Shhhh! FlyQ EFB version 4.0 takes shape

Earlier today, I saw the first preliminary build of FlyQ EFB version 4.0.  Wow!  This is not just a new version.  Rather it’s an entirely new way to think about what an app aviation does.    The basic concept has been kicking around in my head for the past 2 years so it’s incredible to see it actually start to take shape.  Lots of work to go but the team is moving fast.  If you’re not already doing so, use the Follow feature of the blog system (right side of the page) to get notified about updates.

Like the Augmented Reality in FlyQ InSight and the Slingshot wireless data transfer system, we’re applying for a patent on it.  Unfortunately the patent isn’t done yet so I can’t say more but … wow is it great to see it materialize!  To be clear, version 4.0 is not just a new version with a feature or two 😉

Steve

 

19 thoughts on “Shhhh! FlyQ EFB version 4.0 takes shape

  1. Steve,

    I really think version 3.3 is FANTASTIC and personally I don’t see a need for more cool Gee Whiz stuff. Version 3.3 does everything I need it to do.

    I would prefer you guys fixing little issues that 3.3 might have instead. I think this is the best flight planning and flying app/EFB in the world, as it is.

    I agree with John above, “keep up the good work.”

    Paul

    Liked by 1 person

    • Thanks Paul. As you probably noticed, we spend most of the last 3 release working on fixing bugs — large and small — and improving performance, battery life, and stability. In keeping, v 3.3.1 is being reviewed by Apple now and should be released by them this week. It includes:

      Version 3.3.1 (10/23/18)
      + FIXED: Problem downloading ChartData for some states
      + FIXED: Weather Gallery and Local/Regional/National radar does not load
      + FIXED: Two crashing bugs when downloading ChartData
      + FIXED: Navigational database does not function properly after a monthly update until the app is restarted.
      + FIXED: Crash when changing login email account

      Version 3.3 (10/12/18)
      + Animated radar
      + Substantially faster performance
      + 2X better battery life / lower device heat
      + Refinements to ADS-B traffic display
      + Minor fixes

      Version 3.2.1 (9/20/18)
      + ADS-B traffic tail numbers and detailed target info
      + Lots of bug fixes and stability improvements

      Version 3.2 (7/26/18)
      + Slingshot: Patent-pending wireless ChartData for in-panel systems like BendixKing xVue Touch
      + Appareo Stratus 3 support
      + Fix for Send to Avidyne
      + Fix for iOS 9 screen layout
      + Misc. fixes

      Version 3.1.1 (6/21/18)
      + Fix sporadic crash at startup with certain map layers
      + Fix weather briefings not refreshing for offline flight plans
      + Fix minor layout issue with METARs and TAFs
      + Fix problem where fuel stops were added in some cases even when not requested
      + Reduce memory pressure with the Grid layer

      Version 3.1 (5/31/18)
      + Tuned for iOS 11 and the iPhone X
      + Full Leidos support
      + Automatic fuel stop planning based on price
      + Shows recently cleared ATC routes for IFR flights
      + Restores Avidyne ADS-B and Flight Plan transfer features
      + Other flight planning improvements
      + Various fixes and improvements

      Version 3.0 (2/9/18)
      + iPhone version
      + Flight recorder
      + Augmented Reality
      + Helicopter and Gulf of Mexico charts
      + Maps and plates for Central America
      + Various fixes and improvements

      Liked by 1 person

  2. I would like to see W&B template added to new feature that we can customize for different planes (as many of us fly multiple rentals)! Thanks.

    Like

  3. Hi Steve:

    We are using FlyQ for IFR flights ………….

    Does Fly have capability that includes TEC Route planning between airports)?

    If not, do you see a FlyQ future improve IFR flight planning?

    Suggestions welcome…
    Thanks,

    Keith Moore
    805-551-0983

    Like

  4. I wonder if it will have some sort of real time communications information, like indicating on the moving map whether or not a particular radio facility is within range. All of the data to determine that is already there, aircraft altitude, distance to the radio facility and elevation of any obstructions (e.g. the airport is on the other side of mountains or in a valley). For example, if a radio is in or out of range there is some indication on the map or in a list of radio frequencies for a facilities. That way I don’t waste time trying to call up the local weather (AWOS, etc.) at an en-route airport or trying to call an FBO at the destination when they aren’t in range. If they aren’t already planning that capability it would be nice to see it added.

    Like

    • I’m not sure why I’ve seen this question a few times — it’s been there for 6 months. When planning an IFR flight, the system asks Leidos what the recently cleared routes are. If one is a TEC route, you get a TEC route back. We do not try to do our own routing via TEC but I would think the actual Leidos routes are far more useful for such routing anyway.

      Like

  5. Everybody is asking for TEC Routes because in IFR Training we use the Chart Supplements. We get told by all the CFII that we should look at the TEC. I appreciate your input in regards to LEIDOS, but almost no CFII uses LEIDOS which means they keep going back to referring to TEC. I am not sure why its so difficult like ForeFLIGHT to include the option of all the TEC so that we can show and use them and be able to show our flight planning based on TEC and then as a backup use LEIDOS !!! Not sure why this is so difficult if you keep seeing the same question over and over again…

    Like

    • Hi Ramin. Thanks for the note. I admit that I’m not as familiar w/ ForeFlight in this regard but their Help topic says to find the TEC routes in the A/FD and enter those. FlyQ has the same system — go to Documents, open the appropriate A/FD, and find the Preferred Routes section. Copy the route as necessary and paste into the Search box at the top of the app. Then likely file the IFR flight plan — which happens to me using Leidos but that’s not relevant and transparent to you as a user anyway. Am I misunderstanding something?

      Like

      • A wonderful Good afternoon Steve,
        Thank you so much for getting back to me in regards to FlyQ and TEC. I appologize if I came across as rude and direct and I hope we can together find a solution. The information you gave me was much appreciated but it did not solve the problem. Let me give you an Example.
        In Foreflight if you look at IFR Route from KCRQ to KCCB it will give you the option to choose SANP23 which is a TEC on Page 517 if you look at the A/FD: Southwest.
        in FlyQ if I follow your instructions and basically Look on page 517 on the A/FD and on the top Search Box (btw COPY and PASTE is not possible in FLYQ) enter the information : KCRQ OCN V23 DANAH V363 POM KCCB , create it and then go on the MAP to look at the route, you will see that between waypoint DANAH and WOKRO, it will not follow V363 but rather just takes a direct flight. That means it completly ignored the route, does not fly over ELB VOR and therefore I could not file SANP23 as it is given in TEC.
        Please let me know if you wish to talk on the phone or if you believe I am not doing something right or if you just think the APP is not working correctly with the TEC.

        Thank you so much, and Please believe me it is out of love for FLYQ that I want to see it be the best APP for enthusiastic pilots like myself so that every generation of pilots after us can benefit from it and truly appreciate it.

        Thank you

        Like

      • Hi Ramin. We’ll have a look at why that didn’t work as expected but I suspect it’s because the autorouter tries to go direct off an airway once you hit a certain distance from the airport. As your example was very short, that probably happened. And no, you didn’t sound rude at all! You’re the customer — we LOVE feedback both good and bad (ok, good feedback is more fun to read but bad feedback is more useful).

        Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s