iPad Mini vs 696

[BrianL99]

Now that I have about 10-12 hours under my belt with my Sting, I have a few questions about the 696 vs Foreflight on my iPad (particularly as it applies to weather services).

& I admit to taking advantage of the assembled knowledge of the group, rather than spending the next 4 hours with Google Search

First off, I hate Garmin. Always have, always will. I think their human interfaces are awful and they haven't changed in the 15+ years they've been in the Aviation business (I also have a Garmin product I use for golf, same aggravations).

I haven't yet used Foreflight and my iPad mini in flight, I've just been playing with it at my desk.

I have Xm Weather on the 696. The iPad Mini I bought for flying doesn't have cell service, but I do have a Dual SkyPro.

The weather I get from the iPad while sitting in my office, far exceeds the capability I seem to get from the 696. Part of my conclusion is based on the fact that the weather information services available on the iPad, are more 'traditional" and seem easier to read and interpret in my opinion. I assume the iPad Mini is acquiring this weather information through my WiFi and away from my WiFi network, I'm not going to get any of this ... which makes me wonder if I should switch my iPad minis (I have 2) and use the one with a Cell connection as my aviation iPad?

If I do that, I assume I'll lose my weather services at somewhere around 5000' ?

The Foreflight interface seems much easier to work with than the 696 ... opinions?

The "glare" issue on the iPad is disconcerting. It seems I would need my canopy shade closed in order to read the iPad. True?

I like the idea of being able to show flight progress, with an actual "Sectional" as the background on ForeFlight. Is there a way to do that on the 696, that I haven't found yet?

The "squeeze/expand" functionality of the iPad, seems vastly superior to the "zoom" switch on the 696. Thoughts?

If I bite the bullet and get the Dual Weather/GPS/ADS-B, I guess it can only run either the 696 or ForeFlight? Which means I'll need to choose one or the other as my primary navigational screen?

BTW, I love the ForeFlight Checklist program. I know Garmin has some sort of Checklist implementation, but I haven't tried it yet.

Thanks all!

[Merlinspop]

Morning, Brian -

You're probably in the minority in terms of your dislike of Garmin's operating logic. But that's fine. There are options.

Wrt to your mini... You may want to switch to one with cellular capability just to give yourself more options. You'll have a built in GPS in case your Dual dies. Possible cellular connection on the ground when there's no wifi.

As for glare, there are some who report good results from anti-glare films. Others report they're useless. Brand/models probably made all the difference.

[Dennis]

Hi Brian,

The iPads with cell connectivity have more accurate GPS chips. I have ForelFlight on my iPhone and iPad Mini Retina. I like to see the RADAR displays on the iPhone while I'm driving.

Be aware that the RADAR you get from ForeFlight is about 5 minutes delayed. It is not real-time weather. I like the tops and vector display of direction and speed of the storms. I lose RADAR somewhere above 5000 feet depending somewhat on Verizon cell tower density.

The glare is a problem. The window needs an anti-reflection coating, but I know of no tablets with it. The matt surface stick-ons may help.

Fly safely and often.

Dennis Persyk Skycatcher N900DP Based 68IS

Skycatcher Page
http://users.foxvalley.net/~dpersyk/skycatcher.htm

YouTube Dixon Flight http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VWqDS1xlYR0

YouTube Pattern Flight
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NVRBbWZr ... e=youtu.be

[CTLSi]

......

[Dennis]

[quote="CTLSi"][quote="BrianL99"]Now that I have about 10-12 hours under my belt with my Sting, I have a few questions about the 696 vs Foreflight on my iPad (particularly as it applies to weather services).

"you still need to mount an external antenae if you want the GPS to be as robust as the panel mounted 796"

That does not apply to an iPad with cellular access and it has no bearing on whether the iPad can receive a cell tower. Rather, the iPads with cellular capability come with much more accurate GPS chips. In my Skycatcher my iPad reads position and altitude to the same accuracy and precision as my Garmin G300 glass panel. No external antenna required.

Dennis

[SportPilot]

.......

[Jack Tyler]

Brian, several of us with retina displays opted to try a (then) new Sporty's anti-glare matt screen over our various iPads after having had disappointing results with other screens. As I recall, it was due to a report from an Aviation Consumer writer when discussing the new retina display. The results are mixed but effective from a pilot's perspective: I fly with my iPad mounted via a RAM mount right on my side window, and I'm able to see/read/use the display in direct sunlight. The downsides are that it washes out the clarity and brilliance of that display when you are watching a movie, for example, and I do find max or nearly max brightness is required, thereby drawing down battery life. But we do long-distance flights somewhat regularly, where weather changes are a major factor, and these are consequences I'm willing to accept for the safety I get from Foreflight & our Stratus II.

I don't have the matt screen's product name handy but calling the Sporty's store and asking for info about 'the good one' will be enough, I believe.

[designrs]

The RAM mount works so well and so easy.
I'm sorry that I didn't buy one when I was renting aircraft.
It's not distracting and it puts the iPad Mini pretty close for reading all of the small stuff on the chart.
I use the iPad as primary and in addition to the 696.

Just have to watch that you don't hit the trim buttons while operating the iPad.

[designrs]

I also modified a Sporty's Checklist app that I run in the iPad as well...
great for ground ops… for flying I still like my placard checklist for approach, etc.
Not the time to be pressing extra buttons.

[sandpiper]

In an ideal world I would prefer to have whatever I am using built into the panel. Until then my iFly 720 does pretty well to supplement my antique 396 with XM.

[SportPilot]

.......

[Wm.Ince]

The RAM mount works so well and so easy.

Same setup I use.
It works great.
Additionally, I use a Dual XGPS150 remote (Bluetooth) antenna. That also works great and has an 8-hour battery life.
Serious cross country navigation.
The iPad Air display is awesome.

[Merlinspop]

designrs - with that mount... if you put it in Portrait orientation, could you use the camera to snap some en-route pics? Or would the curvature of the windscreen at that point distort things too much?

[Jack Tyler]

I notice Brian's asked a number of Q's we haven't addressed.

"I haven't yet used Foreflight and my iPad mini in flight, I've just been playing with it at my desk. I have Xm Weather on the 696. The iPad Mini I bought for flying doesn't have cell service, but I do have a Dual SkyPro. The weather I get from the iPad while sitting in my office, far exceeds the capability I seem to get from the 696..."

First, XM wx service depends on which subscription you chose. IMO for recreational GA flying the full XM sub offers no value added over the mid-level sub, and that's going to be equivalent to what you get with Foreflight IF you can receive ADS-B. This leads to a second-level Q: does it make financial sense to purchase an ADS-B receiver if one isn't going to upgrade to ADS-B in/out any time soon. When I ran those numbers 1.5 years ago, discontinuing the XM sub paid for my Stratus II in about 18 months (so I notice my Stratus II just became "free"). But Decision #1 for you would seem to be whether the kinds of flying you do warrants wx info in the cockpit. If you flew during a Florida summer or distances that often carry you across a frontal boundary, the answer is pretty easy. For local flying and/or flying you only tend to do on calm days for an hour or two, the opposite answer is probably also pretty easy.

I assume the iPad Mini is acquiring this weather information through my WiFi and away from my WiFi network, I'm not going to get any of this ... which makes me wonder if I should switch my iPad minis (I have 2) and use the one with a Cell connection as my aviation iPad? If I do that, I assume I'll lose my weather services at somewhere around 5000' ?"

Yes, all that wx info in Foreflight is coming from your wifi service. In-flight, the altitude of your cellular receive capability will depend on your location (e.g. out west and in the midwest, there are generally fewer ADS-B stations than on the coastal regions and more populated areas), and also due to topography and your distance from a tower. The approximate altitude I've seen reported most often where cell service is lost is ~3,000' AGL but IME even that overestimates reliable cell service even in tower-rich areas. And depending on your flying, there can be a dysfunctional relationship between flying low enough to get reliable cell service (more often likely when doing local flights and short hops) and actually needing wx advisory services from Foreflight (when on longer flights when you are likely to be higher more often and so without cell service). Your Dual SkyPro plays no role in the 'wx gathering' issue and, as mentioned before, I'd use the cell-capable iPad in your cockpit because of its better GPS performance.

"The Foreflight interface seems much easier to work with than the 696 ... opinions?"

If you mean WRT wx info, that's probably because the wx info is mostly native (in a user interface sense) to Foreflight. IOW you go to the same places on the iPad for the same wx depictions when flying as when briefing and flight planning. Also keep in mind the NEXRAD data is delayed for both wx sources you mentioned: XM and via ADS-B. And the METARs & TAFs are issued on their own sked, so the equipment with which you access those is irrelevant. Now...if by 'easier to work with' you mean the user interface, IMO that depends substantially on how often you use the device in question. I use a 496 as one back-up nav source and for me the UI is more complicated (partly due to much earlier technology) than Foreflight. BUT after I flew with the 496 for a while, using it regularly, I find I can readily get it to do all its capable of. It just takes more button pushing with a different logic scaffold in my mind. BUT BUT another thing I've noticed is how much more demanding Foreflight has become as its grown in features. I find my 'currency' in using Foreflight is now more important with its use, whereas before I didn't notice that being a problem for me.

"The "glare" issue on the iPad is disconcerting. It seems I would need my canopy shade closed in order to read the iPad. True?"

Depends...but generally 'yes'. One of the advantages of mounting an iPad as Richard's pic shows is that you can adjust the angle of the iPad. But when sunlight strikes the iPad surface, an effective anti-glare screen is necessary to avoid it being washed out...and that's going to happen.

"The "squeeze/expand" functionality of the iPad, seems vastly superior to the "zoom" switch on the 696. Thoughts?"

One reason this iPad ability coupled to Foreflight has improved functionality is that NOAA has now digitized all the charts, so you get better clarity at zoom-in levels. Another benefit is that it auto-adjusts between TCA charts and sectionals as you zoom in/out. If your 696 uses vector charts (the norm for Garmin products I've seen), then zooming in will continue to provide similar clarity.

"If I bite the bullet and get the Dual Weather/GPS/ADS-B, I guess it can only run either the 696 or ForeFlight? Which means I'll need to choose one or the other as my primary navigational screen?"

First, research whether ADS-B 'in' data can be shared. I believe it can be, in which case you would benefit from it twice over, if you chose. As for 'primary nav screen', you may find you will gravitate to a pattern similar to flying a/c with two Nav/Coms. Primary coms are always worked off #1 with supplementary coms (e.g. monitoring an AWOS or how active the pattern at the arriving field is) are always worked off #2. This convention establishes a routine set of behaviors and therefore reduces mistakes and confusion. You may find you will want to develop your own practices based on which device best serves which purpose(s). As one example, you may not want to bother mounting your iPad for a local flight or pattern work, in which case the 696 may evolve into the basic data/com/nav tool. For flights requiring flight planning, you may find the homework you did on the iPad (route, your wx brief, checking winds aloft) is easily carried into the cockpit, which may mean the iPad is your primary cross-country nav tool. Having choices is a good thing!

[CTLSi]

......