Approach plates on pocket PC?

[paul kgyy]

I'm looking for the ability to just load and read approach plates on my
Ipaq. I know that Control Vision has their Pocket Plates, but with a
Garmin 430 I don't need geo-referencing, etc etc.

Anyone know of simpler setups available? I'd guess there should also
be a way to limit what you load by area or type of approach.

[Whit]

Paul,

Pocket plates does allow you to set filters to choose only certain
states and approach types. Also, the geo-referencing is a snap. Just
select geo-reference, touch an item on the approach plate, and select
its name from the drop down list. You just need to reference two items
and you are done.


I can't speak for other items.

Martin

[Mitty]

seattleavionics.com

I have not used their pocket pc feature, but the interface for accessing plates,
called "Plate Packs," is nice and clean. There is no subscription. It is a
one-time purchase. The plates can be downloaded directly from NACO, too, so I
don't think there would be a problem even if the vendor went TU.

On 9/8/2005 2:11 PM, paul kgyy wrote the following:
> I'm looking for the ability to just load and read approach plates on my
> Ipaq. I know that Control Vision has their Pocket Plates, but with a
> Garmin 430 I don't need geo-referencing, etc etc.
>
> Anyone know of simpler setups available? I'd guess there should also
> be a way to limit what you load by area or type of approach.
>

[Hilton]

Paul,

> I'm looking for the ability to just load and read approach plates on my
> Ipaq. I know that Control Vision has their Pocket Plates, but with a
> Garmin 430 I don't need geo-referencing, etc etc.

Why do you want approach charts on a Pocket PC? During our development of
WingX for the Pocket PC (www.hiltonsoftware.com), I thought about adding
that functionality, but figured it wasn't usable, arguably unsafe, etc...
Is this purely for referencing on the ground, or would you intend to use
this in IMC while flying an approach?

FYI: I could probably add this to WingX in 2-3 weeks if pilots really wanted
it and I could be convinced it was a safe feature to use. I put safety of
the product's use ahead of 'money to be made' - so being convinced about its
safety is important for all our new features.

Thanks,

Hilton

[paul kgyy]

My Garmin 430 gives me the approach routing, but does not provide
minimum altitudes.

I would normally carry paper charts for planned arrivals, either
purchased or downloaded and printed.

I'd like to use the ipaq as a backup in case I need to land someplace
unplanned. Also, I tend to carry the ipaq around with me everywhere I
go, but not paper plates :-).

[Hilton]

Paul,
> My Garmin 430 gives me the approach routing, but does not provide
> minimum altitudes.

Ahh, now that I would (love to) add to WingX in a heartbeat - MVAs! I wish
they were available...


> I would normally carry paper charts for planned arrivals, either
> purchased or downloaded and printed.
>
> I'd like to use the ipaq as a backup in case I need to land someplace
> unplanned. Also, I tend to carry the ipaq around with me everywhere I
> go, but not paper plates :-).

I'm still completely unconvinced that approach charts can/should be used to
fly an approach even as a backup.

Thanks,

Hilton

[Jonathan Goodish]

In article . com>,
"paul kgyy" > wrote:
> I'm looking for the ability to just load and read approach plates on my
> Ipaq. I know that Control Vision has their Pocket Plates, but with a
> Garmin 430 I don't need geo-referencing, etc etc.
>
> Anyone know of simpler setups available? I'd guess there should also
> be a way to limit what you load by area or type of approach.


I have tried both PocketPlates and the Seattle Avionics product. Of the
two, PocketPlates is much better on the PocketPC because it displays the
plate in its own "lightweight" viewer--the Seattle Avionics product
relies on Adobe Reader PocketPC to view the plate (seemed like a huge
slug on the iPaq 4705). The PocketPlates update and sync operations
were much, much simpler. You do not have to use the geo-referencing
ability of PocketPlates.



JKG

[[email protected]]

Hilton wrote:
> Paul,
>
> > I'm looking for the ability to just load and read approach plates on my
> > Ipaq. I know that Control Vision has their Pocket Plates, but with a
> > Garmin 430 I don't need geo-referencing, etc etc.
>
> Why do you want approach charts on a Pocket PC? During our development of
> WingX for the Pocket PC (www.hiltonsoftware.com), I thought about adding
> that functionality, but figured it wasn't usable, arguably unsafe, etc...
> Is this purely for referencing on the ground, or would you intend to use
> this in IMC while flying an approach?

Usable is in the eye of the beholder- as the Pocket PC screens get
bigger (and less pocket-able) I'm starting to find I can actually read
a plate displayed on one. So, instead of hanging the paper plate on the
yoke, you call it up on the PPC, and a little dot shows where you are.
Nice situational awareness gizmo. Primary navigation tool? No way.

-cwk.

[Hilton]

cwk wrote:
> Nice situational awareness gizmo. Primary navigation tool? No way.

OK, I can agree with that. Thanks for the post. That includes a GPS etc.
I find it highly 'optimistic' that pilot would use a Pocket PC's instrument
chart in flight as their primary which is what most pilot tend to say; e.g.
"I don't always have my paper charts", or "This is cheaper", etc...

Hilton

[Jonathan Goodish]

In article >,
"Hilton" > wrote:
> > Nice situational awareness gizmo. Primary navigation tool? No way.
>
> OK, I can agree with that. Thanks for the post. That includes a GPS etc.
> I find it highly 'optimistic' that pilot would use a Pocket PC's instrument
> chart in flight as their primary which is what most pilot tend to say; e.g.
> "I don't always have my paper charts", or "This is cheaper", etc...


With PocketPlates and the Seattle Avionics products, you can print the
plates for your destination and alternates as part of your pre-flight
planning. If you find yourself in a pinch during the flight, you can
always pull the information off of the plate on the PocketPC. Printed
or not, I certainly don't stare at the plate during the approach--I pull
off the important information and focus on flying the airplane.



JKG

[[email protected]]

Jonathan Goodish wrote:
> In article >,
> "Hilton" > wrote:
> > > Nice situational awareness gizmo. Primary navigation tool? No way.
> >
> > OK, I can agree with that. Thanks for the post. That includes a GPS etc.
> > I find it highly 'optimistic' that pilot would use a Pocket PC's instrument
> > chart in flight as their primary which is what most pilot tend to say; e.g.
> > "I don't always have my paper charts", or "This is cheaper", etc...
>
> With PocketPlates and the Seattle Avionics products, you can print the
> plates for your destination and alternates as part of your pre-flight
> planning.

Considering that most people lose more money in their couch every 56
days than it costs for a set of NACO plates, I keep a complete set in
my bag no matter what. Cheap insurance I think.

-cwk.

[Paul Tomblin]

In a previous article, said:
>Considering that most people lose more money in their couch every 56
>days than it costs for a set of NACO plates, I keep a complete set in
>my bag no matter what. Cheap insurance I think.

You lose $4 x 24 books = $96 every 56 days? I think you need to invest in
better pockets.


--
Paul Tomblin > http://xcski.com/blogs/pt/
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we
are to stand by the president, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and
servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." -- Teddy Roosevelt

[Mitty]

On 9/10/2005 11:44 AM, wrote the following:
> Jonathan Goodish wrote:
>
>>In article >,
>> "Hilton" > wrote:
>>
>>>>Nice situational awareness gizmo. Primary navigation tool? No way.
>>>
>>>OK, I can agree with that. Thanks for the post. That includes a GPS etc.
>>>I find it highly 'optimistic' that pilot would use a Pocket PC's instrument
>>>chart in flight as their primary which is what most pilot tend to say; e.g.
>>>"I don't always have my paper charts", or "This is cheaper", etc...
>>
>>With PocketPlates and the Seattle Avionics products, you can print the
>>plates for your destination and alternates as part of your pre-flight
>>planning.
>
>
> Considering that most people lose more money in their couch every 56
> days than it costs for a set of NACO plates, I keep a complete set in
> my bag no matter what. Cheap insurance I think.
>
I print the Seattle Avionics plates for places I might end up, but carry a set
of Air Chart Systems plates (quite cheap, sent once a year plus monthly update
bulletins) as backup. You can print the SA plates on nice strong paper, punch
them or not as you like, mangle them, write on them, lose them, and then just
print fresh next time you need the plate.

I also have defined a "plate pack" of about 20 plates named "metro practice
approaches" that I just print every time I'm headed out for practice. No
messing with the books or mangling my only (tissue paper) copy of a plate. Very
convenient.

[Jonathan Goodish]

In article . com>,
wrote:
> > With PocketPlates and the Seattle Avionics products, you can print the
> > plates for your destination and alternates as part of your pre-flight
> > planning.
>
> Considering that most people lose more money in their couch every 56
> days than it costs for a set of NACO plates, I keep a complete set in
> my bag no matter what. Cheap insurance I think.


That's not the point of having charts stored electronically. It would
be quite expensive and cumbersome to have the chart books for the entire
United States along with you on every flight.



JKG

[Andrew Gideon]

Hilton wrote:

> I find it highly 'optimistic' that pilot would use a Pocket PC's
> instrument chart in flight as their primary which is what most pilot tend
> to say; e.g. "I don't always have my paper charts", or "This is cheaper",
> etc...

With what are you comparing the use of a palmtop for plate display in your
determination that it is unsafe? A complete lack of plates? Or having all
the necessary paper plates?

Even if the latter, why do you view the palmtop as less safe? Size of the
display? Reliability of the device? Something else?

What would the electronic device need to be/do/have/etc. for you to consider
it at least equally safe as paper?

- Andrew

[Hilton]

Andrew wrote:
> Hilton wrote:
>
> > I find it highly 'optimistic' that pilot would use a Pocket PC's
> > instrument chart in flight as their primary which is what most pilot
tend
> > to say; e.g. "I don't always have my paper charts", or "This is
cheaper",
> > etc...
>
> With what are you comparing the use of a palmtop for plate display in your
> determination that it is unsafe? A complete lack of plates? Or having
all
> the necessary paper plates?
>
> Even if the latter, why do you view the palmtop as less safe? Size of the
> display? Reliability of the device? Something else?
>
> What would the electronic device need to be/do/have/etc. for you to
consider
> it at least equally safe as paper?

I just want to be able to see all the information clearly - simple as that.
During an approach, you're looking at the top for the frequencies, at the
bottom for the minimums and missed instructions, also looking at the chart
for step downs, intersections, VOR frequencies, radials etc etc etc.
Basically, I believe that during an approach, a pilot is referencing the
*entire* plate and I have to assume that the added task of scrolling on a
small device while in IMC on an approach is adding an unnecessary
task/distraction.

Hilton

[Andrew Gideon]

Hilton wrote:

> I just want to be able to see all the information clearly - simple as
> that.

So it's the display size and quality, yes?

- Andrew

[Mitty]

On 9/8/2005 10:03 PM, Jonathan Goodish wrote the following:
> In article . com>,
> "paul kgyy" > wrote:
>
>>I'm looking for the ability to just load and read approach plates on my
>>Ipaq. I know that Control Vision has their Pocket Plates, but with a
>>Garmin 430 I don't need geo-referencing, etc etc.
>>
>>Anyone know of simpler setups available? I'd guess there should also
>>be a way to limit what you load by area or type of approach.
>
>
>
> I have tried both PocketPlates and the Seattle Avionics product. Of the
> two, PocketPlates is much better on the PocketPC because it displays the
> plate in its own "lightweight" viewer--the Seattle Avionics product
> relies on Adobe Reader PocketPC to view the plate (seemed like a huge
> slug on the iPaq 4705). The PocketPlates update and sync operations
> were much, much simpler. You do not have to use the geo-referencing
> ability of PocketPlates.
>
>
>
> JKG

The speed issue doesn't surprise me. Seattle Avionics uses the MS "dot net"
framework, which is a huge slug. The SA product has been very slow on the two
regular machines I have tried it on as well. Especially in rendering the plates
for printing. IMHO relying on almost anything from Microsoft is a bad design
decision for many reasons, speed and size being the most relevant here.

That being said, I like the fact that there is no ongoing subscription cost.
That was the clincher for me.

[Andrew Gideon]

Anyone tried the Cheetah product? I know that it's much more than plates,
but I'm wondering how well, on their dedicated hardware, they've done
things like approach plates.

For a while, this was a non-starter for me because of how they retrieved
weather data. But they recently made XM an option, so I'm now considering.

- Andrew

[Jonathan Goodish]

In article >,
Mitty > wrote:
> That being said, I like the fact that there is no ongoing subscription cost.
> That was the clincher for me.


That's true, but who knows how long Seattle Avionics is going to be
around? Based on the published bio of its CEO, it sounds like he
basically specializes in starting companies and then selling them.

The SA product DOES, however, let you grab the plate updates from the
FAA instead of the SA server, which is nice.



JKG

[Jonathan Goodish]

In article e.com>,
Andrew Gideon > wrote:
> Even if the latter, why do you view the palmtop as less safe? Size of the
> display? Reliability of the device? Something else?
>
> What would the electronic device need to be/do/have/etc. for you to consider
> it at least equally safe as paper?


The PocketPC is just as "safe" as paper as long as you properly brief
the approach. The PocketPC is legal to use instead of paper.

Now, if you were single-pilot IFR without an autopilot, properly
briefing the approach on the PocketPC would certainly be a challenge, in
my opinion.



JKG

[Jonathan Goodish]

In article et>,
"Hilton" > wrote:
> I just want to be able to see all the information clearly - simple as that.
> During an approach, you're looking at the top for the frequencies, at the
> bottom for the minimums and missed instructions, also looking at the chart
> for step downs, intersections, VOR frequencies, radials etc etc etc.
> Basically, I believe that during an approach, a pilot is referencing the
> *entire* plate and I have to assume that the added task of scrolling on a
> small device while in IMC on an approach is adding an unnecessary
> task/distraction.


I guess I'm different. I almost NEVER reference the plate during the
approach. I brief the approach prior to commencement and memorize the
inbound course, step downs, and MDA/DH. I ignore the missed
instructions until I'm actually on the missed (hint: step #1 is always
CLIMB).

That being said, I do prefer to have the plate in front of me, and I
rarely fly single-pilot IFR. I usually have the non-flying pilot brief
the approach for me and then hand me the plate. Maybe that's cheating.


JKG

[John R. Copeland]

"Hilton" > wrote in message =
ink.net...
>=20
> I just want to be able to see all the information clearly - simple as =
that.
> During an approach, you're looking at the top for the frequencies, at =
the
> bottom for the minimums and missed instructions, also looking at the =
chart
> for step downs, intersections, VOR frequencies, radials etc etc etc.
> Basically, I believe that during an approach, a pilot is referencing =
the
> *entire* plate and I have to assume that the added task of scrolling =
on a
> small device while in IMC on an approach is adding an unnecessary
> task/distraction.
>=20
> Hilton
>
Hilton, I agree with your view, but I've always thought that Jeppesen's
"Briefing Strip" addition to the top of their charts was a good summary =
of
the information we previously had to be scanning around the chart for.
Where the plan view of an approach is displayed on the panel GPS,
the Briefing Strip supplies the bulk of all else you need for many =
approaches.

Exceptions abound, like multiple stepdown fixes, for example,
where the Briefing Strip isn't enough by itself, but is a big aid =
nonetheless.
One case of that is the VOR-DME into KASE, Aspen, Colorado.
Its profile shows four stepdown points, but only ALLIX is in the =
Briefing Strip.

[Mitty]

On 9/11/2005 7:39 PM, Jonathan Goodish wrote the following:
> In article >,
> Mitty > wrote:
>
>>That being said, I like the fact that there is no ongoing subscription cost.
>>That was the clincher for me.
>
>
>
> That's true, but who knows how long Seattle Avionics is going to be
> around? Based on the published bio of its CEO, it sounds like he
> basically specializes in starting companies and then selling them.
>
> The SA product DOES, however, let you grab the plate updates from the
> FAA instead of the SA server, which is nice.
>
Yes, that was a factor for me. I figured I was safe. But it appears that the
software talks to the mother ship to get some kind of database update before it
actually goes for plates. So that may mean that the thing dies if the mother
ship sinks. I hope to not find out.

[Hilton]

Andrew wrote:
> Hilton wrote:
>
> > I just want to be able to see all the information clearly - simple as
> > that.
>
> So it's the display size and quality, yes?

Yes, my primary concern is the display size and quality. Not so much the
size per se, but the fact that the pilot cannot see all the information at
once, quckly, without scrolling.

Hilton

[Andrew Sarangan]

Have you tried www.myairplane.com? They have IFR and VFR charts for
the iPAQ. I have used their software in the past, and it is pretty
good. Price is only $30 for a single cycle. I usually don't bother
keeping the charts up to date because I use them in conjunction with
paper charts.

[John T]

Mitty wrote:
>
> IMHO relying on
> almost anything from Microsoft is a bad design decision for many
> reasons

Now your comments are much more understandable now. You have no technical
backing for your comments, but since it runs on a MS platform using MS
technology, it must be a poor product.

That makes sense.

--
John T
http://tknowlogy.com/TknoFlyer
http://www.pocketgear.com/products_search.asp?developerid=4415
Reduce spam. Use Sender Policy Framework: http://spf.pobox.com
____________________

[Hilton]

Jonathan,

> That's true, but who knows how long Seattle Avionics is going to be
> around? Based on the published bio of its CEO, it sounds like he
> basically specializes in starting companies and then selling them.
>
> The SA product DOES, however, let you grab the plate updates from the
> FAA instead of the SA server, which is nice.

Not really. If the FAA changes one character, then the software vendor
(e.g. SA) has to update all their programs or have some way to tell their
program where to find the actual data. It has happened before, and it'll
happen again. Things change a lot more often than you think - a well
designed program hides this from you.

The way we've written the new *free* WingX Browser (Weather Service) for the
Pocket PC is to grab all the data on our server and make it available to the
WingX Browser clients. That way, if anything changes on the 3rd party
server, the worst our pilots will experience is a minor hickup while we
re-direct our code - no updates required by the user, in fact they may never
know anything changed. The key to all this is that you are dependant on
your software vendor. If the company get sold, goes under, etc, your
downloads will stop working sooner or later and you won't get any updates.

Hilton
FYI: By *free* I mean no signup, no registration, no fees, nothing, zippo,
zilch.

[Jonathan Goodish]

In article t>,
"Hilton" > wrote:
> Not really. If the FAA changes one character, then the software vendor
> (e.g. SA) has to update all their programs or have some way to tell their
> program where to find the actual data. It has happened before, and it'll
> happen again. Things change a lot more often than you think - a well
> designed program hides this from you.

I disagree. First of all, the optimal way to obtain the updates is from
the SA server, but they are compressed. You can obtain the uncompressed
diagrams from the FAA server. I can't recall whether the SA program
permits you to change the server address, but it would be ideal if it
did.


JKG

[Hilton]

Jonathan Goodish wrote:
> Hilton wrote:
>> Not really. If the FAA changes one character, then the software vendor
>> (e.g. SA) has to update all their programs or have some way to tell their
>> program where to find the actual data. It has happened before, and it'll
>> happen again. Things change a lot more often than you think - a well
>> designed program hides this from you.
>
> I disagree. First of all, the optimal way to obtain the updates is from
> the SA server, but they are compressed. You can obtain the uncompressed
> diagrams from the FAA server. I can't recall whether the SA program
> permits you to change the server address, but it would be ideal if it
> did.

I think that's what I said. :) I know SA advertises 5x compression, has
anyone verified this? Just curious.

Hilton