AOPA's internet based flight planner

[GeorgePerry]

I was wondering if those of you out there who use the legacy AOPA Real-Time Flight Planner, like the new internet based update.  I for one do not.  I'm going to rant just a bit since AOPA has decided to discontinue the RTFP starting Jan 09.  Maybe others love it...I'm interested to hear other users opinions.

I dont' find the internet based version useful or intuitive compared to the legacy flight planner.   Here are my issues:

1.  Maybe its my glacially slow PC but the pages seem to take a long time to update / load. (w/cable internet)

2. The screen space is filled with stuff you don't need like the screen selection tabs. I guess they could be alittle bigger??

3. The box to zoom feature doesn't show the area highlighted. It fits to the small retangled shape chart display area. 

4. I perfer the real time flight planners chart like background. You can access the map without having to program in a 'route'. Also special use airspace on the 'new' map doesn't show the altitudes without clicking on it. The real time planner has airspace dimensions, like restricted areas depicted right on the chart.

4. The controls to move or slew the map are clunky and not at all intuative. Also the old grab and drag feature for route changes is really nice. This internet based version dosen't have that.

5. AOPA's internet based planner is not compatible with an iphone...Navmonster is.

I'm not sure what AOPA computer guy thinks this is a good format, but I recommend getting some pilots involved to make this thing worthwhile. I wish AOPA would use the old flight planner as the baseline and improve from there. What AOPA has now isn't really an improvement

My 2 cts...GP

 

[TurboExec]

I tried to use the new internet one once and that was enough for me....I just didn't like it.  I use Voyager Free Flight for all my planning purposes.

[KSMooniac]

I looked at the original AOPA one briefly but didn't like it at all and primarily use www.fltplan.com now and find it to be wonderful.  I've poked around in the new AOPA thing but haven't used it enough yet to know whether I'll switch or not.  It looks like a big improvement to me, though, and I'll give it a try when I have more time before my next trip.

[GeorgePerry]

Fltplan looks like a patchwork of disjointed colors and seems crammed with ads.  I'm not a big fan.

[KSMooniac]

It certainly isn't as polished as others, but it is free, very simple, and I find it to be exceedingly accurate on time en-route forecasts using the wind data.  A very nice bonus is the presentation of recently planned and ATC-provided routes/clearances for similar flights.  Gives you a very good idea of what you'll get if going IFR vs. what you want.

[N9660M]

I agree with most of your assessments George.  The one advantage over the legacy AOPA planner is that the new version is Internet based, so doesn't require any software to be loaded on the computer you're using.  That's helpful when I've been staying at a relative or friend's place and am planning my flight back home on someone else's computer.

One feature I'd like to see is a planner that recommends the altitude at which you'd get the best ground speed based on forecast winds.  For example, to be able to input a block, say 4000-10,000 feet, and then the planner tell you the optimal altitude.  If AOPA's planner does this, I have not figured out how.

Jim  

[KSMooniac]

Jim, you should check out fltplan.com .  It is internet-based as well, completely free, and will give you ETE/GS predictions at the appropriate altitudes for your route of flight.  For example, if you plan for 7000', it will also show 3000, 5000, 9000, 11000 so you can compare the times enroute based on the forecast winds.  In my experience (almost 2 years now) it has been very, very accurate with their M20J profile.

[The-sky-captain]

I agree, I have used Fltplan.com for the past couple of years as well and it is extremely accurate on winds aloft, the various notams and airport info and wx info. I also use weather.gov and click on the aviation tab to look at all of the airmets and sigments for turbulance, convection, iciing... It's pretty cut and dry showing where the trouble spots are with their map overlays. I've never used the AOPA site so I can't compare the two.

[GeorgePerry]

My default internet based planner is Navmonster. http://navmonster.com/  It also has really good winds aloft info with predicted Time En Route predictions without all the adds to sort through.  It doesn't have grapical winds, just a chart showing winds over the route of flight (red for HW, green for TW).  It also doesn't overlay WX on the route.  I guess there are aspects of each I like but none really have everthing I want...the RTFP AOPA currently has is very good.  I wish AOPA could transfer it directly to the internet.

[randypugh]

I know there's 100's of sites but fltplan works for me and charlies aviation weather covers everything I need to know  

[RobertoTohme]

My 2 cents in the issue:

For domestic flights, hands down fltplan over AOPA (much greater accuracy in winds / time en-route); however, I do a lot of flying into northern Mexico, and the RTFP had been an excellent tool at that since fltplan doesn't do international.  As to the new internet version of AOPA, let's put it that we haven't made friends (yet) but it's the inevitable future, for what it seems..

[FlyDave]

Has anyone seen Voyager from Seattle Avionics?

I really like it. It has numerous features and I have found the flight times to be quite accurate for my Cherokee.

There's a free version that you can download (I'm going to buy a copy to support the product) and it has so many features that most pilots can use that version. Check it out at:

http://www.seattleavionics.com

It only runs under windows but, if you don't have internet connectivity, you can still flight plan but without the benefit of weather.

Dave

[N9660M]

Scott, took your advice and registered for FltPlan.com yesterday.  Practiced planned a few X/C and do like it better than AOPA.  Will start using it for my flight planning.  Thanks for the tip.

Jim 

[N57039]

I was a fan of RTFP as well, and at first wasn't so happy with AOPA's internet flight planner. However, after working with it I am growing accustomed to the changes and am actually beginning to like it. There is a LOT more data available than RTFP offered. You just have to learn how different features are accessed with the left and right mouse buttons. I really like the various weather overlays, and it's also pretty easy to compare flight times at different altitudes. I missed the "rubber band" route change at first, but now can put in the waypoints I want to use even faster than RTFP; it just took some practice and understanding of the program. I have no problem with the speed on AT&T's cheapest DSL plan.

Lance

[Greg_D]

For those who liked the old AOPA flight planner, Jeppesen has an internet based flight planner.  In fact, the old AOPA planner was a light version of the Jeppesen planner.  The Jeppesen Internet Flight Planner does require a PC to operate.  It won't work on a Mac unless you boot into Windows or run an emulation program.

I've have a subscription to Jeppesen's FlightStar program.  Nice, but *very* expensive.

Recently, I've been playing with Enflgiht's planner.  www.enflight.com  It works on a Mac or PC.  Also works well on an iPhone or other Smartphone with web browser (you can even file flight plans on them).  The interface doesn't have all the bells and whistles as some of the other stuff, but it's fast and efficient, like our Mooneys.  The software allows for batch downloads of NACO approach plates.  With all of that, and my new 696, I may just dump the expensive Jepp subscription.

 

Oh, they have a free 30 day evaluation and they don't require a credit card to register.

[Mooney_Allegro]

I have never used the AOPA flight planning software, so I can't comment on ease of use.  I was introduced to fltplan.com when I flew corporate out of Washington Dulles in 2003.  It made flight planning so much easier including figuring out how much fuel to order for a trip.  I still use it for the Mooney, and it's pretty easy to use. 

[GeorgePerry]

Well AOPA has stopped supporting the Jeppesen flight planner.  It's too bad becasue the internet based flight planner that replaces it sucks