PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - Which chart are you using?
View Single Post
Old 6th Nov 2006, 23:47
  #23 (permalink)  
xetroV
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Europe
Posts: 264
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 3 Posts
Originally Posted by captjns
Put away the snuff and stuff the hankie up your sleeve, put down the sword and get a grip . Colors on a chart ain't going to keep you out of the mountains. As stated before in an earlier post an LH captain showed me his charts to which I thought were very methodical and uncluttered in their presentation... and yes... better than the Jepps.
There have been several pretty thorough CFIT studies, and these studies certainly did show the benefits of using coloured maps. Colours on a chart can be one factor that can help you keep out of the mountains, and that's what aviation safety is all about: layered defences.

The assumption that colour means clutter is wrong, as proven by several 'other' charting companies. In terms of clutter, Jeppesen charts are amongst the worst anyway, even in black and white.

The Flight Safety Foundation (FSF) CFIT Task Force made the following recommendations to the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO):

* That requirements for the use of ground-proximity warning system (GPWS) be broadened. ICAO in 1998 amended its requirement for GPWS to include all aircraft with maximum takeoff weights above 5,700 kilograms/12,500 pounds or authorized to carry more than nine passengers;

* That early model GPWS equipment be replaced. ICAO in 1999 introduced an amendment requiring predictive terrain hazard warning functions in GPWS equipment (enhanced GPWS or terrain awareness and warning systems) in turbine airplanes certified on or after Jan. 1, 2001, and with maximum takeoff weights above 15,000 kilograms (33,069 pounds) or authorized to carry more than 30 passengers;

* That color-shaded depictions of terrain heights be shown on instrument approach charts. ICAO said that requirements for such depictions are scheduled to be introduced in November 2001;

* That aircraft operators be warned against using three-pointer altimeters and drum-pointer altimeters. ICAO in November 1998 adopted amendments prohibiting the use of these altimeters in commercial aircraft operated under instrument flight rules and warning that “due to the long history of misreadings, the use of drum-pointer altimeters is not recommended” in other aircraft;

* That the design and presentation of nonprecision instrument approach procedures be improved with a standard three-degree approach slope, except where prohibited by obstacles. ICAO said that requirements for such improvements are scheduled to be adopted in November 2001;

* That automated altitude call-outs be used. ICAO in 1998 amended the standards for operations manuals to require that they include “instructions on the maintenance of altitude awareness and the use of automated or flight crew call-out”; and,

* That the important CFIT-avoidance benefits provided by the global positioning system/global navigation satellite system (GPS/GNSS) be recognized. ICAO in 1995 cited the urgent need for progress in applying satellite navigation to nonprecision instrument approach procedures. In 1998, ICAO introduced GNSS area navigation procedures. ICAO said that criteria to support basic GNSS operations in all phases of flight are scheduled to be introduced in November 2001.

The task force also recommended that all civil aviation authorities adopt the use of hectopascals for altimeter settings. (ICAO and the World Meteorological Organization both introduced requirements in 1986 for the use of hectopascals for altimeter settings.)
http://www.flightsafety.org/cfit3.html
xetroV is online now