Research
Understanding how Pilots socialize and share knowledge
Surveys & Interviews
We distributed a survey to 26 general aviation pilots capturing behavioral patterns: which platforms they use to connect, how often they seek peer advice, what types of information they share, and their initial attitudes toward social features in flight tools. The survey gave us a quantitative baseline and helped us prioritize topics for interviews.
We recruited 9 general aviation pilots for in-depth conversations exploring how they seek advice, what makes them trust or distrust information online, how they currently use ForeFlight, and how they'd feel about social features within a flight tool. Sessions were conducted over Zoom, recorded with consent, and transcribed for analysis.
We used semi-structured interviews, rather than structured surveys alone, because we needed pilots to surface concerns and scenarios we hadn't anticipated. The format allowed us to follow unexpected threads, like the discovery that trust concerns were more than simple "I trust it / I don't" positions.
26
Survey Responses
9
Pilot Interviews
4.15/5
Mean interest in social features
Key Findings
Local knowledge is the most wanted, least available information
From the survey, 80.8% of pilots reported discussing route planning and local knowledge with others; 6 of 9 interviewees expressed a strong desire for airport-specific peer insights, unofficial traffic patterns, noise abatement procedures, which FBOs are welcoming to small aircraft. This type of knowledge exists only through word of mouth and is invisible to pilots flying somewhere new.
"That local knowledge doesn't exist anywhere. You just kind of have to figure that one out." (P2)
"Might be nice to be able to send out a general question, ‘hi, I'm going to XYZ…to, you know, to anybody who's signed up to be an informant about XYZ. That could be useful." (P6)
Trust is non-negotiable before pilots act on peer advice
All 9 participants raised credibility unprompted. Some required formal credentials (CFI/CFII); others needed first-hand recency. All verified peer advice against official FAA sources before acting on it.
"I try to find an official reference… especially from the FAA… then I know it’s reliable." (P1)
"I very rarely trust what I see online… you don't know their credibility." (P3)
High interest, but specific and legitimate concerns
Pilots were enthusiastic, mean rating 4.5/5, but named three concern areas unprompted: low-quality or biased advice, platform misuse (spam, self-promotion), and distraction during safety-critical moments.
“I'm just kind of more concerned about spam." (P2)
"It's like using maps while scrolling social media… it could be distracting." (P7)
User Personas
Research findings were synthesized into two personas that guided all subsequent design decisions, representing the two most distinct user types in our data.
Design Requirements
From our ideation matrix we recognized that implementing all design requirements would be challenging. As a result, we prioritized five key aspects: Verified profiles, Structured discussions, Content quality, User Control, and Map layer — focusing on the most essential elements to deliver a functional and impactful solution.
01
Verified profiles
Display credentials and experience to establish trust
02
Structured discussions
Topic-based forums with search, filtering, and DMs
03
Content quality
Upvoting, reporting, and verification to surface credible information
04
User control
Opt-in — social features never interrupt core flight workflows
05
Airport map layer
Contextual peer knowledge surfaced at the airport level
© ForeFlight Social