VFR Bimbling Chart Requirements

[Pontius]

Before I immediately get flamed (a)I have used the search function and (b)I have searched CARs and the AIP to try and find a definitive answer to my question but I'm still left wanting :)

Let's say I want to go out for a bimble around the skies, remaining outside of all controlled airspace for the entire flight on a nice, sunny, cloud-free day. I'm VFR throughout.

Now, I think I'd be okay just carrying a relevant VNC but a mate of mine insists that I'd need all the other charts available i.e ERC, WAC, VNC & VTC. Reading the rules, I've 'selected' the VNC from the AIP's list (Gen 0.1, 9.1) and, as far as I'm concerned that's 'applicable' to the flight I'm carrying out (CAR 233). Why would I want to carry all that other gumph when it's not relevant to my flight, where I know where I am, I'm clear of any regulated airspace and I'm just looking out the window all the time?

My 'day' job involves boring holes in the sky, IFR, so I'd like to get things right, just in case Mr CASA turns up and has a hissy fit because he thinks I'm doing something naughty.

So, leaving aside opinions such as "This is what I carry because it gives me a warm and fuzzy feeling", is anybody able to offer a definitive answer to my question; what charts am I legally required to carry? References in addition to mine would be appreciated.

Thank you :ok:



AIP GEN 0.1
9. RELEVANT DOCUMENTS AND CHARTS
9.1 To ensure compliance with CAR 233.(1)(h), a pilot in command must have access during flight to appropriate documents and charts selected from the following:
a. VFR: ERC,WAC,VNC,VTC and ERSA for the route being flown.

CAR233
(h)the latest editions of the aeronautical maps, charts and other aeronautical information and instructions, published in AIP or by a person approved in writing, that are applicable:

(i)to the route to be flown; and
(ii)to any alternative route that may be flown on that flight;

[Jabawocky]

Appropriate and selected from

So a jolly from your farm strip in the back of beyond..... The local WAC is all there is!

Surely it is not harder than that, unless there is another stupid rule buried elsewhere.

[NIK320]

I once had a discussion with an FOI about that.
If you where to conduct a flight in the local area OCTA and you could demonstrate a knowledge of the area and that your operation was not going to infringe controlled airspace (i.e. I remained less than 2000ft and north of X which is 5nm north of the 2000ft step) then there would not be any charts appropriate for the flight.

I'm not game enough to test that theory just in case another FOI disagrees with it. In your case id do the same and take the VNC or VTC.

[TOUCH-AND-GO]

Well assuming that you go for a flight from A ----> B with both destinations within the vicinity of the appropriate chart. Then I interpret that as;

"a pilot in command must have access during flight to appropriate documents and charts"
(i)to the route to be flown; and
(ii)to any alternative route that may be flown on that flight

So if A and B are on a VTC why should I carry 1,2,3? :E

Nowhere in the regs or AIP does it clarify that you need to carry ALL documentation!

[Horatio Leafblower]

THis one came up in a testing officer refresher recently.

The answer from the Flight Training and Testing office seemed to be "Common sense applies".

ie: If relevant, a VNC will substitute nicely for WAC+ERC.

It was about the most sensible thing I have heard form a CASA officer for years :hmm:

[MakeItHappenCaptain]

Jaba, would disagree in that the WAC does not provide frequency information, therefore I advise that an ERC would also be required.

Horatio & TG, in total agreement.

My next curly one...

Does "information and instructions, published in AIP" mean you carry them too?:confused:

Have flown for companies that explicitly require them in the ops manual and personally, I always carry them...

[triathlon]

You require a chart or charts which give you information to navigate visually, airspace and frequencies. VNC covers those 3 requirements.

[trolleydriver]

Why would you need to know what "frequencies" to be on if you don't carry a radio?? and if you don't have enough fuel to even reach Controlled airspace, wouldn't the WAC be the only relevant chart required?

[Sunfish]

Its the mere fact that arguments like these are even possible in Australia that tells me that the regulations are legalistic crap.

Why ferchissake is it so hard to put down a simple "Must have", "Should have", "Could have" based on the intended route, aircraft range and duration and put us all out of our misery?

This ranges from WAC or VTC/VNC onwards and upwards.

To my limited way of thinking, it is foolish not to have access to the details of any airport you might conceivably divert to. In my case that means carrying ERSA, VNC/VTC, WAC outside the Melbourne basin and a PCA plus ERC if I am touring.

And of course the trusty Ipad with OZ-Runways :E

I didn't need to open a single paper document on the last Ten day tour. Even had the POH and VFG on it for good measure.

[djpil]

Sunfish, I assume that you had not seen CASA's latest draft of the Part 91 operational regs? The current reg is fine, what is missing is a sensible CAAP (or AC when or if the new regs come out).

OzRunways is taken care of nicely by a new draft CAAP on EFBs. In fact, for private ops the draft CAAP is enough because it clearly (well, almost clearly) explains existing laws.

[triathlon]

Who really wants to be flying around in an aircraft without a radio? I personally like to know who else us out there.
So ya need a chart with frequencies!

[Pontius]

Triathlon,

You require a chart or charts which give you information to navigate visually, airspace and frequencies.

Who really wants to be flying around in an aircraft without a radio? I personally like to know who else us out there.
So ya need a chart with frequencies!

I have to admit I enjoy flying around without the constant blare of people talking all the time. It's bad enough when I'm getting paid to do it, so being able to turn off the wireless and just enjoy the view is something I relish. I'm in WA and benefit from a LOT of airspace that doesn't have lines drawn all over it and large airfields with their associated restrictions and so I'll quite often do my CTAF stuff and once clear of the field I'll turn the volume to zero, keep my peepers busy looking outside and bathe in the serenity that is Class G :)

So, back to the subject at hand. I realise your first quote above is sensible but where is that actually stated? For instance, if we take Jaba's scenario where Bloggs launches from his farm strip in the GAFA, why would he need a VNC/VTC where there is no airspace around him? Likewise, why can he not have either a list of local CTAF freqs (if applicable) or, indeed, write the same on his WAC? I know I'm being facetious with my argument but I'm just trying to get to the bottom of this thing and find out the no-**** legal requirements, which aren't necessarily what one might do on a day-to-day basis i.e. Bloggs might well carry a VNC because he wants to, rather than being required to.

MakeItHappen, same thing I suppose. Why not write any freqs that might be needed on the WAC?

Sunfish, your summary of the 'legalistic crap' situation is exactly why I have posed this question. There are too many vague statements which are then open to interpretation. Taking it to extremes, if I'm off on my bimble around the local area (as detailed above) and carry a sheet of paper from the ERSA with an alternate that I MAY divert to, if somebody spoils my home airfield's runway (and the grass is to soggy) then I could argue that I'm not required to carry any charts at all. After all, I'm not flying a route and, therefore there's not an applicable chart. I'm sure an FOI would have a different take on the matter and therein lies the problem. Because the regulation is not clear-cut it's open to interpretation and CASA seems to have a fair few arseclams in the misinterpretation department, who I'd rather not have to cross swords with. Again, I know I'm being an argumentative knob and I do, in reality, carry suitable charts but maybe I should have been a lawyer as I do enjoy trying to settle these types of questions once and for all :}

[LeadSled]

Pontius,
Could I suggest you take a careful look at the rule book.
The situation of "no radio" and a radio that you don't want to use are very different.
The penalties for having a (serviceable) radio, and not keeping a listening watch are substantial.
Tootle pip!!

PS 1: Re. the draft 91 and 135, have you noticed the number offenses that carry the maximum 50 penalty points, even for matter that I would regard as trivial.
PS 2: Sunfish, spot on again.

[Horatio Leafblower]

BTW I am fairly sure I have seen an NPRM about "bimbling" and making "Bimbling" an offence of strict liability.

Don't say I didn't warn you. :=

[compressor stall]

I'm in WA and benefit from a LOT of airspace that doesn't have lines drawn all over it and large airfields with their associated restrictions and so I'll quite often do my CTAF stuff and once clear of the field I'll turn the volume to zero, keep my peepers busy looking outside and bathe in the serenity that is Class G

Can you tell me how you can keep your peepers looking out for a turboprop 100 kts faster than you coming in from behind?

I'll answer that for you. You can't. You are probably that f@&#}!t who I nearly clobbered one day in the middle of WA a few years back in a turboprop going into a station strip despite my calls on area.

If you want to play risky, fine. Go and race cars or climb mountains or do low level aeros. Don't increase the risk to other pilots who are going about their job and wanting to get home to their family for tea. U got a radio? Use the f^£>%#}ng thing.

[\rant]

[triathlon]

Compressor stall I agree with you 100%
pontius pontius pontius. There are always those that just choose to do as they wish. Just carry the maps, turn the radio on and conduct yourself like a pilot should, whether your in the outback or terminal area. I can enjoy the view and listen to the radio at the same time. It's what pilots do isn't it?
Maybe I am from old school!

[Pontius]

LeadSled,

Thank you for your suggestion re The Rule Book. I did indeed have a look at it and I'm pleased to say it proves every day is a school day and I learnt something useful about listening watch and the requirements of Reg 243. That'll teach me to assume the same rules apply in Australia as they did in my 'old country' :(


Compressor Stall,

No, it wasn't me in the middle of WA nearly getting clobbered by you. I know this because I've never been anywhere near the middle of WA, nor any 'stations'. As I said above, I've learnt the error of my ways regarding a listening watch in Australia and will not sin again. However, to answer your specific questions (a)when bimbling I don't fly along in straight lines. I'm often turning and regularly clear the airspace to the side and behind me, so stand as good a chance as anybody in Class G airspace at seeing conflicting traffic (b)the altitudes at which I bimble, versus their distance from any airfields would put me way below any aircraft on a normal descent profile into those locations (c)before you talk about approaching aircraft below that profile because of low(ish) cloud, I don't bimble on such days (d)where I slip the surly bonds of Earth we have no turboprop traffic, save for the very occasional RFDS PC12. And, for what it's worth, I've done the low level aeros without 'playing risky'.

[compressor stall]

Pontius, glad to hear that you will keep an ear out from now.

For the record there are many aircraft landing at airstrips not marked on WAC charts or ERCs etc. Just because there is no CTAF does not mean that there are no aircraft in the circuit for a station (farm) strip with the pilot eyes downcast trying to ascertain the wind and see if there are any cows on the strip.

And funny you should mention that very occasional RFDS PC12. That's what I was poling when I nearly ran over someone not taking on the radio. They might be occasional to you, but to the people flying them daily they aren't.

Fly safe, and listen out.

Regards

CS

[Jabawocky]

Make it Happen

Read my post again.....this time carefully;)

126.7 might just be the most appropriate and if you know for 200nm the area is 123.95 should you get high enough to use it, you dont need a chart in your back paddock!

Think About It Captain! :ok:

[triathlon]

Hey Jabba
What about this one.
What if I flew a 3 HR nav exercise which I have done 100 times before. I know the route, know the frequencies I need to monitor, call up for clearances, if I carried just a WAC does that make it right?

[Arm out the window]

As a point of order, I don't think 'bimbling' should be a term ever associated with aviation.

Tooling around, perhaps, preferably without thumb in bum and mind in neutral, or hack, rack and zooming if conducting aeros, but bimbling just doesn't work for me, I'm sorry.

[Jabawocky]

triathlon,

I see your point, however in your example you have expanded way outside the farmer flying around his paddocks in the back of beyond and below 1000AGL. I am not saying you can apply this across the board of familiar routes etc.

In your case, what if something had changed recently, and you had to refer to an ERC or a diversion and needed info on Airport XYZ.

For the farm guy, the area frequency change, boundary change, or a diversion airport is not a factor. If he diverts it is which paddock do I land on?

Carrying a full load of charts, will have no meaning.

Just one extreme to another. So what does the law really require in this extreme?

The original post is another little Gem of pprune D&G :ok:

[MakeItHappenCaptain]

Jaba,

The pilot in command of an aircraft must not commence a flight if;

(h) the latest editions of the aeronautical maps, charts and other aeronautical information and instructions, published in AIP or by a person approved in writing, that are applicable

are carried in the aircraft and are readily accessible to the flight crew.



Does NOT say appropriate and selected from.

Oh, did I misinterpret your response?

I thought the OP wanted to know what they needed to avoid an FOI getting upset?

Read the original post, and the CAR, this time, carefully....

Say someone's going for a tootle (not a bimble) around their property and sees a situation worthy of a call to someone more important than anyone who's not on the CTAF, (lets say a crashed RV:E). Where do you get the area freq from?

Don't think it's wise to make up a scenario that encourages pilots to head off with only a WAC on board. Think about it.

[Jabawocky]

MIHC

I agree with you, and I don't condone minimum information.....heck I have a reputation built on far too much information! :}

But lets look at my post
Appropriate and selected from

So a jolly from your farm strip in the back of beyond..... The local WAC is all there is!

Surely it is not harder than that, unless there is another stupid rule buried elsewhere.

Seriously what else is applicable and or useful.

And in your scenario.....Retrad vehicle bingled on said farm, out in the back of beyond. An ERC, ERSA or any other chart is farking useless.

Do you need a chart to activate your PLB/EPIRB/ELT and assuming you could dial up a frequency such as an area frequency, how do I get pranged retard vehicle or piper cub or C185 above 2000' in such a wrecked state? How many pilots do not know what 121.5 and its use is?

I am perfectly capable of reading CAR's CAO's and anything else just like you are, but just for a minute, apply a dose of reality.

Let's say I want to go out for a bimble around the skies, remaining outside of all controlled airspace for the entire flight on a nice, sunny, cloud-free day. I'm VFR throughout.

Now, I think I'd be okay just carrying a relevant VNC but a mate of mine insists that I'd need all the other charts available i.e ERC, WAC, VNC & VTC. Reading the rules, I've 'selected' the VNC from the AIP's list (Gen 0.1, 9.1) and, as far as I'm concerned that's 'applicable' to the flight I'm carrying out (CAR 233). Why would I want to carry all that other gumph when it's not relevant to my flight, where I know where I am, I'm clear of any regulated airspace and I'm just looking out the window all the time?

This is the crux of the matter....I just took the hypothetical to an extreme.

Don't read more into it than that. :ok:

[MakeItHappenCaptain]

I would actually suggest that you may in some cases have better luck on the area fequency than 121.5.

And you seen to forget just how big some "farms" in Australia can be.:cool:

Did I say it was your RV that was damaged?

Any number of scenarios that might require authorities being called. Vehicle accident one possibility.

I agree 100% that a lap of the strip, commonsense speaking, shouldn't require the entire Airservices library to be carried, however remember that your profile on here carries a bit of respect and you need to make sure you aren't seen to be encouraging poor airmanship. Quite easy for someone here to think you were referring to wider applications.

Think about that. (Yeah, those kind of comments kinda annoy me, too, so if you don't put 'em out there, I won't either):ok:

[aeromatt]

The pilot in command of an aircraft must not commence a flight if;

(h) the latest editions of the aeronautical maps, charts and other aeronautical information and instructions, published in AIP or by a person approved in writing, that are applicable

are carried in the aircraft and are readily accessible to the flight crew.


Makeithappen,

I hope you typed that and didn't copy and paste out of the regs as I interpret that to mean I must not fly if i am carrying maps...

[triathlon]

Jaba Jaba Jaba

Never have I seen a person try so hard to twist the law.
If you are doing as little as circuits, on your outback farm strip, have on hand a map which you can navigate with and a map which has frequencies.
OK. Maybe that is a load of bull&&it to carry the above mentioned documents, who gives a sh&t, it's the law pal!

[Pontius]

Triathlon,

First of all it must be said that we're arguing the semantics of the regulations and not necessarily what is either sensible or what we would actually do. Having said that, I'm with Jaba on this one. We are required to select publications from the 'list' that are applicable to the route we're flying. In the back of beyond I would say a WAC is applicable and it could be argued that carrying only that complies with the letter of the law (again, not necessarily what we'd actually do).

a map which has frequencies........it's the law pal

Please show me where the regs say we have to have frequencies on the map. If that is indeed law and if a WAC is the only applicable chart, then a well-meaning and law-abiding pilot would be breaking the law by only carrying a WAC......even if he has an ERSA sitting next to him. See what I mean about semantics ;)

[triathlon]

I give in. A WAC chart will satisfy an FOI and the LAW.
I have been educated.
Cheers. :).

[Pontius]

That's a bit petulant, Triathlon. What you have written regarding charts is sensible and what 99% of pilots would actually do on a day-to-day basis. However, if you're going to say something is the law (frequencies on charts), then one should be able to provide a reference to that law; rather than it being a personal opinion on an interpretation of the law (which may very well be correct). Jaba has postulated a hypothetical situation which is, as far as I read the rules, legal and above board. It just shows how liberally the rules can be read and goes back to what Sunfish said about CASA and rule writing.

I would suggest you haven't been educated, rather had it re-emphasised that the regs are in some instances non specific enough that they can be interpreted in differing ways. What I may think is 'applicable' could differ from what an FOI thinks is 'applicable' and I don't think that is good enough if we're referring to regulations.

Edited to add: Saturday's bimble involved carrying a VNC, WAC and ERSA and I even left the wireless volume up and gave everybody a damned good listening to; so it's not true what they say about old dogs and tricks. I didn't hear any RFDS aircraft but I did hear 'Bob' and 'Joe' discussing a good fishing spot and it's location. I don't know who 'Bob' and 'Joe' are but I'm not sure 126.7 is the best frequency for that, maybe Channel 87 :)

[Jabawocky]

MIHC,

Good point, we should all be careful as to how a newbie would read things, and I am always on others cases about that, so fair call.

Like I said before, none of us would fly that way, least of all me or Forkie :E he out info's me! But it does show one size does not fit all.

Just like so many rules and regs.......no clear answers, often lots of opinion. Optimal operations usually cover more than the basics the regs require.

Cheers!

J:ok:

[MakeItHappenCaptain]

(1)
The pilot in command of an aircraft must not commence a flight if he or she has not received evidence, and taken such action as is necessary to ensure, that:


Aeromatt, yup, fair call. Never let it be said I won't stand up and say, "My bad."
:\

[Sunfish]

The pilot in command of an aircraft must not commence a flight if;

(h) the latest editions of the aeronautical maps, charts and other aeronautical information and instructions, published in AIP or by a person approved in writing, that are applicable

are carried in the aircraft and are readily accessible to the flight crew.

Somewhere deep in the bowels of CASA a lawyer is laughing.

The only way to be actually safe is to carry everything available, all the time, and it had better not be in the rear locker where you can't get at it in flight.

To put that another way: applicable = "capable or suitable for being applied."

The lawyers have refused to define the minimum information required. That is why the "other aeronautical information" catch all is there. In other words even if you have no intention of landing at XYZ, you are required to have all available "aeronautical information" for XYZ if your aircraft is capable of reaching XYZ under current flight conditions.

"Its all on my Ipad" doesn't cut it either - hence my Twenty pound flight bag whenever I go touring.

[triathlon]

What you say makes sense sunfish. No matter how you look at it.

[aeromatt]

"Its all on my Ipad" doesn't cut it either

Why not? I know this is a completely separate argument but what you've posted says we need access to the latest editions of maps, charts and other information, makes no mention of those maps and charts needing to be printed on paper...

[Shagpile]

http://www.casa.gov.au/wcmswr/_assets/main/newrules/ops/nprm/nprm1211os_annexd.pdf

*draft*, but shows CASA's current line of thinking

[MakeItHappenCaptain]

Aeromatt.

So what happens when your battery goes flat? Don't laugh. I know an FOI who asked a pilot to show him the electronic copies and as he fired his ipad up, the battery low message flashed and the system shut down.

Jeppesen still issues paper maps with electronic subscriptions and you have to buy a copy of Jeppview to print out the relevant charts.

Ozrunways is not updated every two weeks as Jepps are. How do you amend charts in the meantime?

[compressor stall]

Ozrunways is not updated every two weeks as Jepps are. How do you amend charts in the meantime?


You read the NOTAMS. How often are DAPS updated ??

[MakeItHappenCaptain]

So now tell me how you amend an electronic chart that is only reissued every three months.

Bit hard to write on an ipad...:rolleyes:

[aeromatt]

Not trying to be argumentative but Sunfish stated quite matter of factly that an iPad wouldn't cut it, to the best of my knowledge until the proposed changes are implemented there is nothing saying I can't use my iPad and nothing saying the charts which must be carried need to be printed on paper.

I don't have an instrument rating so I can't speak for the practicalities (or not) of having IFR charts in electronic form but the VFR maps and ERSA are updated on Ozrunways in line with the paper versions.

I still carry paper copies of the WAC, VTC and ERC along with printed ERSA pages for airfields I plan to or am likely to divert to as I like to write things on them as I'm flying, there is no way I'm carrying 20lbs worth of ERSA, AIP and every map when they're all there in electronic format. A power adaptor for the iPad so you can charge it on the go will sort out the battery issue.

[djpil]

I agree aeromatt, apart from the new rules about EFBs for AOC holders, everything in that draft CAAP reflects the current rules.
(backup battery pack if no power source works well plus everything on an iPhone too). I also like paper charts, easy to carry tucked behind my shoulder harness.

[MakeItHappenCaptain]

I don't have an instrument rating so I can't speak for the practicalities (or not) of having IFR charts in electronic form but the VFR maps and ERSA are updated on Ozrunways in line with the paper versions.

http://www.airservicesaustralia.com/aip/current/sup/s11-h74.pdf

Three years in between reissues of WAC charts.
Again, how can you amend an electronic version.

When was the last time you actually read notams?
How often do they show chart amendments?
I just ran a location brief on YBBB and the fifth and sixth notams on the list were.......

chart amendments.:rolleyes:
surprise, surprise, surprise....

Again, how can you amend an electronic version?

Good idea on carrying the paper backups for the intended destinations (incl. alts). That is the legal requirement. I would be carrying eight full volumes of Jepps if I had everything on paper for a ferry from Europe to Australia, but it cuts to two with electronic subscriptions. I print a nav plan and plates for each day's flying, but still use the ipad for primary reference. I am legal that way.
Remember Jepps amend every two weeks, not three months.
Oz runways (not knocking it, I use it too) carrys the big "NOT FOR USE IN AIR NAVIGATION" disclaimer on startup. I still carry the required VTC/VNCs etc... In paper. (and amended):ok:

[triathlon]

I think the captain has spelt it out in black and white!
Don't you?

[aeromatt]

Amendments notwithstanding, you seem to have missed my point,

Good idea on carrying the paper backups for the intended destinations (incl. alts). That is the legal requirement.

Point me to the law which makes it a legal requirement to carry documents and maps printed on paper..

[Sunfish]

******** Aeromatt, you prove that you are NOT required to have paper.

This is the effing problem! All is in CASA'sinterpretation, NOT YOURS, good lick with spending $100,000 plus to clarify this point for us.

[Lasiorhinus]

Its not CASAs interpretation that counts, despite what they will have you believe.

All that matters is the court's interpretation.

And I agree with aeromatt: carrying the charts is required. The law makes no further claim that it must be on paper. Precisely how you carry the charts is up to you - all that is required is that you do.

[MakeItHappenCaptain]

Why do Jeppesen supply paper ERCs and TACs and require the Jeppview program to print the plates with electronic subscriptions?:confused:

Still haven't been told how you amend three month old electronic maps.:cool:

If you don't need to carry paper, aeromatt, why do you? Surely a couple of pages from the photocopier drawer would be cheaper to write things on as you're flying?:hmm:

[aeromatt]

Its not CASAs interpretation that counts, despite what they will have you believe.

All that matters is the court's interpretation.

Amen.

Still haven't been told how you amend three month old electronic maps.

I'll agree, you can't. We're not talking practicalities here though, we're talking law.

If you don't need to carry paper, aeromatt, why do you?

I answered that question in a previous post, I carry a paper map because I prefer it, not because I'm scared the CASA monster isn't going to approve of my electronic copy.

The entire ERSA and AIP and all the other maps I have in electronic form, to carry all of those in paper wouldn't be practical and would only add weight to my nav bag.

[Scion]

CASA make the rules so why cannot we just ask them on their website and paste the replies here?

If it is so difficult to understand they should be able to explain simply in words we can all understand, for safety sake!

Is this not their remit?