Approach Plates - documentation

[742-xx]

Having looked at Aerad and Jeppessen and rejected them because of cost, I heard about these - Terminal Procedure Publications / Approach Plates - FAA NACO (NOS) (http://www.mypilotstore.com/mypilotstore/chart/FAA_Terminal_Procedures_Approach_Plates.asp)

How come we don't have these here in the UK ?

They seem much more robust for the GA environment, the Aerad/Jeppessen types seem like they are printed on old toilet roll and fairly fragile.

But the cost alone surely makes these 'FAA style' a good idea ?

[bookworm]

How come we don't have these here in the UK ?

Because in the US, Joe Taxpayer pays to have them created free for pilots to use, and in the UK, he doesn't.

[Contacttower]

Well we do have ones in the AIP...but they are not really usable because system minima have to be added to them to get the MDA/DAs and they have no RVR figures on them. Unlike in France for example where the AIP plates are fine...

[NorthSouth]

Try these (http://www.gcap.co.uk) - designed for GA, got all the minima on them, and cheap.

NS

[paulsalem]

If you're not happy with the Jepp paper type, order JeppView (http://www.jeppesen.com/personal-solutions/aviation/ifr-jeppview-electronic-charting.jsp) (Jepps on the computer) and print them out on A5 paper. Or get an iPad and use the Jepp FD (http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/jeppesen-mobile-fd/id446912582?mt=8) (plates & enroutes) or TC (http://ww1.jeppesen.com/main/corporate/microsites/jeppesen-mobile-tc/) (plates only) app.

I've used NOS/NACO/AeroNav (US Gov't plates) quite a bit, and Jeppesen is way better. The data for all the approaches come from the same source (FAA) but Jepp does a better job of displaying it.

[Genghis the Engineer]

We do have them in the UK, and they're free. I use them for my instrument flying, as do a number of other people I know. Perhaps marginally less user-friendly than Jeppesen, and you have to work out your own approach minima, but since they're free, I'm not going to start complaining.

You'll need to register with the AIS website, but they are here (http://www.nats-uk.ead-it.com/public/index.php%3Foption=com_content&task=blogcategory&id=6&Itemid=13.html).

For free charts for the rest of Europe, you need to register with the EAD website here (http://www.ead.eurocontrol.int/publicuser/public/pu/login.do)

All you need then is a printer. I just print them out on A4 on my home inkjet, and have little folders made up of those in A4 filing pages, strung together with treasury tags - one folder per airport I am likely to visit. Quick check online before a trip to make sure they're still current, print out new ones if they're not.

If like me you are an IMC rather than IR holder, then the minima are very straightforward anyhow. Ignoring all the advisory guff in the IMC syllabus, it always comes out at 1800m RVR, 500ft DH on a PA, 600ft DH on an NPA. I spent quite a lot of time trying to fine any exception that that, and failed. Add more if rusty!

For those who do like a nice spiral bound set of approach plates - you can buy them from the RAF for £27.50 +p&p for a book that covers half the UK. Details here (http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/+/http://www.aidu.mod.uk/AIDU_Cat/AIDU_Products_and_services.pdf).

Just sometimes Britain does do things at-least as well as the rest of the world!

G

[IO540]

A better formed Q would be to ask why does the UK CAA, and almost every other European CAA, create plates which are drafted for A4, when they could have drafted them for A5 and produced plates which are directly usable in the cockpit.

The taxpayer subsidy is irrelevant, because the European CAAs do produce free approach plates. They just make them barely cockpit usable, by drafting them mostly for A4 and mostly showing an OCA and not an MDA, etc.

Why do they go most of the way and then stop when they could have done something usable with minimal extra effort?

I asked the CAA head of mapping (face to face) and his astonishing and arrogant reply was that the CAA is not in the business of competing with commercial data providers.

You can take that answer in different ways, one of which is that the CAAs are in bed with Jeppesen and protect Jepp's business - perhaps, in some cases, in return for Jepp paying them for the use of their "copyright". Certainly, Eurocontrol were for many years protecting Jepp's business, though, I am sure, without getting any money for doing it.

[A and C]

The person starting this thread has rejected out of hand two products that have taken some time to develop and are intended to be the best to use in the cockpit environment Jeppesen and EAG (AERAD disappeared a few years back).

The toilet paper jibe is particular telling and uninformed, Jepps use this grade of paper to save weight and it is stronger than the alternative.

Im not a particular fan of EAG plates but they are far better for cockpit use than the AIC version and the Jepps are streets ahead of both, when the workload goes up and the cloud base goes down is the time you will start to appreciate good and clear information that is well presented so as to avoid errors on your part.

Now how much is your next mistake going to cost ?

[742-xx]

The person starting this thread has rejected out of hand two products that have taken some time to develop and are intended to be the best to use in the cockpit environment Jeppesen and EAG (AERAD disappeared a few years back).



Rejected due to cost - for a GA pilot with an IMCR I think that most reasonable people would agree.

The toilet paper jibe is particular telling and uninformed, Jepps use this grade of paper to save weight and it is stronger than the alternative.



Again, I'm sure that most reasonable people understood what I meant. In a clean sterile Boeing/Airbus or whatever cockpit, nice clean lightweight paper is fine. In a 30+ year old Cessna/Piper club aircraft not so good. With the best will in the world greasy fingerprints end up on everything.


As most people have said the UK AAIP plates are probably the best option, although A4 is awkward.
As I stated in my first post, the FAA version in the form of a small booklet seems a good idea.
They are reasonably priced, published regularly and seem readily available at most pilot stores.

[A and C]

With the annual UK subscription for all the charts that an IMC rating holder can use legally at IRO €500 (€400 for the renewal) it would seem that you are working very hard to save the cost of 2 or maybe 3 hours flying and with an electronic subscription soon to be available at IRO €180 your argument rather falls apart.

Until recently I would print the charts I needed and bin them at the end of the flight using the a Jeppview system, that was until the latest Jepp app for the iPad.

My flight documentation for a european trip at use time was 15Lb of books a computer and a small printer, now it is an iPad and a few charts.

[foxmoth]

With the annual UK subscription for all the charts that an IMC rating holder can use legally at IRO €500 (€400 for the renewal) it would seem that you are working very hard to save the cost of 2 or maybe 3 hours flying and with an electronic subscription soon to be available at IRO €180 your argument rather falls apart.

Remember that this is the private flying forum - for many here 2 or 3 hours is a significant amount of their annual flying!:\

[742-xx]

My original point was that the 'Terminal Procedure Publications' seemed a good idea.
Their format seems more suited to GA.
They are readily available and they are reasonably priced, at less than 6 dollars per region.
Jeppessen etc charts are fine products, if you use them on a daily basis.
But the price seems difficult to justify for a mere IMCR GA pilot, where as the 'Terminal Procedure Publications' approach seems more suitable.

[A and C]

Foxmoth should a pilot with that little flying in a year be flying IFR ?

742-xx may be you shuld talk to AIDU at Northolt and see if you can get hold of the military flip charts, they are basically the EAG product customized for the military knee pad and intended for use in the fast jet/support helicopter environment, they are a reasonable product but I prefer to pay my money and use the Jepps.

Ministry of Defence | About Defence | What we do | Security and Intelligence | DIS | ICG | No1 Aeronautical Information Documents Unit (No 1 AIDU) (http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/AboutDefence/WhatWeDo/SecurityandIntelligence/DIS/ICG/No1AeronauticalInformationDocumentsUnitno1Aidu.htm)

[Genghis the Engineer]

A&C et.al., in my post #6 above, I linked to the catalogue for the military products - the flip charts are £27.50 + £0.99 per go.

G

[Anonystude]

If you're using AIDU plates be aware the RVR minima are usually not to EU-OPS.

[foxmoth]

Foxmoth should a pilot with that little flying in a year be flying IFR ?

I agree, but some do, and even if not flying IFR it does not mean he should not have up to date charts just in case,there are also some of us that fly for a living then fly GA as well, not all of us are rolling in it and would like to have affordable up to date plates.

[Jodelman]

A better formed Q would be to ask why does the UK CAA, and almost every other European CAA, create plates which are drafted for A4, when they could have drafted them for A5 and produced plates which are directly usable in the cockpit.

Not sure if I'm missing something here. I don't have any problems printing the approach plates from the NATS site in A5 format.

[Genghis the Engineer]

Not sure if I'm missing something here. I don't have any problems printing the approach plates from the NATS site in A5 format.

I've done that, although personally I find the text a little small.

Personally I print it at A4 and have an approach plate folder for each airfield. More visible, and I prefer to keep the approach plate separate separate to my main kneeboard.

Just personal preferences I suspect.

G

[Gertrude the Wombat]

Just personal preferences I suspect
Like for example, some people might be able to read them printed at A4 but not at A5.

[Genghis the Engineer]

I struggle to read them at A5 to be honest. My main personal preference is to get my approach plates for free! Having A4 plates seems an acceptable price for that.

G

[IO540]

Yes; a part of it is that if you take the normal (e.g. UK) AIP plates and print them out in A5 size, few people over 45 can read them without reading glasses :)

The other part is that the plates do not give the MDA/MDH. This is a bizzare approach (no pun intended) and I cannot see why they do that, other than a deliberate measure to ensure they are not used by anybody flying seriously.

Many of the AIP plates are also unclear or just badly drafted. I cannot think of a good example off hand but have seen a few.

But for most private pilots this is a non discussion because 99% of them cannot afford Jepps - other than a UK-only subscription. IIRC, that one is under £200.

[Ultranomad]

Yes; a part of it is that if you take the normal (e.g. UK) AIP plates and print them out in A5 size, few people over 45 can read them without reading glasses
One can somewhat alleviate this problem by cropping the margins off an A4 plate and fitting the result into an A5. It's only a few percent larger than uncropped, but it makes a noticeable difference.
In a similar manner, I cropped the margins off A5 plates to load them into a bookreader (Nook).