Your Skyvector replacement.

[EdFred]

The Skyvector CEO's email is: dgraves@skyvector.com

We've been emailing back and forth. He seems to have no inclination to revert to the old site. That's why WE ALL must email him and indicate we want the old site back.

Once I suggested he offer the old and new version he just ignored the rest of my emails.

 

[Henning]

There's enough technical brain power on this board it shouldn't be that difficult to build what you want. It's not like you have to develop the databases.

 

[ahkahn]

How about happy medium... Rather than reverting back to the old SkyVector, fix the new one so that it is as user-friendly as the old one was, and has all of the new functionality of they now offer. If you're going to start an email campaign, start with that. Let them know the features they killed and tell them you want them back!

I agree, the new SkyVector is much more cumbersome and I told them that in Osh Kosh. They were very proud of the new SV, and after the demo, it is much more robust, but sometimes simple is good. I told them that.

 

[RyanShort1]

OK so I definitely use things differently than most but the old SV was great for planning photo missions this one not so much.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Leonard]

Anyone using Golden Eagle flight prep anymore?

Sometimes

 

[jimmyjack]

Why would you want the old site back ? It didn't do 1/2 the stuff the new one does. Plan, brief, file, all in one place for the outrageous price of free.

Well, there are better options to plan, brief and file. And everyone uses those.

And, what SV did so well (streamlined, simple map planning) it now doesn't do well at all.

Graves hopped on the Plan, Brief, File bandwagon and has no intention of getting off. I'm not sure why he's so bent on it... does he make more $$$ by going this route?

 

[weilke]

Well, there are better options to plan, brief and file. And everyone uses those.

Which ones ?

And, what SV did so well (streamlined, simple map planning) it now doesn't do well at all.

They added one mouseclick. I didn't know pilots were that inflexible.

Graves hopped on the Plan, Brief, File bandwagon and has no intention of getting off. I'm not sure why he's so bent on it... does he make more $$$ by going this route?

He runs a business. Right now, all he has are a couple of banner ads. I imagine he'll offer a subscription at one point.

Trying to remember who that guy was that ran the chart site until a letter from flightprep put him out of business. He was a good example that you can't live off giving stuff away for free.

 

[poadeleted21]

Which ones ?



They added one mouseclick. I didn't know pilots were that inflexible.



He runs a business. Right now, all he has are a couple of banner ads. I imagine he'll offer a subscription at one point.

Trying to remember who that guy was that ran the chart site until a letter from flightprep put him out of business. He was a good example that you can't live off giving stuff away for free.

I've seen 8 figure software decisions made based on the number of mouse clicks to accomplish a task. A good sales guy will use it as a selling point. Folks here don't seem to like the new SV, the CEO doesn't seem to care and resorted to juvenile level deception. Seems the market is responding. I haven't been to SV since I felt they did the pilot community a disservice by fueling/funding flight prep's as asanine assault on online flight planners. Mr. Dave's behavior here, and thumbing his nose at the POA community makes me not regret that decision.

Google seems to be keeping the lights on by giving stuff away for free.

 

[CJones]

So why hasn't iFlightplanner been attacked by the retreads with their 'patent infringement' lawsuits? Is it because he's using Google as the 'mapping' software, and they're scared to go after someone that will actually tell them to pound sand - and mean it?

 

[weilke]

Folks here don't seem to like the new SV,

'Folks here' refers to two or three opinionated posters who keep starting multiple threads bashing SV.

Google seems to be keeping the lights on by giving stuff away for free.

I pay them a couple of hundred $$ every month. That may have something to do with them keeping the lights on.

If something is given to you for 'free', you are the product being sold.

 

[poadeleted21]

'Folks here' refers to two or three opinionated posters who keep starting multiple threads bashing SV.




I pay them a couple of hundred $$ every month. That may have something to do with them keeping the lights on.

If something is given to you for 'free', you are the product being sold.

Yep, and the sheep aren't happy.

No, it's not just here. Take a trip to the SV forums for starters.

 

[Henning]

So far I'm not seeing why I would want to use SV over GP for planning.

 

[SixPapaCharlie]

Yep, and the sheep aren't happy.

No, it's not just here. Take a trip to the SV forums for starters.

So far they have deleted every one of my posts on SV forum.
I believe it was because my user name was RokaDave

 

[Henning]

So far they have deleted every one of my posts on SV forum.
I believe it was because my user name was RokaDave

Try using CManson.

 

[EdFred]

'Folks here' refers to two or three opinionated posters who keep starting multiple threads bashing SV.

You may want to learn to count.

I have blocked skyvector.com with my router so I am no longer tempted to use it and don't accidentally give them traffic.

I'm a new iFlightplanner convert. Whoops on that changing link off of my webpage rokadave!

Perfect. Since Skyvector turned itself into useless garbage, I've been looking for a replacement. Now I've found it. Thanks Ed!

yup...+2 on trash.

I'm with EdFred and most of the people here. Skyvector used to be my primary initial "big picture" tool prior to virtually all flights. I loved its simplicity; it was a poster child for the KISS design.
Now it's devolved into something messy, complex and ugly, essentially useless for my purposes.
I have other tools for the deeper level flight planning, but none at the moment for that simple and easy top level view.
I guess that's progress.

Well, there are better options to plan, brief and file. And everyone uses those.

And, what SV did so well (streamlined, simple map planning) it now doesn't do well at all.

Graves hopped on the Plan, Brief, File bandwagon and has no intention of getting off. I'm not sure why he's so bent on it... does he make more $$$ by going this route?

"If it ain't broke, don't fix it."

I am NOT a fan of being forced to learn a new user interface. Give people the choice between the old one and the new one.

Absolutely. Why f*** up something that worked well? It's all marketing, trying to add "cool" features and failing miserably when users see "you do not have javascript enabled". Idiots, "my JS is enabled and worked d*mn well before you hosed it, you losers!"

I rarely used SV before (limited capabilities) so I am not sad. But it is good to know how they operate. I will stick with VFRmaps and AirNav, they are much better and work in most browsers.

I'm not seeing the route planning features on vfrmap. Does that site have it?
Yeah, the new skyvector isn't what I'm looking for. The flight plan page is nice and all, with wind correction factors, but I like to do that stuff by hand still. I got a couple of errors on the site, and am not sure I'd trust their math just yet.

No like. :-(

ya the new skyvector sucks monkey butt. I won't be using it much anymore. The old way it showed your leg distances/times was great. The new thing is a totally different page and it just sucks.

Indeed. Until skyvector restores the interactive nav log function, iflightplanner has replaced SV on my flight planning tab on my browser. To the original poster, thanks for the find!!

I'm with Ed on this one, this one is the single most important functionality feature of a flight planning site, the ability to run iteration upon iteration of time/distance modifications to a proposed travel plan.

X2

I liked the simple planning tool it used to have. I'm not going to use the complicated flight planner... I have foreflight for that.

And that doesn't even include the guys that refuse to use skyvector after the flightprep incident.

 

[Henning]

I'm still trying to understand why I would want to use it versus Garmin Pilot (or ForeFlight or whatever else one uses in flight)?

 

[RyanShort1]

It was really useful at home. I used to use Skyvector almost exclusively for flight planning photo missions and playing with routing for efficiency. The new style is totally useless for that purpose - really useless. It used to be easier to use than Foreflight for me, and if I did it on my big monitor and screenshot it to print out it was a handy backup for in flight use. The iPad mini's screen wasn't as nice an option and on a long day I could start to run out of battery.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[MooneyDriver78]

I'm still trying to understand why I would want to use it versus Garmin Pilot (or ForeFlight or whatever else one uses in flight)?

Only 1 reason I can think of: if you have a big monitor on your
PC verses iPad mini screen.
I use paper for planning, easier to get the big picture .

 

[Henning]

Only 1 reason I can think of: if you have a big monitor on your
PC verses iPad mini screen.
I use paper for planning, easier to get the big picture .

That's what I do, although I pretty much already understand the "big picture" navigating across the country. I don't like doing the same thing on multiple platforms. People here bitching about an extra click here and there when they are simultaneously adding an entire redundant process.

 

[dell30rb]

FWIW I used skyvector all the time until it got all complicated a few weeks ago.

It was great as a quick, basic planner. No-frills is exactly what I want.

It takes time to learn a complex flight planning system. Most of us have subscriptions to powerful planners - efb systems (foreflight or garmin pilot etc..) and use that for the actual planning, weather, and filing of the flight plan. Not to mention flying along with it.

Skyvector used to fit a need for me. I needed something free, easy and quick to basically ballpark potential trips and find fuel prices and my stops for theoretical trips or for general planning 1-2 weeks out. I'm sure the new look added lots of great features but it changed so much I don't know how to use it. I'm sure I could figure it out, but like I said - i've got foreflight and I know how to use that, so why bother.

SkyVector is free - and so is this feedback.

 

[GeorgeC]

Yes, yes, a thousand times yes.

FWIW I used skyvector all the time until it got all complicated a few weeks ago.

It was great as a quick, basic planner. No-frills is exactly what I want.

It takes time to learn a complex flight planning system. Most of us have subscriptions to powerful planners - efb systems (foreflight or garmin pilot etc..) and use that for the actual planning, weather, and filing of the flight plan. Not to mention flying along with it.

Skyvector used to fit a need for me. I needed something free, easy and quick to basically ballpark potential trips and find fuel prices and my stops for theoretical trips or for general planning 1-2 weeks out. I'm sure the new look added lots of great features but it changed so much I don't know how to use it. I'm sure I could figure it out, but like I said - i've got foreflight and I know how to use that, so why bother.

SkyVector is free - and so is this feedback.

 

[weilke]

You may want to learn to count.
.
.
.
And that doesn't even include the guys that refuse to use skyvector after the flightprep incident.

Lol, I guess you have the anger of the internet on your side. Are you gonna avenge 'Cecil the lion' too ?

 

[Mistake Not...]

I'm still trying to understand why I would want to use it versus Garmin Pilot (or ForeFlight or whatever else one uses in flight)?

Well, as a Garmin Pilot user, for me:

I'm sitting here, right now trying to plan a flight to Marathon Key. I'm thinking about KHSV->KOCF->KRSW->KMTH (mostly planned around bladder limits).

Unless I'm missing something (and I hope I am), all I can get out of GP is a total distance and time. I can't find anything that'll give me times for each segment. I'd have to enter each as a separate trip, and I don't want to do that. Right now, I'm "what iffing" the best stops, times, etc.

Skyvector used to be great for that. When they sand the few rough edges off of IFP, I'll like it as much (or more, I like the look better).

 

[RyanShort1]

I wasn't kidding about my links.

http://texastailwheel.com/index.php/links

 

[Palmpilot]

Originally Posted by Palmpilot View Post
"If it ain't broke, don't fix it."

I am NOT a fan of being forced to learn a new user interface. Give people the choice between the old one and the new one.

Just to clarify, I'm still somewhat on the fence about the new format. I haven't worked with it enough yet to have a firm opinion one way or the other.

 

[MooneyDriver78]

Well, as a Garmin Pilot user, for me:

I'm sitting here, right now trying to plan a flight to Marathon Key. I'm thinking about KHSV->KOCF->KRSW->KMTH (mostly planned around bladder limits).

Unless I'm missing something (and I hope I am), all I can get out of GP is a total distance and time. I can't find anything that'll give me times for each segment. I'd have to enter each as a separate trip, and I don't want to do that. Right now, I'm "what iffing" the best stops, times, etc.

Skyvector used to be great for that. When they sand the few rough edges off of IFP, I'll like it as much (or more, I like the look better).

I just did, here is how to do it:
First, change the columns to what you want (ETA, crosswind, etc) by selecting the column heading you want to change, then to get the ETA to be filled in select file &brief, this go get the winds and it will fill in column, obviously this will change as winds change if you are doing this ahead of time.
It doesn't actually file the plan as the name implies, it takes to a page that you then can file the plan, or get Duats brief if you choose.
Edit: I was using the trip planning page

 

[EdFred]

Just to clarify, I'm still somewhat on the fence about the new format. I haven't worked with it enough yet to have a firm opinion one way or the other.

All of my suggestions /requests were implemented by iFP within a week - and I'm not even a paying member. That's customer service.

 

[Mistake Not...]

I just did, here is how to do it:
First, change the columns to what you want (ETA, crosswind, etc) by selecting the column heading you want to change, then to get the ETA to be filled in select file &brief, this go get the winds and it will fill in column, obviously this will change as winds change if you are doing this ahead of time.
It doesn't actually file the plan as the name implies, it takes to a page that you then can file the plan, or get Duats brief if you choose.
Edit: I was using the trip planning page

Aha! Didn't even occur to me that I could do that. And, I was on my phone, so only two columns are showing up.

thanks.

 

[JoeSelch]

All of my suggestions /requests were implemented by iFP within a week - and I'm not even a paying member. That's customer service.

Ha!
I just came here to post an update as I was spit-balling on iFP and noticed the changes ...

Can't remember the whole laundry list, but what makes it rock for me now is:

• After typing waypoints routing box, pressing [ENTER] shows the route
• Navlog waypoints can be re-sequenced by drag & drop

Ed - I guess now we have to say, "iDo"

 

[admatthews]

Ha!
I just came here to post an update as I was spit-balling on iFP and noticed the changes ...

Can't remember the whole laundry list, but what makes it rock for me now is:

• After typing waypoints routing box, pressing [ENTER] shows the route
• Navlog waypoints can be re-sequenced by drag & drop

Joe, here is a summary of the changes in addition to those you just mentioned...

• Added "GS" parameter for groundspeed in the Permalink
• Added a scroll bar to the table area if the nav log is taller than the map/viewable area
• Clicking a Waypoint ID in the nav log will zoom to that location on the map
• Clicking Total Distance or Total Time in the nav log will zoom out to the full route
• Mousing over a route line now highlights both the line and the corresponding segment in the nav log, and vice versa
• All route changes now result in an immediate recalculation, with a couple exceptions;
  1. Inserting a new waypoint by clicking on route line, as pilots are most likely to rubberband that waypoint immediately
  2. Dragging a waypoint (which when released, shows the snap-to options) recalculates once a snap-to location is selected
• Fixed the bug where the snap-to menu would appear off the page when clicking near the edge of the browser window
• Previous map type, route and groundspeed are now restored via cookies

The official 'press' announcement will be made this week, but it only makes sense for us to share it here first. Looking forward to hearing your thoughts!

Best,
Andy

 

[Checkout_my_Six]

ok...I tried it again....and now it works in FF. So, I'm back.

 

[JoeSelch]

Joe, here is a summary of the changes in addition to those you just mentioned...

<snip>

The official 'press' announcement will be made this week, but it only makes sense for us to share it here first. Looking forward to hearing your thoughts!

Best,
Andy

Thanks, Andy!
Appreciate your work and response to user input.
Color me an iFlightPlanner convert!

I see you guys are in A2, just down the road. Maybe you'll join us for one of our Great Lakes PoA meet-ups.

 

[MikeS]

I agree with everything that's been said so far about SV and iFP. I've never used GP so can't comment.

I was as annoyed as OP with the changes to SV a few weeks ago and went with the herd over to iFP.

I'm not faulting iFP for anything and am grateful to the designer for providing the flying community such a fine program. I find myself however going back to SV - despite their recent retrograde "improvements" - for the quick and dirty flight planning for which it's been so useful. I'm finding it is still the more convenient tool for on-the-spot "what if" flight planning. Simplicity with an intuitive interface requiring zero cleverness on the part of the user seems to me to be the key ingredients for this type of application. If SV and iFP want to load up their programs with features, I wish they would just create new products and leave the uncomplicated old gems they started with alone.

Since they're free I feel a bit guilty complaining. These programmers are having fun and in the process providing useful tools for others to use if they choose. Instead of saying thanks here I am complaining. I have become the sort of person that I've scorned in the past. What a revoltn' development this turned out to be.

 

[admatthews]

I agree with everything that's been said so far about SV and iFP. I've never used GP so can't comment.

I was as annoyed as OP with the changes to SV a few weeks ago and went with the herd over to iFP.

I'm not faulting iFP for anything and am grateful to the designer for providing the flying community such a fine program. I find myself however going back to SV - despite their recent retrograde "improvements" - for the quick and dirty flight planning for which it's been so useful. I'm finding it is still the more convenient tool for on-the-spot "what if" flight planning. Simplicity with an intuitive interface requiring zero cleverness on the part of the user seems to me to be the key ingredients for this type of application. If SV and iFP want to load up their programs with features, I wish they would just create new products and leave the uncomplicated old gems they started with alone.

Since they're free I feel a bit guilty complaining. These programmers are having fun and in the process providing useful tools for others to use if they choose. Instead of saying thanks here I am complaining. I have become the sort of person that I've scorned in the past. What a revoltn' development this turned out to be.

We know pilots need different types of planning resources at different times, and that is why we give you options... For your simple "what if" planning there forever will be iFlightPlanner.com/AviationCharts.

Our full-featured planning with detailed navigation logs, certified weather briefs, and flight plan filing capabilities are available as a completely separate product - and one doesn't require the other. Feel free to try our demo account at iFlightplanner.com/Demo to compare the two.

I appreciate your insight Mike, please don't hesitate to reach out if you have any questions!

Best,
Andy

 

[SkyHog]

Do you figure RokaDave still has the taste of FlightPrep's junk in his mouth, or has the new changes helped him wash the taste out?

Either way, he is the reason we lost RunwayFinder. His decision to drop to his knees gave Flight prep the guts to push on.

 

[d5by5]

Not bad, but one of the key functions that I tend to use a lot doesn't seem to be supported. Say I want to fly from my home airport (KMWC) to Des Moines (KDSM) as an example. Generally, I start my planning with a direct route between the two. Then, I decide which navaids to use (I fly /A) to fly that route... and like to be able to grab the route and drag it to include navaids along the way. I can do this in Foreflight (app, with web functionality to come soon, I'm told) and Skyvector.

One other thing that'd be nice would be to be able to drag/drop the waypoints in a flight plan, in case they get added incorrectly. Again, Foreflight (both app and web version) and Skyvector allow this and I use it quite often.

But it looks like a solid start to another possible web-based planning option. Thanks for sharing it!

You can do this in iFlightPlanner by typing in the waypoints yourself in the route box. You can also rubber band them on the sectional.

 

[JoeSelch]

I've largely switched to iFP, but ... Before scooting out the door for 6Y9, I found myself wanting a quick, big-picture look with METARs & TAFs all across the state of Michigan.

The Enroute Conditions on iFP appear to be limited to the planned corridor of flight.

What I wanted to know was where my outs were and weren't.

So, back to SV it was for a quick peek. :sheepish:

 

[admatthews]

I've largely switched to iFP, but ... Before scooting out the door for 6Y9, I found myself wanting a quick, big-picture look with METARs & TAFs all across the state of Michigan.

The Enroute Conditions on iFP appear to be limited to the planned corridor of flight.

What I wanted to know was where my outs were and weren't.

So, back to SV it was for a quick peek. :sheepish:

Checking the "Adverse Flight Rules" layer will show all non-VFR METARs so you can quickly see where the trouble spots are.

There are "Flight Rules" and "Worst Forecast" layers in iFlightPlanner for iPad that we could add to the web-based version if this is more of what you're looking for? Let us know!

Best,
Andy

 

[Palmpilot]

Do you figure RokaDave still has the taste of FlightPrep's junk in his mouth, or has the new changes helped him wash the taste out?

Either way, he is the reason we lost RunwayFinder. His decision to drop to his knees gave Flight prep the guts to push on.

I don't begrudge his decision to cave any more than I begrudge Geico's decision to pay ransom to get his computer files decrypted. It's too easy to demand that others fight our battles for us when we're not the ones who will suffer the consequences.

 

[JoeSelch]

Checking the "Adverse Flight Rules" layer will show all non-VFR METARs so you can quickly see where the trouble spots are.

There are "Flight Rules" and "Worst Forecast" layers in iFlightPlanner for iPad that we could add to the web-based version if this is more of what you're looking for? Let us know!

Best,
Andy

Thanks for the quick follow-up, Andy!

Unfortunately, "Adverse Flight Rules" wouldn't have helped.
There were a lot of green METARs that day and while not technically "adverse," I don't consider multiple layers of few and scattered starting at 200 ft working up to a ceiling of 3000 ft to be friendly flying. I wanted to know how green the greens were.