ForeFlight version 8 has been released.

No argument here. But in the long run these will end up far superior to scanned paper... If only for the writing staying right side up!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
The problem I have with what FF is doing is that they aren't being honest about it. When it was time for me to renew last year, I had to HUNT for the option to renew at my current Basic level, but had no problem locating the upsell to Plus or Pro plans. In fact, their web site didn't even offer me an option to renew the Basic plan, only the Plus or Pro plan. I'm pretty sure I posted a complaint about that obfuscation before.

In my opinion, whoever is directing their marketing/sales efforts is tarnishing their reputation with these tactics. Tyson's spin (which I've heard before) only makes it worse. Unfortunately, I suspect that they don't care as long as they like the numbers on the balance sheet. It's a shame.


JKG
 
Options, and premium products, are where the profit is. They are pushing us towards their most profitable products. Which, by the way, they are pretty sure we will like once we get past the grumbling about price. Seems like a pretty good business move to me.

Have you ever tried to buy a bare bones car? Almost impossible. You usually have to special order it.
 
It's aviation. Nothing that the airlines haven't been doing to their customers.
 
The reality is we've seen an astonishing amount of value created in just a few years. Compare the value of Foreflight dollar for dollar with a 15k panel installed TSO'd navigator. Sure beats carrying a chart case too!

I agree they could have done a better job with pricing tiers...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
gsengle said:
The reality is we've seen an astonishing amount of value created in just a few years. Compare the value of Foreflight dollar for dollar with a 15k panel installed TSO'd navigator. Sure beats carrying a chart case too!
Click to expand...
Apples to oranges. There certainly is value, but you can file and fly an instrument approach with the $15k panel. Can't do that with FF or any other portable/tablet.
 
I'm talking about value. Of course it is apples and oranges. It's still amazing what you get for max $200 a year. What would every American chart for the entire country of every type have cost? Plus weather subscription? Plus flight planning tools, plus plus plus... It's just hard to listen to people complaining too much about one of the greatest bargains and fastest innovations in aviation...

I know complaining is just the way people are, but no one makes anyone pay any more today to get what you're already getting for a great price... And it just keeps getting better.

Interesting to note that my data subscription for the eastern half of the us for my 530w from jeppesen costs more than $199...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
FF had been trying to raise the annual price so their approach is to start charging for new features. What I pay yearly covers r/d as the old development has already been paid from those prior year subscription dollars, but I have to pay again? Not going to do it.

I have pro with SV and I rarely use sv so I will drop that next renewal. FF now has to maintain two sets of maps - tell me how that is cheaper for them?

All I have read up to today was how great FF was. Now the old charts sux and we need new ones? I flew fine the other day with the old ones. And up to today no one was complaining about the charts.

I have started FltPlanGo and they are planning a series of training webinars. Don't need/use stratus2.

$199 buys lots of avgas at $3.47/gallon and I will gladly keep my own logbook.
 
denverpilot said:
They announced it months ago AFAIK. Making vector graphics out of FAA data isn't free, so I don't mind a price bump for that.
Click to expand...

Yes agree. And it isn't just FAA... Those vector graphics are there WORLDWIDE. There is a lot of work that went into that.
 
Just curious, too lazy to look this up myself, do the other guys (GP, flyQ, etc) have pricing tiers?
 
GLMS_NC said:
Now the old charts sux and we need new ones? I flew fine the other day with the old ones. And up to today no one was complaining about the charts.
Click to expand...

You flew just fine with the old charts, because that was all you had.

...and no one complained? I sure did. Not in any official way, but I grumbled a lot about how cluttered the VFR charts were and how hard it was sometimes to find the one little bit of data I needed. And how the overlapping charts (sectional / terminal) sometimes made things difficult. (Flying in the LA area makes this especially difficult. Our sectionals are very cluttered.).
 
Hey guys you're not thinking about it the right way. The whole point is that they don't have to make the vector maps. The computer dynamically renders them straight from the data. That's the whole point. The rasters was an old tech stop gap to scan the paper coming from the government. All that old school by hand work will go out the window soon.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
At $199, I think it's still one of the best deals in aviation. If you think that's too much, there are other options out there.

It amazes me what a cheap bunch of SOB's pilots are. :)
 
gsengle said:
Hey guys you're not thinking about it the right way. The whole point is that they don't have to make the vector maps. The computer dynamically renders them straight from the data. That's the whole point. The rasters was an old tech stop gap to scan the paper coming from the government. All that old school by hand work will go out the window soon.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
You're right, and that's why many on this forum are unhappy today. Vector maps are better for ForeFlight, just not better for pilots flight planning. As one example: If you look at airspace it only gives the shapes, not the heights or floors of the shelves. Maybe ForeFlight has implemented it differently than Garmin, but for GP you have to touch each individual section to know the information easily displayed at a glance on a chart. To me raster maps on iPad are the goldilocks situation between paper charts and vector maps. Agreed, paper charts aren't the answer, I've even tried to pinch and zoom them.

As I said before, vector maps are superior for flying, but for that I have G3X Touch displays. I want foreflight to support my EFIS, not try to replace it.
 
Add me to the list of loyal subscribers now looking into other options. Like others I didn't want logbook or syn vis, and have Pro. I'm not impressed with Foreflight right now, I think this is truly a dumb business move...
 
I don't get it...just keep pro if your happy with pro...I was a complainer too as I was a pro user. But $50 more bucks I upgraded, why not, was it worth it..IDK..but its only $50. I've wasted more on less! Plus after you pay it you will forget about the extra.
 
It's funny, it was ForeFlight, Dynon, MGL, etc. that disrupted the business model and forced Garmin to make their subscriptions more reasonable. Now I expect the reverse will happen, many of us will switch to GP and ForeFlight might reconsider their pricing.

Or, out of inertia or laziness, we'll just keep paying more each year. Does anyone know how LogTenPro's subscription model ended up working out for him?
 
Last edited:
gsengle said:
Hey guys you're not thinking about it the right way. The whole point is that they don't have to make the vector maps. The computer dynamically renders them straight from the data. That's the whole point.
Click to expand...

And you know this how? Do you work for Foreflight? You've seen the code that does this? Or are you just guessing?
 
That's what a dynamic data driven vector map is. It's the whole point.

And yes, I spent a career developing software and have a degree in computer science.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Foreflight has been rock solid for me and I have zero complaints. I get access to every chart I could need at any time of the day or night and the app has NEVER crashed while I've been using it in the air. There's no way they can make everyone happy and until their website switches from .com to .org the goal will be to maximize profits while providing a quality product. If I don't like a product I don't buy it anymore and I try something else...the free market is a beautiful thing.
 
gsengle said:
That's what a dynamic data driven vector map is. It's the whole point.

And yes, I spent a career developing software and have a degree in computer science.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

So you're guessing? Based on your expert opinion?
 
No I'm not guessing. They've described it in plain English all over the place. That's what it is.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Pilawt said:
VFR_zpsvocvce4e.jpg



New "Aeronautical" chart only:

Aero_zps68rpzgx0.jpg
Click to expand...

HOLD UP!

So for VFR we all know lakes and rivers are one of the best landmarks... So why the heck did FF disappear Sturgeon Lake (major landmark) and all but disappear the frickin giant Columbia River (looks like MAYBE a creek) on their new maps?!

Do they think their demographic is going to be SOO glued to the screens that they don't care about the outside the window visual landmarks?? That would the the V of the VFR

That's a big issue
 
gsengle said:
No I'm not guessing. They've described it in plain English all over the place. That's what it is.
Click to expand...

Got a link? I only saw reference to dynamic decluttering which is an entirely different beast.
 
RalphInCA said:
Just curious, too lazy to look this up myself, do the other guys (GP, flyQ, etc) have pricing tiers?
Click to expand...
Yes some do. You can search yourself easily enough for the details but, other than FF I think it's based mostly on VFR vs IFR functionality. FlyQ and I think Pilot does that. WingX used to but has now gone to single tier pricing.

I think the gripe most folks have with FF's pricing comes down to the requirement to buy a bunch of things you don't care about in order to get something you do. Best example I can think of is georeferenced airport diagrams. Given the 20-year FAA runway incursion hot topic, one of the best things going for all pilots. FF only packages it with "Pro" so a VFR-only pilot who wants them is also paying for georeferenced instrument approach charts she doesn't really need. For one contrast, FlyQ prices VFR vs IFR and the VFR subscription includes the airport diagrams.
 
Already posted one. Believe me the only way to achieve the rendering they do is as I described.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
gsengle said:
"Rather than using scans of paper charts, Aeronautical Maps are driven by data, opening up a huge range of possibilities for how information is displayed on the map."
Click to expand...

Well of course the aero maps are driven by data and not scans of paper charts. This does not say how they got the data. You're still guessing.

Seeing that you're guessing, I'm also going to guess. These vector maps are worldwide from a variety of sources. I'm sure they have imaging processing software to aid them in capturing the vector outlines but am also quite sure but guessing that there are humans guiding the process and then other humans involved in QC. They're not going to have a process grind through multiple sources of different data from multiple agencies world wide, and then have it just automatically publish the databases to their users. What if there is a mistake?

Not trying to pick on you just saying don't assume there is not a lot of work that was done and a lot of work that is ongoing to support this new feature. It is a great new feature. I am prepared to pay for it.

It has a few shortcomings... For example airspace regions should have the altitude available, like the B floor and ceilings. I'm sure they will fix that.
 
RalphInCA said:
In the new mapping system, how can you see the floors and tops of controlled airspace? For example - the floor and top of a class bravo shelf? This is especially important for those of us in complicated airspaces like the LA area.
Click to expand...
That was asked for in the thread on the AOPA forum. Tyson responded that the feature request has had lots of votes from many places and is high up on the improvements list.
 
James331 said:
Do they think their demographic is going to be SOO glued to the screens that they don't care about the outside the window visual landmarks?? That would the the V of the VFR
Click to expand...
So use the new "Aeronautical" map layer over the sectional chart background, as in the third screenshot I posted. You have all the terrain features of the sectional, plus scalable, legible text always right-side-up even in track-up mode, and easily-discernable SUA boundaries. Turn the sectional chart on when you want terrain detail, turn it off when you want minimum screen clutter.

I use an iPhone in a yokemount for basic magenta-line following, and this will ease the eyestrain considerably. I tried it and I like it.
 
Last edited:
Remember also that this is version 1.0 of this rendering engine. Think of how good it can get.... It's not static like paper. (or sectional scans)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
AggieMike88 said:
That was asked for in the thread on the AOPA forum. Tyson responded that the feature request has had lots of votes from many places and is high up on the improvements list.
Click to expand...

That is good to hear. This is my number one issue with it right now. They need to get on this because the way it is now it is not useful for flying around where there is Bravo airspace for example because you can't see where the vertical limits are. I wouldn't use it where it would be most useful for me.
 
Pilawt said:
So use the new "Aeronautical" map layer over the sectional chart background, as in the third screenshot I posted. You have all the terrain features of the sectional, plus scalable, legible text always right-side-up even in track-up mode, and easily-discernable SUA boundaries I use an iPhone in a yokemount for basic magenta-line following, and this will ease the eyestrain considerably. I tried it and I like it.
Click to expand...

I'm keeping my old version, mainly because I'm on a jail broken device and don't want to loose my jailbreak and performance on a new iOS.

That said, not having MAJOR landmarks on any VFR chart/map/layer is a cardinal sin of cartography
 
Just touch the spot your curious about and you can see the airspace heights. Or turn on the sectional layer.... It is there, just that you have to tap for it...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Pilawt said:
So use the new "Aeronautical" map layer over the sectional chart background, as in the third screenshot I posted. You have all the terrain features of the sectional, plus scalable, legible text always right-side-up even in track-up mode, and easily-discernable SUA boundaries I use an iPhone in a yokemount for basic magenta-line following, and this will ease the eyestrain considerably. I tried it and I like it.
Click to expand...
I can see the value of the straight aeronautical map for folks who are using FF in the air on their iPhone, but overlaying the aeronautical vectors on top of the raster sectional looks like crap.
 
gsengle said:
Just touch the spot your curious about and you can see the airspace heights. Or turn on the sectional layer.... It is there, just that you have to tap for it...
Click to expand...

I don't think so... If I tap nothing comes up. Also I agree with Fearless Tower the aero map overlayed on the sectional looks terrible. Even more cluttered than before.
 
Don Quixote said:
I don't think so... If I tap nothing comes up. Also I agree with Fearless Tower the aero map overlayed on the sectional looks terrible. Even more cluttered than before.
Click to expand...

Here you go...

7d974858ca17321e90dc213e4674f013.jpg



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
So, I upgraded and the new "Aeronautical" map is available - but no aeronautical features at all show; just city and lake names.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top