Rebuild the Windows-exclusive simulation tool for web to unlock evaluation by users on Mac/Linux/mobile, expanding the addressable user base by 25% per quarter.
Before
After
In this whole V4 Application, there is only 3 main user flow, which the EASA Engineers use the most.
The product had too many buttons doing the same thing — it made screens feel cluttered and confusing. So before fixing anything else, we mapped out every button and nav path into one clean Information Architecture. Developers could use this later as the single reference, instead of guessing."
"The product had a lot of complexity, so we decided to create high-fidelity wireframes first finalizing the exact data input fields, layout, and visual structure before development started. This way there was no back-and-forth later."
"Created 3 different iteration to finalise one which aligned with clients visual layout in mind & better UX approach from design side"
Version A · 16:9
Version B · 16:9
Version C · 16:9"A product like this needs a proper design document. It helps keep the design streamlined and makes it easier to adapt when changes come up later."
Desktop & Mobile · 16:9Dragging of pop ups. Repositionable, draggable modals were asked for.
The cost in development and accessibility outweighed the benefit.
Closing the window and opening again with tabs intact.
Persistent tab state across full window close and reopen was technically out of scope for this phase.
Breaking the grid and still being responsive. Some asks needed the grid to bend in ways that would have broken the responsive promise.
The grid stayed.
A functionlaity was needed, where data needed to be hold when the browser is closed.
[Designer justification for the above developer point.]
[Developer point two to be added.]
[Designer justification for the above developer point.]
At some point, the desktop and mobile designs didn't align properly. As a designer, I had to explain what responsive vs adaptive design actually means to the team. This also pushed us to take a different approach — one that broke some UX guidelines, but it's what the business needed most.
Responsive vs Adaptive · 16:9
I would've scrapped the whole 'show all buttons upfront approach and gone with a tabbed structure instead. But the user base had a lot of older users — they needed lower cognitive load, and we also had to design around color blindness.
For an user group more than 50+ age group, familiarity beats novelty. The hardest task was not making the tool look new, it was making the new tool feel like the old one while keeping and increasing the business revenue.