Navtech TAPs etc.

[Willard Whyte]

So, how do 'we' all feel about the ditching of reliable Jeppy plates and the move to Navtech TAPs?

Forgive the lead-in question, but I think they're a bag o' sh1te.

[TMK1]

I think that ditching the Jepp TAPs and moving to Navtech is a huge step backwards in the provision of AI. Finally after getting worldwide access to a standard format of TAPS, it is taken away for what I would view as an inferior product, also with far less coverage. I remember when Navtech was briefly used a couple of years ago, there where loads of complaints and they stopped being provided. This seems to be a case of the provider not understanding what the user needs. Sadly its now back to using 5 different formats of TAPs again!

[Uncle Ginsters]

So, we ditched our beloved Jeppy plates for NavTech which have since, and very quickly, been shown to be untrustworthy and lacking Jeppy's coverage.

For why? Rumours of all kinds of contract wrangling and individuals' tete-a-tetes have left the operators with a far worse service.

I'd love to meet the guy/girl who made that decision....to thank them in person, obviously! :D:D

[A and C]

Having worked for two companys recently who used NavTech I can say that I am now delighted to now be flying for a company that uses Jeppesen TAPs.

The NavTech plates try to put too much data on one plate, the east bound SID chart for LGW is cramed with so much data that the stop altitudes are confusing and very likeky to result in a level bust, it is only the fact that aircraft are usualy under radar vectors towards the end of the SID that has preventd this mistake being made.

On another STAR chart for a North African airfield the step down altitudes are unclear.

These are just two examples that spring quickly to mind.

All in all the data is badly depicted and the coverage is not the best but they are cheaper than Jeppesen..................I guess this policy is just SOP for the armed forces at the moment.

[Herc-u-lease]

Can i just clarify, you are being given Navtech plates as opposed to Jepp in the RAF? How does that tie in with the navigation database you are using? Unless you are changing databases too is that not a prime opportuntity for inconsistencies between the two?

[Runaway Gun]

I'm sure somebody decided that the cheaper option suited aircrew the best :E

[Uncle Ginsters]

Can i just clarify, you are being given Navtech plates as opposed to Jepp in the RAF?

Allegedly (and this is ppRuNe!) those making the decisions spurred on by our appetite for risk ownership post-Hadden-Cave asked Jeppesen to sign away their collective lives and sign to say something verging on "We hereby agree that any aircraft that ever crashes with a Jeppesen plate in the flight deck/cockpit did so because of the TAPs". Clearly, Jepp said "Screw that RAF" and we're left with NavTech and all their errors.....at least that's what i heard :}

The remainder of the Jeppesen service - JetPlans, Regulated Take-off Tables/Graphs etc - is still in place, thankfully.

Bring back Jeppesen TAPs not only are they correct but i can then use their iPad App too ;)

As for VigilantPilot's "That verges on a flight safety risk....", that's the understatement of the century dear chap! Flying with incorrect plates and no backup IFR/IMC? How much of a fall do we want to set ourselves up for?

[Megaton]

We use Navtech and they are universally loathed. All the important info can be crammed into a tiny corner of a plate. Useful info like check altitudes for non-precision approaches was removed. The glossy paper is hard to read at night. There are numerous errors. Taxi charts extend over several pages. They are a bag o' sh1te. It's bad enough in the airline environment where we go to the same places quite regularly and have time to interpret the plates. I don't envy anyone who has to use them in anger, under pressure and for the first time.

[Darwinism]

The company I work for is going the other way - Navtech to Jepps. Can't happen a minute too soon! Are you guys being forced to use Navtech performance charts and nav data too?

[StopStart]

I couldn't quite believe it myself when I heard we were doing this. Yet more muddled thinking and flawed decision making from the RAF - an outfit that is fast becoming a world leader in both fields. I would despair but there's really no point bothering any more.

[Runaway Gun]

I've seen AIDU facsimile us copies of plates before. Can you imagine how unreadable it becomes when coloured sheets are sent via fax? Then they were photocopied and handed to the crews. Yeah right - at least it was cheaper (that word came up alot during my discussions with them).

[FJ2ME]

I know that I'm going to get shouted down for this but can i make a serious suggestion? Every time you uncover an inaccurate plate or a poorly depicted plate that leads to (or indeed could lead) an infringement, then right an incident report on ASIMS. With the MAA's new power and the onus on reporting all incidents, they will soon get a wealth of data of rubbish TAPS and someone will have to change it. Make all this new fangled risk-register and post-Haddon-Cave gayness work in our favour for once. These TAPS are crap and AIDU have lost the plot recently so the more this is brought to the attention of the high-paid help who sign of on our risks, the more inclined they will be to do something about it.

[I'm Off!]

FJ2ME,


Completely agree. The only way to tackle this is DFSOR every single time there is any confusion or discrepancy. No good complaining without actually doing anything about this.