Just wondering. What are the requirements for approah plates on board an aircraft without EFB???? must both pilots have the original copy or can either have a photo-copied version provided an original is onboard??? I hope this is the appropriate forum for this discussion.
You are required to have available the information necessary for the planned flight, inclusive whatever alternate planning you have made.
Your operations manual may specify what vendor to use but wether you chose [insert any company here] it remains your responsibility that the information is current and valid for your flight.
The question about photocopy or "original" could possibly end up being one about copyright, but none of the private vendors are approved for anything - except when they deliver data to your FMC navigation database.
Of course it is! The only catch is ensuring 'net access during the approach. That was a bit of an issue for me so now I just use M$ Flight Sim. As a flight planning tool it's not bad either. Why, it wouldn't surprise me if you couldn't plan across the pond with it...
Both pilots don't need a copy of the plate either. Just a single copy of the current one has to be on board so, for instance, a pilot flying could brief from a single plate, then hand it to the pilot monitoring for the approach.
Well its a very good question. Instead of asking the question, why not look up the answer. Do your self a favor and learn the information that is located in the Jeppesen 'General' section of the Airway Manual. Instead of putting your feet up, reading the newspaper or the latest edition of GQ, do some work.
If you were working with me on a long haul flight you might learn a thing or two.
Well I did read what Jeppesen has to say about it and didn't quite fully understand it. Which is exactly why I posted my question here. Sadly, I'm not working with you on a long haul flight which is why I'm trying to learn off here. Thanks for your advice in any case.
Jeppesen states that - "RVR visibility values are charted only when the value is not the same as the prevailing or meteorological visibility value. When a difference occurs, the respective RVR and prevailing or meteorological values are prefixed with 'RVR' and 'VIS'. When there is no difference, the minimum is shown only once and means either RVR (if RVR is reported for that runway) or visibility if measured otherwise."
Regrettably, greybeard, now 17 posts and no proper answer! nitpickers answer is of course correct but the query from 'superfly' was 'why do you require a greater vis. without RVR at that airfield'? We still do not know. Have you actually looked at any current Jepp charts?
Most of the UK ILS charts quote only 'RVRxxxm'. We all (hopefully) know about converting met vis to RVR, so as long as generally you have a met vis of at least 550m you are ok for CATI. Why then is it necessary to publish a met vis? 800m is actually the visual approach minimum RVR, and why the quoted chart requires an equivalent RVR of at least 800m I know not. Do you?
Is this purely an 'Indian' thing? Does this appear on any European charts? I recall (going back a bit!) Pristina used to have only a met vis minimum for the ILS 35 which I think WAS 800m.
The above picture/screen shot that I added is from the Jepp lengend manual. So, my guess is its not just an Indian thing. But, I have seen RVR and VIS being reported in quite a few current Indian approach charts.
Nitpickers answer seems to be the most favourable right now. But, visibility is reported in RVR below 1500m, why is VIS here stated at 800m ?