Tip for using ForeFlight IFR

[LDJones]

I find using the iPad and ForeFlight a godsend flying IFR. Before anyone panics, I'm not saying it's my primary form of navigation...there's an IFR-certified GPS on-board and I file /G.

But when you're flying along and ATC gives you an unexpected reroute it's much quicker to edit the route on the iPad first, get turned towards the new waypoint, THEN program the primary GPS for the change.

Since I like ForeFlight to reflect the actual trip flown, I've adopted a handy technique for dealing with these pop-up changes:

First, I immediately press and hold on the little airplane representing my current position and tell ForeFlight to add the coordinates to my flight plan. That preserves the current leg up to that point in the flight plan. THEN I add the new waypoint(s) assigned by ATC to my plan. If the new waypoints are easily locatable on the map (i.e. a VOR), I'll just press and hold the course line until the rubberband feature kicks in and drag it to the new waypoint. If it's an intersection, which can sometimes be hard to find in a busy IFR chart, I'll just edit the text in the course window, typing in the intersection name and letting ForeFlight locate it. It works really slick.

I just did a Minneapolis, MN to Lexington, KY to Batavia, OH to Grand Rapids, MI and back to Minneapolis in the Bonanza. All flight planning, briefing and filing was done via ForeFlight, all under IFR (although mostly clear weather until the last leg which was solid IFR for the first 1.5 hrs.).

ForeFlight made it all amazingly easy. GPS-driven, geo-referenced airport diagrams are the greatest advance in airport taxi safety when visiting large, multi-runway airports. Now I never want to be without them.

 

[LDJones]

ForeFlight en route:

 

[denverpilot]

Since I like ForeFlight to reflect the actual trip flown, I've adopted a handy technique for dealing with these pops changes: ...

Oh! Thanks for sharing that tip.

I really hadn't thought about it, but I didn't like when I'd change a course line that it didn't reflect the route anymore.

So simple a solution, I missed it.

 

[LDJones]

Oh! Thanks for sharing that tip.

I really hadn't thought about it, but I didn't like when I'd change a course line that it didn't reflect the route anymore.

So simple a solution, I missed it.

You're welcome. I, too, hated losing perspective on what I'd flown, then the light bulb went on! Works really well. I'm liking ForeFlight more every time I fly with it. I do keep finding little things I think will improve it, and feed them suggestions almost weekly. Will be interesting to see how responsive they are to customer feedback.

 

[jesse]

I find using the iPad and ForeFlight a godsend flying IFR. Before anyone panics, I'm not saying it's my primary form of navigation...there's an IFR-certified GPS on-board and I file /G.

But when you're flying along and ATC gives you an unexpected reroute it's much quicker to edit the route on the iPad first, get turned towards the new waypoint, THEN program the primary GPS for the change.

Using Foreflight to make a course change while flying RNAV is not appropriate. It's not certified for that, nor would I trust the GPS or database for that. By changing course off the route you are then using Foreflight as your primary RNAV. How can you say you're not using it as your primary nav when you have no other certified solution navigating you to your new fix?

I am an avid Foreflight user, and iOS developer, so don't think I don't like Foreflight.

 

[midlifeflyer]

Using Foreflight to make a course change while flying RNAV is not appropriate.

Are you saying that it would be inappropriate when using a paper chart to do the following in response to a course change instruction?

1. Locate the new fix/waypoint on the chart.
2. Estimate the approximate heading that will start you in that direction.
3. Start heading in the new direction.
4. Tune in the applicable nav (whether IFR GPS, NDB, or VOR) to fine-tune your approximation and get on course.

How can you say you're not using it as your primary nav when you have no other certified solution navigating you to your new fix?

What about the IFR certified GPS that the OP says in on board?

 

[COFlyBoy]

Using Foreflight to make a course change while flying RNAV is not appropriate. It's not certified for that, nor would I trust the GPS or database for that. By changing course off the route you are then using Foreflight as your primary RNAV. How can you say you're not using it as your primary nav when you have no other certified solution navigating you to your new fix?

I am an avid Foreflight user, and iOS developer, so don't think I don't like Foreflight.

He's just using the iPad to get a rough heading :wink2:. I wouldn't think that puts you any further off the "certified" course than taking the time to reprogram the flight plan in the approved device.

How far do we usually fly in half a minute? About a mile. I think the difference in that one minute between what the certified box and the iPad is telling you is negligible.

I'm not disagreeing with your point that the certified box is the primary navigation instrument, I'm really just commenting on what the required certainty of navigation should be. If I'm told to reroute (under IFR), I'll likely estimate what my new heading should be and start turning while I'm updating the box in the panel. It seems like this is all the OP is doing, but he can get a much better heading estimate out of the iPad than out of his head.

 

[jesse]

He's just using the iPad to get a rough heading :wink2:. I wouldn't think that puts you any further off the "certified" course than taking the time to reprogram the flight plan in the approved device.

How far do we usually fly in half a minute? About a mile. I think the difference in that one minute between what the certified box and the iPad is telling you is negligible.

I'm not disagreeing with your point that the certified box is the primary navigation instrument, I'm really just commenting on what the required certainty of navigation should be. If I'm told to reroute (under IFR), I'll likely estimate what my new heading should be and start turning while I'm updating the box in the panel. It seems like this is all the OP is doing, but he can get a much better heading estimate out of the iPad than out of his head.

Or he can put that effort towards programming the certified box that he is supposed to be using for his area navigation - it isn't going to take much if at all longer then Foreflight.

 

[Chip Sylverne]

I use find on the map search and type in the identifier to locate the new waypoint. When it appears, I put a finger on it, and then the little orange direct to. Now that I can see course, heading and relative distance, I turn to heading and reprogram the 430.
Foreflight is great for situational awareness.

 

[Chip Sylverne]

Or he can put that effort towards programming the certified box that he is supposed to be using for his area navigation - it isn't going to take much if at all longer then Foreflight.

I guess that depends on how much you trust atc. I like to look at a chart before making a big changes off my cleared route in IMC. Foreflight makes it easy. The new waypoint may not be close enough to be a " nrst" selection on the 430. The whole process is less than a minute.

 

[EdFred]

Quicker way:

"Can I have an initial heading for that new routing?"

Crazy, I know.

 

[jesse]

I guess that depends on how much you trust atc. I like to look at a chart before making a big changes off my cleared route in IMC. Foreflight makes it easy. The new waypoint may not be close enough to be a " nrst" selection on the 430. The whole process is less than a minute.

I can add a new waypoint into my flight plan on a 430 in probably 20 seconds. Then I can see on the map if it makes sense and I am using a system that is certified and has a GPS with RAIM.

I'll then turn on course and program the route into Foreflight whenever.

 

[dell30rb]

ForeFlight en route:

Want to sell that handheld GPS that's mounted in your panel? Does not look like you need it haha

 

[EdFred]

Want to sell that handheld GPS that's mounted in your panel? Does not look like you need it haha

Maybe that's his "certified" GPS.

 

[dell30rb]

His certified GPS is the Apollo GX60 directly below it.

 

[EdFred]

His certified GPS is the Apollo GX60 directly below it.

Yeah, which would explain why it's easier in foreflight. In the 430 it is cake. FPL button start twirling, enter. Boom, first new waypoint is in. I also love how the iPad gets in the way of viewing a bunch of instruments. I will take my setup over any cobbled together tablet setup anytime.

 

[Chip Sylverne]

I can add a new waypoint into my flight plan on a 430 in probably 20 seconds. Then I can see on the map if it makes sense and I am using a system that is certified and has a GPS with RAIM.

I'll then turn on course and program the route into Foreflight whenever.

Then you're better at it than I am.

If the waypoint is a good distance, you'll have to turn the little knob, turn the big knob, turn the little knob, rinse, repeat, and push direct, enter then scale the map to see any sort of detail, while keeping the shiny side up.
The chart in foreflight is big, legible, legal and right in front of me. For me, it's more convenient than dealing with the 430 first, and I don't believe it's any less safe, and I know where I'm going right away.

 

[jesse]

Then you're better at it than I am.

If the waypoint is a good distance, you'll have to turn the little knob, turn the big knob, turn the little knob, rinse, repeat, and push direct, enter then scale the map to see any sort of detail, while keeping the shiny side up.
The chart in foreflight is big, legible, legal and right in front of me. For me, it's more convenient than dealing with the 430 first, and I don't believe it's any less safe, and I know where I'm going right away.

It just takes practice. Too many people don't even bother using FPL and just DIRECT TO all over the place. No wonder people think it's a hassle.

I've never had a 430 lock up in flight. I've seen Foreflight freeze in flight on more then one pilot. It's just of my opinion that using Foreflight to make course changes instead of your primary certified GPS with RAIM is not a good idea. We'll have to agree to disagree.

 

[Chip Sylverne]

It just takes practice. Too many people don't even bother using FPL and just DIRECT TO all over the place. No wonder people think it's a hassle.

I've never had a 430 lock up in flight. I've seen Foreflight freeze in flight on more then one pilot. It's just of my opinion that using Foreflight to make course changes instead of your primary certified GPS with RAIM is not a good idea. We'll have to agree to disagree.

I did have an approach plate not want to change from landscape to portrait once, even with the soft lock off, which put the fear of God in me for ever relying on it solely without paper plate backup for an approach. But the georeferencing is sooo nice...

 

[COFlyBoy]

It just takes practice. Too many people don't even bother using FPL and just DIRECT TO all over the place. No wonder people think it's a hassle.

I've never had a 430 lock up in flight. I've seen Foreflight freeze in flight on more then one pilot. It's just of my opinion that using Foreflight to make course changes instead of your primary certified GPS with RAIM is not a good idea. We'll have to agree to disagree.

I won't beat you up for that approach. Its conservative and FAA approved.

I will point out that turning before programming the certified box or turning after programming the certified box both leave you well within the considerably huge safety margins that have been designed for IFR flight (assuming neither method takes longer than about a minute to get you on course using the certified box).

We'll call this the "Twiddle-Turn vs Turn-Twiddle" debate.

Your point about RAIM is interesting. Enroute, if your handheld GPS was lying enough to be dangerous, you should notice the discrepancy between it and you certified box.

Does anyone know if the 496 does RAIM monitoring?

 

[denverpilot]

So if you have an iPad, a Garmin, and an Apollo all on board (photo above), does it become...

Turn, Time, Twist, Twist, Twist, Poke, Poke, Twist, Twist, Twist, Twist, Twist, Poke, Throttle, Talk?

 

[Chip Sylverne]

C'mon baby, let's do the....

Turn, Time, Twist, Twist, Twist, Poke, Poke, Twist, Twist, Twist, Twist, Twist, Poke, Throttle, Talk

 

[midlifeflyer]

So, we've had three different general responses to the change course issue:

1. Reprogram the route in the certified GPS before doing anything.
2. Use the chart to figure out where the new waypoint is, estimate the heading and turn to it and then reprogram the certified GPS.
3. Ask ATC for an initial heading, turn to it and then reporgram the certified GPS.

I really don't see anything particularly superior or inappropriate about any of the three methods. Seems like a "different strokes" issue to me and I can see folks not only choosing one as their preference but choosing one or the other in different situations.

 

[LDJones]

Using Foreflight to make a course change while flying RNAV is not appropriate. It's not certified for that, nor would I trust the GPS or database for that. By changing course off the route you are then using Foreflight as your primary RNAV. How can you say you're not using it as your primary nav when you have no other certified solution navigating you to your new fix?

I am an avid Foreflight user, and iOS developer, so don't think I don't like Foreflight.

If you feel more comfortable, ask ATC for an initial vector if you think that's an issue. But I figure if ATC needs me to proceed direct to a new point they'd prefer that I do that now...not in two minutes when I get the GX50 reprogrammed.

Think of ForeFlight as backing up that vector, rather than providing primary nav.

 

[LDJones]

Want to sell that handheld GPS that's mounted in your panel? Does not look like you need it haha

It's got to stay at least until ForeFlight provides XM weather!

 

[LDJones]

So if you have an iPad, a Garmin, and an Apollo all on board (photo above), does it become...

Turn, Time, Twist, Twist, Twist, Poke, Poke, Twist, Twist, Twist, Twist, Twist, Poke, Throttle, Talk?

Yeah, something like that! Some steps are saved since the GX50 automatically updates the 396!

 

[LDJones]

So, we've had three different general responses to the change course issue:

1. Reprogram the route in the certified GPS before doing anything.
2. Use the chart to figure out where the new waypoint is, estimate the heading and turn to it and then reprogram the certified GPS.
3. Ask ATC for an initial heading, turn to it and then reporgram the certified GPS.

I really don't see anything particularly superior or inappropriate about any of the three methods. Seems like a "different strokes" issue to me and I can see folks not only choosing one as their preference but choosing one or the other in different situations.

Agreed! For years I've added "VFR GPS" to the remarks section of of my IFR flight plans when flying non-/G aircraft just so the controllers knew I had more than a hunch available on-board. They would routinely ask me what my direct-to course was showing. When I'd tell them they would respond with, "Cleared direct XYZ."

 

[COFlyBoy]

Agreed! For years I've added "VFR GPS" to the remarks section of of my IFR flight plans when flying non-/G aircraft just so the controllers knew I had more than a hunch available on-board. They would routinely ask me what my direct-to course was showing. When I'd tell them they would respond with, "Cleared direct XYZ."

That is pretty slick. I'd totally do that now, if I hadn't blown a buncha money on my IFR GPS.

 

[LDJones]

That is pretty slick. I'd totally do that now, if I hadn't blown a buncha money on my IFR GPS.

I wouldn't regret the certified GPS investment...it's worth it just for all the approaches added to smaller airports that had no approaches just a few years ago. But that's another argument for ForeFlight....the number of approach plates that need to be carried (and update hassle if using Jepp charts) with all these new approaches becomes daunting in and of itself. Foreflight makes it easy to stay current.

(I guess with my enthusiasm for ForeFlight I should add that I have no connection with them...other than as a subscriber. But I sure wish I did! I think they're going to do well.)

 

[midlifeflyer]

Agreed! For years I've added "VFR GPS" to the remarks section of of my IFR flight plans when flying non-/G aircraft just so the controllers knew I had more than a hunch available on-board. They would routinely ask me what my direct-to course was showing. When I'd tell them they would respond with, "Cleared direct XYZ."

I've found that the remarks aren't even necessary. At least where I've been flying, ATC seems to be so used to GPS being available that I've received "direct" clearances while /A and even /U.

 

[JOhnH]

Here is my method. My wife fly's the plane and manages the GNS530W. I diddle with the 496 and Foreflight on the Ipad2. It seems to work really well and one of us always knows where we are and how to get where we are going. It helps sharpen her single pilot IFR skills because we are always in a contest to see who can get it right, first.

 

[LDJones]

I've found that the remarks aren't even necessary. At least where I've been flying, ATC seems to be so used to GPS being available that I've received "direct" clearances while /A and even /U.

I think that's true today. I started doing it back in the mid-90s when the first decent handhelds were appearing. Pilotage and dead-reckoning are still acceptable forms of navigation. Portable GPSes supplement that nicely.

 

[gismo]

Agreed! For years I've added "VFR GPS" to the remarks section of of my IFR flight plans when flying non-/G aircraft just so the controllers knew I had more than a hunch available on-board. They would routinely ask me what my direct-to course was showing. When I'd tell them they would respond with, "Cleared direct XYZ."

I can't remember if this is just ARTCCs or TRACONs but AFaIK at one, the other, or both they don't normally see your flight plan remarks. And FWIW, just because ATC clears you direct, doesn't make it legal. I haven't heard of any GA pilot getting sanctioned for flying IFR direct with a VFR GPS but I know that the FAA enforcement/rules folks insist that this is totally verboten. A commonly employed dodge is to ask for a vector (on a heading you suggest based on your VFR GPS) to some distant waypoint and "direct when able". As long as the target waypoint is something you can actually navigate to legally (e.g. a VOR, not an airport or intersection) that appears to meet the legal requirements even if you "tweak" your heading a bit while following your VFR GPS. Of course the most egregious offense is filing direct (outside of a VOR SV) without the necessary equipment (e.g. IFR GPS or other approved RNAV installation).

 

[midlifeflyer]

And FWIW, just because ATC clears you direct, doesn't make it legal.

I was hoping that the thread would avoid that discussion. Every thread I've seen on a forum that gets into the "is direct under IFR legal without a certified box with the waypoint" has deteriorated very, very quickly.


Fortunately, the thread has already exceeded 30 posts so the likelihood of anyhting useful has already diminished significantly

 

[LDJones]

I was hoping that the thread would avoid that discussion. Every thread I've seen on a forum that gets into the "is direct under IFR legal without a certified box with the waypoint" has deteriorated very, very quickly.


Fortunately, the thread has already exceeded 30 posts so the likelihood of anyhting useful has already diminished significantly

Yep....you're right. Some people thrive on the splitting of hairs. Bottom line, do what works for you. It's your ticket.

 

[gismo]

I was hoping that the thread would avoid that discussion. Every thread I've seen on a forum that gets into the "is direct under IFR legal without a certified box with the waypoint" has deteriorated very, very quickly.


Fortunately, the thread has already exceeded 30 posts so the likelihood of anyhting useful has already diminished significantly

I agree there's no point in hashing it out again, I was just concerned that Loren might be unaware of the issue despite the amount of pointless arguing that's gone on here and elsewhere. Direct with a VFR GPS is a common practice with or without the "tricks" and it's up to the PIC to decide for themselves if it's OK/legal/non-issue.

 

[LDJones]

I agree there's no point in hashing it out again, I was just concerned that Loren might be unaware of the issue despite the amount of pointless arguing that's gone on here and elsewhere. Direct with a VFR GPS is a common practice with or without the "tricks" and it's up to the PIC to decide for themselves if it's OK/legal/non-issue.

Oh, I've been around the horn on this issue a number of times in the last 13 years or so. No stranger to various positions! I tend to be a pragmatist, and go with the flow when it comes to getting along with ATC.