Best iPad App(s)?

I've come to hate accidental route changes in Foreflight.

I now always save the initial rote as a "Favorite" so I can quickly and easily reset it if I screw it up trying to type or select a specific point in the route in the tiny standard sized text box.
 
I've come to hate accidental route changes in Foreflight.

I now always save the initial rote as a "Favorite" so I can quickly and easily reset it if I screw it up trying to type or select a specific point in the route in the tiny standard sized text box.

How exactly do you get accidental route changes? I've never had that happen.

Saving as a favorite is a good tip anyway, though - And don't forget that you can tap the clock icon and go to the previous flight plan as well (there'll be a new one in there for every change you make). That way if you've already substantially modified your plan from the favorited version and make a mistake you can still go back easily.
 
Saving as a favorite is a good tip anyway, though - And don't forget that you can tap the clock icon and go to the previous flight plan as well (there'll be a new one in there for every change you make). That way if you've already substantially modified your plan from the favorited version and make a mistake you can still go back easily.


Great tip
 
How exactly do you get accidental route changes? I've never had that happen.

Saving as a favorite is a good tip anyway, though - And don't forget that you can tap the clock icon and go to the previous flight plan as well (there'll be a new one in there for every change you make). That way if you've already substantially modified your plan from the favorited version and make a mistake you can still go back easily.

Well, I wish I could tell ya. I got a "cleared direct" to HUT VOR on my route out of 1k1 the other day instead of intercepting the filed airway, so I utilized the (very useful) Direct button on the flight plan listing.

What I ended up with was three pink radials out of HUT going backwards toward 1k1 and a gap from HUT to the next VOR.

What I *suspect* happened was that previously I had selected the text route box and was scrolling left/right in it to review the route and left the cursor active inside it somewhere beyond HUT. Probably past "Vxxx" airway number. Foreflight acted like I wanted to go backwards from HUT back to the airport.

I didn't have time to mess with it. I flew the real VOR CDI and hit the Favorite to put it back the way it was on departure. I was just "cheating" anyway to get a heading. The airplane is /U (normally /A... she's back at the shop today to fix that -- GRIN!) so, primary nav is the CDI anyway.

Being /U or /A I like to file the Airway names themselves. I have come to hate that text box for certain things... Like a "direct" given while direct fixes on a long airway segment that Foreflight only knows in the text box as "Vxxx". Things get squirrelly. Foreflight likes individual waypoint names or seems more suited to /G operation than airways.

I also REALLY hate trying to type into the text box, and it's not the size. It's the way the text box widget handles cursor placement. It always starts at the end. I wish it would track where you are in the flight and move the text cursor between the two current waypoints. Scrolling left and right in turbulence is virtually impossible. And there are certain times it would just be easier to type. You spend more time doing scrolling target practice than actually typing. The text window is also way too small. If it were long enough to see most of a long route, one could tap and hold right on the spot you needed to edit.

Finally when doing /U or /A flight planning on the ground, one comes to hate that every change to the route causes a reset of the map centered back to the starting point of the flight. I usually put in starting airport, destination airport, and then zoom and scroll the map to look for the Victor airways that will handle that path. Add one, and an endpoint to the text, I'm back at the starting airport. Now I have to scroll to the endpoint I just entered on the map and look for the next one. Type in next Victor airway and an exit point and map resets to starting point again.

So I tried a new technique. Let's use rubber banding. We'll rubber band the flight onto the entry and exit points all the way to the end, and then edit the text. Problem there is... You still have to scroll around to find the Victor airway numbers after setting the route and now you're fighting the above "always jumps to end" of the text box problem every time you switch focus from the map scrolling to the text box, and then scrolling left to find where to insert the "Vxxx" into the route. And... Once you do... The map, jumps to the starting airport again.

Setting up Victor Airway routes is really clunky. Got any better ideas?

I didn't realize the clock kept a history like that. That's really useful. Will play with that one more.

Noticed one more really subtle thing. I think FF is drawing great circle courses on Airways. I need to find a really really long straight one to be sure. It's supposed to draw them straight down the airway.

Almost imperceptible and I could be wrong. Well within the 4nm limits, probably more like within a few hundred feet. I just noticed it when playing with some enormously long fake routes the other day. It seems to counter this by adding a bejillion entry/exit points to the route along the airway. Nice that it adds them for doing shorter timed legs, but of you already did some paper planning you have to remove them to line up the on-screen flight plan with the one in your lap. It also gets hilarious when it adds three or four near the VOR within a few miles of each other. I wanted the airway, not a waypoint every three miles. ;)

Trivia: Anyone know the longest straight Victor Airway in the Lower 48? (I haven't looked. Just think it's an interesting side-question.)

As always, these are just UI nit-picks and the software does what it's supposed to do, well. It just doesn't "amaze" me when it comes to Victor Airway routing. It likes direct.

Thanks for the heads-up on the clock icon.
 
Here's an example of goofy Airway routing. The text in the text box is...

1K1 ICT V73 HUT V10 LAA V263 HGO V366 FQF KAPA 130kts N1279M 10000ft

Nice and simple.

The route shown in the flight plan added waypoints MUGER WUKOL and WUKUS from ICT to HUT. I don't need those for a 22 mile Enroute leg.

It's clutter. WUKOL and WUKUS are virtually on top of each other in terms of Enroute. Why would I time a leg that short? If you're slightly off course on the airway, and have the "Bearing Next" block active on the HUD, it's doing a lot of whining that you're next bearing is going past you to the right or left, but you didn't ask for that waypoint. You want bearing next pointing at HUT. That's what you filed and asked Foreflight for. Not bearings to every little waypoint from ICT to HUT.

I can tap and hold to remove them, but try doing that in turbulence while being vectored.

I didn't ask for them in the text box in the first place. I'd rather try to tap and hold to ADD them if I want to time a leg, than to have to remove all of them from the route I typed.

4b94241c-23c2-6688.jpg


On the flip side, it's probably "nice" that it adds KILLE GABIE CUKTO etc, on the 99 mile leg between HUT and DDC. Maybe. But I didn't specifically ask it to do that.

4b94241c-24f6-0fb5.jpg


Here's something else that's interesting in the cockpit. Same leg as above, slightly zoomed out.

Note how fuzzy the text on the chart gets as you back out just a little bit. It does it instantly at a certain zoom level. Zoom back in, the chart is crisp again. I do not like that. The screen resolution on iPad 3 can keep up. This looks like an attempt to save processor and display speed gone wrong as you zoom out.

4b94241c-255e-7737.jpg


Just some interesting "stuff" all noticed during the long XCs to Gaston's, filed as a /U.
 
P.S. The examples don't show the "crispness" issue as well as I'd like because the screen shots are compressed on the Tapatalk server. It's stark on the device. Zoomed in, lines and tiny text are crisp. Zoom a little further out and they're fuzzy.
 
Here's an example of goofy Airway routing. The text in the text box is...

1K1 ICT V73 HUT V10 LAA V263 HGO V366 FQF KAPA 130kts N1279M 10000ft

Nice and simple.

The route shown in the flight plan added waypoints MUGER WUKOL and WUKUS from ICT to HUT. I don't need those for a 22 mile Enroute leg.

Change the Route View in Settings to "bends only" and the intermediate waypoints should go away.

Regarding the text resolution on low enroutes, it isn't razor sharp at any zoom level on the original iPad, but it is easily legible. If it's different on the new iPad, perhaps it's an issue specific to that hardware.


JKG
 
Change the Route View in Settings to "bends only" and the intermediate waypoints should go away.

Hey, spiffy. Thanks. Why is "All" the default? That's silly.

Regarding the text resolution on low enroutes, it isn't razor sharp at any zoom level on the original iPad, but it is easily legible. If it's different on the new iPad, perhaps it's an issue specific to that hardware.

If the hardware can display it crisply at a slightly higher zoom level and it switches to fuzzy only a small amount up, that's not hardware. That's a software problem. The screen didn't lose any pixels when I barely zoomed out.

You may be on to something, though... Perhaps it's code to help the older devices keep up. May need to be tweaked by hardware type.
 
By the way, the text box issue could be solved by using a pop-up LARGER text box with LARGER type, or preferably, a pop-up box with itemized waypoints for the current flight plan, similar to Garmin Pilot. As it is now, modifying an active plan in flight is a huge distraction. ForeFlight's answer to these types of complaints always seems to be, "use rubber banding," but that isn't ideal, either. The text box issue seems like something that is easy to fix, so I'm not sure why there appears to be a reluctance to fix it.


JKG
 
Hey, spiffy. Thanks. Why is "All" the default? That's silly.

I would think that a default to more information would be preferable, especially when IFR, because having those intersections identified might be helpful. I haven't tried SIDs or STARs to see if the "bends only" thing exempts them, but I suspect not.


If the hardware can display it crisply at a slightly higher zoom level and it switches to fuzzy only a small amount up, that's not hardware. That's a software problem. The screen didn't lose any pixels when I barely zoomed out.

You may be on to something, though... Perhaps it's code to help the older devices keep up. May need to be tweaked by hardware type.

I didn't say that it was a hardware problem, but rather, a problem specific to that hardware. It is possible that there is some optimization for the display that is yet to be done.


JKG
 
Trivia: Anyone know the longest straight Victor Airway in the Lower 48? (I haven't looked. Just think it's an interesting side-question.)

Not the longest STRAIGHT Victor Airway, Nate, but for a really long (2,595nm) single Victor Airway route, punch "KLAX V16 KBOS" into ForeFlight. :)

That might be fun to fly sometime, just to say you did it!! Aviation's "Route 66".
 
Regarding the text resolution on low enroutes, it isn't razor sharp at any zoom level on the original iPad, but it is easily legible. If it's different on the new iPad, perhaps it's an issue specific to that hardware.

Played some more with the crispness thing on all charts on iPad 3.

Any zoom level that shows 100nm or more from corner to corner in portrait mode, then the picture is degraded and most small text on the chart becomes unreadable. It appears to happen exactly at 100nm.

It shows up even better on dense VFR charts. Here's a good example:

Put "RIC ORF" into the map as a route. Slide the map to center the whole route on one screen without zooming. Note that everything along the route is perfectly legible.

Now slightly zoom out in tiny increments until the map is right at 100nm diagonally across. This is about where each airport is 1" physically from the edges of the screen.

Watch The text all over the chart carefully. Especially the tiny stuff around PHF.

It'll go from perfectly legible to unreadable in one jump with very little zooming out. Physical size of the letters will be nearly the same but they'll go from small and readable to instantly unreadable in a single change right at (or really close to) 100nm across the screen diagonally.

(You can even use the built in ruler to measure it.)

It's definitely software.
 
Not the longest STRAIGHT Victor Airway, Nate, but for a really long (2,595nm) single Victor Airway route, punch "KLAX V16 KBOS" into ForeFlight. :)

That might be fun to fly sometime, just to say you did it!! Aviation's "Route 66".

Wow. That's cool. Now I want to do a "Victor 16 Run".
 
Heh. Without "Bends only" on V16 there isn't a leg that is ten minutes long at 130 knots in the entire flight plan. In over 20 hours or flying. ;)
 
I wouldn't have guessed Foreflight would accept 'KLAX V16 KBOS' as airports are not points on an airway. But before I posted my thoughts I thought I'd at least try it out and I'll be damned, it took it.

Still not sure if that's a bug or a feature...


Btw, if I had the time and money I'd fly that!
 
I think it'll always take airports as the endpoints. Interesting point though.

If you look carefully it added LAX and BOS automatically.

4b94241c-e240-93cf.jpg
 
I think it'll always take airports as the endpoints. Interesting point though.

If you look carefully it added LAX and BOS automatically.

If you do not specify entry/exit points for an airway, I believe that ForeFlight will pick the closest on-airway navaid to the departure/arrival as the entry/exit point. I can tell you that there is a confirmed bug when using some intersections as entry points.


JKG
 
Now slightly zoom out in tiny increments until the map is right at 100nm
It'll go from perfectly legible to unreadable in one jump with very little zooming out. Physical size of the letters will be nearly the same but they'll go from small and readable to instantly unreadable in a single change right at (or really close to) 100nm across the screen diagonally.

It's definitely software.

I suppose that I notice a slight change, but I'm not sure that the original iPad has the pixel density to display the text much better at that level of zoom. It is perhaps more noticeable on the new iPad, but I'm still stuck using yesterday's hardware. :)

I assume that you are reporting these issues to FF?


JKG
 
I probably should, but the marginal value of return is low. It's a crap shoot as to whether they'll fix it or not... There's no bounty for bug hunting, and they might not even consider it a bug anyway.

And now that I know it happens at exactly 100nm, it's easy to work around it.

It's not causing me a safety issue, other than thinking I suddenly need better glasses, and I know the only real solution is everything being converted to vector graphics which is expen$ive.

For less than $200 a year including charts, it kinda "is what it is"...

They've got some stiff competition in feature-set from WingX right now. I'd kinda rather see them work on that stuff. Split-screen for example. Terrain. Etc.

They're all amazing tools for very little money.

Kinda looking forward to seeing the ADS-B toys, but not holding my breath for flyover-State coverage from FAA for a while. Those receivers are DOA here right now.

Another minor pet peeve... Neither is great at landscape mode support. I'd like to see FF move the GPS data bar at the bottom and the flight plan at the top, over to the sides when the device is rotated. Better use of space. With both turned on, you'd better hope your route is east-west and not north-south. Not much screen real estate in the vertical.

The layout is very portrait-mode centric. On my yoke mount, landscape orientation leaves nothing blocked on my panel. Portrait can block my suction gauge, even offset to one side with the RAM mount arm cockeyed.
 
ForeFlight is very focused on getting the details right, which is what makes it such a great app. If they start to prioritize features at the expense of polish or usability (an area where WingX s especially poor), that will be the death of them. They need to add features, but do it right, which seems to be the route they're taking. I am somewhat concerned that they aren't quite moving fast enough, and that Garmin may marginalized them if Garmin decides to really push Pilot.


JKG
 
Garmin won't push Pilot. It won't keep their VP's in the manner to which they're accustomed. ;)
 
Garmin won't push Pilot. It won't keep their VP's in the manner to which they're accustomed. ;)

Garmin's idea of "not pushing" may still be enough to push the others out. That might be the idea, rid the iThingy market of viable apps to compete with their $3,000 handhelds. I keep going between one month Pilot Subscriptions and 3 month ForeFlight ones when I really want to buy WingX for it's terrain features.. But i have a fear of commitment. :)
 
There is no iPad anything that can compete with their handhelds, especially the 796. They are in different markets.
 
There is no iPad anything that can compete with their handhelds, especially the 796. They are in different markets.

I liked my Aera (was stolen) much more than I liked my iPad. For entering a flight plan and following the magenta line. Even the Aera 500 is light years ahead of anything on the iPad. BUT, For the type of flying I do, I don't need both. The iPad is a much better EFB with a "get you by" navigation GPS. That's all I need. if the iPad didn't exist I'd own the Aera, for me at least it was one or the other so that put them in "the same market". If my Aera hadn't been stolen, I wouldn't own an iPad.
 
I liked my Aera (was stolen) much more than I liked my iPad. For entering a flight plan and following the magenta line. Even the Aera 500 is light years ahead of anything on the iPad. BUT, For the type of flying I do, I don't need both. The iPad is a much better EFB with a "get you by" navigation GPS. That's all I need. if the iPad didn't exist I'd own the Aera, for me at least it was one or the other so that put them in "the same market". If my Aera hadn't been stolen, I wouldn't own an iPad.


I look at the unit from the other side, it's PRIMARY function is emergency situational awareness, that it's a nifty EFB is a bonus.
 
There is no iPad anything that can compete with their handhelds, especially the 796. They are in different markets.

That may be true now, but the iPad is obviously perceived as either a threat, opportunity, or both from Garmin, otherwise they wouldn't have released the Pilot app. Garmin will never be able to push out the competition, but they can certainly recapture some of the revenue they're losing to the iPad with an app of their own. The iPad has allowed the markets to converge, or begin to converge, more than multi-use computing devices of the past.

The iPad and similar tablets are much better than previous PC-in-the-cockpit attempts, and in a big way. I don't need a $3500 standalone unit with expensive database updates when the iPad can perform most or all of the same functions at a fraction of the cost, plus function as an EFB and nearly full-function portable computer with great battery life.

Garmin's Pilot app is notable in that it is perhaps the first app that really excels at navigation. I can't imagine why I would prefer an Aera over Pilot for navigation, but with the tablet, I can bring and access a world of information with me. Garmin does need to add terrain, obstacles, etc., but I suspect that will come soon. I'd also like an option to select an aviation base map rather than a chart for the moving map, but I recall reading either here or elsewhere that Garmin has no plans to add such a feature. I suspect that Garmin's plans for Pilot will evolve depending on how the markets change over the next few years.

Right now, my somewhat antiquated GPSMAP 396 remains my primary "backup" device for navigation, but I no longer carry paper charts, thanks to the iPad.


JKG
 
Last edited:
If Garmin thought they were in the same market they would not have released the iApp, it's a product to a different market. The function does not determine the market, the customer's spending determines the market. Adding the iApp opened the cheaper market.
 
I probably should, but the marginal value of return is low. It's a crap shoot as to whether they'll fix it or not... There's no bounty for bug hunting, and they might not even consider it a bug anyway.

Nate - As a beta tester, *I* consider it a bug. So I reported it, using your excellent description (with proper attribution ;)). Nicely done.
 
I wouldn't have guessed Foreflight would accept 'KLAX V16 KBOS' as airports are not points on an airway. But before I posted my thoughts I thought I'd at least try it out and I'll be damned, it took it.

Still not sure if that's a bug or a feature...

That's a feature. Had to test it when airways got added to ForeFlight.

Now that I think about it though, I'm not sure if the FAA's computers would accept a flight plan like that, with no specified entry/exit points. If you send KLAX V16 KBOS to File & Brief, you get departure KLAX, route V16, destination KBOS. I would think you'd need entry and exit points for filing. Has anyone tried filing IFR with ForeFlight using airways with no specified entry/exit points? Did the plan get successfully filed/cleared?
 
I don't use DUATS, I use FltPlan.com for all my flight plan / weather product / pax brief / FBO fax needs.

I just tried to file KBOS to KLAX with 'V16' as the route and it informed me the two airports were not on V16. It wouldn't take it.
 
If Garmin thought they were in the same market they would not have released the iApp, it's a product to a different market. The function does not determine the market, the customer's spending determines the market. Adding the iApp opened the cheaper market.

Huh? I suspect that Garmin is responding to sales pressure for their lower-end portables, against which the tablet apps compete. Otherwise, it hardly makes sense for Garmin to release an app that will cannibalize portable sales, which Pilot is sure to do. However, unlike dedicated hardware, Pilot is offered only under a recurring revenue model for Garmin, which no doubt they prefer.


JKG
 
Huh? I suspect that Garmin is responding to sales pressure for their lower-end portables, against which the tablet apps compete. Otherwise, it hardly makes sense for Garmin to release an app that will cannibalize portable sales, which Pilot is sure to do. However, unlike dedicated hardware, Pilot is offered only under a recurring revenue model for Garmin, which no doubt they prefer.


JKG


Pilot nor any other app on an iPad or other non sunlight viewable screen and dedicated operations will not compete with their 696 or 796 units that people who want a proper unit will buy. They are like me, they will not settle for a iPad product because it's just not quite good enough to be a reliable emergency IFR back up. The iPad stuff is great as an EFB, and for planning but nothing I want for an emergency IFR back up or as a primary VFR GPS moving map. For that it is a failure not only IMO but many others as well. That is why they offer a proper unit which doesn't really compete with the iPad apps and now they are seeing if there is any money they can pick up on iPad supplement products.

The products are marketed to two different pilots, the ones that want the best thing for the job, and the ones that want the cheapest thing for the job. Thing is they already had one market and now they want to see if it's worth going for the other especially since group one also has a group 2 product as well.
 
I know a few items, but what does the Garmin do specifically that makes it better?

You've named one. (Anti-glare.)

Bonus question, what triggers the price to be $2000 more?
 
I know a few items, but what does the Garmin do specifically that makes it better?

You've named one. (Anti-glare.)

Bonus question, what triggers the price to be $2000 more?


Not just glare but brightness as well. Clear legibility is the primary, user interface is the other, then there is system stability. I don't know, maybe mine is the only iPad that messes up and blinks out of the app to home screen and various other fun crap like losing the charts and requiring internet access to get them back.
 
Last edited:
Henning has been having Ipad issues for awhile. I think it is user error, myself.

I used the Ipad I and now use the Ipad 3. I have NEVER had any lock up issues or loss of maps.

I have bought and returned the Ifly 720, Garmin 796 and aera 560. The 796 is just not as easy to use as foreflight. It is not as versatile and at $2500, NOT worth the price.
The 560 screen was so unresponsive after using the Ipad. The small screen was also disconcerting after using the Ipad.
The Ifly screen was very poor when compared to the Ipad.

The one thing those units do well are reading in sunlight. I would like for apple to come out with an Ipad that is a bit smaller. I have a mount that fits between my seats.
I've tried foreflight, wingx and garmin pilot. I prefer foreflight but garmin pilot is intriguing and I may give it another try in the future.
I flew from Idaho, across Montana then through Canada to Alaska with the Ipad and foreflight. I use it here in Alaska as well.
 
Last edited:
It could very well be operator error, but if I don't know what the error is I can't correct my actions and the iPad never tells me what went wrong. As for inputting I don't really have an issue more than with the 430/530 series which are also suboptimal for inputting, but will take a cross fill from the 430.

To be fully honest, I'm not impressed with any of it yet. Maybe I'm just to used to using professional grade equipment on boats, but the stuff for aviation until the GTN 750 I consider poorly designed stuff that is either cheap crap or highly overpriced crap. The difference is I can see the overpriced crap in all light conditions and I apparently don't make operator errors with it.
 
How much is the boat stuff?

Depends what it needs to be compliant with. Between $450 and $450,000 depending on your bridge but a full IMO compliant ECDIS system when tied to a 3 and a 10cm Radar gets pretty expensive.
 
You can now do eAPIS filings from a CBP-approved iPad app, too:

http://iapis.tenderapp.com

http://www.facebook.com/iAPIS.Flight.Manifests

Thanks for the mention :thumbsup:

We are more than happy to answer any questions relating eAPIS manifest submission via iAPIS, directly here, via PM or email.

Also, we'd be grateful for any feedback on iAPIS - we really want to make sure the app provides the best eAPIS submission experience. We know that a specific iPad version would be great and we are looking at the best way of implementing this.
 
Looks like Foreflight has an update out for the blurry charts at 100nm. Haven't d/l'd yet.
 
Back
Top