Nice new ForeFlight feature

[MBDiagMan]

Does this feature work at all airports or only with multiple runways? I flew out of a one runway municipal airport to another single runway municipal yesterday and never saw the warning.

 

[denverpilot]

Does this feature work at all airports or only with multiple runways? I flew out of a one runway municipal airport to another single runway municipal yesterday and never saw the warning.

Someone mentioned they think you only get the feature if you've paid for georeferenced approach plates. I haven't checked.

 

[LDJones]

Someone mentioned they think you only get the feature if you've paid for georeferenced approach plates. I haven't checked.

I've heard the opposite...that it's part of the base subscription. And I got the pop-up yesterday at KSGS, a single runway field.

 

[gprellwitz]

Someone mentioned they think you only get the feature if you've paid for georeferenced approach plates. I haven't checked.

I mentioned that I got the warning at Sidnaw, which has no approaches, light, tower, pavement, etc. So geo referenced approach plates certainly have nothing to do with it!

 

[denverpilot]

I mentioned that I got the warning at Sidnaw, which has no approaches, light, tower, pavement, etc. So geo referenced approach plates certainly have nothing to do with it!

The *feature* might. Doesn't have to have anything to do with whether there is an approach or not. Unless you're saying you don't pay for that feature.

 

[denverpilot]

P.S. It seems like it's a base feature, per the blog. But it really doesn't say.

http://blog.foreflight.com/2012/08/...dds-runway-proximity-advisor-x-plane-support/

 

[Sac Arrow]

It is a base feature. I have it, and I only have the base subscription.

 

[denverpilot]

It is a base feature. I have it, and I only have the base subscription.

Fair 'nuff.

Foreflight didn't say anything to me at any runways tonight, I just realized. Interesting.

Is it defaulted "on" or did you have to turn it on?

I only just realized it didn't say anything just now, hours after the flight. Heh. Didn't really notice nor care during the flight.

Now I'll have to look and see if it's "off" somewhere in settings.

 

[denverpilot]

Hmm. Visual and audible alerts are on. Interesting.

Tonight was a simple VFR flight and I didn't put the iPad on the yoke, nor plug it into the intercom for a 0.6 hop to KLMO. It was probably in Karen's lap when it was talking.

Definitely didn't say anything at the hold line at LMO. Wasn't in view at APA for takeoff or landing.

 

[JGoodish]

Hmm. Visual and audible alerts are on. Interesting.

Tonight was a simple VFR flight and I didn't put the iPad on the yoke, nor plug it into the intercom for a 0.6 hop to KLMO. It was probably in Karen's lap when it was talking.

Definitely didn't say anything at the hold line at LMO. Wasn't in view at APA for takeoff or landing.

For the runway proximity alerts, I can hear the iPad (on full volume) even with headsets when it isn't piped into the audio system.

However, I noticed that it doesn't giving me an "approaching" alert until I am well past the hold-short line at my local field, and I'm not sure that the alert would give me enough time to stop before entering runway if I wasn't expecting it. I would have thought that the "approaching" warning would have come much earlier. I suspect that this isn't a ForeFlight issue as much as it's an issue with the data their using.

The hold-short line at my local airport used to be much closer to the runway, until it was moved back within the past couple of years. I have no idea if the decision to realign the hold short line was arbitrary, or done for compliance reasons, but regardless, I suspect that the data ForeFlight is using for my field is not up to date.


JKG

 

[EppyGA]

Runway Proximity Advisor
The Runway Proximity Advisor is a visual and audio alerting feature – designed to help reduce runway incursions – that advises you when ForeFlight Mobile predicts your aircraft is approaching, entering, or crossing a runway.
Runway Proximity Advisor will display a visual alert on any ForeFlight screen and announce the name of the runway you are approaching, entering, or crossing. ForeFlight Mobile is aware of hold-short locations and offsets (e.g. on high speed taxiways) for certain airports, resulting in more precise annunciations at those airports. Here are a few screenshots of the RPA in action:



A bluetooth aviation headset capable of utilizing the Bluetooth audio streams from iOS – such as the recently released Lightspeed Zulu.2 - is required for audio alerts. Headsets with an “aux in” port are compatible using a standard 3.5mm audio cable. We’ll update the list of compatible headsets as we hear from different headset manufacturers.
Runway Proximity Advisor was made possible through the FAA’s sponsored research of MITRE, which laid the groundwork for this helpful safety feature. ForeFlight enhanced the original deliverable by adding more airport coverage, corrections, and a commitment to ongoing maintenance of the underlying airport geospatial data that drives RPA.

http://blog.foreflight.com/2012/08/...dds-runway-proximity-advisor-x-plane-support/

Reading Is Fundamental

 

[Sac Arrow]

Fair 'nuff.

Foreflight didn't say anything to me at any runways tonight, I just realized. Interesting.

Is it defaulted "on" or did you have to turn it on?

I only just realized it didn't say anything just now, hours after the flight. Heh. Didn't really notice nor care during the flight.

Now I'll have to look and see if it's "off" somewhere in settings.

No, I didn't do anything to turn it on or activate it - it took me totally by surprise. Maybe you didn't have a GPS fix at the time? Or it may require a minimum level of accuracy before it activates. Being off 160 feet is nothing in the air, but too inaccurate for a reliable ground proximity warning.

 

[LDJones]

The hold-short line at my local airport used to be much closer to the runway, until it was moved back within the past couple of years. I have no idea if the decision to realign the hold short line was arbitrary, or done for compliance reasons, but regardless, I suspect that the data ForeFlight is using for my field is not up to date.

I doubt any database has the precise location of hold-short lines, so they probably base it off some standard distance from the runway edge. They recently moved our hold-short lines, too.

 

[JGoodish]

I doubt any database has the precise location of hold-short lines, so they probably base it off some standard distance from the runway edge. They recently moved our hold-short lines, too.

I suspect that there is some standard for location of the hold short lines which perhaps is not reflected in ForeFlight's data. ForeFlight never claims to warn relative to the hold short lines, but I would expect it to warn me that I'm approaching a runway before I'm just about to roll onto it, which it does not appear to do at my home airport.


JKG

 

[EppyGA]

I suspect that there is some standard for location of the hold short lines which perhaps is not reflected in ForeFlight's data. ForeFlight never claims to warn relative to the hold short lines, but I would expect it to warn me that I'm approaching a runway before I'm just about to roll onto it, which it does not appear to do at my home airport.


JKG

ForeFlight Mobile is aware of hold-short locations and offsets (e.g. on high speed taxiways) for certain airports, resulting in more precise annunciations at those airports.

Right from my earlier post which was from the ForeFlight blog.

 

[JGoodish]

[/B]Right from my earlier post which was from the ForeFlight blog. [/COLOR]

Still doesn't solve the problem. Even if it doesn't know where the hold short lines are, it does know where the runway is, and I would think that it could/would give the "approach" warning well in advance. However, I'm sure that GPS accuracy factors into this as well, and I honestly didnt look at that data the last time I flew. I will say, however, that the "entering" announcement appeared to be right on the money.

In any case, not a big deal. Any warning is better than no warning, in my opinion.


JKG

 

[BillTIZ]

if you don't have the bandwidth to be able to taxi, look out the window, control the airplane and be entering your flight plan in your 430/530/etc you should not be operating any kind of heavy machinery . . .

Says the heavy iron pilots that clip wings passing on taxiways, or wing tips clip tails as they pass parked airplanes.

 

[ChrisK]

Does this feature work at all airports or only with multiple runways? I flew out of a one runway municipal airport to another single runway municipal yesterday and never saw the warning.

Worked for me today on single runway airports.

 

[BillTIZ]

It was never intended to be a primary stop gap or warming system...but it appears to be intended as a second layer of protection. Maybe if Comm Air Flight 191 had this feature it would have saved 49 lives, a nice aircraft and a big black eye to aviation.

If we don't need this kind of technology because we can simply read the "big painted signs", then turn in your GPS and XM Nexrad Weather and just stick with your ADF and Mark 2 eyeballs. They work too without all this Gee Wiz digital technology.

Gene

I'm all for technology. But I don't have XM into my cockpit, no inflight NEXRAD updates and the ADF approach has been disabled at many airports. My Mk2 calibrated viewing devices work just fine and a radio call to Flight Watch takes longer than it should.

How many new pilots would get lost if their GPS failed, chart reading and DR is becoming a lost art. Load direct to, tie in the autopilot and sit back and watch the technology. Let's talk to those Air France pilots in the mid Atlantic about that.

I've been flying 38 years this month, 20 of those years in go fast ground hugging Air Force jets with some nice for their day technology before GPS. I work every day improving the technology to help the current generation of going faster military pilots so they can survive the fight come home safely.

I just completed a flying vacation, 5300nm across some rugged and barren country. Yes I had Foreflight on my iPad, but no Canadian charts, just paper charts. (I could not see spending the $$ for Canadian charts for a year when I only needed a month for the trip. Are you listening ForeFlight?) Yes I had a KLN-89B in the airplane and used it.

And Canadian FSS services put ours to shame. Flight plans are assumed active at the proposed departure time and the ATC tower will close the flight plan for you. The briefers on the phone know their area, know the weather trends and know what happens with local weather and terrain interaction.

NavCanada supports the C.A.R.S. (Civilian Airport Radio Service) program at a lot of small low volume airports. Great service, local traffic advisories, not controlling, weather information and a relay to FSS if you need it.

Sure, I like technology, but it has become a crutch to too many young pilots. They can't do mental math and plan a divert in their heads and fly at the same time without that magic GPS. What ever happened to TLAR navigation and fuel estimates.

And yes, I have navigated across the waters, at 420KTAS plus, at FL altitudes, with a sextant and found the refueling tanker mid ocean, and had the spin genes INS dump in the process.

 

[BillTIZ]

Hmmmmmm.........I load the FP at the hangar or in the runup area with parking brake set. But then I'm an old geezer with limited processing capability.

 

[L.Adamson]

Sure, I like technology, but it has become a crutch to too many young pilots. They can't do mental math and plan a divert in their heads and fly at the same time without that magic GPS. What ever happened to TLAR navigation and fuel estimates.

Sorry..........

But I still look at all those deadly CFIT accidents...........that could have been avoided with the magic of GPS, had it been available at the time. I don't buy into the thought.........that "old school" was good enough.

Sure.... GPS can be a crutch, but why not? It can actually keep your head, "more" out of the cockpit, if used correctly. It's called total information at a glance.

L.Adamson --- and I flew before GPS too.

 

[JGoodish]

Sure, I like technology, but it has become a crutch to too many young pilots. They can't do mental math and plan a divert in their heads and fly at the same time without that magic GPS. What ever happened to TLAR navigation and fuel estimates.

Technology is always a tool, not a requirement. However, it can be a tool that effectively supersedes older methods and provides material enhancements to safety and productivity. Such is the case with GPS, inflight weather, etc.

While I would agree that a single point of failure could be a problem (do you fly a single engine airplane?), the likelihood of such a failure is low with regard to GPS navigation, especially since most folks have multiple GPS devices on board these days, and many GPS devices are able to use multiple satellite systems. The reality is that there isn't much of a need to be proficient reading the chart, and relying on a chart that doesn't show the constantly changing state of TFRs and other pertinent information certainly isn't an enhancement of operational safety or efficiency. Sure, you could call FSS and then draw all of that stuff on the chart, but why? Technology to automate all of that work is relatively inexpensive and readily available.

I'm sure that I could type letters on typewriter, ride around in my car with no air conditioning in the 100 degree heat, and cook my dinner over a campfire rather than in the microwave, but why would I want to do those things when technology has provided a better way?

I do support the teaching and refresher of foundational knowledge and skill, but I don't support a stubborn insistence on clinging to antiquated methods or technology when better alternatives are available. Even with applications such as ForeFlight, a pilot still needs to fly the airplane, maintain situational awareness, and retain the knowledge and experience to exercise good judgment. If technology can make more and better information available to the pilot, he will be even better equipped to make decisions regarding the safe operation of the flight.


JKG.

 

[LDJones]

I agree with Goodish. It's almost to the point that if you're NOT using these available technologies you may not be meeting the minimum standard of care required of a pilot in 2012, from a legal liability (not necessarily FAA) point of view.

I've decided to let my student pilots who've demonstrated proficiency in the FAA mandated "old school" chart-plotting techniques to make additional x-c flights using their iPad/Nexus/etc. That's what they will be using when they're done with training so now is the time to teach them how to use it effectively.

 

[L.Adamson]

I agree with Goodish. It's almost to the point that if you're NOT using these available technologies you may not be meeting the minimum standard of care required of a pilot in 2012, from a legal liability (not necessarily FAA) point of view.

I've decided to let my student pilots who've demonstrated proficiency in the FAA mandated "old school" chart-plotting techniques to make additional x-c flights using their iPad/Nexus/etc. That's what they will be using when they're done with training so now is the time to teach them how to use it effectively.

Excellent!

That's how it should be. I get a bit concerned, when students are brought through the process with the mentality, that GPS is cheating. If nothing else, they're just getting "cheated" out of valuable information, that these devices supply.

L.Adamson

 

[Mafoo]

I agree with Goodish. It's almost to the point that if you're NOT using these available technologies you may not be meeting the minimum standard of care required of a pilot in 2012, from a legal liability (not necessarily FAA) point of view.

I've decided to let my student pilots who've demonstrated proficiency in the FAA mandated "old school" chart-plotting techniques to make additional x-c flights using their iPad/Nexus/etc. That's what they will be using when they're done with training so now is the time to teach them how to use it effectively.

That's a great attitude.

My CFI is doing the same. Also, for all the preflight information, he said it doesn't matter at all where you get it. If you want to use Foreflight to get the weather information, then go for it.

I think relying on something like Foreflight as the only thing I know, for preflight information is perfectly fine. If for some reason I lose my iPad, or Foreflight goes out of business, I can simply not fly until I find an alternative source for the same information.

 

[wabower]

+1. I'll be waiting for the first reference to any best practices material that endorses such activity. It's the same as texting while driving,and all's youse gotta do is watch them weaving on the taxiway to know which guys are trying to drive and punch buttons at the same time. The peanut gallery needs to know the following:

Don't do it, especially if you want to look like a pro. The pros you want to emulate are those who understand the need to get this stuff done on a timely basis and allow sufficient time to get it done before anything moves.

Says the heavy iron pilots that clip wings passing on taxiways, or wing tips clip tails as they pass parked airplanes.

 

[jesse]

+1. I'll be waiting for the first reference to any best practices material that endorses such activity. It's the same as texting while driving,and all's youse gotta do is watch them weaving on the taxiway to know which guys are trying to drive and punch buttons at the same time. The peanut gallery needs to know the following:

Don't do it, especially if you want to look like a pro. The pros you want to emulate are those who understand the need to get this stuff done on a timely basis and allow sufficient time to get it done before anything moves.

+1 on the above -- the more I fly -- the less rushed I become.

 

[LDJones]

My CFI is doing the same. Also, for all the preflight information, he said it doesn't matter at all where you get it. If you want to use Foreflight to get the weather information, then go for it.

I think relying on something like Foreflight as the only thing I know, for preflight information is perfectly fine. If for some reason I lose my iPad, or Foreflight goes out of business, I can simply not fly until I find an alternative source for the same information.

When my son took his check ride last summer we asked the examiner about using the iPad for weather. His response: "By all means! That's the future. Show me how you use it!" My son did and he passed without a problem.

 

[BillTIZ]

Sorry..........

But I still look at all those deadly CFIT accidents...........that could have been avoided with the magic of GPS, had it been available at the time. I don't buy into the thought.........that "old school" was good enough.

Sure.... GPS can be a crutch, but why not? It can actually keep your head, "more" out of the cockpit, if used correctly. It's called total information at a glance.

L.Adamson --- and I flew before GPS too.

Look at the NTSB accident report for the CAP C-182 with G1000 that had a CFIT in the dark. GPS with moving map and terrain displays will not save you from CFIT. GPS is nice, but you need to kow how to use it.

 

[BillTIZ]

I agree with Goodish. It's almost to the point that if you're NOT using these available technologies you may not be meeting the minimum standard of care required of a pilot in 2012, from a legal liability (not necessarily FAA) point of view.

I've decided to let my student pilots who've demonstrated proficiency in the FAA mandated "old school" chart-plotting techniques to make additional x-c flights using their iPad/Nexus/etc. That's what they will be using when they're done with training so now is the time to teach them how to use it effectively.

I agree, but if you disable the GPS, dead batteries in a handheld, 1/2 way to destination. Can they still get there old school? I like your style, show me first that you can do it without GPS, then show me you can use GPS and still fly.

 

[L.Adamson]

Look at the NTSB accident report for the CAP C-182 with G1000 that had a CFIT in the dark. GPS with moving map and terrain displays will not save you from CFIT. GPS is nice, but you need to kow how to use it.

I'm very aware of that accident report. Even talked to the CAP about it, since I'm so "pro" GPS & synthetic vision.

Yes--------GPS, moving maps, and terrain displays will certainly go along way in the prevention of future CFIT (controlled flight into terrain). It's already made a real difference in Alaska. It's probably the reason we no longer average three CFIT's every year, around here.

In the CAP case, their best guess, is that the pilot who was familier with the Garmin 1000..........was showing different menu pages to the pilot in the right seat, who was unfamiliar with the system. As to why, a terrain pop-up warning wasn't seen......is anybody's guess.

New rules were put into effect, since. In order to occupy either front seat, all pilots must have taken a Garmin 1000 course, and be checked out.

--- Of course, this "one" incident, is always used as reason, as to why these devices don't work. I hear it often.---

In the meantime, I've spent years flying over accident sites, to test the accuracy of a good moving map GPS with terrain databases. They work every time & very well, I might add. Plenty of warning, for many miles ahead of time.

L.Adamson

 

[L.Adamson]

I agree, but if you disable the GPS, dead batteries in a handheld, 1/2 way to destination. Can they still get there old school? I like your style, show me first that you can do it without GPS, then show me you can use GPS and still fly.

What do you consider as old school? Pilotage, VOR nav, both?

What if your new plane isn't equipped with VOR nav radios. I know that many of us "experimental" aircraft builders are not wasting the money on them.

I have not had a dead GPS in 19 years. Have not lost a signal for 18 years. I've used five Garmin aviation GPS's since that time, and one Lowrance. Always use the aircraft's power & batteries for backup. Also carry a backup GPS. In the meantime, I always follow along on "current" charts. All long mountain cross country flights, are always pre-planned. I've never much cared for VOR's in all these years. They're line of sight, and don't work much of the time, in the mountain country I fly in. IMO....compared to GPS, triangulation is a waste, and involves more head down time. I'm very happy to see part of the VOR network dismantled. It can go down in history, along with the nav systems that preceeded it.

L.Adamson

 

[denverpilot]

What do you consider as old school? Pilotage, VOR nav, both?

Circling the water tower hoping the city painted their name on it.

 

[sdflyer]

What do you consider as old school? Pilotage, VOR nav, both?

What if your new plane isn't equipped with VOR nav radios. I know that many of us "experimental" aircraft builders are not wasting the money on them.

I have not had a dead GPS in 19 years. Have not lost a signal for 18 years. I've used five Garmin aviation GPS's since that time, and one Lowrance. Always use the aircraft's power & batteries for backup. Also carry a backup GPS. In the meantime, I always follow along on "current" charts. All long mountain cross country flights, are always pre-planned. I've never much cared for VOR's in all these years. They're line of sight, and don't work much of the time, in the mountain country I fly in. IMO....compared to GPS, triangulation is a waste, and involves more head down time. I'm very happy to see part of the VOR network dismantled. It can go down in history, along with the nav systems that preceeded it.

L.Adamson

I just went to FAA seminar where I being told theat there are many case of loosing GPS signal. And that while relying on GPS pilot still must maintain dead reckoning.

GPS is still controlled by department of defense and can be jammed if necessary.
Also satellite can go bad at any moment if it happens that pilot fly in mountainous area he may loose signal for several minuets just enough to end up in the mountain.

Just like FAA representative said a lot of pilots use GPS without understanding how it works. How many satellites it takes, how many control stations and so on.

 

[LDJones]

Look at the NTSB accident report for the CAP C-182 with G1000 that had a CFIT in the dark. GPS with moving map and terrain displays will not save you from CFIT. GPS is nice, but you need to kow how to use it.

Another argument for using all the tools in the arsenal from primary training onward.

 

[LDJones]

I agree, but if you disable the GPS, dead batteries in a handheld, 1/2 way to destination. Can they still get there old school? I like your style, show me first that you can do it without GPS, then show me you can use GPS and still fly.

Yep, that's exactly what I said. And I require they have paper charts with them.

 

[L.Adamson]

I just went to FAA seminar where I being told theat there are many case of loosing GPS signal. And that while relying on GPS pilot still must maintain dead reckoning.

GPS is still controlled by department of defense and can be jammed if necessary.
Also satellite can go bad at any moment if it happens that pilot fly in mountainous area he may loose signal for several minuets just enough to end up in the mountain.

Just like FAA representative said a lot of pilots use GPS without understanding how it works. How many satellites it takes, how many control stations and so on.

Deep in a mountain canyon, loss of signal is very possible. Keep in mind, that most GPS receivers pick up eight to eleven satellites at any one time.
Nearly all of my flying is serious mountain country. You certainly need to know, where you are, despite GPS; but the odds of it working, are far greater than not. I know that from my experience, and the experiences of many others. It seems, that only a few CFIs have weekly GPS failures.
As I've previously mentioned............a good friend who fly's Boeings (in which GPS is the #1 nav system).......is now up to eleven years, with just one GPS loss of signal, of short duration. Of course, some Boeings still don't have the luxury of GPS.

Government jamming....sure it can be jammed. But when a foreign country knocks out all of our satellites, following a nuclear bombardment.........we'll most likely have to quit flying GA that day.

As to the workings of GPS............it's about time that some instructors become more familiar, and pass this info along to their students. I know for a fact, that some instructors are still not comfortable with all the varieties of GPS's. Happily, manufacturers are starting to make them more user friendly. We don't want anybody to blindly follow the magenta line.

 

[L.Adamson]

Yep, that's exactly what I said. And I require they have paper charts with them.

Good idea. I always do. I even keep them current.

 

[LDJones]

In the last 2,000 hours that I've used GPS almost exclusively I've lost signal once for less than two minutes. So, yes, it can and does happen. But I back up GPS with VORs, which I find out of service way more often than GPS.

Over northern FL a few years ago ATC gave me a reroute while IFR. I punched it into the GPS and started navigating to the newly assigned VOR waypoint while I tuned it into the radio. I could not get a signal on either radio. When I asked the controller about it he said, "Oh, yeah, that one flooded out a couple of years ago and they haven't brought it back online."

Yet they were still sending people to that fix, probably assuming most had GPS.

 

[LDJones]

Good idea. I always do. I even keep them current.

I can't say that I keep them all current, but now I have iPad with ForeFlight and Nexus with Garmin, so two different devices with two different software products with two different chart sets.