[month-index] [thread-index] [prev] [next] [thread-prev] [thread-next]

Well (after my most recent birthday) I now have both FS and DD. FS
definitely wins on map integration. DD sectionals are extra cost while they
are included with FS. Plus FS has road maps and IFR charts. Also FS
altitude profile is useful and appears to have good topological info while
DD appears to use the sectional max altitude to determine the altitude along
the flight. DD has me climbing to 4500 ft to go LWM to 6B6 (20 nm away and
I fly at 1500).

DD has a nicer looking W&B chart although both work fine.

FS can overlay weather information on the route if you keep buying updates.

I have not seen any of the bugs people experienced in earlier versions of
FS.


I still have not committed to one or the other (but I will by next birthday
when I have to figure out which one I want updates to )

David Abrams


"Bart A" wrote in message
news:V1vU5.999$uo2.157232@feed.centurytel.net...
> I have stuck with Destination Direct. Sooner or later Flitestar will work
> all
> the bugs out of their software, but they keep completely rewriting it to
> make
> it more like the solid program that DD has been for years. They have
caught
> up and even passed in a few select features, but last I had checked it
> still had
> some big slow down problems and a few fatal crashes...
> And with DDs ease of use, and some of the new features for weather
they
> put into 4.5, I still would rank Destination Direct higher.. Oh and I
think
> Avweb
> and Aviation Consumer did too!!!
>
> Happy Flying
>
> Bart A
>

View index by [date] [author] [subject]
Previous Message:: Re: Old Pilot Logbook off-line
Next Message:: Re: Old Pilot Logbook off-line
Previous message in thread:: Re: flight planning software
Next message in thread:: Re: flight planning software