Foreflight Course vs Heading Question

[Funkeruski]

Is there any way to get Foreflight to display magnetic course when planning a route for purposes of determining the proper VFR altitude I need to fly? It seems that when I plan a route, it displays the magnetic heading with the wind correction angle. Don't tell me I'm going to have to break out my damn protractor!!

 

[Anymouse]

If it's that close, then it probably doesn't matter. But don't let the purists know I said that.

I don't have Foreflight so this is only a guess, but can you do a zero wind flight plan??

 

[MachFly]

Type in that you will be departing a week later, this way FF will not know the winds and will not be able to give you a wind correction.

 

[MBDiagMan]

Where do you tell it that you will be flying a week later?

 

[Funkeruski]

Type in that you will be departing a week later, this way FF will not know the winds and will not be able to give you a wind correction.

That worked well. Thanks. For the poster above, there is an ETD box when you are editing you route after the new FF update. You can click on that box and change the departure date.

 

[jason]

Where do you tell it that you will be flying a week later?

One week is most easily accomplished in the "Edit Nav" box on the iPad (see arrow on screenshot). You'll see the ETD field updated (see oval).

Shorter time periods you can do right in the search blank...

+45 <-- 45 minutes from now
+12:10 <-- 12 hours 10 minutes from now
8:00AM <-- the next "8am" from now (either this morning if before 8am or tomorrow if after)

You can do other dates in the search box, but the format is rather obtuse...

20120731T07:55:00 <-- July 31, 2012 at 7:55 AM

 

[crash7]

You can also put in a ridiculous altitude (say, 80,000ft) so Foreflight can't get winds aloft. Then it shows the raw course.

 

[kontiki]

Can't you just enter no altitude?

I would be careful using Foreflight for altitude planning because it will draw a nice magenta line that plots a course under 10,000 ft of mountain granite. As far as I know it has no features for terrain and obstacle protection.

 

[jason]

Can't you just enter no altitude?

I would be careful using Foreflight for altitude planning because it will draw a nice magenta line that plots a course under 10,000 ft of mountain granite. As far as I know it has no features for terrain and obstacle protection.

You mean besides every aviation chart that lists every minimum altitude, sector altitude and obstacle that could be of consequence?

Foreflight isn't a substitute for proper preflight planning. It is an aid to it.

If somebody were to fly into a mountain because Foreflight drew a line they probably shouldn't have been flying in the first place.

 

[Jaybird180]

Can't you just enter no altitude?

I would be careful using Foreflight for altitude planning because it will draw a nice magenta line that plots a course under 10,000 ft of mountain granite. As far as I know it has no features for terrain and obstacle protection.

Neither does paper.

Not to be a smart alek sir, but have we become so content with electronics we can no longer do it old Skool?

 

[kontiki]

Neither does paper.

Not to be a smarta$$ sir, but have we become so content with electronics we can no longer do it old Skool?

Paper isn't automation that gives you a magenta line. At least the AOPA planner tells you it's having a difficult time calculating wind correction under rock.

Just my opinion, it's a human factors issue. I agree with you otherwise. I think everyone needs to get the word if they hadn't thought to check and see how it acts.

I intentionally tried entering the course of the Thanksgiving holiday crash in PHX out of curiosity, just to see if it would have helped. Just my vetting process for new automation.

Too many people assume what software should be doing.

 

[Sac Arrow]

Or you can simply turn your data or wifi off and it can't get the winds.

But honestly, unless you're planning on flying in a hurricane, it's not going to make enough of a difference to worry about.

 

[MAKG1]

Is there any way to get Foreflight to display magnetic course when planning a route for purposes of determining the proper VFR altitude I need to fly? It seems that when I plan a route, it displays the magnetic heading with the wind correction angle. Don't tell me I'm going to have to break out my damn protractor!!

Maybe I'm missing something, but you can't add (say) 7 deg WCA to an MH of 175 at planning time to determine that you should be at an even thousand plus 500? It just doesn't seem that hard.

 

[Funkeruski]

Maybe I'm missing something, but you can't add (say) 7 deg WCA to an MH of 175 at planning time to determine that you should be at an even thousand plus 500? It just doesn't seem that hard.

I think you are. Here is a route that I will be flying. The first pic below has winds factored in and would have me flying at odd plus 500 altitudes. The second has winds removed and would have me fly even plus 500. Since the second photo is actually magnetic course (as opposed to magnetic heading) I need to base my correct altitude off that, and even plus 500 is the proper altitude regardless of the winds.

If I had just relied on the the first photo (with the winds), I would be in violation of the FAR's and would risk getting pulled over by an FAA sky trooper. Plus, when I have a head on collision, I want the NTSB report to reflect that I was flying the correct altitude.

 

[Jaybird180]

Never thought about that....

 

[JGoodish]

Paper isn't automation that gives you a magenta line. At least the AOPA planner tells you it's having a difficult time calculating wind correction under rock.

Just my opinion, it's a human factors issue. I agree with you otherwise. I think everyone needs to get the word if they hadn't thought to check and see how it acts.

I intentionally tried entering the course of the Thanksgiving holiday crash in PHX out of curiosity, just to see if it would have helped. Just my vetting process for new automation.

Too many people assume what software should be doing.

ForeFlight's behavior when displaying routes is no different than any other GPS I've ever used. ForeFlight doesn't display terrain, and doesn't claim to, so there can't be any reasonable expectation that the software will warn you of terrain conflicts. None of these apps automate flying the plane, and the PIC is always still responsible for operating safely.

Relying on software to tell you where there's a big mountain is just negligent pre-flight planning, in my opinion. The pilot has a responsibility to look over the entire route and come to an understanding of what he will encounter along that route. ForeFlight is probably a better tool for this purpose than even WingX, which does display terrain (but does NOT overlay Internet weather, and does NOT download text PIREPs or NOTAMs unless you're connected to an ADS-B receiver). I discovered recently how important the weather overlay functionality is on the ground, and it's quite important, in my opinion.


JKG

 

[Velocity173]

I had an examinee on one of my last instrument checkrides in the Army lay his Ipad down on the center console to navigate with Foreflight. I really didn't know how to react. I mean our standards don't say: Enroute navigation- ensure aircraft is touching magenta course line at all times. Since he was just using it as a safety backup I allowed it. It's strange though flying a mulit million dollar aircraft where the easiest way to navigate and avoid weather is by using your Ipad instead of the installed avionics. I at least had him hold and do approaches using the CDI though!

 

[Sac Arrow]

I had an examinee on one of my last instrument checkrides in the Army lay his Ipad down on the center console to navigate with Foreflight. I really didn't know how to react. I mean our standards don't say: Enroute navigation- ensure aircraft is touching magenta course line at all times. Since he was just using it as a safety backup I allowed it. It's strange though flying a mulit million dollar aircraft where the easiest way to navigate and avoid weather is by using your Ipad instead of the installed avionics. I at least had him hold and do approaches using the CDI though!

Did the iPad do a better job?

 

[Velocity173]

Did the iPad do a better job?

Hard to say. He never was outside +- 5 degrees on the CDI so I couldn't bust him on exceeding the standard. Ipads are actually now being issued to pilots in the Army. Question is will the Army allow them on checkrides and if so will they update their Aircrew Training Program to have separate Ipad navigation standards. Army is usually slow to catch on but I think in the next couple of years all this "laptop technology" will revolutionize how things are done in Army Aviation.

 

[L.Adamson]

Relying on software to tell you where there's a big mountain is just negligent pre-flight planning, in my opinion. The pilot has a responsibility to look over the entire route and come to an understanding of what he will encounter along that route.

There are many unplanned circumstances, in which terrain warning would have been life saving beneficial. I have many "for instance", accident storys I could discuss, but here is one....

Pilot is on a multi state cross country with his twin engine aircaft. The winds have been unfavorable & will require an unplanned fuel stop. He is flying parallel to a mountain range and starts a descent to an untowered airport. Since it's a bit hazy & the ground is covered with snow, he has no idea that within a few seconds, quickly rising terrain will appear that's several hundred feet higher than he is. At the last second, he slams both throttles full forward, and yanks full back on the yoke. It's the only option. The aircraft stalls into the terrain at nearly the same angle, and cartwheels. He's very lucky, as he and his wife suffer only minor cuts and bruises. In the meantime, residents in homes a few hundred feet below, worry that the airplane will slide down into their homes. This ridge is a steep one. And it's also an illusion. When seen from certain angles, and especially in haze, it doeasn't appear to suddenly rise from level ground. It's ninty degrees to terrain that's several thousand feet higher. BTW--- this same area has been clobbered in various angles over the years.

As I do live out here, and have known many, many CFIT accidents over the years............terrain database GPS can be the "wonderful" difference between being here now........and gone in a second.

L.Adamson

 

[jason]

There are many unplanned circumstances, in which terrain warning would have been life saving beneficial. I have many "for instance", accident storys I could discuss, but here is one....

Pilot is on a multi state cross country with his twin engine aircaft. The winds have been unfavorable & will require an unplanned fuel stop. He is flying parallel to a mountain range and starts a descent to an untowered airport. Since it's a bit hazy & the ground is covered with snow, he has no idea that within a few seconds, quickly rising terrain will appear that's several hundred feet higher than he is. At the last second, he slams both throttles full forward, and yanks full back on the yoke. It's the only option. The aircraft stalls into the terrain at nearly the same angle, and cartwheels. He's very lucky, as he and his wife suffer only minor cuts and bruises. In the meantime, residents in homes a few hundred feet below, worry that the airplane will slide down into their homes. This ridge is a steep one. And it's also an illusion. When seen from certain angles, and especially in haze, it doeasn't appear to suddenly rise from level ground. It's ninty degrees to terrain that's several thousand feet higher. BTW--- this same area has been clobbered in various angles over the years.

As I do live out here, and have known many, many CFIT accidents over the years............terrain database GPS can be the "wonderful" difference between being here now........and gone in a second.

L.Adamson

I can think of another way that he may have kept himself off of the rocks on a hazy day. An instrument flight plan/approach. Or, perhaps, looking at any chart.