Foreflight Desktop Beta

Eek! The Germans!
tumblr_lq34bgrqZQ1qhtnb0o1_500.gif
 
Yeah, that isn't going to be accurate for a turbine aircraft.

Of course it is. Put in the correct average number, it'll generate the correct output. The only difference with Fltplan is that it lets you store the averages for all of the altitudes so that you don't have to put them in each flight. I agree that that's easier, but that doesn't make FF inaccurate. It just makes it a tiny bit more work.
 
That should start changing if LIDO catches on a bit more. Their product is far superior on the EFB end than Jepps.

After 9 months of using LIDO charts, I'm not sure I'd agree with you.

We're doing the switch to everything Lufthansa here soon, including dispatch releases. We'll see how that goes.
 
Of course it is. Put in the correct average number, it'll generate the correct output. The only difference with Fltplan is that it lets you store the averages for all of the altitudes so that you don't have to put them in each flight. I agree that that's easier, but that doesn't make FF inaccurate. It just makes it a tiny bit more work.
Ok
 
I'm betting that's just a garbage in/garbage out problem. People have taken the time to put the right performance data into Ptlplan, but they don't with FF.
There's not enough room to put garbage in to FF. We take from 800 pph to 500 pph for the limited altitudes we have in the King Air. Depending on the altitude it can be an hour of fuel off.
 
Eh, I've found that my own spreadsheet is more accurate for that than Fltplan. To each his own.
You have a spreadsheet that has winds and temps aloft imputed automatically?

That sounds like a hell of a lot of work planning a flight.
 
I had an example of the FltPlan/FF routing distinction in choosing routes come to light yesterday. Planning a flight to a new location on Tuesday. Went into FF and put the departure and destination airports. Hit the route box; there were no "special" routes, so it gave me airways. As usual when I see that, I went to FltPlan and put in the same pairs and found that the last five ATC routes were simply "direct."

Come to think of it, I don't think I've even seen "direct" as a FF route selection. Considering how conservative they have been historically, my WAG is that's intentional since it might not comply with the AIM guidance about a fix in each Center airspace.
 
I had an example of the FltPlan/FF routing distinction in choosing routes come to light yesterday. Planning a flight to a new location on Tuesday. Went into FF and put the departure and destination airports. Hit the route box; there were no "special" routes, so it gave me airways. As usual when I see that, I went to FltPlan and put in the same pairs and found that the last five ATC routes were simply "direct."

Come to think of it, I don't think I've even seen "direct" as a FF route selection. Considering how conservative they have been historically, my WAG is that's intentional since it might not comply with the AIM guidance about a fix in each Center airspace.

What do you mean by "special?"

When I do the same thing, it gives me a choice of recently cleared routes (which are frequently direct) or airway-cleared. If there aren't any recently cleared routes between two points, I can see it being blank. To give you an example - around here, I might want to fly GAI -> OXB. A typical (and common routing for that, due to the SFRA) is GAI - BAL - OXB.

But you can get an airway routing which is much more circuitous. FF has both.

I'm not saying one software package is better than the other; I have no FltPlan experience. I'm just trying to understand what you were looking for in FF.
 
What do you mean by "special?"

When I do the same thing, it gives me a choice of recently cleared routes (which are frequently direct) or airway-cleared. If there aren't any recently cleared routes between two points, I can see it being blank. To give you an example - around here, I might want to fly GAI -> OXB. A typical (and common routing for that, due to the SFRA) is GAI - BAL - OXB.

But you can get an airway routing which is much more circuitous. FF has both.

I'm not saying one software package is better than the other; I have no FltPlan experience. I'm just trying to understand what you were looking for in FF.
Exactly what I described in my post.

When I did the departure-destination pair for an upcoming flight in FF, all I got was airway routing. Nothing else. When I did the same pair in FltPlan, I found 5 flight recently cleared by ATC for direct routes.

It was just a follow-up to my earlier comment that, when it comes to this particular function, FltPlan still has a slight edge on ForeFlight. That's all. Just comparing a single feature to explain why I use both services. I've seen the same things numerous times before.
 
Back
Top