iFly EFB

Analysis by Appcrazy

Flying with a tablet can be wonderfully convenient, but only when the software is built around the way pilots actually prepare, navigate, and make decisions in the cockpit. I spent time with iFly EFB as a mobile flight-planning and navigation tool, and my impression is that it aims much higher than a basic map app. It is designed for both visual flight rules and instrument flight rules, so it sits closer to an electronic flight bag than to the ordinary navigation apps most people use on the ground.

That distinction matters. A general mapping app is excellent for roads, addresses, traffic, and everyday travel. It is not designed around airspace, flight planning, cockpit workload, or the difference between a visual route and an instrument procedure. Adventure Pilot, LLC has built this app for a much narrower audience: people who need aviation information presented in a practical flying context.

The app is free to install and carries an Everyone content rating, which makes trying it relatively simple. Its in-app purchases range from $0.99 to $179.99 per item, however, so “free” should be understood as free entry rather than a promise that every aviation resource or capability costs nothing. That is the first point I would explain to a pilot friend: install it without paying, explore the workflow, and decide whether the paid elements match the way you fly.

How the free starting point translates into real value

The strongest part of the value proposition is the chance to evaluate an aviation-focused workflow before committing to it. A pilot can see whether the presentation feels natural on a phone or tablet, whether the planning process fits personal habits, and whether the app deserves a place in preflight preparation. That is much more useful than judging it from a short description alone.

In my experience, an electronic flight bag earns its place by reducing friction before departure. The useful question is not simply whether it displays a moving map. The question is whether I can move from “Where am I going?” to “What do I need to review before I go?” without jumping among several unrelated tools. iFly EFB is appealing because its identity is aviation-first rather than road-navigation-first.

For a VFR pilot, that focus can make the tablet feel like a dedicated flight companion instead of a large phone with a map open. Route preparation, airspace awareness, and cockpit reference work all belong to the same general task. For an IFR pilot, the attraction is different: the app is intended to support a more structured planning environment, where the route and the information surrounding it need to be considered together.

Advertisements

I would not treat the free installation as proof that the complete experience is free. The purchase range is broad, and the most expensive item is significant enough that a serious pilot should inspect exactly what each purchase unlocks before spending. The practical value depends on the content and tools required for a particular operation, not merely on the download price.

That makes the app’s cost structure easier to understand in three layers. First, there is the no-cost opportunity to install and assess the interface. Second, there are optional purchases that may make the app more useful for a specific flying routine. Third, there is the question of whether those purchases replace another aviation subscription or simply add another source of information. Without answering that last question, a low entry price can be misleading.

Take a Look at Our Blog

What I would test before paying

I would begin with a route I already know rather than an ambitious cross-country plan. Familiar geography makes it easier to judge the app itself instead of spending the whole session checking whether I understand the route. I would look at how quickly I can build the flight, inspect the surrounding airspace, review the planning details, and return to the main navigation view.

I would also test the app on the device I expect to carry in the aircraft. A workflow that feels spacious on a large tablet may feel crowded on a phone. Conversely, a tablet can make charts and planning details easier to inspect while taking more space in a small cockpit. This is not a minor comfort issue: if controls require too much attention, the app may create workload instead of removing it.

Another worthwhile test is a “change of plan” exercise. Start with a simple route, then alter the destination or add an intermediate point. Aviation rarely follows a perfectly rigid plan, and an EFB should remain understandable when the route changes. I pay close attention to whether the revised plan is obvious at a glance or whether I need to repeat several steps to confirm what changed.

Finally, I would compare the app’s paid options with the tools I already use. If another EFB already covers chart access, planning, and cockpit navigation in a familiar way, iFly EFB needs to offer a noticeably better workflow to justify additional spending. If I currently rely on disconnected tools, the app has more room to deliver value because consolidation itself can be worthwhile.

Useful habits that make an aviation app safer to use

One non-obvious lesson with any EFB is that preparation should happen before the engine starts. I would not make the first serious route-building session a cockpit activity. Explore the menus at home, learn where the planning information lives, and decide how the display behaves before flight. That turns the app from something to operate into something to consult.

I would also keep a deliberate separation between planning and confirmation. Building a route in an app is not the same as accepting it without review. I would compare the result with the information and procedures appropriate to the flight, then brief the route in plain language. The screen should support my decisions, not replace them.

A second useful habit is to create a short personal checklist for the app itself: device charged, display readable, route reviewed, required information available, and a backup plan ready. This is especially important because an EFB is an electronic aid. Its convenience is valuable precisely because it concentrates so much work in one device, but concentration also means a device problem can remove several functions at once.

A third insight is to use the app as a rehearsal tool even when I am not flying that day. Running through a familiar route helps reveal which controls are intuitive and which require deliberate attention. It also helps me discover whether the app suits my mental model of flight planning. That kind of rehearsal is more revealing than casually opening the map and deciding that it looks polished.

Where the trade-offs become important

The first trade-off is specialization. Aviation software can be more useful than a general map because it speaks the language of flight, but that same specialization makes it less relevant outside aviation. If I only need directions to an airport by car, a standard mapping app is faster and simpler. iFly EFB is not meant to compete with those tools, and using it for ordinary navigation would miss the point.

The second trade-off is cost clarity. The app is free to download, but the presence of per-item purchases means I need to understand my intended use before treating it as a complete solution. A recreational pilot who flies occasionally may be satisfied with a limited investment. A pilot who expects a full planning and instrument workflow may need to consider the upper end of the purchase range, depending on the resources desired.

I would avoid assuming that the most expensive option is automatically the best value. The right purchase is the one tied to a real need in my flying. If I fly mostly familiar local VFR routes, paying for capabilities I rarely consult may not improve my experience. If I regularly prepare more demanding flights, the calculation changes because time saved during planning and the convenience of an integrated aviation workspace may matter more.

There is also a learning curve. Even an intuitive EFB contains more concepts than a normal map application. Airspace, flight rules, route structure, procedures, and cockpit presentation all require context. A new user may initially feel that the app is asking more questions than a simple navigation tool. That is not necessarily a flaw, but it does mean the app rewards users who are willing to learn its workflow.

Another limitation is that screen-based convenience can encourage overconfidence. A clean route line can look reassuring even when the pilot has not fully reviewed the surrounding conditions or the operational details of the flight. I see the app as a strong planning and reference aid, not as permission to stop thinking. The best experience comes from using it to organize information while retaining normal pilot judgment and appropriate backups.

Device choice creates a further compromise. A larger screen can make route inspection and chart work more comfortable, while a smaller device is easier to position and carry. I would not choose the app in isolation from the hardware. Before purchasing anything, I would imagine where the device will sit, how it will be viewed, and whether I can interact with it without taking attention away from essential flying tasks.

There is a practical difference between an app that looks useful at home and one that remains useful under pressure. I would therefore judge the interface by its busiest moments: rerouting, checking a detail quickly, switching from planning to navigation, and recovering from an interruption. If those transitions are clear, the app has a meaningful advantage over a collection of unrelated tools. If they feel confusing, the aviation focus alone will not solve the problem.

A realistic flight-planning scenario

Imagine that I am preparing a daytime VFR trip to an airport I know, but the route passes through an area where airspace awareness deserves careful attention. At home, I would open the app, build the route, and inspect the path rather than simply accepting the first straight line. I would look for points that deserve a briefing, consider where the route changes character, and note what I need to verify before departure.

On the day of the flight, the app’s value would be in keeping that preparation accessible in one aviation-oriented place. If I decide to adjust the destination or add a stop, I would want the revised route to remain understandable without starting from scratch. That is a concrete reason to prefer a dedicated EFB over a general map: the route is being considered as a flight, not just as a line between two locations.

For an IFR-oriented user, the same scenario becomes more demanding. The app’s support for IFR flying makes it relevant to a workflow where the route must be treated with greater procedural discipline. I would use it to organize the planning process, then independently confirm the details that matter for the actual operation. The advantage is not that the app removes responsibility; it is that it can give that responsibility a more coherent workspace.

In both cases, I would prepare before entering the aircraft and avoid treating the screen as the only source of truth. The app can help me arrive at the cockpit with a clearer plan, but a clear plan still needs a proper briefing and a backup approach. That balance is essential to getting genuine value from any electronic flight bag.

Who should use it, and who should look elsewhere?

I think iFly EFB is best suited to pilots who want one aviation-specific environment for planning and in-flight reference, especially those who fly both VFR and IFR or are moving toward a more organized electronic workflow. It is also a sensible candidate for someone who has outgrown a basic moving-map application and wants tools shaped around aviation rather than adapted from road travel.

It may also suit a student or newer pilot who wants to become comfortable with EFB-based planning, provided that the app is learned gradually and used alongside proper instruction. The free installation lowers the barrier to exploration. A learner can decide whether the layout makes sense before committing money, while an instructor can help ensure that convenience does not turn into dependence.

Frequent pilots may find the strongest value because repeated planning makes small workflow improvements add up. If I prepare many flights, a tool that keeps the process organized can save more mental effort than it would for someone who flies only a few times each year. The broad purchase range then becomes a question of frequency and need rather than a simple “cheap or expensive” judgment.

I would be more cautious if I only want a basic map, if I dislike learning specialized aviation software, or if I already have a trusted EFB that covers my needs. Switching tools has a cost in attention and familiarity. Another option may be better when it offers the exact chart coverage, device experience, or planning workflow I already know and use effectively.

I would also skip it as a primary solution if I expect an app to make flight decisions for me. No EFB should replace pilot judgment, training, required planning, or sensible backup preparation. The app is most useful for a pilot who wants better organization, not for someone looking for an automated answer to every operational question.

Its reputation is encouraging: the app holds a 4.9 average from around 700 ratings, with more than 300 written reviews and over 50 thousand installs. Those figures suggest that it has found a committed audience, although they should be read as context rather than a substitute for testing it on my own device and in my own style of flying.

My buy-or-skip verdict

I would recommend trying iFly EFB if you are an Android or iOS pilot looking for a dedicated aviation planning environment and you are willing to evaluate the paid options carefully. The free starting point is useful because it lets you judge the interface and workflow before making a larger commitment. For pilots who want support across visual and instrument flying, the app’s focus is more relevant than what a general navigation app can provide.

I would not recommend buying every available option immediately. Start with the kind of flying you actually do, identify the information and workflow you genuinely need, and compare the purchase against any EFB you already use. The top end of the in-app purchase range makes that comparison especially important; value depends on the individual pilot’s requirements, not on the number printed beside the most expensive item.

My final view is positive but practical. The best reason to choose iFly EFB is not that it puts a map on a screen; it is that it treats navigation as part of a pilot’s wider preparation process. That makes it a credible alternative to piecing together general maps and separate aviation tools. Its limitations are equally clear: it requires learning, thoughtful purchasing, suitable hardware, and responsible backup habits.

Adventure Pilot, LLC has created an app worth investigating for serious aviation use, particularly when the goal is to make VFR and IFR planning feel more connected. I would install it, test a familiar route, try a route change, and examine the available purchases before relying on it for an important flight. If that trial feels natural and the paid value matches my flying, I would keep it. If I only need occasional basic directions or already have a complete EFB I trust, I would skip the extra complexity.