AERAD Charts - What is happening
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aircraft approach categogy DL
Can anyone enlighten me as to what aircraft approach catergory DL
is ?( letter L should be slightly lower than letter D ). Could it be a "large" Cat D ac or a "long body" Cat D ac, although I thought aircraft approach categories were purely speed based at max landing wt.
is ?( letter L should be slightly lower than letter D ). Could it be a "large" Cat D ac or a "long body" Cat D ac, although I thought aircraft approach categories were purely speed based at max landing wt.
Last edited by Sam Dodger; 7th Aug 2008 at 11:29.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 319
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We had the booklet issued to every pilot in the company, with reminders to study it before the implementation date. Even with that preparation, when I first had to use the new plates, they were an absolute horror.
Our summer sim profile is set around the airport I know best in the world, where I flew as a student, a PPL, an FO and as a captain. Even with that local knowledge, I found the plates almost unusable.
An example was elevation: instead of having the TD elev presented on a graphic representing the ground, it is in a box at the top- adjacent to a box with another elev, in identical print. Some of the terrain notes for the missed approach (instructions on how to avoid high ground if you cannot maintain the climb gradient) appear to have been removed.
Another issue is renaming the pages. Why? The old alphanumeric page numbers were easy to deal with in the flight deck- giving them numerical page IDs only is a nice neat solution, like giving us rows of identical switches and controls. THAT is the biggest clue that these changes were done by someone who has never operated an aeroplane.
I see this has devolved into another Jepps vs Aerad thread, which is unhelpful. What I would suggest is that companies which bought Aerad plates, did so because they wanted the Aerad presentation. Companies which wanted Jepps style presentation, bought Jepps plates.
If we are to have Jepps style presentation forced on us, we might as well buy Jepps plates! That, I suspect, is a conclusion many companies will come to.
Our summer sim profile is set around the airport I know best in the world, where I flew as a student, a PPL, an FO and as a captain. Even with that local knowledge, I found the plates almost unusable.
An example was elevation: instead of having the TD elev presented on a graphic representing the ground, it is in a box at the top- adjacent to a box with another elev, in identical print. Some of the terrain notes for the missed approach (instructions on how to avoid high ground if you cannot maintain the climb gradient) appear to have been removed.
Another issue is renaming the pages. Why? The old alphanumeric page numbers were easy to deal with in the flight deck- giving them numerical page IDs only is a nice neat solution, like giving us rows of identical switches and controls. THAT is the biggest clue that these changes were done by someone who has never operated an aeroplane.
I see this has devolved into another Jepps vs Aerad thread, which is unhelpful. What I would suggest is that companies which bought Aerad plates, did so because they wanted the Aerad presentation. Companies which wanted Jepps style presentation, bought Jepps plates.
If we are to have Jepps style presentation forced on us, we might as well buy Jepps plates! That, I suspect, is a conclusion many companies will come to.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: I used to know
Posts: 175
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Used them in anger at night week and a half ago
they are very cluttered and un userfriendly.
In particular the ident for the ils is hard to find far less read. The old not below heights / altitudes were clear and consise ie a line under.
Now plain font used which is the same one as the font for alternate minima ie Loc/dme etc.
During the day bad at night nightmare.
And another thing - which idiot proof read these plates numerous errors pages missing etc etc.
Rant over
they are very cluttered and un userfriendly.
In particular the ident for the ils is hard to find far less read. The old not below heights / altitudes were clear and consise ie a line under.
Now plain font used which is the same one as the font for alternate minima ie Loc/dme etc.
During the day bad at night nightmare.
And another thing - which idiot proof read these plates numerous errors pages missing etc etc.
Rant over
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Somerset England
Age: 62
Posts: 349
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'll add to the rant as well, we have just started getting these as replacements and I was shocked at how difficult they were to use.
Not user friendly at all and as has been said difficult to read and gather information from. I for one would welcome the return to the old format.
Not user friendly at all and as has been said difficult to read and gather information from. I for one would welcome the return to the old format.
I have to agree the new charts are a complete shambles. Whilst the drawn procedures may look a little clearer, the text lets it down and now can make familiar procedures confusing.
At my home base there is a hold based on a local VOR and although the VOR is drawn (now using the same symbol as an NDB), the radial on which the hold is orientated doean't appear at all on one of the STARS.
Also I have noticed that quite a few of the SID radials are out by one or two degrees between whats written in the text and drawn on the chart.
Apparently the chart production has been outsourced to India
At my home base there is a hold based on a local VOR and although the VOR is drawn (now using the same symbol as an NDB), the radial on which the hold is orientated doean't appear at all on one of the STARS.
Also I have noticed that quite a few of the SID radials are out by one or two degrees between whats written in the text and drawn on the chart.
Apparently the chart production has been outsourced to India
Join Date: May 2002
Location: England
Posts: 247
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
O'dear! RIP Aerad, once great charts now unusable!
Why are the SIDs in reverse alphabetical sort of order! So difficult to use, I dread the day the CDG or MXP plates change to Navtech!
As a funny mistake I noticed on the airfield layout plate for BHX the taxiways are the wrong way around, ie printed in mirror image! Funny as this may be at familiar airfields, does not inspire confidence on a trip to a new field!
Also noticed a number of symbols that appear but have no ref at all in the handy little book explaining the legends etc!
Come on Aerad Racal Thales Navtech or whatever your next name is sort it out!
Why are the SIDs in reverse alphabetical sort of order! So difficult to use, I dread the day the CDG or MXP plates change to Navtech!
As a funny mistake I noticed on the airfield layout plate for BHX the taxiways are the wrong way around, ie printed in mirror image! Funny as this may be at familiar airfields, does not inspire confidence on a trip to a new field!
Also noticed a number of symbols that appear but have no ref at all in the handy little book explaining the legends etc!
Come on Aerad Racal Thales Navtech or whatever your next name is sort it out!
Pretty poor proof-reading on the ones I have seen. Aberdeen ground/aerodrome chart gets 5 runway designations out of 7 wrong (e.g. refers to Heli Runway 23 as "32H" with a QDM of 189deg)
Scotstown Heli departure refers to "SHE" when it should be "SHD"
And the legend pages have page after page where all the letter "n"s are missing, making it very hard to read. Maybe not so important, but doesn't give any reassurance as to what else they have missed.
Not impressed........
Scotstown Heli departure refers to "SHE" when it should be "SHD"
And the legend pages have page after page where all the letter "n"s are missing, making it very hard to read. Maybe not so important, but doesn't give any reassurance as to what else they have missed.
Not impressed........
Join Date: May 2006
Location: LHR ( EGLL )
Age: 57
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ah Christ,
See what happens just as you start to get old ............
Hope I get one of the new fandango girls or boys what is young sitting next to me again that is used to new things and change so they can teach me how to interpret the dammned things.
Never had these problems when I was a kid flying the DC9 back when planes were real with dials and switches, pencils and notepads to work out the sums.
Bah humbug
Old and grumpy Jox
See what happens just as you start to get old ............
Hope I get one of the new fandango girls or boys what is young sitting next to me again that is used to new things and change so they can teach me how to interpret the dammned things.
Never had these problems when I was a kid flying the DC9 back when planes were real with dials and switches, pencils and notepads to work out the sums.
Bah humbug
Old and grumpy Jox
Join Date: May 2002
Location: England
Posts: 247
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Its not been old! Even the youngsters are confused! Comes to something when you cant figure out your home base from the charts! I live in fear of the day I have to go somewhere for the first time with these plates!
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: uk
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting thread. I originally thought all this was due to the fact we naturally resist change.. However, using these charts I now find whilst some details are clearer, the text especially is too small and a struggle to read in a darkened cockpit. And interesting to see a VOR symbol is the same as a waypoint. It just makes it more time consuming to find info you want. I'm not against change, I just dont understand what was gained by changing everthing .
But my biggest query has to be why the MSA at my local airport is now lower... world changing geograpical event, or typo?
But my biggest query has to be why the MSA at my local airport is now lower... world changing geograpical event, or typo?
In general I find the new format pretty easy to get my head around. The information bar at the top of the approach plate for example is useful if you need to brief in a hurry. Give me another 30 years and the text maybe a little small
Mistakes on the plates are not limited to the new format, a new revision for an airfield I fly into in the old format contains a number of errors. Perhaps the QA is the issue we should be concerned with?
Mistakes on the plates are not limited to the new format, a new revision for an airfield I fly into in the old format contains a number of errors. Perhaps the QA is the issue we should be concerned with?
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 356
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm disgusted with the new format as there are several areas in which they significantly less clear than before.
All radio beacons and waypoints are identical in depiction. So rather than looking for a relevant VOR or NDB now you have to study the frequencies - not difficult sure, but not as simple as before.
The 4d altitude check on the glide is now ambiguous wihtout careful studying where there is a separate DME for an ILS. Plus at several airports I've been to the LLZ 4d check is up to 60ft higher than the glide but its just not clear which is which at a glance.
The glidpath angle is now written on the vertical profile picture. When I pointed it out to a Captain who couldn't find it he was gobsmacked when he saw it. It is so faint it is basically a watermark on the page.
SID altitude constraints are the worst for flight safety in my oppinion. Previously an altitude or FL was underlined / overlined or both but they've removed the line and replaced it with MAX/MIN/AT so on a dark night in turbulence they look similar. How can this be an improvement?!
CATII charts have gone too. Now you have to use a CATI chart and flip to the back for the CATII minima.
As ravfooty said, the EU-ops minima are now on the chart and most captains I've flown with so far have been unaware of the fact that the JAR-ops minima we use are at the back.
Yes the company should have told us but they didn't until we turned up for work, pulled out the new plates and phoned ops to say the plates were all wrong - they said oh but we told you all about them ages ago... except they hadn't....
All radio beacons and waypoints are identical in depiction. So rather than looking for a relevant VOR or NDB now you have to study the frequencies - not difficult sure, but not as simple as before.
The 4d altitude check on the glide is now ambiguous wihtout careful studying where there is a separate DME for an ILS. Plus at several airports I've been to the LLZ 4d check is up to 60ft higher than the glide but its just not clear which is which at a glance.
The glidpath angle is now written on the vertical profile picture. When I pointed it out to a Captain who couldn't find it he was gobsmacked when he saw it. It is so faint it is basically a watermark on the page.
SID altitude constraints are the worst for flight safety in my oppinion. Previously an altitude or FL was underlined / overlined or both but they've removed the line and replaced it with MAX/MIN/AT so on a dark night in turbulence they look similar. How can this be an improvement?!
CATII charts have gone too. Now you have to use a CATI chart and flip to the back for the CATII minima.
As ravfooty said, the EU-ops minima are now on the chart and most captains I've flown with so far have been unaware of the fact that the JAR-ops minima we use are at the back.
Yes the company should have told us but they didn't until we turned up for work, pulled out the new plates and phoned ops to say the plates were all wrong - they said oh but we told you all about them ages ago... except they hadn't....
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think the CAA need to get involved here and start regulating these things.
The charts are full of errors, unclear and generally a joke.
I'm sure that if a journalist got hold of the fact that our safety standards are being compromised because of these plates something would be done about them.
The charts are full of errors, unclear and generally a joke.
I'm sure that if a journalist got hold of the fact that our safety standards are being compromised because of these plates something would be done about them.
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: France
Posts: 481
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hello, is this the 'Happy Pilots Fly Jeppesen', thread? May I come in?
Suggs, you're right. many accidents and incidents over the years and no effective effort to establish a Standard. Madness!
(Geddit??? Madness??? Suggs?????)
Suggs, you're right. many accidents and incidents over the years and no effective effort to establish a Standard. Madness!
(Geddit??? Madness??? Suggs?????)
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: ortac
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is a safety issue as the plates are far from clear, ILS freq is not too badly displayed but is smaller than before, could be a safety problem if not briefed properly as think the SID/STARs are confusing if unfamiliar to airport, this new design must have been a school project in Brussels for under tens..