Foreflight vs Garmin Flight

Maximillian_Jenius said:
Sheppard Air, or Dauntless Software. I'm leaning towards Sheppard, heard a lot of positive stuff about it mostly here and IRL. I've never heard of Dauntless before last night, when my instructor suggested it.
Click to expand...

None - just study the FAA publications and you will pass the written exam. The score is mostly irrelevant, all that matters is passing them.

You almost certainly get a higher score using Sheppard Air, but memorizing the answers doesn't teach you anythin.
 
Maximillian_Jenius said:
Okay, let's add another wrinkle the the thread. Which written prep software is better? Either from experience (preferably) or opinion/word of mouth.

Sheppard Air, or Dauntless Software. I'm leaning towards Sheppard, heard a lot of positive stuff about it mostly here and IRL. I've never heard of Dauntless before last night, when my instructor suggested it.
Click to expand...
Sheppard air. I don't know why anyone wouldn't use Sheppard, it's a pretty much guarantee pass. I've used it since commercial all the way up to now studying for the ATP.
 
Maximillian_Jenius said:
Trying to decide between the two. My instructor has Foreflight and well, it looks awesome. I guess the decision really isn't between aesthetics. Or is it? They both do the same thing right, or does one do the thing better than the other. Or is it mainly opinion?

On the outset for me. It might just come down to Android vs iPad. I prefer Samsung and currently have a Galaxy 6. If I wanted Foreflight I'd have to get an iPad, as it is only an Apple product. So since I already have a Samsung Android product, does it make sense to get an iPad just for Froerflight? When I could just get a 128 bit 10.1 Samsung tablet, and get Garmin Flight.

I get a lot of mix reviews from people I ask in the real world. And it really seems to come down to Apple vs Android. And it seems that most pilots that I talk to have an Apple product, and thus prefer Foreflight.
Click to expand...
Head to Head? No Question. Foreflight!
The question really should be rephrased. "When will MIC/Boeing/Jepp BUY-OUT Foreflight and charge $200000/yr for Jepp-Charted Foreflight subscriptions?"
 
CoffeeIcePapers said:
Fltplan Go. Not the most visually appealing, but free georeferenced charts. Does nearly everything foreflight does. A huge plus for me is the fltplan.com integration of navlogs.
Click to expand...
You've pointed out the main thing FF is missing. I've suggested it to their leadership. I think they are working on it. The issue at foreflight that subsumes this one is their assumption of reliance on magenta lines. If they could integrate the old school (knowing WHA you're doing) with the new (doing it easily with no need to know stuff), it would be damned close to perfect.
 
Maximillian_Jenius said:
Okay, let's add another wrinkle the the thread. Which written prep software is better? Either from experience (preferably) or opinion/word of mouth.

Sheppard Air, or Dauntless Software. I'm leaning towards Sheppard, heard a lot of positive stuff about it mostly here and IRL. I've never heard of Dauntless before last night, when my instructor suggested it.
Click to expand...
With Sheppard, you won't learn a GD thing, but unless you're a troglodyte, you'll pass. Everything else is somewhat different.
 
Crop Duster said:
With Sheppard, you won't learn a GD thing, but unless you're a troglodyte, you'll pass. Everything else is somewhat different.
Click to expand...
You can learn from Sheppard. I don't understand this argument. After using Gleim or most study prep softwares you REALLY won't learn anything. Literally Gleim has explanations "Answer A is incorrect because the correct is B" wtf?

The explanations Sheppard has is great with amazing references from books I've never heard of. Now the preferred study method Sheppard has you won't learn much, just memorize. You don't have to use that study method and you can do it old fashioned and learn every question if you have the time.

Also, I don't know why people are so defensive to learn these written questions. I know they're trying to improve these writtens to make them better and more realistic but I haven't seen it. Just pay your money, take the test and call it a day. I don't think those tests make you any better of a pilot by learning the FAA tricks on cross country planning or Microwave Landing Systems.
 
Roger Roger said:
Why would you need to? If it's only mounted in a plastic tray it's not like it's permanently installed. That's the way our Feds look at it anyway.
Click to expand...

Depends on the FSDO. The one near Houston was red tagging aircraft that installed the AirGizmo Garmin x96 docks, don't know if they have relaxed that standard. On the West coast no issues.
 
tcco94 said:
You can learn from Sheppard. I don't understand this argument. After using Gleim or most study prep softwares you REALLY won't learn anything. Literally Gleim has explanations "Answer A is incorrect because the correct is B" wtf?
Click to expand...

God forbid one should look up the *reasons* A is incorrect.

The explanations Sheppard has is great with amazing references from books I've never heard of. Now the preferred study method Sheppard has you won't learn much, just memorize. You don't have to use that study method and you can do it old fashioned and learn every question if you have the time.
Click to expand...

Sheppard simply cites the relevant section from the particular FAA publication. They will add their color commentary on a question if they feel it is relevant. So does Dauntless, and in the same way. Books you've never heard of? I've never, ever seen a citation in Sheppard that wasn't an FAA publication. These are the same people who encourage you to try and memorize unfamiliar questions after a test and call or email them after your test to ensure they get it into the study curriculum.

I've used both Dauntless and Sheppard, by the way. Sheppard gets one tiny edge for setting up a study process that Dauntless doesn't, but that process can be applied to both. Dauntless has a superior user interface and better flexibility on how you use their software. Sheppard has some silly ideas about how people use software, in my opinion.

Also, I don't know why people are so defensive to learn these written questions. I know they're trying to improve these writtens to make them better and more realistic but I haven't seen it. Just pay your money, take the test and call it a day. I don't think those tests make you any better of a pilot by learning the FAA tricks on cross country planning or Microwave Landing Systems.
Click to expand...

This is a matter of debate, in my opinion, best left to FSDOs and DPEs. It's stuff we need to learn one way or another. The validity of the subject matter is up to those guys.

@drunkenbeagle made the most salient point - if you study the FAA pubs, you will learn the material for the writtens. All Sheppard and Dauntless and everyone else do is provide context and organize the information in more accessible ways.

My own experience: I find that studying for the writtens forces me into an independent study path so that I understand WHY particular answers are correct or not. I was never a good student and I don't have great study habits - the writtens have frequently provided me a good road map to follow so I can learn the how and why as well as the what.

I still feel like there is no substitute for a good discussion with a CFI who is really knowledgeable on a subject - I learned more about p-factor and propeller characteristics over beers in a DC bar (ask @hook_dupin ) than anywhere else. But it was the studying of the material that gave me the right questions to ask.

Does that make sense?
 
killbilly said:
God forbid one should look up the *reasons* A is incorrect.



Sheppard simply cites the relevant section from the particular FAA publication. They will add their color commentary on a question if they feel it is relevant. So does Dauntless, and in the same way. Books you've never heard of? I've never, ever seen a citation in Sheppard that wasn't an FAA publication. These are the same people who encourage you to try and memorize unfamiliar questions after a test and call or email them after your test to ensure they get it into the study curriculum.

I've used both Dauntless and Sheppard, by the way. Sheppard gets one tiny edge for setting up a study process that Dauntless doesn't, but that process can be applied to both. Dauntless has a superior user interface and better flexibility on how you use their software. Sheppard has some silly ideas about how people use software, in my opinion.



This is a matter of debate, in my opinion, best left to FSDOs and DPEs. It's stuff we need to learn one way or another. The validity of the subject matter is up to those guys.
Click to expand...
Seriously? So you're really going to suggest to a student buy a book with their money that has no explanations to teach them? Literally just tells you that's the answer and if you want to know why you should look it up? In what world would that make sense? That's a complete waste of money. Of course there are times where "looking it up" is needed and I encourage those times...but not spending my money to have someone say look it up but here is the answer. These programs are designed to teach you for the written and anyone who pays for anything that says "answer is A .... want to know how? Look it up". That's besides the point. We all know studying takes an enormous amount of time. Sheppard will give you the exact FAA publication (usually it's FAA, I agree) and PAGE NUMBER to save you HOURS of searching and studying. That's my moneys worth right there.

Also, yes just in the Aerodynamics section of the ATP written has referenced aircraft maintenance books that were not published by the FAA. The fact that I know this too is because the explanation even says we cannot quote this due to copyright material. Not sure why you'd argue that in the first place, have you taken all the FAA writtens? Macho much? The whole point of my argument is that Sheppard is a good software and those who claim you won't learn anything from it....baloney. It's got great references, great explanations, and updates probably just as good as any software removing and adding questions. Do most people just go the primacy route? Yeah, of course because most people know how pointless these writtens are....but if you care to learn every little detail of every question you have the liberty of doing that. Prices aren't unreasonable either. I don't know what your argument to me is...Sheppard sucks?
 
tcco94 said:
Seriously? So you're really going to suggest to a student buy a book with their money that has no explanations to teach them? Literally just tells you that's the answer and if you want to know why you should look it up? In what world would that make sense? That's a complete waste of money. Of course there are times where "looking it up" is needed and I encourage those times...but not spending my money to have someone say look it up but here is the answer. These programs are designed to teach you for the written and anyone who pays for anything that says "answer is A .... want to know how? Look it up". That's besides the point. We all know studying takes an enormous amount of time. Sheppard will give you the exact FAA publication (usually it's FAA, I agree) and PAGE NUMBER to save you HOURS of searching and studying. That's my moneys worth right there.

Also, yes just in the Aerodynamics section of the ATP written has referenced aircraft maintenance books that were not published by the FAA. The fact that I know this too is because the explanation even says we cannot quote this due to copyright material. Not sure why you'd argue that in the first place, have you taken all the FAA writtens? Macho much? The whole point of my argument is that Sheppard is a good software and those who claim you won't learn anything from it....baloney. It's got great references, great explanations, and updates probably just as good as any software removing and adding questions. Do most people just go the primacy route? Yeah, of course because most people know how pointless these writtens are....but if you care to learn every little detail of every question you have the liberty of doing that. Prices aren't unreasonable either. I don't know what your argument to me is...Sheppard sucks?
Click to expand...

Super emotional response. No one's attacking you, man.

Looking things up is a good way to reinforce learning.

The FAA publications are free.

I didn't say Sheppard sucks.
 
killbilly said:
Super emotional response. No one's attacking you, man.

Looking things up is a good way to reinforce learning.

The FAA publications are free.

I didn't say Sheppard sucks.
Click to expand...
I'm not taking your responses personal but I do think Sheppard gets a rather bad wrap around the industry. Sorry to type emotionally.
 
fholbert said:
Depends on the FSDO. The one near Houston was red tagging aircraft that installed the AirGizmo Garmin x96 docks, don't know if they have relaxed that standard. On the West coast no issues.
Click to expand...
Did the docks have a charger built in? The air gizmos iPad dock is nothing more than a piece of plastic with some clips that hold the iPad. As long as you don't modify primary structure to put it in its not even a major alteration. Then you power it with a TSOd USB port and you're good to go. Done this mod on 4 135 airplanes and not heard a peep other that they want the iPad's placards as not for navigation.
 
Never used Garmin. Prefer Foreflight over JeppFD. Compnay also uses MyGDC which is ok, but I haven't dug too deep into it.

I preferred Gleim over Sheppard Air. Never scored below a 95 on any test. Used Sheppard for the ATP and got a 99 so I can't complain about the results. Just liked the study methods of Gleim better.

To each their own.
 
I've used FF, Garmin Pilot, and WingX and prefer WingX. Perhaps not as easy to learn as FF but once you used it few times in actual flight you suddenly realize how everything (buttons, charts, menus etc) is exactly where you expect them to be. It just feels to me like WingX is built by pilots, while FF is built by some latte sipping hipsters who also design beautiful banking apps and video games but haven't been in the cockpit once.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top