Originally Posted by
Odai
as I'm not interested in using the navigational capabilities of this software (don't have the money to spare for a tablet computer in any case), I am only looking for something to help make my planning a bit more efficient and quicker (and possibly more accurate).
SkyDemon Light is perfect for you if you are UK only, and it is free. If you want more detailed planning capabilities along with weather and forecast winds aloft, you need the paid for version. You are not forced to take the navigation capabilities if you aren't going to use them
I can see that it makes more sense from an operational perspective, as digital publications by their nature are going to be more up to date and accurate in general, but from a legal perspective things are more vague.
I don't think it is particularly vague. The legal requirement is that you are diligent - it doesn't specify which source you must use.
Of course I'm responsible for my own actions, but with regards to the last part of your comment, wouldn't other incidents described in this thread indicate that when mistakes are made by the pilot due to errors in the official publications, the pilot is protected legally?
This is -much- more likely to happen if you rely on a paper chart which is out of date before it is even printed. Unless you go to the trouble of marking up your chart with every single amendment, it will never be as accurate as a live digital product.
BUT... not all products are equal. SkyDemon and PocketFMS for example are renowned for being incredibly accurate. Some other software has utterly awful airspace data.
After all, if I bust some temporary airspace on a flight because no mention is made of it in the NOTAMS, AIP etc published on the NATS site, and I couldn't possibly have been aware of it, how could it have been my fault?
You are - in my opinion - far more likely to miss something by using the NATS site than you are using a graphical planning tool.
For example, if I were to make such a mistake due to an error in the information provided by a third party not associated with the CAA/NATS like SkyDemon
Well, SkyDemon are closely associated with NATS in that they provide their official graphical NOTAM tool
would the authorities consider it reasonable preparation for a flight on my part to have only referred to such publications as opposed to also referring to the 'official' sources (even though they can be less accurate/up-to-date)?
Of course they would.
I'm assuming the Met Office is the group responsible for providing this information in the UK. I have personally found that, for TAFs, all software that I've tried out (mostly phone apps) gives me older information than what I can get off the Met Office site - which is one of the reasons I'm hesitant. However I have yet to try this feature on SD.
METARs and TAFs should be the same whatever platform you view them on. I can't see any time delay between AeroWeather on iOS, SkyDemon or or the Met Office website.
The paid for SkyDemon software also includes startlingly accurate winds aloft data.
Also, I notice that when I wish to access airfield details (plates, textual information) the software starts a download. However, it doesn't state where the files are being downloaded from.
The data comes from SD's servers, and they in turn have a live B2B agreement with Eurocontrol.
Finally, legal issues aside, are there many pilots who would indeed just use something like SD on its own for flight planning and navigation, without ever referring to the CAA/NATS publications? Do you reckon this is reasonable?
Yes, a great many people do that now, and yes it is completely reasonable.