Emmanuel,
I think you have the right intentions, but you seem to be mixing up different technologies with widely different purposes, requirements, and implementations. You advocate the “convergence of existing standards”, but I don’t understand what you mean by that, and I’m afraid you don’t understand it yourself either. I don’t blame you because you are certainly not the only one. But you cannot just “converge” standards/technologies for the same reason you cannot broadcast weather on TCAS, do voice communication over GPS, or stream a movie using NDB channels. Even when looking at seemingly similar technologies like ADS-B and FLARM, they don’t mix well together. ADS-B was developed for ATC purposes with several miles of separation. FLARM is a tactical collision avoidance system with meter accuracy. PowerFLARM systems receive ADS-B Out and integrate this into the collision algorithms, but this has several challenges as ADS-B was not developed for this purpose (e.g. timing, position accuracy). FLARM has actually described this pretty well in a white paper:
https://flarm.com/wp-content/uploads/man/FTD-062-System-Design-and-Inte…
This becomes an even bigger problem e.g. when trying to relay the data using ground stations. And honestly, why would you? It’s not the same data and it cannot be translated. There is a reason that standards exist. Over 50% of GA in Europe already have FLARM, and there is no reason for the other half not to have it. ADS-B does not solve any problem in terms of collision avoidance.
If you have been flying over Europe and not seen much traffic when not on a collision course, this is how the system is designed (you can, however, change this in the configuration). But your FLARM transceiver is working also when nobody is around.
