One fix they need with the new mapping is the option to turn off seaplane bases like you can with heliports. They really clutter the display in Minnesota, when they're unusable by the majority of flyers.
ForeFlight version 8 has been released.
- Thread starter AggieMike88
- Start date
MtPJimB
Pre-takeoff checklist
I did not have terrain setting turned on. That fixed it. Thanks.
Well, you do have to pay for upgrades. They don't give you Excel 365 just because you owned Excel 2010.
denverpilot
Tied Down
Aww cmon. They're usable ONCE... Hehe.
He said he has the O365 subscription. You do get upgrades with that, so he's comparing apples to apples... Well kinda.
One is a multimillion dollar company with worldwide sales, and the other is a boutique software company selling into a very small market.
I don't think Foreflight's pricing is out of line with what I would expect their costs to be, completely aside of the value of the $50 to "upgrade" to the new stuff.
Couple of hundred bucks a year in a boutique market with a crap-ton of user data updates? They're cheap. Real cheap.
I suspect the pricing increase is due to the reality of costs of building and maintaining it all.
I'm on record as not a fan of the way ForeFlight tiers its pricing but I don't have a gripe with a tiered pricing concept.
But I think your comparison is not really apt.
First, it's hard to compare the latest subscription based Office 365 with what has been a tiered Microsoft Office at least since 1995, with Home, Student, Profession and other variations with different components. But even Office365 is tiered, with Home and Business versions with slightly different feature sets. Even Windows itself is tiered with Home and Pro versions with different features and pricing. I think that's been historically true for a lot of multi-function software suites. And an EFB intended to VFR use and one intended for IFR use may well have very logical differing pricepoints (my only gripe with FF pricing).
Second, have you tried to get Excel without also paying for the rest of Office365, even the stuff you don't use? Not that many use MS-Access (a traditional MS tiered pagae pricing point between Home and Pro) or get a discount for dropping Outlook (I'd buy something else if I wasn't already paying for it) or Publisher (I think I used it last in 2002).
That's true but I don't have to pay a dime more to use Excel 2010 for as long as I want. Office 365 is a model closer to ForeFlight. The upgrades in this year's Excel came along with the same annual subscription.
hockeyrcks9901
Pre-takeoff checklist
This is my biggest gripe with FF.
Why do I have to pay for synthetic vision, predominately an IFR issue, to get geo referenced airport diagrams?
I'm a VFR student pilot, not going to use the logbook because I don't want to be stuck on someone's ecosystem.
Let me buy a VFR subscription with just charts and airport diagrams.
Tiered systems are good but they need to make sense, not this pro plus, basic, pro, basic plus crap that adds things that don't go together.
simtech
En-Route
Just get the basic plus then. You can zoom in so far on the areo maps that you will see the airport laid out with taxi ways identified and your position will be on it. Boom no georefrenece plates needed.
hockeyrcks9901
Pre-takeoff checklist
That's what I do but my point was it's silly the way they "group" or bundle things like a cable company.
simtech
En-Route
Ah I didn't know you already had the Aero charts, my bad! Yeah I do agree with you on the bundle part, GP does the same...kind of. 2 tiers..a VFR tier and an IFR tier which will set you back $149. The thing is once the shock wears off people are still going to do it.
Does GP do the same? Can you get Garmin SmartTaxi diagrams in the VFR package? VFR vs IFR functionality makes sense. This gripe with FF''s tiered pricing is that it is not tiered that way. Assuming no great need or desire for the global maps (assuming. FAA or FF taxi diagrams are de facto available in basic plus and I am not sure of that since the pricing schedule says the are not, I'm sure there will be those who don't find the global charts useful), a VFR pilot cannot get georeferenced airport diagrams in FF without getting the Pro package.
Do you? If you zoom in on an airport in Basic Plus, do you see the airport with marked taxiways and runways, hot spots, and ramp designations? To me, that would be the bare minimum for a taxi diagram even without the other information the FAA airport diagrams contain.
Question for those who have already used "plus" Global Charts band also have access to a G1000 or Avidyne MFD, how much difference is there in the way information is displayed en route?
Last edited:
hockeyrcks9901
Pre-takeoff checklist
It's not as good as actual airport diagrams but it does have the runways and taxiways marked.
Like I said, FF bundles things in a stupid way. I shouldn't have to do this silly workaround to have geo referenced airport diagrams. That should be included in a VFR package. Why do I have to buy geo referenced approach plates to get the airport diagrams? Why should I pay for a logbook to get synthetic vision?
Their bundles are illogical just like most cable companies. "Oh, you want the local sports channels? Well you need our movie package for that." Just dumb.
Otherwise it's a great product and I definitely get a great value from it. Just think they should rethink their pricing structure.
onezuludelta
Pre-takeoff checklist
Has anyone else noticed there are WAY more NDBs than there are on the sectionals? There's 4 or 5 on Long Island, when the sectional only shows 2. Two of the "new" ones say LOM and an airport code, so is that an outer marker?
Yup, you got it.
JimNtexas
Pattern Altitude
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2006
- Messages
- 2,259
- Location
- Austin, Texas
- Display Name
Display name:
Jim - In Texas!
I have a friend who works at Foreflight, he was going on about how great the data driven charts were going to be. I was a little skeptical, but I've flown with them twice now, and they really are a big improvement over scanned charts.
And I don't know why someone would think that VFR reporting points would not be in the FAA database. I'm sure the FAA generates sectionals from a database to generate paper charts. They have some QC, and maybe some hand tweaking, but everything you see on a sectional is in a database I'm sure. Do you think there is a post-it note somewhere with the lat/longs of the reporting points, so a scribe can ink the sectional with a quill pen?
Remember that FAA chart data is not just used to print paper charts. It is also used to generate radar overlays for ATC radar. Everything on your FAA chart is in a database somewhere.
I'm pretty sure FF uses not just FAA data from also data from other commercial sources to give you as update and easy to use chart as possible.
Now there are several good free-as-in-beer nav programs with geo-refed plates and airport diagrams to choose from if FF doesn't suit you for one reason or another. Because Capitalism!
And I don't know why someone would think that VFR reporting points would not be in the FAA database. I'm sure the FAA generates sectionals from a database to generate paper charts. They have some QC, and maybe some hand tweaking, but everything you see on a sectional is in a database I'm sure. Do you think there is a post-it note somewhere with the lat/longs of the reporting points, so a scribe can ink the sectional with a quill pen?
Remember that FAA chart data is not just used to print paper charts. It is also used to generate radar overlays for ATC radar. Everything on your FAA chart is in a database somewhere.
I'm pretty sure FF uses not just FAA data from also data from other commercial sources to give you as update and easy to use chart as possible.
Now there are several good free-as-in-beer nav programs with geo-refed plates and airport diagrams to choose from if FF doesn't suit you for one reason or another. Because Capitalism!
connerjadwin
Filing Flight Plan
This is an awesome step in the right direction for ForeFlight! Aside from a few minor omissions (airspace altitudes, etc), I think they launched a fantastic product. There is no doubt that the end of paper charts is near. ForeFlight is making a case that NOAA no longer needs to spend tax payer money on charting!
rwellner98
Cleared for Takeoff
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2009
- Messages
- 1,383
- Display Name
Display name:
rw2
I agree that it would be better to display them, but in the interim people should be aware that they can touch the airspace and get the information to pop-up.
Fearless Tower
Touchdown! Greaser!
They're still going to have to spend money on charting, just not on printing.
denverpilot
Tied Down
Like I've said, paper charts will be obsolete the day everything on the chart legend is in the electronic version. No doubt about that. Everything in the legend is there for a reason.
Whether that's sooner or later is simply a function of how fast the developers code.
Thank you. So, if you got a taxi clearance that involved multiple taxiways, turns and crossed runways, would the zoom in be helpful in understanding and navigating it?
Well, to be technical, you don't have to buy the logbook to get the synthetic vision, but, as you know, I agree completely with your point.
azure
Final Approach
Well, actually the NDB isn't the outer marker itself. LOM means Locator Outer Marker and my understanding is the NDB is the "locator" part. There should also be a co-located marker beacon.
hockeyrcks9901
Pre-takeoff checklist
I've only briefly played with it and it would be helpful but it's not as good actual airport diagrams. Would I rely on it? No, but it is useful for knowing where your are. I would keep a regular diagram around just because.
I'm pretty sure you have the regular taxi diagram in basic Foreflight. It's just not georeferenced.
Lachlan
En-Route
100LL is going away, too. Should we all start walking now because "someday" we won't be able to fly, or convert to electric motors? Please understand that not every "upgrade" is an upgrade, and just because it's newer doesn't make it automatically better.
gsengle
Pattern Altitude
- Joined
- May 9, 2016
- Messages
- 2,099
- Display Name
Display name:
Gsengle
That's a poor analogy. But yes, if you can run cheaper, safer mogas, yep you should.
My only point was you better get ready. And it's going away for a reason. Paper maps are labor intensive, error prone, hard to update and hard to keep up to date and even with this 1.0, the dynamic ones are in many ways already superior.
So not sure why everyone is so touchy and argumentative, except evidently we want to make aviation great again? How bout radio ranges! Lighted airways!! No one took your sectionals away. Yet.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
My only point was you better get ready. And it's going away for a reason. Paper maps are labor intensive, error prone, hard to update and hard to keep up to date and even with this 1.0, the dynamic ones are in many ways already superior.
So not sure why everyone is so touchy and argumentative, except evidently we want to make aviation great again? How bout radio ranges! Lighted airways!! No one took your sectionals away. Yet.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Last edited:
Now, now. Don't get people started.
You mention labor intensive. My favorite line on that comes from my wife, a non-pilot. We were on a club group trip and there were three of us in the plane. The other pilot was coming back to flying after a layoff and asked whether I would object to treating it as a practice IFR flight. Of course not. So he donned the hood and pulled out his paper charts. After watching him unfold, fold, put aside, take out, etc. etc on what was about an hour and 15 minute flight, she commented, "Wow! That was a lot of work. No wonder you love your iPad."
focal_plane
Pre-takeoff checklist
I've used FF for over 3 years and have been happy. I've got Pro with SV, IPAD Air and Stratus 2. I wasn't real enthused with the logbook stuff when released recently but I suspected that I might be forced into it with their subscription structure at some point. I never even looked at GP but after reading the thread, just started looking at compatibility with GP. It might make sense since I've been considering going the GTX-345 route. Certainly not a done deal at this point, just lookin' and thinkin'. Current subscription ends around May '17; will keep what's been working for now but eyes are wide open.
Fearless Tower
Touchdown! Greaser!
I'm not convinced that there is a significant difference in labor.
Someone still has to enter the corrections/updates whether they are doing it to a raster image or vector object. It isn't like they are physically redrawing each sectional every cycle.
FWIW, when electronic chart systems were initially being developed, the primary reason that the maritime world went with vector charts over raster was for one single reason alone: file size and bandwidth. It had nothing to do with labor intensity.
gsengle
Pattern Altitude
- Joined
- May 9, 2016
- Messages
- 2,099
- Display Name
Display name:
Gsengle
It's just one factor. But yes either way you have to maintain the data. The drawing, maintaining and publishing of the rasters is an extra step.
Yep bandwidth is another great reason, we've all waited for long Foreflight sectional downloads on slow FBO wifi...
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Yep bandwidth is another great reason, we've all waited for long Foreflight sectional downloads on slow FBO wifi...
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Fearless Tower
Touchdown! Greaser!
Not really. It is like editing an image in Photoshop and then saving. Most individual corrections probably take the same amount of time as editing a vector object. I've personally done both for nautical charts.
gsengle
Pattern Altitude
- Joined
- May 9, 2016
- Messages
- 2,099
- Display Name
Display name:
Gsengle
The vector object is just the aeronautical database which needs to be maintained for multiple purposes, so I'm confused at your comment. The chart is an extra step. Not to mention all the bandwidth supporting all those downloads, the errors human map makers can make, the printing (for now) etc.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
denverpilot
Tied Down
I can run mogas. If I drag it in small quantities from many miles away in a dodgy tank trailer. Gosh I guess I'd better stop calling the 100LL tanker truck over to the hangar.
As far as the chart stuff goes, I can't speak for others but I'm not arguing. I'm stating facts. Your electronic charts will replace the (scanned or real) paper version when they provide 100% of the information the paper does. Not rocket science here, really. I've been discussing the content not the display technology.
Snicker... Now you want to talk money and efficiency in government? LOL.
So you've proven with a hard budget spreadsheet that the entire cost of paper end to end is cheaper than computer based? I'd like to see that analysis. Please include every computer that touches the data along the way, any and all data center power sources and maintenance costs, all software development costs, and debugging costs, and all of it from start to finish.
I suspect you'll find your assertion about total "taxpayer cost" is flat wrong. But I have an advantage here, I've done a similar study on a project in the 1990s for a company to know exactly what a conversion to computer tech in that business was going to cost, as part of a cost/benefit analysis.
It's damned near impossible even at scale, for a bunch of paper products to be replaced by computer tech at lower cost. One must factor in added functionality as a benefit that the additional margin lost in higher costs actually pays for directly.
I know this is abstracted away from you at the level you're working at (since you said you're at the user end, editing the graphics) but the servers and software and infrastructure to make that possible on your workstation is not cheap.
"Computers are always cheaper!" is one of the huge lies of the IT industry. Companies and organizations that recognize this and analyze whether the switch is actually cost effective are somewhat rare. But they do usually post record profits on a regular basis.
But hey. You said to be ready. I'm ready! Bring on a cheaper across-the-board replacement that reproduces everything the chart does.
A little economic reality: Haven't we already proven by empirical evidence that this isn't cheaper? Foreflight raised the price, they didn't lower it.
Darn those pesky systems engineering people who know how to run a calculator... and total up prices. They're ruining your all-digital utopia.
For every "printing costs will go down!" excited person, there's three building the data center, maintaining the servers, desktops, all the software each run, continuously debugging it all (that never stops, humans haven't coded a perfect piece of software yet), running the power plant, digging up the coal...
You can take that analysis as far as you like, but tech rarely makes things cheaper overall.
It doesn't matter. Here's why...
Tech has to make things better. Not the same. Not a replacement. Better. The "new hotness" must do MORE than the thing it replaces.
Don't worry. We're all "ready"! LOL. Get to work.
Vector maps are now slightly beyond the "proof of concept" or "novelty" stage now in aviation.
Cool. Got a long way to go.
Fearless Tower
Touchdown! Greaser!
The raster charts already exist and the process for updating them already exists. Whereas to completely replace raster charts means adding every single object and feature into the vector database. That has not been fully accomplished to date as far as I can tell and will have to be done before vector charts can truly be a replacement for the raster sectionals.
Unless you are saying that the raster sectionals already being produced from
vector databases?
hockeyrcks9901
Pre-takeoff checklist
Nope.
I'm in the middle of nowhere right now without access to my tablet but I'll try to post a screenshot when I get back.
The zoomed in FF8 map view shows geo referenced taxiways and runways but not nearly as good as a proper airport diagram.
Maybe my phone actually attached them... Looks like it. I know they don't show a geo reference in that screenshot but I wasn't at the airport when I took it.
Attachments
Last edited:
I meant I think you have regular non-georeferenced taxi diagrams available in the app, not on the map. They should be in the Airports tab. "Plates over Maps" is definitely a "Pro" feature.
wsuffa
Touchdown! Greaser!
All y'all are missing a basic rule of business. First you change the market and drive out the older way of doing things (in this case, the paper charts, which are much harder to get and more expensive than they were). Once the older way is gone, you can then raise the prices once you have people hooked on the new model. Add features occasionally to keep competitors at bay, and you're golden. Copyright and patents don't hurt, either.
It's a time tested model. We've recently seen the consequences in the pharma world.
If you think it's expensive now, wait until Jepp buys them out.... :O
It's a time tested model. We've recently seen the consequences in the pharma world.
If you think it's expensive now, wait until Jepp buys them out.... :O
Fearless Tower
Touchdown! Greaser!
Hmmm.....it all makes sense now....
Step 1: steal underpants
Step 2: ???
Step 3: Profit!