If I owned iFly...

[RogerE]

My goal would be to make Ifly the best VFR EFB on the market. Many things might apply to IFR along the way, but VFR would be my main focus. I'd measure progress against the best on the market.

I don't know if Foreflight is the 'best', but one thing I noticed, they map most (all?) NOTAMs with geographic references, like circles with lat/long center references. For example, parachute jumping areas and ARTCCs NOTAMS that provide geographic locations.

Yes, we can and should read and absorb textual NOTAMS, but the whole point of an EFB is an easy and visual way for pilots to know how these areas may affect our flights. Even Leidos FSS doesn't do this.

That's my suggestion...any thumbs up?

 

[Cobra]

Thumb's up for NOTAM improvements, yes, but that doesn't have anything to do with VFR vs. IFR.

As someone who files and flies IFR every single flight, I would not use iFly at all if it didn't include the IFR features it has. Gotta say I'm glad you don't own iFly.

 

[k9mjm]

IFR is definitely where iFly EFB has the most room for improvement. It's not bad, but... not being able to sequence into the missed segment of approaches, not being able to split screen your approach plate with the moving map, not including procedure turn / hold guidance on the 3D EFIS, etc. are holding it back. The approach plates are grainy because they are low-res - that graininess is added workload, and unnecessarily silly if you're running on a $1200 iPad Pro. I feel like the IFR pilots are left behind a lot.