midlifeflyer

Yep. Too many things different from what is selected to display (including the aeronautical layer) to the zoom level. I'm not even sure what the complaint is.

Same.

It’s also in the general Settings area.

Perhaps turning it on?

Other than the track vector, those are the top three things I see the most wanted in SmartCharts discussions.

There's a reason I recommend people buy a tablet with plenty of memory even if they claim, "I will only use it for..." I have four EFBs (I've had as many as 6 at one time), the trainers for both Garmin and Avidyne, and a few other aviation apps before getting to the non-aviation stuff like document collections, personal notetaking apps, and downloaded videos and audio, all using about 2/3 of the storage capacity of my Mini. But I knew I was a "fill whatever space you have" kind of guy before I bought my first iPad.

I subscribe to both. I love the Smart Charts but I would not make a “permanent” switch from one to the other for a single feature. FF and GP (for iOS) are both excellent EFBs. For most of what people use, there is functional parity. Most of the differences lie in flow - how one gets to the features they want. Easy example is flight planning. In FF, it’s based on the map. Add waypoints, remove waypoints, look at the mods you did before, pull up procedures and add or delete them, etc etc etc. GP flight planning, OTOH, takes place on a flight plan page that has an interface and functionality similar to the latest Garmin navigators. One is not objectively better or worse than the other, but Pilot A may like the Garmin better because of similarity to their GTN; Pilot B might like the less structured FF method. If you are new to EFBs, a switch may not make any difference. But if you have gotten used to one or the other’s form and flow, the differences and learning curve might be a little frustrating, How much varies with the person. How I or anyone else use either or both is irrelevant to you. Best bet is do a trial and decide for yourself.

I guess that depends on your definition of "not so long ago." Before the current CARES setup, one could order a CD of the registry records for $10. $20 if you needed them certified for court. Turn around wasn't too bad. I still have one from 2007 and I'm sure it's not the first one I ordered. I wouldn't expect a discussion of ADS-B privacy issues in a response from a group primarily interested in title analysis and clearing capability, (even though that group is the one that always had access because they were local). I think the two issues are separate. I know people who have no problem with people knowing they own an aircraft but have PIA accounts to munge their tail number and ADS-B signature to keep their travel secret.

I was wondering about those issues.

I did a few demo flights using X-Plane. If you have been flying with a GTN navigator, you should find the flight plan setup very familiar.

I can see them tying a static timing item, perhaps a short range, based on user-selected airspeeds. Time to the MAWP is already available; has been since way before SmartCharts. It’s just the next waypoint in the sequence, but doesn’t take the place of a timing table when timing is necessary.

BTW, in addition to all the requests for additional feature, there is actually one thing missing. I would have never noticed it if someone else didn't point it out. There is no timing table for approaches which require timing. As a complete alternative to traditional charts, that's a bit of a surprise. Perhaps it's an assumption that everyone has certified RNAV equipment in the cockpit or will calculate it themselves

It may have some impact but I really don’t think it’s going to have a huge effect. By far most of the differences are feel and flow.

That's about it.

I just flew an approach in X-Plane with it. I didn't really notice it in the other videos, but when you load an LPV or ILS, it also creates a waypoint for the calculated location of the DA on both the Plan View and the Profile View.

There is one. Josh Flowers/Aviation 101 has a flight with it. I'm pretty sure at this point its fixed north up. There's no icon or button to change orientation which I would expect if it's variable.

I think the goal here was to have a chart like we have with a government or Jepp chart that we don’t overlay on the map, while decluttering it. “Declutter” and showing traffic, weather, obstacles, etc would seem to be polar opposites. But since it is all digital, I can see Garmin adding the ability for the user to add some clutter back in. (You can, btw, use it in split screen, with the obvious size and space limitations, but it’s not bad.)

I've been playing with it on the ground. Very impressive and I can't wait to try it in the air.

Nice example of a personal operations manual.

I’m always worried about a powerful magnet near the panel. Is that not really a concern?

I've seen that as well. In one, there was a checkride failure in which, after intercepting a VOR radial, the next task was a vectored ILS. The pilot blew thought the localizer. Twice before the DPE called it quits. You probably can guess exactly what happened. But while I agree it's a standardization issue, I don't think it's UI-related. Rather, I think there's a tendency to teach auto loading and autoswitching as the best way to do it. The result is that the trainee gets complacent and doesn't perform the basic tune and identify task. After all, the system will take care of it, won't it? Worse yet, that complacency gets translated into other tasks, mostly in the form of failure to do two things: Look at what's next laterally and vertically. Determine what needs to be done in order to accomplish that next step from both an aircraft configuration and avionics system standpoint.

To me, the bigger issue is that even those who learned on new avionics have trouble with them. I think I mentioned at some time that the final one on the list - clearing/bypassing the hold-in-lieu when cleared straight in - joined the list when three pilots in a row screwed it up. All three received their instrument ratings with a similar system (the task is the same with whatever you have). One of them also received their CFII in one. That's my favorite instrument training rant these days. The nature of instrument training has always meant a lack of real-world tasks. With VOR and ADF, there was a limited amount of functionality so performing those tasks was at least part to the standard curriculum. But with the new avionics, there's a basic proficiency problem when passing the instrument checkride.

I don’t think a request for priority is necessarily the same as declaring an emergency.

“Emergency” has become a click bait word on YouTube.

I wouldn't compare updating an iOS app with updating panel avionics but I know there have been issues with updating the panel, whether working with cards or wirelessly. Yes, Garmin switched to standard SD cards with the G1000 as early as 2005. The requirements/recommendations changed a bit through the years. At first it had to be "Garmin" branded SD cards but then it changed to the current "open market SDHC cards," although the recommend the ones they'd been rebranding for years - SanDisk. They still require a "Garmin" TSO'd card for Gx0000 units where the navdata card has to remain in the unit during flight, but those are also SanDisk.