The biggest pro for FF right now is that you get Jeppesen charts on two ipads for one subscription.
With Jeppesens app, you need two subscriptions to get the backup iPad.
Johan_M wrote:
#125
The biggest pro for FF right now is that you get Jeppesen charts on two ipads for one subscription.
Plus if you have an iPhone, it also has access to the Jeppesen charts.
Tried FF in “anger” today over 4 flights (for Project Propeller), 3 VFR low level and one IFR.
The chart with the auto-highlight feature works great for VFR. Finding which frequency to call is not easy, better than in Garmin Pilot but Skydemon nails this feature, which is important in Europe where you don’t get hand overs from one flight information service to the other all the time. There are a lot of nice features (like giving you the ATIS freq and the local QNH when you get closer to destination, warming you that you’re approaching a runway while taxiing) which while not necessary, shows the software has been done to make pilots’ lifes easier.
For IFR, planning and filing the route was ridiculously easy. However the transition level is set at FL180 like in the US, so my filing at 11,000’ puzzled ATC enough that they replaced my fpl and the one I had filed wasn’t used.
I would ditch Garmin Pilot in favour of FF tomorrow if I didn’t use the Database Concierge feature.
Full disclosure : I was enrolled in the FF beta program last year, which meant that by buying a full US subscription I had early access to European features. At the time there were so many things lacking that I actually never used the program in flight; so while I provided feedback, I was (understandably) dropped from the program, though it seems I still get some of the early features.
Do the audio warnings come out on a headset connector, on the Ipad, or are they available via bluetooth?
I am surprised the TL is 18000 because the eurocontrol autorouting was developed by a European company. There is no reason to file anything other than the validated route, and AFAIK all eurocontrol routes use flight levels (even if altitudes, using “A” instead of “F”, may be acceptable). This has been tested many times in years past; if you wanted to file a (useless for practical purposes) “I” FP from EGKA to EGMD at 2500ft, you would file it at FL025. Eurocontrol knows nothing about the TL and a FL is always acceptable for both validation and filing.
I can’t really explain what happened because FF doesn’t display the details of the FPL anywhere, it seems. But when I asked for startup at Exeter, the tower asked if I was fine at FL110 instead of 11,000’, and on landing I got a notification from FF that my FPL has been suspended because dit was never activated.
That’s really strange. One may well need to see the actual filed FP; it should be visible somewhere, or copied to email.
ForeFlight will generate a pdf document copy of the actual prepared flightplan on the ICAO form if the pilot wishes. The sequence the pilot uses is to select the Flights view details, choose a validated auto-route and then tap Proceed to File. The File view is essentially the flightplan form, but to obtain a pdf copy of the ICAO form filed out by the filing system, the pilot taps the Send-To Icon and then taps Export PDF. A PDF of the completed form is returned and the pilot may view it or send it to Message, Mail, Add to Notes, Print it, or Save it. The filing system will do some fix-ups to ensure correct formats are used and construct field 18 from the data the pilot supplied as well as calculating and adding any EET entries. What is returned is a filled out form.
Thanks NCYankee.
The FPL does have A110 instead of F110.
Peter wrote:
AFAIK all eurocontrol routes use flight levels (even if altitudes, using “A” instead of “F”, may be acceptable).In some countries, the base of all ATS routes are above the transition altitude and then what you say is true. But not in all — e.g. Germany has several ATS routes with bases below the transition altitude and you should certainly file an altitude if you intend to fly them down low.
This has been tested many times in years past; if you wanted to file a (useless for practical purposes) “I” FP from EGKA to EGMD at 2500ft, you would file it at FL025.You would? In that situation I always file A025. (And I do file such flight plans as they are not useless for practical purposes in Sweden.)
Eurocontrol knows nothing about the TL and a FL is always acceptable for both validation and filingIf that is true (which denopa’s example seems to contradict) there is some sense to it as the transition altitude varies between different places and the transition level of course varies also with the weather situation. With today’s rule that the transition layer must always be at least 1000 ft thick, it is very unlikely that Annn and Fnnn are both flyable and distinct levels. (The QNH would have to be >1050.)
Eurocontrol does not seem to know anything about the TL of the particular airspace.
With Achim of Autorouter on his 6th “vacation”, with (statistically speaking, on past record) about a year to run 
we aren’t going to get a more definitive answer. I have never heard of anyone flying in Eurocontrol airspace filing anything other than FL – regardless of the TL. However @mm_flynn might know more; he developed the FlightPlanPro router about 10 years ago.
For example for Biggin EGKB departures there was a specific reason to file 4000ft initially and this was always filed as FL040 TL is 6000ft there.
I suspect there is more to this however because if what denopa found was normal, it would have surfaced elsewhere by now.
The altitude or FL that you climb to upon departure will be as issued by ATC, and it will be A or F as appropriate. But that is nothing to do with what has been filed and validated.
I definitely want to test the autorouting feature, and it should be possible to do with a FF subscription and running the app as a browser app i.e. no Ipad needed.
