Case File 03
Procedure Design
Boeing · Mapping Tools · Product UX
Modernizing an outdated procedure-design workflow by bringing the work directly onto the map.
Procedure designers use this software to create and edit flight procedures for aviation. I helped modernize it.
Company
Boeing
Role
UX Specialist
Focus
Mapping · Drawing tools · Tool design · Direct manipulation
1
2
3
4
5
0.0
AAA
Selected path
Points
Length
Type
Layers
Terrain
Obstacles
Airspace
Production interfaces are confidential. Every screen in this case study is a reconstructed example using fictional data and a deliberately different UI.
01
The problem
A fragmented, tool-heavy workflow.
Procedure designers moved between Google Earth, FPDAM and roughly 25 drawing tools to create work that ultimately needed to live on a map. The problem wasn’t that the software looked old. The workflow itself was fragmented and tool-heavy.
Fragmented tools
Google Earth
FPDAM
1
Find the point in Google Earth
2
Take a screenshot or snippet
3
Move into FPDAM
4
Load and zoom to the location
5
Start drawing with the legacy tools
Tool overload
Roughly 25 drawing tools. Some opened more nested controls.
Even basic drawing meant moving between tools.
Manual geometry
Corners and curves built by overlapping shapes.
Basic drawing meant manual geometry.
Before
Fragmented workflow
Multiple applications
Roughly 25 drawing tools
Nested controls
Manual geometry
Tool switching
Redesign direction
The map as the workspace
Map as the primary workspace
A focused set of roughly 10 core tools, including measurement
Direct editing on the map
Fewer unnecessary interactions
More familiar creation behavior
02
Map as workspace
The map is the workspace.
The redesign direction was to let procedure designers work directly on the map, instead of treating the map as something they moved in and out of. Paths, waypoints, obstacles and terrain live together on one canvas.
1
2
3
4
5
0.0
AAA
Selected path
Points
Length
Type
Layers
Terrain
Obstacles
Airspace
1
2
3
4
1
Paths and waypoints
2
Editable geometry
3
Obstacles
4
Terrain
03
Simplifying the toolset
From roughly 25 tools to about 10.
We looked at what designers were actually trying to create and explored whether a smaller set of flexible tools could support that work more directly. The direction is roughly 10 core tools, including measurement.
Before
Roughly 25 tools
Some opened more nested controls.
After
About 10 core tools
0.0
Measure
Illustrative toolset. About 10 core tools, including measurement.
04
Direct manipulation
Edit the geometry right on the map.
Instead of forcing designers through layers of drawing controls, I explored interactions that felt closer to modern design tools, where objects can be selected and edited directly on the canvas. Familiar behavior from tools like Figma and Adobe apps shaped how I thought about it: select an object, manipulate it directly, adjust the geometry and keep working on the canvas.
1
Select
Click a path and its control points appear.
2
Edit
Drag a control point and the geometry follows.
0.0
3
Check
Measure the result and keep working on the canvas.
Reconstructed interaction states. Fictional geometry, illustrative behavior.
05
Managing the work
More than the drawing canvas.
Procedure Design had two levels. A dashboard organized the work: project history, who created what, timestamps and previous work. The map-based workspace was where designers created and edited the procedure itself.
Project level
Creation level
Projects
Project
Created by
Last modified
History
Approach procedure A
A. Reyes
Mar 14, 09:20
View history
Departure procedure B
K. Patel
Mar 12, 14:05
View history
Airspace review
D. Novak
Mar 10, 11:40
View history
Missed approach C
A. Reyes
Mar 04, 16:15
View history
Obstacle check
L. Ferreira
Mar 02, 10:30
View history
06
Looking ahead
Research / Exploration
Designing for more than traditional aircraft
I also explored how UAS, drones and emerging aircraft could affect future procedure-design workflows. This is what I looked at:
How drones navigate around obstacles
How routes could be represented
How obstacle information might affect route planning
How new aircraft types could interact with existing aviation infrastructure, with traditional aircraft, eVTOL and drones operating in related airspace
This was future-focused research alongside the Procedure Design work. It did not become a designed or released drone platform.
07
Reviewed and refined
Reviewed and refined with people who knew the work.
Over about five months, concepts were created, reviewed, discussed and refined with aviation SMEs who understood the existing procedure-design workflow. The reviews were there to make sure that simplifying the interface didn’t remove the precision and control the work requires.
1
Create
2
Review
3
Discuss
4
Refine
I wasn’t redesigning a specialized aviation tool in isolation. The concepts were reviewed and refined with people who understood the work.
08
Where it landed
Where it landed.
I worked on Procedure Design for about five months. The redesigned workflows and concepts were reviewed and refined with SMEs. The project was ultimately placed on hold.
Reflection
The biggest opportunity wasn’t adding better tools. It was making the map itself a more natural place to create and edit the work.
Next case file