hevansrv7a
Well Known Member
eSectionals is a subscription service that provides sectionals, TAC's and so on over the internet. I have been using it for a few months and for the most part I like it. The owners/programmers are good people to work with. The data is kept current; they notify you of updates and you download them.
Flight Prep's Golden Eagle (FPGE) is a "free" flight planner that runs on Windows. There are premium versions including one that is internet based and the high-end "Chart Case" but I'm not reviewing those. The basic FPGE is free to download and run and it keeps the data current on the 28 day cycle.
eSectionals allows you to draw your course line from anywhere to anywhere and to then put in waypoints (you must do them in order) to which the line will then conform. It provides for printing and for saving JPG's to your PDA; that's what I use it for as well as reviewing the planned route for airspace issues that are not as clear in the basic FPGE.
The latest version of FPGE (2007) was just released and it contains some nice improvements. Did I mention that it is connected to CSC DUATS? You can plan your route and file it with FSS all within the program if you are on-line. It also creates printable flight logs, flight plans and the route portion of the sectional(s) in PDF format.
The reason I am comparing these two unlike programs is that now, FPGE allows you to subscribe to their service which includes the same NACO raster images as everyone else has - of the sectionals, for instance.
So now these two good programs intersect in the area of creating images of the route superimposed on the sectionals or TAC's or WAC's or whatever.
The advantage of doing it all from within FPGE is that FPGE is a much more sophisticated tool for creating and storing flight plans. Its route can be from/to any recognized airspace point (airport, navaid, intersection..) plus user-created waypoints. The route can be rubber-banded. The weather can be overlaid. Winds can be incorporated into time and fuel calculations. The flight plan creation is automatic, with pilot and aircraft profiles. And more. It's a true flight planner. I rely on it with or without sectional images.
So what about cost and image quality? On my PC and on my PDA, an HP 4700, the images from FPGE were about twice the byte count and in my opinion, sharper and of better contrast. The cost for a one-year VFR USA subscription to eSectionals is $99.95. The FPGE full CONUS sectionals are $99.00. eSectionals, however incudes TAC's, Flyways in VFR. FPGE also offers WAC, IFR Hi/Low and approach plates, but you all know you can get plates from AOPA, right? I think you get slightly more for your hundred dollars with eSectionals, chart-wise, but not necessarily for image quality nor features. Both have pricing options more complex than I am citing here, so for that follow the links. You can, for example, reduce the number of charts you want in FPGE and cut costs.
Both offer in-cockpit upgrades with moving map, but all that is beyond the scope of this review.
There is a catch about FPGE image quality. You can, if you wish, simply move the PDF file from your PC to your PDA and it works pretty well, at least for a small to medium file size. I found, though, that with a little bit of work I could make a JPG of each page of the PDF and get much better image quality. That is the image quality I am comparing to that of eSectionals. Both are good, but as noted here, the FPGE image is, I think, better.
So, in summary, I'm thinking of switching to FPGE for my electronic charts. It seems better to me to have it all in one program and have better image quality. The price difference, if any, is not worth fretting about. I would be happy to respond to any questions, but the web sites of the two products are very useful as a first place to look.
Flight Prep's Golden Eagle (FPGE) is a "free" flight planner that runs on Windows. There are premium versions including one that is internet based and the high-end "Chart Case" but I'm not reviewing those. The basic FPGE is free to download and run and it keeps the data current on the 28 day cycle.
eSectionals allows you to draw your course line from anywhere to anywhere and to then put in waypoints (you must do them in order) to which the line will then conform. It provides for printing and for saving JPG's to your PDA; that's what I use it for as well as reviewing the planned route for airspace issues that are not as clear in the basic FPGE.
The latest version of FPGE (2007) was just released and it contains some nice improvements. Did I mention that it is connected to CSC DUATS? You can plan your route and file it with FSS all within the program if you are on-line. It also creates printable flight logs, flight plans and the route portion of the sectional(s) in PDF format.
The reason I am comparing these two unlike programs is that now, FPGE allows you to subscribe to their service which includes the same NACO raster images as everyone else has - of the sectionals, for instance.
So now these two good programs intersect in the area of creating images of the route superimposed on the sectionals or TAC's or WAC's or whatever.
The advantage of doing it all from within FPGE is that FPGE is a much more sophisticated tool for creating and storing flight plans. Its route can be from/to any recognized airspace point (airport, navaid, intersection..) plus user-created waypoints. The route can be rubber-banded. The weather can be overlaid. Winds can be incorporated into time and fuel calculations. The flight plan creation is automatic, with pilot and aircraft profiles. And more. It's a true flight planner. I rely on it with or without sectional images.
So what about cost and image quality? On my PC and on my PDA, an HP 4700, the images from FPGE were about twice the byte count and in my opinion, sharper and of better contrast. The cost for a one-year VFR USA subscription to eSectionals is $99.95. The FPGE full CONUS sectionals are $99.00. eSectionals, however incudes TAC's, Flyways in VFR. FPGE also offers WAC, IFR Hi/Low and approach plates, but you all know you can get plates from AOPA, right? I think you get slightly more for your hundred dollars with eSectionals, chart-wise, but not necessarily for image quality nor features. Both have pricing options more complex than I am citing here, so for that follow the links. You can, for example, reduce the number of charts you want in FPGE and cut costs.
Both offer in-cockpit upgrades with moving map, but all that is beyond the scope of this review.
There is a catch about FPGE image quality. You can, if you wish, simply move the PDF file from your PC to your PDA and it works pretty well, at least for a small to medium file size. I found, though, that with a little bit of work I could make a JPG of each page of the PDF and get much better image quality. That is the image quality I am comparing to that of eSectionals. Both are good, but as noted here, the FPGE image is, I think, better.
So, in summary, I'm thinking of switching to FPGE for my electronic charts. It seems better to me to have it all in one program and have better image quality. The price difference, if any, is not worth fretting about. I would be happy to respond to any questions, but the web sites of the two products are very useful as a first place to look.
