Thoughts on Boeing’s Purchase of ForeFlight

Steve Podradchik Uncategorized

Today’s news about Boeing purchasing ForeFlight is very interesting and, I think, changes GA in a material way.  And it sounds very, very familiar…

In 2000, a little data company based on Denver was purchased by Boeing.  In the press release about the Jeppesen acquisition from 2000, Boeing wrote:

“We are delighted at the prospect of becoming part of The Boeing Company,” said Horst Bergmann, CEO of Jeppesen. “We’re looking forward to working together to create an array of new digital information services and to speed the movement of our existing products to new digital platforms.”

Today’s ForeFlight press release said, effectively, the same thing.

Before the acquisition, Jepp had been a very innovative company that significantly increased GA safety.  They were admired and respected by GA pilots.  But after the purchase, I don’t think I saw anything innovative come from Jepp again.   Of course, there has been plenty of innovation in GA since 2000 and, to put credit where credit is due, much of that has been because of ForeFlight (not to mention other innovative companies like Seattle Avionics.)  In other words, Jepp was once innovative then wasn’t.  Will the same thing happen to ForeFlight?  In fact, has it already?  In the past two years, many of us have noticed a shift by ForeFlight away from GA and towards commercial aviation.

One major reason for the success of ForeFlight, FlyQ, WingX, Garmin Pilot, and other apps has been mass distribution of the FAA approach plates and airport diagrams.  Before these apps, pilots certainly could choose to use the FAA printed diagrams over expensive Jepp charts, but the ease of use of these apps combined with the vastly higher cost of Jepp plates, definitely drove the success of these apps.  Now that Jepp and ForeFlight are together under one roof, one has to wonder if it’s in Boeing’s best interest to continue to favor FAA plates or to push expensive Jepp data much more strongly into ForeFlight.  Perhaps “nudge” people towards using Jepp data by increasing the price of the FAA subscriptions?

So what’s the takeaway from today’s news?  In my opinion, based on 25 years of business experience, I would expect the past to be prologue.  I would expect a slower pace of innovation, higher prices, and focus on commercial aviation.

I’d love to hear your thoughts.

  • Steve

 

 

82 thoughts on “Thoughts on Boeing’s Purchase of ForeFlight”

  4. George Santayana in 1905 said, “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it. And Winston Churchill paraphrased, “Those who fail to learn from history are condemned to repeat it.”
    No wonder Churchill quoted Santayana; history does repeat itself.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

  6. I agree with you 100%. Will this push you into getting Canadian content Sooner? The Civil Air Search And Rescue (CASARA) in Canada has completely switched to using Foreflight. Everything is geared that way. How will the sale of Foreflight affect CASARA. Something you can think about.

    Sent from my iPad on Telus network. Capt Al Blakely CD (ret’d) Piper PA-28-140 GNVV Based at Janzens (CLJ3) About 7 miles NNE of Lethbridge Many Happy Landings http://www.casaralethbridge.com http://www.lethbridgesportflyers.com

    WARNING – CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE This e-mail message and any attachments thereto are intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed and contains information that is confidential and may be privileged and exempt from disclosure. Any distribution, copying or disclosure is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender alblakely@gmail.com immediately by return email and delete the message unread without making any copies. Thank you.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

  7. Stay strong, your products are excellent, pricing and service and customer response are outstanding. You stay the same. History will tell the furtue of this latest move with Boeing.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

  8. Hi Steve and all,

    I fully share your thoughts. The combi of Foreflight and Jeppesen is bad news for GA pilots.

    NB I live in Europe, where Jeppesen has a poor reputation for customer service. They’re just not interested in GA pilots. We’re not where the money really is.
    For VFR there is a great alternative app called SkyDemon (innovative, very customer oriented and good value for money). What we really miss is an IFR app alternative for the too-expensive Foreflight/Jeppesen monopoly. One of the issues for the developers is the difficulty to obtain approach plates. Hope this will change one day.

    I used FlyQ last year for a XC trip with friends. We were impressed by the ease of use, the many handy features, the outstanding customer service and bang for the buck. Keep going like this !

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

      • It’s not going to be good for GA pilots for at least a couple of reasons:
        1) As mentioned, increased subscription costs

        2) There’s major push to unman lots of things that fly at all levels within aviation. Just look at FedEx and their use of the C208. Also google for “ALIAS” and Sikorsky. Pilots are being further removed from the loop.

        Liked by 1 person

      • It’s definitely not good. I work for a competitor of Boeing in the unmanned space. We had an occasion once to use/integrate Jeppesen’s flight planning tools with one of our projects. In speaking in person with their sales/technical side, it was quickly clear they were more interested in how many units and data services packages they could sell to both military and corporate flight decks. Our project was focused on an unmanned GA solution. Once they learned that, they saw no upside to potential sales. Support for our integration effort quickly waned.

        If I can take away anything, they’re going for the bigger potatoes and using FF to get a leg up in the EFB and data services side of things. Pricing will largely kill the GA subscription base. But more importantly, look at the historical trend of reducing manning in the cockpit. As someone who’s an ATP and CFI and a software engineer, I can say this with clarity – pilots are a dying breed. We are viewed as “meat servos”, “1/3 the budget for training”, and “the weakest link in the kill chain”.

        While increased pricing and lack of GA support will reduce the GA subscription numbers, eventually they’re coming after all pilots so that anybody can hop in their flying machine, click the “Goto” button, and the automation and data services provided on the digital backplane will do the rest.

        DARPA’s ALIAS program was always intended to teach the non-human, AI-equipped “copilot” how to fly an aircraft it’s never flown before in a matter of minutes, not months. This will effect all of us at some point. The only manual flying will be those small planes not equipped with such technology.

        It doesn’t make me happy to say any of this, but this is what I see going on as both a pilot, and an engineer reducing the need for pilots in the cockpit. It’s a weird position to be in as I definitely love to fly!

        Liked by 1 person

      • As usual, the Big guys cant leave our GA apps alone. Just a matter of time and it will be $ 500.00 a year for the renewal. What a bunch of crap.

        Like

  10. I once was a Foreflight user and happy until… until the deal with L3 com and then with Garmin. I am old and don’t like to be told what to do, lol. Thus in my all glass panel you find not a single Garmin instrument however wonderful they may be. I could not get an answer as to whether they would play with my Lynx so I discovered you! I admire the entrepreneurial spirit and the attitude of let us work with any and all. I have enjoyed my interaction with you and Keith. Your product keeps improving and offering greater services. I suspect working for you is hard but rewarding! Not making your staff risk life and limb to make it to the office in horrible Wx speaks volumes. I hope Jeppeson does not succumb to big corporate blindness and forget why Jeppeson became successful and why they purchased them.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

    • I followed Rusty’s path. Started with Foreflight and became discouraged with their moves to a restricted platform for my future ADS-B requirements. Went shopping for a new app and settled on FlyQ, it has been a happy relationship, +5 years, ever since. Fantastic app, constant innovation and five star support!

      Five Jeppesen binders with 1 year of unfiled revisions available..

      Ritch

      Like

      Reply

  11. Agree, but I would not have put it so politely. This almost sounds like the Federal Trade Commission should review the merger/acquisition for its market influence, being upward pricing pressure as a result of this deal.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

    • I am seldom considered “polite” in my opinions! Not sure if our little market would merit FTC review and, even if it did, ForeFlight has about a 55% market share (ours is 11%) according to an October 2018 AOPA survey so not sure if they would influence the market much. Personally I expect ForeFlight’s market share to drop — starting with the email campaign to non-FlyQ users that we just sent out 😉

      Like

      Reply

  12. I would consider FlyQ if Jeppesen approach plates were linked economically – I just can’t do government charts after 50 years of flying Jepps.

    Like

    Reply

    • Honestly, I get that but they just aren’t that different anymore. The FAA picked up a lot of Jepp’s features a few years ago. Suggest taking a look and playing with FlyQ for a bit to see for yourself.

      Like

      Reply

      • Sorry Steve, I must disagree. To hard-core IFR pilots that are intimately familiar with Jepps, there is no comparison. Yes, at first glace the NOS plates resemble Jepps, but the devil is in the details.
        Example: ODPs. they are right there with all the other plates in Jepps, first page. No need to hunt around in a different part of the Terminal Procedures pub.

        I hope you will provide a path for using Jepps with FlyQ EFB.

        Like

      • I thought the same way as George. Flying every day and flying as many as 15 approaches per day, I thought the NOS plates lacking. Not anymore. We use them with great satisfaction. I will agree it is an inconvenience to have to look for some items that are right on the Jepp plates. I find it a minor inconvenience. We have the Jepp plates and have been forced to use them as the newer equipment is integrated with them. I think the bottom line is, Jepps are too expensive for the average GA pilot that owns his own plane. Boeing WILL increase the fees One way or another for FF and Jepp. The big flight departments will clearly go Jepp and most likely FF. The rest of use will go Boeing at our jobs and NOS with other platforms. FlyQ is a very very good option. Now that I have Stratus 3i I am not forced to use FF. I always resented that!

        Like

  13. I’m personally sick of too much innovation from Foreflight. The first / early versions had what I wanted/needed: a nice pinch-zoom, seamless set of charts, rubber-band route planning, and a little picture of my plane on the chart. Track-up was nice too. It ran quite well on my V1 iPad. Then came update after update and it no longer fit on the V1 iPad. Upgraded to an iPad mini which was good for a while, but now even that barely works.

    Give me VFR and LoIFR charts, airplane position, rubber-band routing, and WiFi uploading flight plans to my Dynon on something that doesn’t take forever to update and require buying new hardware every couple of years, and I’ll happily pay $50/year for it. Throw in referenced approach plates and I’ll pay $100/yr. Otherwise, I’m going to stick with printing out paper approach plates from the FAA data and just type in the flight plans into Skyview by hand.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

  14. I never saw Foreflight as particularly innovative – there’s was the occasional good idea coming from them, but generally where I saw their strength was introducing really slick and good-looking versions of other people’s ideas. They also marketed themselves very well – the tie in with Sportys for example was genius. The truth is though, I think FlyQ and WingX can both claim to have introduced more features we all take for granted now. Their subscription model was also a big turn off in latter years.

    I do wish them well though – Tyson obviously was doing something right and it looks like he just hit the jackpot.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

  15. I agree with you, Steve. Decades ago, I used Jepp plates in my business and charter flying – hated those government fat paper books. Still do. Jepp is outrageous with their pricing – and not much to make one desire them over the government books – except … Avidyne IFD navigators. These are marvelous devices that are dependent on Jepp charts. MANY Avidyne users would appreciate an alternative plate vendor – maybe Seattle? There would be dozens of converts if an alternative became available for Avidyne users.

    Keep driving ahead with FlyQ and maybe it can now overtake the ForeFlight app in the business and commercial cockpits.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

  16. Wishing for very green pastures for Seattle Avionics with GA… I love my VFR package and know every other VFR pilot would share the same sentiments.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

  17. Wow, you have such a low opinion of Boeing for someone who named their last release after their first building….

    Like

    Reply

    • Good point. But I actually have a lot of respect for both Boeing and ForeFlight. Decades of business experience (including selling a company I started) and a belief in looking at history to predict the future makes exceptionally skeptical that this will end up well for GA pilots.

      Like

      Reply

  18. are you KIDDING me!?!? “In other words, Jepp was once innovative then wasn’t. Will the same thing happen to ForeFlight? In fact, has it already?”

    WHAT!?!? foreflight has had 11 releases in the last year with new features in each one, Flyq has had just 5 and they were lame! Oh wow stratus 3 support, what an innovation. these are the sad words of someone crying sour grapes bc their competitor got a payday and they didnt. sorry buddy. Don’t drag them down…. work harder!!!

    Like

    Reply

    • Thanks for writing, Ed.

      Sour grapes? Anything but. I emailed Tyson this morning (we’ve worked together in the past when Seattle Avionics provided geo-ref plates to ForeFlight) and sincerely congratulated him and wished him the best. He graciously replied. Heck, if anything, I’m quite certain this move helps FlyQ so it’s good for SA, too.

      I won’t debate who has been more innovative in the past year although I think Augmented Reality, Slingshot, routing based on ATC clearances + fuel price optimization + altitude optimization, the forthcoming v4 visual logbook, and several other features we added are WAY more innovative but that’s up to you to decide.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

  19. Steve,
    The news this morning left me glad that I have a FlyQ subscription to go with my Foreflight. I have used both, but was more comfortable with Foreflight because I had used it for so long, but I had noticed a trend towards larger aircraft and commercial operations. I will be diving deeper into FlyQ now, and may give up my Foreflight Subscription.

    Like

    Reply

    • Thank Scott. Yes, I noticed that, too, and commented on it recently. From the mass of feedback I’ve received today, you’re not alone to think that way. Believe me, we’ll be working hard to make switching easy. For example, FlyQ EFB v 4.0 (almost ready) includes a super-powerful visual logbook feature. It will be able to import many existing logbook formats, not the least of which will be from the ForeFlight logbook. In the meantime, I might also suggest reviewing some of the 70+ videos we have on YouTube. https://youtube.com/FlyQEFB

      Like

      Reply

      • How long until V4.0? I liked the preview last year and thought it was almost ready for launch then.

        Like

      • Hi Edward. We hope to ship it or at least be very close by Sun n Fun (April). Working VERY hard on it. Been improving the performance of the new system a lot and doing a lot of work re: reporting graphs and tables and CFI endorsements. Almost ready for beta!

        Like

  20. So this is news to me. I recently bought a Scout which only works with Foreflight, will this be incorporated into FlyQ EFB if I purchase it on my next subscription coming up this summer?

    Like

    Reply

    • ForeFlight likes to get people locked into their app by getting ADS-B makers to be exclusive to them so the Scout and the early Stratus boxes were ForeFlight only. The Stratus 3 is open as are virtually all other ADS-B systems. We support more than 20 — essentially everything open. Suggest selling the Scout and getting a Merlin. The Merlin has better antennas, a dual channel receiver, a WAAS GPS, and an AHRS so it’s a much more capable unit. And it works with virtually all apps so you’re not locked into FlyQ.

      Like

      Reply

      • Yeah, Appareo, manufacturer of Stratus devices, had to open up their compatibility because Foreflight released their own device.

        Like

  21. So, if becoming part of Boeing means you stop innovating then this is a chance for others who do innovate to grab market share.

    While you are supporting the GA community, please don’t forget the simulator community is also growing and this is another great market for you.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

  22. I had tried FlyQ a few years ago and was impressed, but ended up using Foreflight. At the time, I felt the interface was easier. With more and more releases, Foreflight has become more cumbersome. This press release alarms me a little, and am considering what the future may hold for me as far as the app I use. Is the Stratus 2s compatible with FlyQ? Or do I have to spend more $$$ to get a 3? Tired of the endless spending. What can you offer?

    Like

    Reply

    • Hi Shell. Sadly the Stratus 2 only works w/ ForeFlight. It’s easy to sell and get a 3 and think Appareo even has a tradein. Or sell it and get a Merlin for $249 or some other Stratux and pocket the difference between selling the 2 and the Merlin. Of course the Merlin works w/ all apps (well, except Garmin)

      Like

      Reply

      • How about positioning the Merlin. Flat as shown? On it’s side? Couldn’t find any info.

        Like

      • You can position it however you like. The Settings page for the device let you specify the orientation for the AHRS. 3rd parties sell mounting brackets if you want to mount it vertically on a window, for example.

        Like

  23. My lifetime subscription to data in FlyQ is looking better and better each day. I think FlyQ is a very good product but I usually use Foreflight. The fact that I have a lifetime subscription to FlyQ but still pay for Foreflight Pro Plus should tell you something. I’d really like to see FlyQ pick up the pace a little bit with innovative enhancements that really make FlyQ better and shy away from gimmicky enhancements. Best of luck. I think the purchase of FF by Boeing is a real opportunity for FlyQ.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

  24. I think a comglomerate like Boeing has only one interest and that is airlines and corporate aviation.
    With corporations paying upwards beyond 5000.00 per year for nav data coverage it is ridiculous to think that Foreflight would remain a viable product for us general aviation pilots

    Than you Steve for stepping up to the plate wit FlyQ

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

  25. I’ve used 3 nav platforms over the years starting with Seattle Avionics before there was FlyQ as a web based flight planning tool. Ranking the 3 puts FlyQ as an easy favorite, with FF close behind and Garmin Pilot in 3rd. When I upgraded my panel in my experimental, I went with the G3x/625 combo. Wanting to take advantage of Connext I started using Garmin Pilot and found it adequate but not intuitive. Unfortunately, FlyQ doesn’t connect with Garmin and, surprisingly, an email to Garmin from me didn’t change that… :-O I am not an engineer and don’t see why FF can work through Connext but not FlyQ. In a perfect situation, I would surely be using the”Q” rather than the others and very much appreciate the convenience of seamlessly altering flight plans in one platform and seeing the change on all instantly. In IFR that’s one less cockpit task to do. Until then, It will be FF over Pilot wishing for FlyQ.

    Like

    Reply

    • There is no technical reason why FlyQ cannot talk to Garmin devices. We work with EVERY OTHER ADS-B and panel systems out there. See https://www.seattleavionics.com/SupportedADSB.aspx

      The reason we can’t work with them is very simple — they won’t allow it. On iOS, Bluetooth device makers (Garmin uses BT not WiFi to connect) must specifically list apps that they allow to access their hardware. Garmin refuses to allow it. It’s that simple. That said, you can easily use FlyQ Online to transfer flight plans, via an SD card, from FlyQ to the Garmin. Have you tried that?

      Like

      Reply

      • I didn’t know that but I’ll try it! Thanks for the explanation and tip. I’m not sure what Garmin has to gain by singling out SA to limit access but allowing FF. I guess there must be a monetary component involved. In any event, I will continue to keep my fingers crossed and ready to re-subscribe when there is compatibility.

        Like

      • Garmin claims that it costs them $ to support apps and they already sell as many boxes as they can make. The real reason, I think, is simply that we’re already beating them in marketshare by 25% (AOPA survey in Oct). They really had no choice but to support ForeFlight but they are not very motivated to be open and play w/ the other kids. Good people at Garmin but corporate culture does not seem to encourage open standards.

        Like

  26. Hi Steve,

    I have been corresponding with you for some time re: being tied to FF because I had a Stratus 2i.. I was thrilled to Buy the upgrade to Stratus 31 so I can use it on other platforms. I have been using FF for 9 Years and now need to make the change to FlyQ. I would appreciate a tutorial as to how Stratus 3i connects to FlyQ. Does it just happen or do I have to make selections in FlyQ to get it to work.

    I just bought the 3i and have not tried to connect to FlyQ. I want to drop my FF subscription ASAP
    after becoming familiar with FLYQ.

    I believe FF and Boeing will no longer serve GA well. I smelled this coming long ago and have been l looking and praying for a way out. Now I have it.

    Like

    Reply

    • Thanks Ron! To be honest, while I didn’t expect Boeing to buy them, it did seem that they had been moving away from GA to BA or commercial aviation for a bit (we even mentioned this in some marketing materials recently).

      Using the 3i is as simple as it is in ForeFlight (and like using any other ASDS-B in FlyQ) .. just connect your iPad/iPhone to the WiFi network from the Stratus 3 and fire up FlyQ. All automatic!

      Thanks, Steve

      Like

      Reply

      • Hope Seattle Avionis charts are going to get approved for use with Avadyne. I will never go back to Jepps

        Like

  27. Garmin has great people but they are mercenary in support. Look at all the people that have spent 3k to 5k to upgrade their 430and 530 units to 430w and 530w. Horrible cost. When they soon run out of displays the units will become paper weights. Not very nice of them to not maintain these parts . As a result, I will just throw away my 430 when it fails and replace it with an Avidyne 440. All the avionics shops I talk to say it is a excellent unit. Down side is serve for Avidyne is not good. Hope they can correct that.

    Like

    Reply

  28. I saw the shift by ForeFlight, but was baffled as to the “why” of them ignoring me. Three months later, they announce their sale. So, clearly in my mind at least, three months ago they’d backed off because they all knew the sale to Boeing was in the works.

    I don’t expect it to get better.

    But I’m grateful because I tried FlyQ for the first time this weekend and was thrilled to find all that I’d been missing with my loyalty to ForeFlight. FlyQ is much better for GA pilots, and I used to be Air Force and airline, so I know how FlyQ is better for the GA world.

    Like

    Reply

  29. Bigger is frequently not better. While my aviation friends have recommended Foreflight, I liked what I saw with your product and you guys haven’t let me down. FlyQ and it’s siblings continue to be innovative and they serve a niche in aviation that may not have the big bucks. GA needs companies like yours and if Foreflight wants to change it’s focus – OK. As long as we have companies like Seattle Avionics, we will do fine.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

  31. Throughout this string there is constant Huzzahs for FlyQ. I echo the same when flying in the USA, but have been let down as soon as departing for Canada and Mexico. I have friends who are happy with FF and part of it is because of better neighbor country coverage. The FlyQ VFR Mexico charts are a bad joke. The IFR Mexico chart is close to unusable but when I looked at my friends FF display of the same area it looked way more useable. FF offers foreign coverage. Example, nowhere could I find an important AD for Ensenada, but my FF friends had it. Caused me a 100 mile detour.
    Another example, flying to Toronto and all my download areas were green, then while enroute I discovered there were no approach plates and the airport was IMC. I had to double back, land, go to FltPlan and print out approach plates. There was no clue the plates would not be there in FlyQ.
    And yes folks, I know it is always safer to have printed plates with you, blah blah blah. But if you do real cross country you simply won’t have them all.
    I am a lifetime IFFR subscriber to FlyQ and very happy that I am, but may have to buy FF because of the poor foreign coverage by Fly Q.
    In Summary my present opinion is that FF has way more for the person needing foreign coverage. FlyQ is the best tool there is in the USA. I use it on my iPad and have a backupiPad.
    Thanks Steve,
    Cherokee 235 driver, 7100 hours.

    Like

    Reply

    • Hi Sam. You’re right about the Canadian coverage in FlyQ and something we continue to try to workout w/ Nav Canada (it’s the cost model they use that’s the issue). I do not understand the issue w/ the VFR maps in Mexico, however, as they look great to me and are from the Mexican government. Can you email the specifics of your issue w/ them to support@seattleavionics.com?

      Like

      Reply

  32. As a user of both FF and the Jepp EFB I can tell you that the Jepp/Boeing EFB is junk compared to FF. The only improvement in the Boeing product came than FF started helping the Boeing team. And that was on AP the airline side! My biggest fear is that FF will wither and die, and unless a worthy competitor comes along, the Jepp EFB will have no reason to improve. It is a sad day.

    Like

    Reply

  33. As a lifetime FLyQsubscription holder I am cautiously optomistic. Cautious, as it’s a slow motion market when it comes to change and way too territorial. And that’s really annoying to the end user (GA) when considering all the monies invovlved on both sides; production monies spent and user purchases. No reason for it to be that slow to get improvements, cross company cooperation etc.

    Hoping that the decreasing support of FF for GA pilots will result in increased interest in FLYQ ( read -sales/dollars) so that FlyQ can expand, increase development of and keep up with the ever increasing growth of panel innovations. ( please start with drop down terrain/ profile views of flt plans) please review what so many people liked about FF and adapt those differences into FLYQ. THAT would corner the market but more importantly serve GA the best.

    There are many companies developing groundbreaking equipment to replacement steam powered gauges to ‘ glass’ gauges. These may be able to, should be able to be integrated into an EFB.

    I for one would like to see how things could work smoother in the modestly priced world of “panel upgrades” for my 50 yr old Cessna. I see EFB’s playing a big part in this for the future.

    (And why can’t I click “like” on any post above without a wordpress webpage opening telling me to open an account? Very annoying.)

    Like

    Reply

  34. In the words of the great Maharishi Yogi (of Berra) “It’s deja vu all over again” I was a long time full US Jeppesen paper subscriber until they were bought by Boeing and became priced out of the market. I went back to the NOS charts by necessity as I am solely a GA single engine pilot.

    Not only that but Jeppesen has a lock on the data bases which are installed in Bendix King, Avidyne, and other aircraft panel mount avionics thereby requiring multiple purchases of the same database! (Avidyne. Are you listening?) As with yourselves and the commenters, once the honeymoon is over I suspect the prices to rise as well.

    Like

    Reply

  35. Steve, I appreciate your comments on the Boeing acquisition of Foreflight. I’ve tried FlyQ in the past but frankly found the Stratus alternatives difficult to work with (I’ve tried 2). Well this news has prompted me to spring for the Stratus 3 upgrade and it works well with FlyQ. Thanks for continuing to improve your product and your dedication to the GA community.

    Like

    Reply

  36. My previous post (curiously not in the above string…) about FF’s future now being questionable now leaves (appears to leave) a gap in EFB services for GA. A perfect opportunity for SA/FlyQ to fill that void. But, Merely being avaialable as a product will not completely fill that void, A concerted effort to understand the platform differences and continued development will bring those previous FF users into the fold. And then we all are better off in the long run. As a lifetime subscription holder I have a committed interest in where this goes and how it all plays out. But seeing the largest EFB provider give up and sell out ( which the customer sees as abandonment) makes the flock nervous as a ripple effect.

    Like

    Reply

    • Quite agree. A gap is open and while FlyQ does most of the same things as ForeFlight (mostly better, I think) and many things that ForeFlight doesn’t do, there are definitely things that we lack relative to ForeFlight. We are addressing these roughly in the order that existing and potential customers rank them as adjusted by difficultly/time to do them. For example, a log book is one of the top 5 requests and is the key part to v4.0. A few others, such as the terrain profile you mentioned in your last post, are high on the list but are also available right now in FlyQ Online. FlyQ Online also partially fills some other holes with such as vastly better weather layers and a timeline / altitude slider. See the following if you’re not familiar w/ the wx in FlyQ Online: https://youtu.be/aH4QIggQny0 Our general operating procedure is to add a combination of features that are specifically requested by people (which are normally features that other systems have) and new features that no one else has. I think this combination is and has been critical to our success.

      Like

      Reply

      • Thank you Steve for the update about improvements being done based on user input, and in an order of importance based on input. This is really good. I did not know that kind of input was being used and I understand having to make a decision based on best use of time/difficulty for getting the biggest bang for the buck for workload and results. Thanks for the tip about the profile view in the online planner. I have used the online planner but not recently. I am not a regular user of online planners now, preferring to use the ipad for planning and FLYQ on the mini for everything just as I would in the plane. This, For me, is better for overall familiarity, competency and safer flying. I do use the “2 finger” distance feature in FLYQ that shows height info. Keep up the good work, best of luck.

        Like

  37. I’ve been using the Foreflight with my Stratos system and 2s in a helicopter, finding I spend too much time crossing T’s and dotting I’s to get what I need out of the Foreflight. Spending some time and actually ordering the FlyQ I’ve decided to order the Stratos 3 and cancel Foreflight. We all need to spend more time looking outside and flying our aircraft. These products are to make flying safer not more complicated, we don’t all have co-pilots to handle the avionics. We’re lucky to have FlyQ so lets support them.

    Like

    Reply

    • I agree. I was so very happy when they made the Stratus 3 so I was no longer locked into FF. S3i works great with FlyQ

      Like

      Reply

    • Instead of the Stratus 3 (at $700), might I recommend a Stratux portable ADS-B receiver/AHRS device. This is a Rasberry Pi based device that works very well. I have had one now for a year and it works fine.

      You can buy it as a “turn-key” for around $240 via Amazon. Or buy it a DIY project by purchasing separate components. Again via Amazon.

      The downside to Stratux is does not have built-in antennas or a battery pack. The internal GPS receiver offered at Amazon will work fine. I power mine via ships power.

      I will say that the Micro SD card with preloaded software is not a high quality device and I have had one of those fail. I flashed the software to a SanDisk brand card (flashing instructions are available on YouTube on “Crew Dog Electronics” channel) and have not had any trouble since.

      Just something to consider and no, I am not in anyway affiliated with Stratux or Crew Dog.

      Dale

      Like

      Reply

      • I switched to Stratus 3i from 2i.
        Stratus is a very excellent unit.
        Stratus 3 costs $600 and I got $200 trade.
        I like the 3i because it is ship powered with ext antenna. I do enjoy the traffic call outs associated with FF.
        I am not much for fooling with units that require battery charging.

        The units yo suggest certainly will do the job.

        Like

  38. I have loved and used Foreflight for years, almost since its beginning. The service and product has helped GA almost more than any other “partner” we have. I am very concerned that Boeing will be able to stoop down to our level and in the same way as has Foreflight. That’s why,. when I heard the announcement, my thought was “oh crap!”

    Like

    Reply

Leave a reply to Mike B Cancel reply