midlifeflyer

Yes, but as M20F said, for that, IFR GPS is a replacement. That's why those approaches are being changed as the compass locators are decommissioned,which is taking place pretty much whenever one needs any maintenance. The only restriction on the use of GPS to replace ADF (or VOR) is for lateral guidance on the final approach course of an NDB or VOR approach.

..and even they are disappearing. the compass locator is unnecessary for the OM for an ILS. It might be necessary for such things as the PT or the missed, but even there, I've seen quite a few recent replacements of what were single ILS/LOC plates with ILS/LOC Z and Y plates with one saying "Radar Required" and the other "GPS Required."

I use ForeFlight but not on a phone (Android). But I am not looking for attitude-capable apps for my phone. My feelings about it, FWIW: I really like the existence of a backup HSI in case of a partial panel emergency. I had it on my Garmin GPSMap years before iPad was invented and practiced with it periodically for the same purpose. I have SV in Foreflight for two reasons: (1) Foreflight doesn't give me that backup HSI without it. (2) It looks cool when I show it to others. I can also see it as safety feature for VFR flight in marginal conditions (I won't say "scud-running" ;)) to keep and eye on those towers. Other than it's use as an emergency backup for an aircraft system failure (and periodic practice for that purpose), I only rarely open it up in flight at all. And I don't feel I need for a backup for the backup.

Yeah. One full-size iPad Only semi tongue-in-cheek. I'm planing on trying a mini for the first time this week (borrowing from a friend) although I have been very happy with my full-size iPad in the cockpit for the past ~5 years.

Thank you for the kind words. Let's just say that I'm not religious about apps and operating systems.

Probably not. The differences between the main contenders comes down to less than 10% about features, with everything else being the UI. And those have not changed much in ForeFlight, WingX or Pilot since they started. Since you opted for WingX over ForeFlight at the beginning because you found the ForeFlight UI less inviting, you are not likely to change your opinion after a few years of getting used to WingX. OTOH, the similarity between WingX and Pilot in the use of a home screen menu is likely to make the transition easier, even without the similarity of UI between Pilot and Garmin's panel solutions. But the connection between primary equipment and EFB is less important to some than you might think. One of the reasons for ForeFlight's overall success in the market is that a lot of people like its UI. A lot. That doesn't change for everyone due to cockpit avionics. In fact, I have friends who have Garmin cockpits started with Pilot for that very reason and are transitioning to ForeFlight now that Garmin panels and ForeFlight talk to each other via FlightStream.

Not sure how you are a lone "sole" (or what shoes or fish have to do with it; sorry, can't resist) when the only thing you are lone about is the choice of EFB, and they really are ultimately all the same in terms of their basic chart and map functions. The airplanes in my club have various types of Garmin on-board GPS from 430s to 750s. For charts, I'm using ForeFlight as my primary chart source, with an Android tablet EFB as backup. I will have used ForeFlight for 5 years next month and haven't had a paper chart in the cockpit (unless it was someone else's ;))for at least 4.5 of those.

Oops. That's "it is in the same category," not "it is just you!"

It is.

I haven't seen what you have in in the Bonanza pilots I've flown with when compared with any others. But you are giving a perfect example of what I was saying. The issue is really the phrase "no runway remaining" being taught or learned way to literally by some instructors and pilots. It really means "no runway remaining that is available for to land on in the case of a problem." That 1000 ft of runway from 600 AGL you mention will, of course, do absolutely nothing. To stick with the Bonanza, Vy at max gross for an normally aspirated A36 is 100 KTS. That's covered in what, about 3 seconds? And would require a 12,000 FPM descent rate to land on it even assuming assuming you can even slow down from 100 KTS to an acceptable landing speed?

There really isn't a conflict between these two posts. The key is "as soon as practicable." I tend to be a "no remaining runway" guy, But when giving training I've seen pilots thinking there is more than there is and delaying retraction more than necessary. Takeoff from a very long runway, following a "no remaining runway mantra" can also mean unnecessarily late gear retraction.

After some 4 years of trying different solutions, I'm pretty much a yoke guy. For VFR local flights, I'll sometimes just toss my iPad on my lap or use an MyClip but for IFR, I want my charts, especially my approach charts right in front of me on the yoke, just as I did when I flew with paper. I still use a full-size iPad 3rd Gen. Although I see some advantage to being in portrait mode, I've come to like mount the iPad in landscape mode I have a rotating mount that allows me to change the orientation without disconnecting anything). I've stuck with full size because I've had the sense that a minim would feel too small but the fact that I've started to brief approaches with only a half screen is beginning to lead me to consider a mini for the next purchase. Here's a photo of what my setup looks like in flight,

That is an excellent point. It's something we talk about during basic mountain training in Colorado. This, for example, is the airport at Glenwood Springs, CO (KGWS). The airport is in a canyon, the runway raised up, and you can see the Roaring Fork River (brrrr!) crossing short final (the photo is north on the bottom for some reason - the norm is to land on 32 and takeoff on 14). Even without a northerly wind, the sink can make things a real challenge.

Limiting it to Mooneys, 12,000 or 13,000 about 20 years in a C model along V611 in New Mexico on an IFR trip. As high as 16,000 in other piston aircraft. Haven't had a reason to go much higher.

Yes it does. I am kind of a ort of a computer guy. Even wonderful, pure, never goes wrong (LOL!) Apple products need a reboot once in a while. It's the first thing I do when thinks get a little funky and sometimes I do one just for the heck of it.

http://www.flyscbc.com/ On facebook: https://www.facebook.com/groups/358949335134/ I keep saying to myself I'm going to fly into one of the northern SC events!

I'm very pleased to say that on October 30, I was appointed an FAASTeam rep for the Greensboro, NC FSDO district.

I see you have one of the newer M20C manuals :D

I suspect there's some experimentation going on. I was just weighing in on the latest iteration.

It looks different today. First time since the changes started I think it is noticeably awful.

Poor UI is very much a personal preference thing. I find it poor compared to other EFB apps, but that's just me. Reliability is a big issue to me . Whether iPad or Android I have never used it in flight without it crashing at some point. Others I know have reported the same. I'm one of those who doesn't carry paper charts at all. My primary EFB is ForeFlight on my iPad and I use a different EFB on an Android tablet as backup. Not FltPlan Go! I don't find it reliable or usable enough for even that. YRMV but that's my take. And I'm a long-time user and fan of FltPlan's website.

Not an Air but I fly with a full-size iPad on a yoke mount and it works fine for me. Here's a photo. It's a capture from this video...

It's been around about 2-3 years. You'll probably find it a bit more cumbersome and a bit less stable for in-flight use compared to the others out there. Not a big deal for VFR flight but it doesn;'t give me warm fuzzies for IFR. I've been a subscriber to FltPlan.com for a long time and love the accuracy of their flight planning, but Go! is pretty much a ground-based tool for me.

Sounds like a bit of a jerk with the rudder pedal truck. But part of the point of the iPad failure (although I always wonder whether those who do that do it with paper also or are just showing electronics bias) is that, these days, we almost always do have a back-up to handle this situation. The "trick" in real life as well as the checride, is to have the CRM & ADM skills to use them. One great temptation would be to say to the Examiner, "hand me yours" Personally, paper or plastic, as an instructor I'd be very interested in what the pilot does first in this situation. As a pilot I have two different initial actions depending on the overall situation.

Absolutely legitimate question and scenario. In fact, you seem to have re-stated what I said in the post you answered . But why the ? There are a number of very good and very simple answers to that one. Some of them apply just as much if the Examiner said "Your (paper) approach plate just fell on the floor. What are you going to do next?" at the same point in the flight. An instrument pilot who is not thinking of that possibility or thinks that the scenario only applies to EFBs is making a mistake. Not just for the checkride.