweb.net]

I ran across this old 2015 RAS conversation about OGN and FLARM after I Googled "does FLARM pick up OGN".

With the current work by the SSA to finance OGN receivers around the US (my club near Chicago just installed one) the number of receivers in the US is growing ... but nowhere near the density that I see in Europe (200:1?).

So back to the original question. Basically, does FLARM and OGN get along? Around my club we have some ships with FLARM ($$$), some with ADS-B ($$$$). FLARM can display both FLARM and ADS-B traffic. In the spring some more ships will have OGN transmitters - basically only to track on the ground where our ships are.

OGN trackers (https://live.glidernet.org and https://glidertracker.org/) shows OGN and FLARM traffic. FLARM tracks, and displays, ADS-B and FLARM.

But what about in my cockpit? I can see FLARM and ADS-B. I cannot see OGN as this needs cellular reception which is dicey at best while at altitude. I have not read that my FLARM receiver pick up OGN. Are FLARM receiver(s) capable of doing so? If so, will FLARM someday make the software changes to do so? I imagine that there is a classic case of (expensive) commercial industry in direct conflict with (cheap) grass-roots open-source engineering.

Expiring minds want to know.

Thanks,
John (OHM)

[Charlie Finn]

The OGN trackers installed in the gliders receive OGN and Flarm, in addition to sending to ground stations. You do not need cellular to see OGN aircraft. The trackers can connect to most moving map displays and provide traffic info for OGN and Flarm aircraft. Optionally you can install A SoftRF SkyView for around $50 that provides a radar and voice alert for traffic.

Charlie

[Davis Chappins]

Charlie is correct.

For the purpose of this thread, OGN = FLARM. More generally, OGN is the network of ground stations and air transceivers that send and receive positions of gliders to then be sent to the internet to be viewed on various websites.

The OGN Trackers based on softRF (LILIGY TBEAM and the like) can be configured https://github.com/lyusupov/SoftRF/wiki/Settings to run in "Legacy Mode" which is the FLARM protocol. OGN Trackers configured as "Legacy" will see and be visible to other FLARMs as well as ground stations.
OGN Trackers configured as "OGNTP" will not see or be visible to other FLARMs and only be visible to ground stations.

I am not sure of the history of why the difference exists but if configured your OGN Trackers will be just as visible as FLARMs while in the cockpit.
You do not need an internet connection in the cockpit to see FLARM or OGN aircraft, although it can be helpful to use a webpage to see the progress of gliders that are outside of the 915mhz tx/rx range.

[Moshe Braner]

On 1/10/2023 2:17 PM, Charlie Finn wrote:
> The OGN trackers installed in the gliders receive OGN and Flarm, in addition to sending to ground stations. You do not need cellular to see OGN aircraft. The trackers can connect to most moving map displays and provide traffic info for OGN and Flarm aircraft. Optionally you can install A SoftRF SkyView for around $50 that provides a radar and voice alert for traffic.
>
> Charlie
>

Somebody last year or so decided to call those things "OGN trackers",
and that choice is still causing confusion. Yes there are "OGN
trackers" in existence. About 100 of them in total, worldwide. They
are used in world-level competitions, mostly to transmit the real-time
locations of the aircraft ENCRYPTED. They are retrieved from OGN,
decrypted (in a device on the ground) and re-posted with a 10-minute
delay, so that the spectators can enjoy the show. Those "OGN trackers"
use a radio protocol that is NOT FLARM-compatible, but that can be
interpreted by the common type of OGN ground stations.

The devices mentioned around here recently as "OGN trackers" are
something else entirely. They are two-way-communicating
FLARM-compatible devices, visible to other aircraft with FLARM or
FLARM-compatible equipment. (But, unlike PowerFLARM, they do not
receive ADS-B.)

Some clarification of terms:

OGN: The Open Glider Network. These are servers on the internet that
accept data in certain formats and pass the data on to clients that ask
nicely. This system does not directly use any sort of radio communications.

OGN ground stations: these receive signals from nearby aircraft (by
radio), interpret them, and pass the data on to the OGN servers (via
internet connection). Most such stations receive FLARM (or
FLARM-compatible) signals. There are thousands of such stations in
Europe. Still a rather small number in the USA.

There are other types of OGN ground stations. E.g., in the UK some
light aircraft use a system called "Pilot Aware", and the ground
stations that receive those can pass that data to OGN too.

There are many other data sources for OGN. E.g., Davis Chappins and
others have arranged systems whereupon you can register your SPOT or
InReach and have the data show up on OGN. Some ADS-B data is also
harvested (directly by receivers on the ground, or from the internet
servers those are feeding) and sent to OGN. Some other systems use the
cellphone data networks to feed data into OGN. E.g., the IGCdroid app
can do that.

OGN viewers: anybody can send requests in the right format to the OGN
servers, and receive selected data. But mostly people utilize the
existing web sites that do it for you and display the data nicely on
maps etc. Those are NOT the OGN servers, those are third-party clients.
For example: live.glidernet.org glidertracker.org gliderradar.com
glideandseek.com (and others)

OGN data (once it's been sent to the OGN servers) is NOT available to
aircraft, unless an internet connection is arranged in the aircraft.
E.g., one can run a web browser on a smartphone with a data plan and
connect to an OGN viewer - when and where cellphone data connection is
available. This is not the best way to get real-time data on aircraft
around you. FLARM (or FLARM compatible) devices that communicate
directly with each other over short range (up to several miles or km)
are much better suited.

The equipment recently mentioned:
* it is not off-the-shelf, you need to put the boards into cases of some
sort, install the software, etc. But the hardware is cheap and the
software is cheaper (free and open source).
* the FLARM-compatible devices run the "SoftRF" software. I recommend
the version that knows how to project the paths of circling gliders.
* the SkyView device is a FLARM-radar type system. I think it's better
to see the FLARM traffic in your navigation computer. Even the free
XCsoar and Tophat give voice traffic warnings too. If you want to use
the standalone SkyView, I recommend the version of it that offers
traffic warnings related to present collision danger - the original
SkyView software only gives traffic advisories about farther-away traffic.
* you can find all that software here:
https://github.com/moshe-braner/SoftRF - including source code,
executables, and documentation.