Rick Junkin

Yeah, I think it's a matter of what works best for you. I really wasn't a fan of the on-screen checklists until I used the one on the G3X. The previous electronic checklists were on my iPad/EFB or in one of my radios, like the GNS 430W. To me they felt cumbersome to get to and cumbersome to use, and really weren't an improvement over a checklist I could hold in my hand as you described. But the G3X Touch is way different in that I can get to the checklist page with the easy muscle memory of two turns of my wrist (big twist clockwise, one click back counterclockwise), and I've tailored all but the emergency checklists to fit on a single page. I'm a "flow first - checklist confirm" guy and I don't necessarily physically tick off each item on every checklist as I read through them but I DO sequence to the next checklist I'll need as I complete each checklist. That way when I do my twist-click the next time I'm on the page I need for that phase of flight. I've really grown to like using it. It has centralized and simplified my work flow.

None of the Garmin checklist implementations that I’m aware of are “smart checklists”. They are electronic presentations of the POH checklists or checklists built by the user. Are there other manufacturers that have smart checklists for piston GA aircraft? I think that’s a feature confined to big iron, but I’d be happy to be wrong about that.

It may be an easier first step for some folks to use the Ace-Editor app on an iPad or Mac to review their checklist file to look for an empty checklist. The app will open the checklist file, but as you page through the checklists the app will crash if you come upon an empty checklist. You'll still need to use the PC based Garmin Checklist Editor or the web based EFIS Editor at https://rdamazio.github.io/efis-editor/ to fix the file by either deleting the empty checklist header or adding a place-holder step to the empty checklist.

If you're having problems with getting your checklist to display on the G3X, look at your .ace file in the Garmin Checklist Editor and make sure you didn't create any "empty checklists". You have to have at least one checklist step under each checklist header or the G3X will give you a "No valid checklist present", or something like that, on the checklist page. For instance, if you created a Ground Emergencies group and created an Engine Fire checklist header in that group, you have to enter at least one step under the Engine Fire header. Hopefully that's the solution for the folks having issues. @Oscar Avalle, this solution wasn't in the troubleshooting info I sent you.

I wouldn’t say the iPad was a problem, just one more piece of gear to mount and manage. It served great purpose before I upgraded my panel, but I found I didn’t need or use it much inflight with the new displays and avionics. Writing on the iPhone is different but easy with an appropriate stylus. And I can use my finger if necessary. The mount I use makes it easy to detach the phone and hold it in my hand while I write on it.

Indeed. It appears Garmin is continuing to optimize Garmin Pilot for Part 91 and possibly Part 125 operations, while ForeFlight has to keep the wider market of GA, commercial and military operations in mind. I tried to find some reliable numbers on the distribution of EFB users across Parts 91, 125 and 135 but understandably wasn't able to find anything publicly available. Garmin is big enough across their product lines to be able to afford to stay focused on the "niche" of Part 91/125, where Foreflight is more of a one-trick-pony and has to keep their offering relevant to all pilots and operation types. Granted, ForeFlight's one trick is a VERY good one.

AMEN! That was the first question I asked when Garmin released SmartCharts. The answer was essentially that they're looking at how to deploy SmartCharts more broadly and that the Garmin Pilot implementation is the first step. I've already made the transition to using the G3X to review NOS charts, which enabled me to remove the iPad from my yoke. Now I just have my iPhone on a MyGoFlight suction mount attached high on my side window to use for copying clearance and taking notes on the scratch pad, and for auto-recording into my Foreflight logbook. It's always there as a backup as well. I still do my flight planning and briefing on an iPad, and then use my phone to load the flight plan into the airplane. Like @PT20J, once I've briefed the procedure and set up the GTN and G3X I don't need to reference the approach plate anymore. The thought of SmartCharts integration with both the G3X and GTN opens some really cool simplified automation possibilities.

Actually the Garmin SmartChart IAP IS their own "plate", complete with geo-referencing in both the plan view and in the profile view. It is not a map overlay. It is a replacement for the NOS and Jepp plates, tailored to show only the information needed for the specific approach and your airplane and equipment capabilities as you've defined them in Garmin Pilot.

I don't post general questions like that in the Bravo forum. I DO find good Bravo-specific info there though, and it's where I post any useful Bravo-specific info I come across. But the separate forum is only as useful as people are disciplined about what they post where. Most people aren't that disciplined about it, nor do I expect them to be. Tapa Talk pretty much trashed that idea with the way it works. I started this thread to gauge interest. If there had been even 100 people interested it may have been a reasonable thing to request. But an order of magnitude less than that makes it a non-starter.

@Oscar Avalle I put this together, hope it helps. Although I think I like Skip's @PT20J response better - "I did the thing, and it worked" G3X Touch Checklist Basics using an iPad.pdf EDIT: In helping @Max Clark with some checklist troubleshooting we discovered that the web based EFIS Editor https://rdamazio.github.io/efis-editor/ has a feature that lets you tag checklist groupings as Normal, Abnormal, or Emergency. That feature doesn't exist in the other editors, particularly the Garmin editor, and may be what's causing the issues folks are having if they've used the tagging feature. @Oscar Avalle, what editor did you use to build your checklists? EDIT #2: I posted this under it's own topic but repeating it here to keep the checklist troubleshooting info together. If you're having problems with getting your checklist to display on the G3X, look at your .ace file in the Garmin Checklist Editor and make sure you didn't create any "empty checklists". You have to have at least one checklist step under each checklist header or the G3X will give you a "No valid checklist file present", or something like that, on the checklist page, and it won't display any checklists at all. For instance, if you created a Ground Emergencies group and created an Engine Fire checklist header in that group, you have to enter at least one step under the Engine Fire header. It may be an easier first step for some folks to use the Ace-Editor app on an iPad or Mac to review their checklist file to look for an empty checklist. The app will open the checklist file, but as you page through the checklists the app will crash if you come upon an empty checklist. You'll still need to use the PC based Garmin Checklist Editor or the web based EFIS Editor at https://rdamazio.github.io/efis-editor/ to fix the file by either deleting the empty checklist header or adding a place-holder step to the empty checklist. Hopefully that's the solution for the folks having issues.

I think what @midlifeflyer was getting at is that with Jeppesen and ForeFlight being owned by the same entity, There may be some reluctance to have ForeFlight develop a feature /capability that would replace the Jeppesen product and cut in to their market. Hence enhancement rather than replacement.

Bingo. For quite a number of years ForeFlight has been putting a lot of effort toward features that benefit the corporate pilots, along with military and airline pilots. Many of those translate well to the light GA pilots, many do not. So the Dynamic Procedures implementation had to preserve the things that support the corporate and airline flight departments' SOP requirements. It would be interesting to see how their market share is distributed across pilot certificates and ratings. I'm guessing that's available somewhere. Garmin appears focussed on making their aviation ecosystem have as much commonality and simplicity across their platforms as possible, Garmin Pilot included. This works well for most light GA pilots and aircraft owners, as well as business flight departments upgrading or purchasing new equipment. Anything that simplifies training and instrument flying is going to be popular with our market segment. Simplifying instrument approach procedure presentation the way they have is a brilliant move toward gaining buy-in from the incoming generations of student pilots.

Yes, agree, and that's really the difference between the FF and GP implementations. FF augments the heritage approach plates with tailored summary data, and GP obsoletes the heritage plates and doesn't require reference to them. Both are improvements that work.

Are you talking about Garmin Pilot SmartCharts? It's not necessary to "verify" SmartCharts, all the relevant and required data is presented in a completely stand-alone, tailored format. However, Garmin gives you the option to switch between SmartCharts and and Jepp/NOS plates with a single button on the SmartCharts page. I think this is really a crutch to help folks get comfortable with using SmartCharts while still having the familiar Jepp/NOS plates immediately available. Smart on their part. No pun intended.

@Max Clark I sent you a PM. Happy to talk you through it and help with troubleshooting.

I sent feedback to Foreflight this evening. I’m copying it here in the event anyone shares my observations and recommendations and also wants to send feedback. If we use similar words to present the same ideas the chances of our comments being grouped together increase and potentially raise the priority of consideration by the development team. Greetings, I’m sorry to say that the Dynamic Procedures implementation is disappointing, especially as compared to Garmin Pilot’s SmartCharts. I’m staying with Foreflight due to the superior aircraft performance features, but Garmin Pilot is catching up on that feature set and once they do I will be more compelled to make the switch to GP. I’ve subscribed to Foreflight since 2011, so this isn’t a decision I take lightly. I installed a full Garmin panel in my Mooney and while Foreflight does everything I need, the Garmin Pilot integration with my avionics is naturally cleaner and the SmartCharts implementation makes it more usable in a single pilot hard IFR environment. I do prefer the weather, filing, and aircraft performance functions in Foreflight but those are all primarily on-the-ground planning functions. GP is moving ahead in the inflight functions that reduce workload when ease of use and timeliness are critical. Specifics on Dynamic Procedures. 1. The disclaimer “Verify with chart” is a show-stopper. For a tailored SID/STAR/IAP feature set to be effective it must be a stand-alone simplified presentation of the applicable data in an easily digestible format. The disclaimer implies things may be missing or incorrect, and that’s not acceptable. I suspect the development team was constrained with a requirement to not produce anything that could fully replace Jepp plates. Garmin obviously had no such restriction and produced a superior product that can stand alone, and could become a standard or template for others to emulate. Recommendation: Drive toward a single page stand-alone presentation of tailored data. 2. The data overlay on an IAP plate, accompanied by the side bar data, is cluttered and feels kludged together. I know a lot of thought and good work has gone in to this feature set but the result has a sub-optimal feel. For instance the pilot must scroll the sidebar or refer to the IAP plate to see the missed approach instructions. The GP implementation makes the instructions available with a single button, and in the very simple graphic format used on NOAA plates. Recommendation: Reduce use of overlay/sidebar data to only supplemental or briefing data that flows and is easily digested. 3. The Dynamic Procedure presentation is only available on the Map page, and an approach must be either entered into the flight plan or sent to the map from the Airport page Procedure tab. This can be cumbersome in a divert scenario when identifying the best divert airfield. Recommendation: Make display of the Dynamic Procedure format available directly in the Airport page Procedure tab. This would require implementation of a single page stand-alone tailored procedure format. EDIT: At 11:30pm I received a personal response and request for more detailed suggestions from a Garmin Sr Customer Experience manager, 3 hours after I submitted my recommendations. They obviously are heavily engaged in refining Dynamic Procedures in response to subscriber feedback. Don’t be shy with your opinions, they want to know what we think!

Interestingly Garmin Pilot does the same, but going back to select circling mins is only two button presses. In Foreflight it takes at least four button presses and possibly some scrolling.

Not a YouTube video, but the latest Aviation Consumer has a Foreflight/Garmin Pilot comparison article. I heard echos while reading it, the author could have used this thread for some of his source material https://digital.emagazines.com/the_aviation_consumer/20250804/mobile/index.html?t=7bcd3f1e-e63a-404d-9cc9-06893ca0f55b&utm_content=email_cover&utm_campaign=aviation_consumer_file_1#p6

Thanks for the info. My expectations are too high . I was looking for communication from Foreflight saying something along the lines of, "Thanks for all of the great feedback we received at Airventure! We're taking the time to incorporate your suggestions before we fully release Dynamic Procedures." Or something like that. But I imagine the actual situation is closer to the development team needing to correct some discoveries identified before and during the Airventure demonstrations of the beta. I wholeheartedly agree the best path is to make sure it's right before release. However, having worked for Boeing for 22 years, I also have a cynical outlook on any communications from the company and its subsidiaries regarding "coming attractions" that include projected dates or even time frames. Now I'm just curious if the release will come before or after the webinar on the 6th. It sure would be nice to have the new software to play along during the webinar.

Thanks for all you do Craig! The content and info exchange here is certainly more than worth the minimum $25 a year.

Hmm. I'm guessing there were some discoveries and learning that occurred from the public hands-on opportunity at Airventure that prompted some revisions to Dynamic Procedures. Foreflight has officially missed the advertised July release. To be fair, I can't recall if Foreflight directly advertised a July release for Dynamic Procedures or if it was something stated in a third party article. But they have been doing monthly releases for some time now, and there wasn't one in July. And they did state a 90 day initial release period for all subscription levels through October. I haven't been able to find anything put out by Foreflight talking about what they're doing or offering an estimated release date for the Dynamic Procedures capability. Has anyone found any new information? I know it's probably early to be looking for info, but this isn't a good look for Foreflight. And the Dynamic Procedures webinar is still scheduled for August 6th. Have they released a beta beyond 17.7.2? @midlifeflyer? @daytonabch04?

My hangar is 60x50, but here it is with 3 airplanes in it. 2 Mooneys, one long body (Bravo) and one mid body (J), along with a CH2000 and a "work in progress" experimental. Plenty of room.