I use android and apple products so I like having similar product on different platforms. It's a nice feature but even as an instrument pilot, I've not once needed it.įltPlanGo has geo-referenced charts and plates, is compatible with almost any ADSB solution, and is loaded with a bunch of little perks. That said, syncing your EFB with a GNS430 at this point should not be a huge factor in my opinion. It should work with FlightStream but I haven't tried it. It's easy to try both and see which you might prefer, other than some learning curve on each.I'm a happy FltPlanGo user. ![]() I keep both loaded and updated on the tablets I fly with just as "app diversity" if one gets fubared for some reason. The differences probably come down to personal preference. I think they're both awesome apps, especially since they're both available free, and are both full-featured EFBs. It is still a solid, capable app from a user standpoint in my experience and has most of the same GA-relevant utility features as Fltplan, but it is a difference that sometimes affects updates, etc.īoth support free chart and plate updates for gov't charts and plates, airport diagrams, supplement info, etc. Avare is developed as an open-source project by enthusiasts and pilots and seems to be mostly change-driven by discussions on the user and developers forums. ![]() It does mean that they do have a revenue stream associated with those users for their premium services, which appear to be popular. FltPlan is professionally developed mostly for the charter/jet/turbine Part 135 world, so they have a lot of optimizations for that including how the app ties to their website for planning, logging, resource management, scheduling, data transfer, etc., and tend to keep up with updates mostly as it relates to that world, but is also still perfectly suitable for GA. Other than preferences that somebody might have with the displays, which I do find different, to me the main difference is the development background. Avares user interface and menus seem more intuitive to me, but that's just me. Creating plans, accessing data like weather, plates, airport info, etc., I find very comparable in both. In most things other things they're both very good and similar, and many people prefer FltPlan Go for filing flight plans. In Avare the traffic displays are less cluttered, the distance rings are thinner so don't intrude as much, and Avare also shows a heading and a track pointer from the aircraft, which I find very useful. I find the situational awareness display better in Avare which is why I tend to use it more. Some things are easier/better in FltPlan Go, some are a bit better in Avare. One was big enough that I went back to using FltPlan Go again (I do go back and forth once in a while), but have since switch back to Avare. It does seem to be mostly competently developed, the application is fully-featured and works very well, but there have been some notable hiccups along the way. So I tried Avare, which I like a lot, but it is open source and the development is somewhat.lets say less professional. ![]() I kept having the tail of my seat belt tap me out of the program without my knowledge in turbulence or something and then the next time I went to look at it and needed it it was gone. I used to use FltPlan Go exclusively but the Android version has one annoyance that I couldn't get past, and that's that if you tap the "back" button twice it exits the program. ![]() Anyone have any driving reason to use FltPlan over Avare (or vice versa)?
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |