2 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

But near in mind both sets of data come from Navigraph. They have a monopoly and the service is very good.

No, Aerosoft produces a competing navdata product called NavdataPro which is also compatible with the Aivlasoft EFB and most of the same popular add-ons supported by Navigraph, so Navigraph does not have a monopoly when it comes to updated nav data.

Just now, w6kd said:

No, Aerosoft produces a competing product called NavdataPro which is also compatible with the Aivlasoft EFB, so Navigraph does not have a monopoly when it comes to updated nav data.

I’d overlooked that, thanks Bob.

The EFB approach plates are pretty generic, and derived from the nav data.  The Navigraph charts are color Jepp plates that depict terrain, approach and airfield restrictions, approach mins for various acft categories and navaid configurations, etc etc.  If you're a real-world IFR pilot (or want to operate with the same kind of information available), there's a marked difference between the EFB-generated approach chart and what you get from Navigraph.

If all you want is the ILS freq and course and the FAF altitude, the EFB-generated approach chart works OK. 

As a flight planning tool, the EFB is pretty cumbersome.  If you plan your own routings rather than using a computer-generated tool, you want to be able to see the enroute charts for planning purposes.

Anyway, there's real value-added in having the full smash with Navigraph--you have access to current data depicted just as it is in the real world.  Whether that's worth the expense will depend on how you fly and how you use the various tools in your planning for the same.

 

Been using EFB 2 for over a year. Hundreds and hundreds of VA flights in mostly GA aircraft, IFR. Wouldn't fly without it. No need at all for any chart subscriptions. 

 

Edited January 11, 20206 yr by Bobsk8

4 minutes ago, w6kd said:

As a flight planning tool, the EFB is pretty cumbersome. 

That’s because it isn’t a flight planner. I generate mine from PFPX and export it into EFB.

3 hours ago, simtom said:

Yep, most of the time I fly PMDG birds. Any reason why they need to be kept current? I'm using cycle 1802 for every program that I use (Active Sky, PMDG, SimBrief, ...) and so far I haven't run into compatibility issues.

I must be missing something here.  Why would a user need this particular EFB when PMDG's B747/-8 and their new B737NGXu for P3Dv4.5 both come with their own EFB?  With a Navigraph subscription PMDG's EFB's  work very well displaying airfield plates. take off and landing performance data etc.  Yes, it would be nice if the en-route Jeppesen charts could also be displayed, but with Simbrief available for flight planning purposes and Active Sky for weather do we still need this separate EFB when flying IFR? 

16 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

That’s because it isn’t a flight planner. I generate mine from PFPX and export it into EFB.

Precisely. 

I also use PFPX, but it does, on occasion and more often than I'd like, produce some strange indirect routings.  I paste the PFPX-generated route into the Navigraph desktop and look at it overlaid on the enroute chart to see if it makes sense, and then tweak it accordingly.

 

5 minutes ago, berts said:

I must be missing something here.  Why would a user need this particular EFB when PMDG's B747/-8 and their new B737NGXu for P3Dv4.5 both come with their own EFB?  With a Navigraph subscription PMDG's EFB's  work very well displaying airfield plates. take off and landing performance data etc.  Yes, it would be nice if the en-route Jeppesen charts could also be displayed, but with Simbrief available for flight planning purposes and Active Sky for weather do we still need this separate EFB when flying IFR? 

Well, if you're flying something other than either of those planes... 

I like having my charts and moving map off to the side on another computer, and on a big enough display (30") so that I don't need bifocals to read it.  The EFB works well as a networked moving map, and especially so for ground ops because it reads the airport (AFCAD/ADE etc) file so you see the airfield and parking spots just as whatever add-on you're using has it laid out, regardless of how current or accurate it may or may not be. 

39 minutes ago, w6kd said:

Precisely. 

I also use PFPX, but it does, on occasion and more often than I'd like, produce some strange indirect routings.  I paste the PFPX-generated route into the Navigraph desktop and look at it overlaid on the enroute chart to see if it makes sense, and then tweak it accordingly.

Yes, PFPX does have its odd routings. I  choose Edit, Advanced and use that option to come up with a more logical routing. Works 80+% of the time.

1 hour ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

I generate mine from PFPX and export it into EFB.

Ditto again, including doing the same with SimBrief.

Edited January 11, 20206 yr by vc10man

5 hours ago, simtom said:

I tried both but I was a bit overwhelmed by the interface of LNM 🙂 I really liked EFB though, easy to change your SID or STAR and clean interface overall.

I fly 95% IFR.

Once you get used to LNM it's pretty easy to use, does all my planning, flight following & logging. Looked at EFB, but preferred LNM as everything you need is there....

 

G

Thank you all for the information, seems like EFB (or LNM) will be better suited for my needs.