Low-Fidelity & Concept Testing
Early wireframes evaluated with real pilots

What we built

We developed low-fidelity wireframes for the companion app concept covering five core feature areas, focused on structure and flows, not visual polish.

Forums

Topic-based

discussion hub for questions and knowledge sharing

Map layer

Location-based interface for airport-specific peer insights

Direct messaging

Private communication between pilots

User profiles

Credential display and activity to support trust

Settings

Privacy controls and opt-in management

Concept Testing • n=2

Separate app strongly preferred

Both participants explicitly requested separation from ForeFlight, citing safety and professional focus. They wanted ForeFlight to remain a clean, distraction-free tool.

"I honestly really like the idea of having it specifically as a separate app." (P1)

"ForeFlight already has a lot… it could be distracting, especially while you're up in the air." (P2)

Credentials required for trust

Both participants would not engage with peer content without clear verification. Usernames alone were insufficient, ratings, hours, and certificates needed to be visible.

"I would want credibility. 100%." (P1)

"I would hope the app verifies it… people can say they’ve flown a ton of hours but they really haven’t." (P2)

DMs preferred over public forums for specific questions

Participants saw forums as useful for browsing, but preferred direct messaging for follow-up questions and sensitive topics — reflecting a preference for peer relationships over broadcast communication.

"I found it helpful, but I want more information… I could DM them and get more." (P1)

"If I wanted to ask a question I would probably use DMs." (P2)

Map must offer something ForeFlight doesn't

Participants responded positively to the map feature but asked a pointed question: why would I open a second app for the same information? Peer-contributed local knowledge must be clearly differentiated from ForeFlight's official airport data.

"Why would I go into a separate app to get the same information?" (P1)

"Very useful… I like how you can click on the airport and see information." (P2)

Moderation mechanisms are essential

Both participants raised safety and spam concerns before they would trust peer content, making visible reporting and moderation features a prerequisite for adoption.

"There are some people… who could say stupid things." (P1)

"Getting false information from it." (P2)

What it led to

Concept testing confirmed the separate app direction and generated specific requirements for the mid-fidelity prototype:

Verified Profiles

Credential display as a core feature, not an add-on

DM as first-class

Easy to access, integrated with forum posts

Differentiated map

Peer-generated, non-redundant local insights only

Moderation visible

Reporting and trust indicators surfaced throughout

Back to Process