Electronic Flight Bag

[grunt82abn]

I tried searching this topic and couldn't find what I was looking for, sorry if it was already covered here on CAP talk.

Is there a standard program that CAP uses for a pilots electronic flight bag, I currently use Fore-flight, and was just curious if CAP had an across the board standard. Thanks

[vento]

There are no standards. From my own observation, the vast majority of aircrew use ForeFlight, followed closely by members using FlyQ.

[JeffDG]

FlightPlan Go is another good option.

It's up to the PIC to determine that he has all available information for flight.

[Panzerbjorn]

I'm deeply embedded in ForeFlight, but I've been very slowly migrating towards WingXPro as their full subscriptions are free for CFIs.

Like what was already mentioned, what EFB app you use is purely personal choice.

[grunt82abn]

Awesome!!! Thanks for the info!!! For school I use Foreflight on an iPad mini with a Bad Elf GPS chip which has worked great so far. I am just getting to know the program and was wondering besides Foreflight what was out there, besides Garmin Pilot, being used by CAP pilots.

[Check Pilot/Tow Pilot]

Hi Sean, I fly about 100 to 150 hours a year for CAP and ForeFlight has been a fantastic addition to my mission flying.

I use the integrated SAR features to great effect. Also the Logbook is an excellent addition that allows for Signatures and a flight photo.

In addition, I use a homemade 1090ES and 978 ADS-B receiver that connects over WI-FI to ForeFlight.

What is really helpful is CAP Flight Pro that allows me to do a Weight and Balance/F71 and upload that form to WMIRS. Sadly it is now only available to previous owners 😔

[Check Pilot/Tow Pilot]

I'm deeply embedded in ForeFlight, but I've been very slowly migrating towards WingXPro as their full subscriptions are free for CFIs.

Like what was already mentioned, what EFB app you use is purely personal choice.

Panzerbjorn, I'm at ATP in Vegas getting my MEI/CFI/CFII, and am also deeply entrenched in ForeFlight. I was looking at adding WingXPro due to their offering for CFI's.

How is the transition or addition to WingXPro going?

[etodd]

Hi Sean, I fly about 100 to 150 hours a year for CAP and ForeFlight has been a fantastic addition to my mission flying.

I use the integrated SAR features to great effect. Also the Logbook is an excellent addition that allows for Signatures and a flight photo.

Dittos on Foreflight. I think I was one of the first, its been several years. The more you use it the more you learn. As yes ... having the CAP SAR patterns included makes it a win-win.

[Check Pilot/Tow Pilot]

Hi Sean, I fly about 100 to 150 hours a year for CAP and ForeFlight has been a fantastic addition to my mission flying.

I use the integrated SAR features to great effect. Also the Logbook is an excellent addition that allows for Signatures and a flight photo.

Dittos on Foreflight. I think I was one of the first, its been several years. The more you use it the more you learn. As yes ... having the CAP SAR patterns included makes it a win-win.

Yeah I remember seeing ForeFlight Mobile 1.0 as a web page but was not too interested. When the app version as 2.0 came out I started using it in late 2008 or early 2009. Then I liked WingX better.

When I become a MEI/CFI/CFII I really need to know both!

[grunt82abn]

THANK YOU ALL!!! It's great to be able to reach out and see what CAP members are using.

[Panzerbjorn]

I'm deeply embedded in ForeFlight, but I've been very slowly migrating towards WingXPro as their full subscriptions are free for CFIs.

Like what was already mentioned, what EFB app you use is purely personal choice.

Panzerbjorn, I'm at ATP in Vegas getting my MEI/CFI/CFII, and am also deeply entrenched in ForeFlight. I was looking at adding WingXPro due to their offering for CFI's.

How is the transition or addition to WingXPro going?

To be honest, quite slow.  I keep 'running home to mama', so to speak, when I'm teaching because I don't have the comfort and familiarity with WingXPro yet that I do with ForeFlight.  I'll probably always be a ForeFlight guy, and love the app.  But I want to be versatile with multiple EFB apps to allow my students the choice that best fits them.  Right now, I'm very good at selling my students on ForeFlight, but not too keen on what I pay ForeFlight per year as an instructor to spread the gospel.

While ForeFlight and WingXPro do essentially the same thing, and both apps even have search and rescue functions, they just do them very differently.  My boss uses WingX exclusively, and has a hard time figuring out ForeFlight, while I'm the other way around.  What I look for in an EFB app besides its capabilities and price is how intuitive the app is.  WingXPro to me just doesn't feel intuitive yet.

[Live2Learn]

Foreflight Pro with synthetic vision ($174.99 annual cost).  I use the SAR package, and have found SV very helpful when flying in "VFR" smoke and haze.  I use a 2013 iPad on a Ram yoke mount.  It works well in a CAP 182.  I like the larger screen than the Mini since sometimes detail is important. 

[Check Pilot/Tow Pilot]

Foreflight Pro with synthetic vision ($174.99 annual cost).  I use the SAR package, and have found SV very helpful when flying in "VFR" smoke and haze.  I use a 2013 iPad on a Ram yoke mount.  It works well in a CAP 182.  I like the larger screen than the Mini since sometimes detail is important.

Cool, I use ForeFlight Pro Plus on a 2016 iPad mini as it seems to fit the right side of yoke better in portrait orientation. Here is a pic, and don't give me crap about the uniform

[Garibaldi]

Foreflight Pro with synthetic vision ($174.99 annual cost).  I use the SAR package, and have found SV very helpful when flying in "VFR" smoke and haze.  I use a 2013 iPad on a Ram yoke mount.  It works well in a CAP 182.  I like the larger screen than the Mini since sometimes detail is important.

Cool, I use ForeFlight Pro Plus on a 2016 iPad mini as it seems to fit the right side of yoke better in portrait orientation. Here is a pic, and don't give me crap about the uniform

You know durn well we can turn any topic into a uniform thread...

[Check Pilot/Tow Pilot]

Foreflight Pro with synthetic vision ($174.99 annual cost).  I use the SAR package, and have found SV very helpful when flying in "VFR" smoke and haze.  I use a 2013 iPad on a Ram yoke mount.  It works well in a CAP 182.  I like the larger screen than the Mini since sometimes detail is important.

Cool, I use ForeFlight Pro Plus on a 2016 iPad mini as it seems to fit the right side of yoke better in portrait orientation. Here is a pic, and don't give me crap about the uniform

You know durn well we can turn any topic into a uniform thread...

Bring it [emoji6]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JeffDG]

Foreflight Pro with synthetic vision ($174.99 annual cost).  I use the SAR package, and have found SV very helpful when flying in "VFR" smoke and haze.  I use a 2013 iPad on a Ram yoke mount.  It works well in a CAP 182.  I like the larger screen than the Mini since sometimes detail is important.

Cool, I use ForeFlight Pro Plus on a 2016 iPad mini as it seems to fit the right side of yoke better in portrait orientation. Here is a pic, and don't give me crap about the uniform

Curious:  Why do you have a different approach up on the iPad than you're flying?  iPad shows a straight LNAV, but panel shows you flying an LNAV+V approach.

[Panzerbjorn]

Foreflight Pro with synthetic vision ($174.99 annual cost).  I use the SAR package, and have found SV very helpful when flying in "VFR" smoke and haze.  I use a 2013 iPad on a Ram yoke mount.  It works well in a CAP 182.  I like the larger screen than the Mini since sometimes detail is important.

Cool, I use ForeFlight Pro Plus on a 2016 iPad mini as it seems to fit the right side of yoke better in portrait orientation. Here is a pic, and don't give me crap about the uniform

Curious:  Why do you have a different approach up on the iPad than you're flying?  iPad shows a straight LNAV, but panel shows you flying an LNAV+V approach.

The G1000 will still calculate VNAV "recommendations" for you even when it's not an LPV approach.

[Check Pilot/Tow Pilot]

Curious:  Why do you have a different approach up on the iPad than you're flying?  iPad shows a straight LNAV, but panel shows you flying an LNAV+V approach.

Good catch!

At KSNS the only approach for RWY 13 is the RNAV GPS approach with an MDA of 540 feet. However, Garmin provides for the G1000 to display an advisory glideslope as an LNAV+V approach.  This was allowed by the FAA in AC 90-107 http://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Advisory_Circular/AC%2090-107.pdf. 

In essence, the most basic line of RNAV (GPS) minimums is the "LNAV" line, meaning "Lateral Navigation". There is no vertical guidance, it's like a VOR approach, and can be flown without WAAS. Garmin (and others) provide an "advisory" glideslope to help make a nice, stabilized descent instead of the "dive and drive" that non-precision approaches typically resulted in. This was termed "LNAV+V" to show that an advisory glideslope was available and could be used for SA.

[JeffDG]

Foreflight Pro with synthetic vision ($174.99 annual cost).  I use the SAR package, and have found SV very helpful when flying in "VFR" smoke and haze.  I use a 2013 iPad on a Ram yoke mount.  It works well in a CAP 182.  I like the larger screen than the Mini since sometimes detail is important.

Cool, I use ForeFlight Pro Plus on a 2016 iPad mini as it seems to fit the right side of yoke better in portrait orientation. Here is a pic, and don't give me crap about the uniform

Curious:  Why do you have a different approach up on the iPad than you're flying?  iPad shows a straight LNAV, but panel shows you flying an LNAV+V approach.

The G1000 will still calculate VNAV "recommendations" for you even when it's not an LPV approach.

There are 3 different types of RNAV approaches.

LNAV only (on chart)
LNAV+V (on G1000)
And LPV

These are all distinct, although the you can have all of them on one approach, the plate shown is LNAV only.

[Check Pilot/Tow Pilot]

There are 3 different types of RNAV approaches.

LNAV only (on chart)
LNAV+V (on G1000)
And LPV

These are all distinct, although the you can have all of them on one approach, the plate shown is LNAV only.

Yes the +V is for guidance only.

So there are really only the following types of charted RNAV (GPS) approaches (Correct me if I'm wrong):

LNAV
LNAV/VNAV
LPV
LP
RNP

FAA Pub: https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ato/service_units/techops/navservices/gnss/library/factsheets/media/RNAV_QFSheet.pdf

[Panzerbjorn]

Foreflight Pro with synthetic vision ($174.99 annual cost).  I use the SAR package, and have found SV very helpful when flying in "VFR" smoke and haze.  I use a 2013 iPad on a Ram yoke mount.  It works well in a CAP 182.  I like the larger screen than the Mini since sometimes detail is important.

Cool, I use ForeFlight Pro Plus on a 2016 iPad mini as it seems to fit the right side of yoke better in portrait orientation. Here is a pic, and don't give me crap about the uniform

Curious:  Why do you have a different approach up on the iPad than you're flying?  iPad shows a straight LNAV, but panel shows you flying an LNAV+V approach.

The G1000 will still calculate VNAV "recommendations" for you even when it's not an LPV approach.

There are 3 different types of RNAV approaches.

LNAV only (on chart)
LNAV+V (on G1000)
And LPV

These are all distinct, although the you can have all of them on one approach, the plate shown is LNAV only.

Yes.  I know.  The G1000 will still calculate the VNAV for you even when you select or forced to select an LNAV approach only.  You have the option to turn the VNAV off, which you can see on the MFD along the soft keys.  Most of the time, I turn it off as it could be distracting, but it has its uses. The idea is to fly a stabilized approach using the calculated VNAV recommendations instead of a dive and drive style approach.

[Check Pilot/Tow Pilot]

Yes.  I know.  The G1000 will still calculate the VNAV for you even when you select or forced to select an LNAV approach only.  You have the option to turn the VNAV off, which you can see on the MFD along the soft keys.  Most of the time, I turn it off as it could be distracting, but it has its uses. The idea is to fly a stabilized approach using the calculated VNAV recommendations instead of a dive and drive style approach.

My response was for JeffDG, I know you know [emoji1]

Interesting that you turn VNV off. If you still use the autopilot then I presume you fly it using VS to set a target speed and power for a target descent rate.

I'm curious why you think that VNV is distracting as it seems that it would inherently have a lower workload with the AP in GS capture mode.

[Panzerbjorn]

My response was for Jeff as well. 

It's been my experience using the VNAV on a non-LPV approach that after you cross the FAF, the VNAV guidance disappears from the screen, which can be distracting in itself if you're flying the approach like you were flying an LPV.

While I'm in agreement that a constant stabilized approach is safer and more comfortable for your passengers, there are situations where it's more desirable for a dive and drive approach to get to your MDA, such as you have a rough idea where that ceiling is and that your MDA lies below it.  There are also some approaches, such as at my home airport, which have lower minimums on an LNAV only approach than an LNAV/VNAV approach.  See below.



So, like all things in flying, the answer is "It Delends".  I also fly and teach in an airplane that's equipped with an earlier non-WAAS G1000.  So, between the reasons above and the fact that I can't use the VNAV anyway beyond a recommendation, I often find the VNAV a bit distracting when I'm not actually trying to use it.

[Check Pilot/Tow Pilot]

My response was for Jeff as well. 

It's been my experience using the VNAV on a non-LPV approach that after you cross the FAF, the VNAV guidance disappears from the screen, which can be distracting in itself if you're flying the approach like you were flying an LPV.

While I'm in agreement that a constant stabilized approach is safer and more comfortable for your passengers, there are situations where it's more desirable for a dive and drive approach to get to your MDA, such as you have a rough idea where that ceiling is and that your MDA lies below it.  There are also some approaches, such as at my home airport, which have lower minimums on an LNAV only approach than an LNAV/VNAV approach.  See below.



So, like all things in flying, the answer is "It Delends".  I also fly and teach in an airplane that's equipped with an earlier non-WAAS G1000.  So, between the reasons above and the fact that I can't use the VNAV anyway beyond a recommendation, I often find the VNAV a bit distracting when I'm not actually trying to use it.

Very good, thank you for sharing!