Approach plates on pocket PC?

In article ne.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

In article . net,
"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

"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.

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.

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

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.

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_s...veloperid=4415
Reduce spam. Use Sender Policy Framework: http://spf.pobox.com
____________________

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.

In article et,
"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

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