carrying a chart in the plane

[spitfire747]

I know it is common knowledge that legally a chart MUST be carried in the aeroplane but can anyone tell me exactly WHERE this is written. I have asked a few other instructors and examiners and no one knows.

Thankyou...
Spit

[slim_slag]

something caught under the 'pilot shall become familiar with all available information concerning the flight' reg (or local equivalent if any). If you don't have a chart, you don't have all available information.

[fireflybob]

Air Navigation Order:-

SCHEDULE 4
Articles 12(6) and 14(2)

5 Scale A

(ii) Maps, charts, codes and other documents and navigational equipment necessary, in addition to any other equipment required under this Order, for the intended flight of the aircraft including any diversion which may reasonably be expected.

Hope this helps.

[homeguard]

Also note the following from the ANO;

Pre-flight action by commander of aircraft

Article 43

The commander of an aircraft registered in the United Kingdom shall reasonably satisfy himself before the aircraft takes off:

(a) that the flight can safely be made, taking into account the latest information available as to the route and aerodrome to be used, the weather reports and forecasts available and any alternative course of action which can be adopted in case the flight cannot be completed as planned;

[DFC]

Based on the above quote from the ANO, it seems to revolve arround the necessity of having a chart on a particular flight. Taking that at face value, one could argue that when operating a VFR flight over well known territory, no chart would be required.

However, the actual ICAO requirement to which the UK has no difference is that the aircraft shall carry - "current and suitable charts for the route of the proposed flight and all routes along which it is reasonably expected that the flight may be diverted."

This seems to make it much clearer as under the ICAO requirement there is no situation where the pilot can fly with no chart.

But, a scribbled pencil drawing of the local area on the back of a fag packet could be just as up to date and useful as a full colour map.....perhaps even more so if required frequencies and procedures are included.

Overall, I don't think that anyone would drag someone over the coals for flying the circuit with no 1:500,000 chart provided that they had all the airfield information required to make a safe flight.

Flying cross country (legally more than 3nm from the field) is a different matter.

Regards,

DFC

[Whirlybird]

And suppose you're flying circuits and someone crashes, blocking the runway, and you have to divert to another airfield? Would that fall into the category of "reasonably expected" or whatever the wording was?

[fireflybob]

Whirlybird, quite clearly, from a legal standpoint, I think it would.

Also I think common sense says carry a map and I can't really think of a reason why you would not want to!

[DFC]

There is no requirement for VFR flights to plan for or carry fuel for a diversion. They do however need to carry a reserve.

Holding for 45 minutes above an airfield is considered enough to have wreckage removed.

Anyone who only does circuits when both the enroute weather etc are suitable for a diversion has never let a student do solo at Vagar!

How many solo students are capable of or briefed for a 50nm diversion after 1 hour solo flying?

Never mkind that - how many instructors get airbourne for a circuit weather check when it may be OK for circuits but absolutely below limits for VFR enroute flight?

Look at the worst case scenario - radio failure and blocked runway?

regards,

DFC

[FlyingForFun]

And if I fly at an airfield where there are at least two suitable diversion airfields within just a few miles - both near enough that I can see them from my airfield's circuit on a good day? (Ok then, maybe not, but I can see them from 3000' overhead my airfield.) I know the frequencies, because I often get a FIS from one or other of them anyway. And I know that there is no airspace between me and them below a significan altitude..... Do I still need to carry a chart in case of diversion?

(I'm not suggesting that I wouldn't carry a chart, btw - I always do, even for circuits. Just wondering how people interpret the law.)

As an aside, am I right in thinking that, unlike JARs, the FARs do carry a specific requirement to carry an up-to-date chart?

FFF
--------------

[Avgas172]

I can see it now first solo student, crashed plane on runway, radio failed, X runway u/s and looking at his ersa for diversion field details, looking at his chart on how to get there while spiraling out of control because he had his head inside the cockpit all the while....:E

[Whirlybird]

Avgas172,

There have been instances of first solo students having to divert, even if not with all the other problems you mention.

Just a point of information, that's all.

[Avgas172]

Yeh whirly, I was only being a smart arse,...LOL , but seriously the need to aviate then navigate & communicate is still a priority.:O

[slim_slag]

FFF

As an aside, am I right in thinking that, unlike JARs, the FARs do carry a specific requirement to carry an up-to-date chart?

Not for little planes under Part 91; there is a reg in part 91 which specifically requires large planes and turbojets to carry a chart (together with spare D cell batteries or something like that).

Of course if you don't have a chart and get lost and have an accident I suppose they can always bust you for being 'careless and reckless', which is the catch all reg if they really want to hang you out.

[DFC]

Whirly,

Would love to hear the story of the first solo(s) that had to divert and the circumstances involved.

Regards,

DFC

[Whirlybird]

DFC,

It was in Pilot's "I Learned About Flying From That" series, maybe a couple of years ago; can't remember exactly when. As far as I remember the poor student was airborne for something like two hours, although I'm not quite sure of that. And I think it was due to an accident on the runway, although again, I can't quite remember. Someone else may remember the details, and which copy it was in. If I get time I'll look it up and tell the story.

[DFC]

We read all sorts of things in the press!

Overall, I have yet to come across a CAA incident report submitted because a solo student had to complete an unauthorised crosscountry flight in the interest of safety.

I believe that the number of such "diversions" compared to the number of circuit details flown by both PPL and students puts the probability in the 10 to the -9 category of unlikely.............(provided that the weather etc was properly checked).

The chances of an engine failure resulting in serious injury in a light aircraft is far more probable than having to make such a diversion.

If there is evidence that diversions are likely, then solo should be delayed until after the navigation elements........i.e. no solo until the very end of the PPL training!

Which way should we have ti then in the interests of maintaining safety?

Regards,

DFC

[WX Man]

As far as I remember the poor student was airborne for something like two hours

Imagine if the guy went on to get a CPL/IR and then landed an interview with airline XYZ. How would you explain that to the CP?!!!:O

Best story I know comes from a friend of mine (could even be reading this). He was OK'd for his first solo, and as he taxied out to the RWY, the cloudbase lowered to about 600ft. TWR didn't know he was a first solo, and cleared him for take off. The guy duly took off, climbed to 1000ft and executed the turns in the circuit "in about the right places". Anyway, before TWR could get a phone call from a very concerned instructor, they'd asked him to orbit on base to allow a Herc to land. Which he did. He then used luck to let himself down and onto final, and landed.

How did he do it? By having goodness knows how many hours in MS flight sim!

[justinmg]

Regarding solo student diversions...... It happened at humberside July this year. The student was on the first solo consolidation. Whilst in the circuit, the airport closed due to a bomb scare. Radar moved all aircraft out of the ATZ, then evacuated the tower and radar. Just before going, radar handed the student onto Waddington who radar vectored him to Gamston. The student had a map with him. Everything else went off uneventfully!!!

Justin

[fireflybob]

Sounds like it would have been a lot safer to let him land at Humberside!

[DFC]

Absolutely agree with that Fireflybob.

After landing and vacating, he would have been further from the terminal and other likely evacuated places than the assembly areas!!!

No doubt their having a map on board made it much easier for the radar controller to vector the aircraft. ;)

What is the point in having a map on board if the pilot has not been given the training required to use it properly.

Also, did the pre-flight planning allow fuel required for the diversion and the required reserve on top of that as well as a check of the safe altitudes enroute and having a line on the chart etc etc..............doubt it very much.

We still are talking about a number of circuit solo student diversions which is lower than the GA fatal accident rate!

Which do we need to tackle?

Regards,

DFC

[justinmg]

Landing was not an option as a Airbus full of holiday makers had just put wheels down and was holding at the end of the active, but thats another story.

Can`t imagine preflight planning had anticipated this, but the a/c never go up with less than 2hrs fuel, so had this happened at the end of his consolidation, he would still have had 1hour reserve.