Two advantages of a plotting chart?

[alosaurus]

Fairly new to flying Oceanic and my company procedure is to use plotting charts. Happy to do that despite a small number of ex KLM Quantas and GSS instructors who are adamant that plotting charts are a 30 year old relic.

The two main justifications (apart from SOP adherence) appear to be

1- An FMS typing ability check .....if lat and longs entered incorrectly the chart would (eventually) show you are off track.

( I wonder also if with the lido flight planning system it is possible for the ATC flight plan info to be incorrectly transferred onto the flight log)?

2- That you have an awareness of the heading to turn onto in the event of a forced descent perpendicular to all the NAT tracks ( we fly random routes above tracks).

The no chart brigade counter

1- that the thickness of a pencil line is greater than the new GNE 10NM distance....so it would be too late by the time you noticed it....and that ADS would mean a message from the ground would be sent to you before then ( although I'm not sure what level of track deviation this represents...mini GNE.).

2- That entering it into route page two or keeping a copy of the sig weather / NAT track overlay also covers this.

Interested in views from across this spectrum.

[safelife]

Planning chart considered a must, European A330 operator.

[RAT 5]

It was 20 years ago, I admit. We used plotting charts. It gave good SA. We kept an up to date record of where we were and where we were going, and all the ATC clearances, with times for each. I once had an accusation from Canadian N.Atlantic ATC that I had not complied with an ATC climb instruction at Position XYZ. This came a few days after the flight. I recovered the flight envelope and the plotting chart. ATC claimed I was given a climb clearance at Time XY-z at Position ABC. From the plotting chart in the envelope I could prove that at Time XY-z I was 200nm away from Position ABC, therefore it could not have been me. Nothing more was heard.
Further, in todays magenta one a/c crews do not look at en-route charts. We know what SOP's say, and we know what crews do. The plotting chart gave much more SA than the ND/MAP. We plotted all the NAT's and our ETOPS circles from en-route ALTN's. With no airfield circles on ND/MAP and no outside visual references, especially at night, the plotting chart was very crucial in keeping us aware of where we were.
Total dependancy on FMC over the ocean is IMHO opinion not a professional good idea.

I admit I am not up to date on current procedures, but, as we have debated many times, too much magenta line addiction is not good when manure hits the air conditioning. Professional pilots need to be aware and not be taken by surprise.

And, it gives you something to do: monitor your flight. Those who oppose its use might just want to sleep or read the paper. And what will you do when the FMC fails en-rpute?

[Piltdown Man]

I've never flown big distances to have an opinion. But I do have a question. Where do you get the position you are going to plot? If it's from the same system that is doing the flying, you will just be copying the error. Or am I missing something?

[RAT 5]

In deed you would if there was one; error that is. That is why 2 FMC's are needed for oceanic crossings. They have been tested to a reliability of 1 in millions, and designed to tell you if they disagree with one another. That was in simple IRS days. Now with GPS the likelihood of error has reduced to 1 in squillions.
But you plot to position on the chart relative to your route and WPT that has already been plotted. If the FMC says you are en-route the 99.999999999% chance is you are. If it says you are off-route then the head scratching starts. So you are doing more than just plotting; you are comparing where the FMC says you are to where you should be.
There will be some old grey hairs who cry, "being back the sextant", and the reply will be, "who's that? A sexy relative?"

[alosaurus]

FMC coding errors.....a few years back they introduced a new lat long convention which resulted in dozens of aircraft following ( very accurately) the wrong route.

Also seen when manually entered flight plans either (1) Don't spot the half degree or (2) As again happens only too frequently enter the wrong lat/long (normally by one degree).

The another issue is solar storms taking satellites out. We are in a major cycle of solar activity for the next few years ( it is why we have more HF problems than we did a few years back).

The other problem is lack of awareness of tracks flying above them on random routes. Again plenty of TCAS warnings in recent years where aircraft have descended when crossing tracks. Presumably they didn't parallel the tracks because they didn't know where they were.

[Piltdown Man]

So if I get this right, you are confirming a position reported by the FMS with a paper chart with your route drawn on it? The position plotted should be on the line and in an appropriate distance along the route? Just out of interest, how often are errors picked up and what is done to correct them? After all, you now don't know where you are.

[galaxy flyer]

We go into the raw IRS position to plot which is an input into the FMS and should be independant. It is crosschecked with the FMS position.

[oggers]

alosaurus

The another issue is solar storms taking satellites out. We are in a major cycle of solar activity for the next few years ( it is why we have more HF problems than we did a few years back).

Where did you get this information from? 3 years ago the weakest sunspot cycle for a century peaked and we are now approaching the trough. We are in a relatively quiet period of solar activity.

Solar Cycle Progression | NOAA / NWS Space Weather Prediction Center (http://www.swpc.noaa.gov/products/solar-cycle-progression)

[alosaurus]

So if I get this right, you are confirming a position reported by the FMS with a paper chart with your route drawn on it? The position plotted should be on the line and in an appropriate distance along the route? Just out of interest, how often are errors picked up and what is done to correct them? After all, you now don't know where you are.



As GF says IRS can be used. How often are errors picked up ....far too often. What are the consequences....a Gross Navigational Error (GNE) against your name and your company. The only UK company I know of to have it's ETOPS approval revoked was Flyglobespan. They had very few incidents....but one of the big ones was a GNE where a one degree entry error was made.Plotting the IRS or FMS position would have told them they were heading to a point 60 miles away from the one correctly marked on the chart.......had they been monitoring progress. That companies profits nose dived as transatlantic routes were no longer viable.

[gatbusdriver]

I would say one of the biggest issues these days is the limitation of the FMC with regards to coding of 1/2 degree RLatSM NAT tracks. That is what would most likely cause a GNE these days. Strict adherence to a MNPS/NAT HLA checklist should prevent this as well as the CONFIRM ASSIGNED ROUTE UM. It won't be long before CODLC and ADS-C will be required in all NAT HLA so you will be informed of any tracking error before you can work it out from the plotting chart.

Saying that, the plotting chart does help increase SA and would be helpful during certain aircraft systems failures.

[JammedStab]

As an airline guy who like most airline guys, does not use a paper plotting chart to cross oceans, I have a question.

We have Jeppesen FlightDeck Pro on our ipads which has an excellent map display and the capability to create waypoints on that map. With just a few presses of the ipad screen screen, we can transfer our flightplan downloaded prior to the flight froma company app onto the Jeppesen app. It takes about 15 seconds and shows the waypoints, airways, etc. with zoom and scrolling capability.

Would the pro-plotting chart guys consider this app to be sufficient as an equivalent to a paper plotting chart?

[RMC]

Jammed stab...most airline guys DO use a plotting chart (accepting that there is a significant minority that don't). Your question should be answered in reverse.....If you had a Gross Navigational Error leading to a TCAS event (not as uncommon as they should be) would the subsequent investigation prove your system was certified. Is the app certified, is the method of verifying no corruption of data when transferring from flight plan to app verified. What is the contingency procedure for signal failure (which I have seen plenty of times with ipad loction).BTW...not denying this is the probably going to be the way forward....but in my company ipads are not certified for in flight use as primary aircraft equipment.

[RAT 5]

Plotting charts also give an improved SA about your en-route alternates. Given some guys fly 2 or 3 hr diversion times, I suspect the airfield circle will be off MAP on the ND. And, as has been discussed, and ETOPS diversion might need to be to 'nearest suitable' not necessarily the further ETOPS allowed ALTN. Sitting over the middle of nowhere, day or night, without having an idea in which direction & how far your bolt hole is, IMHO is not as professional s it could be.

[JammedStab]

Is the app certified, is the method of verifying no corruption of data when transferring from flight plan to app verified. What is the contingency procedure for signal failure (which I have seen plenty of times with ipad loction).BTW...not denying this is the probably going to be the way forward....but in my company ipads are not certified for in flight use as primary aircraft equipment.

Apparently it has some sort of certification...

"Jeppesen iPad Apps Approved by EASA"
The European Aviation Safety Agency on November 15 made available the results of its electronic flight bag (EFB) technical evaluation which should speed the final approval by local civil aviation authorities of Jeppesen’s new Flight Deck Pro and Mobile TC Pro apps for iPad and iOS. The EASA approval tumbles a significant hurdle for the Boeing Flight Services unit to gain the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) approval needed to sell the new technology to European airlines. The new EFBs can be used in most all phases of flight depending upon individual operations specifications."

I suppose the method of verifying no corruption of data upon transfer is the same as verifying no mistake when using a pen or pencil to transfer information. Look at it and double check that it is correct(and it is more likely that a mistake will be made by the pilot marking down incorrect info.

I doubt that the gross navigation error rate has increased with electronic ipad charts.

No need for worry about signal failure, it is a copy and paste function to transfer info.

Not sure if a paper plotting chart has any official certification but if you can find it, it would be interesting to see.

Plotting charts also give an improved SA about your en-route alternates. Given some guys fly 2 or 3 hr diversion times, I suspect the airfield circle will be off MAP on the ND. And, as has been discussed, and ETOPS diversion might need to be to 'nearest suitable' not necessarily the further ETOPS allowed ALTN. Sitting over the middle of nowhere, day or night, without having an idea in which direction & how far your bolt hole is, IMHO is not as professional s it could be.

The Jeppesen Flightdeck Pro app map portion also allows you to enter whatever airports you like for situational awareness.

[RAT 5]

The Jeppesen Flightdeck Pro app map portion also allows you to enter whatever airports you like for situational awareness.

I admit to having operated such routes in the dark ages of pencil & rubber. An FMC was considered almost a NASA designed piece of voodoo magic, and Jeppe paper plates were the crutch of all approaches.

[RMC]

Plotting charts approved in ICAO 007.

Ipads have not been certified for use in UK registered aircraft. The process for certification of commercial equipment is long and very expensive (before you install a £300 bit of IFE in an exec aircraft you will pay in excess of £10,000 for all the required testing). Significant kind of stuff like flammability / battery fire risk etc.

Like I said this kind of system is the future no doubt.....but I always consider what I am going to say to the investigator when the **** has hit the fan as my start point.

[deltahotel]

I hope ipads have been certified for use, because there's a lot of airlines out there using them all day, every day.

[JammedStab]

Plotting charts approved in ICAO 007.

Ipads have not been certified for use in UK registered aircraft. The process for certification of commercial equipment is long and very expensive (before you install a £300 bit of IFE in an exec aircraft you will pay in excess of £10,000 for all the required testing). Significant kind of stuff like flammability / battery fire risk etc.

Like I said this kind of system is the future no doubt.....but I always consider what I am going to say to the investigator when the **** has hit the fan as my start point.

From our ops specs....

"_____ airlines is authorized to use an electronic flight bag as described in the following airplane types: All

Hardware of EFB system: Class 1 - iPad (2 and later)
Software application: Jeppesen FliteDeck Pro: (including Terminal Charts, En-Route Charts, Jeppesen Airways Manual).
Authorized to Replace Paper Documents: Yes"

I will show this to the investigator.

Meanwhile, we also have Class 3 EFB's installed in the aircraft(as delivered from the manufacturer) which have video camera views, company publications, Takeoff and Landing performance calculation capability, various apps such as conversion calculators and timers, approach plates, nearest airport function, and enroute moving map display with ownship symbol also can be used as plotting charts and we do in fact manually enter the route into this which gives us a secondary view of where we are, just like a plotting chart.

I think you might be operating without the latest authorized methods in use globally.

As for paper plotting charts...wouldn't mind trying it once on an oceanic crossing but that would be enough.

[deltahotel]

Plenty of references to plotting charts and how to use them in the North Atlantic Ops and Airspace Manual. It's a dry old read, to say the least.

Paper charts will eventually disappear, of that I'm certain. In the meantime, I guess we keep doing the plots per company procedures. I suppose total time expended on the chart for an Atlantic crossing is in the region of five minutes and I don't know what I'd do with that extra time.

[RMC]

Of course a supplied EFB is certified. If that is what your ops manual says about Ipads great.... Honestly though I do not believe that ipads have been tested iaw https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Advisory_Circular/AC%2021-16G.pdf or the European equivalent.

[galaxy flyer]

They are certified, most US carriers and corporate operators are using them as primary EFBs.

[Piltdown Man]

I think there is a huge difference between primary EFB (we don't have any paper back-up) and primary navigation. There is a placard by our iPad holders reminding us that the inbuilt navigation elements if our EFB's may not be used for primary navigation. But is plotting primary or secondary navigation? I would have thought the latter.

[galaxy flyer]

I agree on using a paper plotting chart. Haven't carried paper terminal charts in years since the FAA approved iPad as EFB.

[JammedStab]

Honestly though I do not believe that ipads have been tested iaw https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Advisory_Circular/AC%2021-16G.pdf or the European equivalent.

http://ww1.jeppesen.com/documents/support/mobile/mobile-fd/iPad-mini-Jeppesen-Mobile-flight-planning.pdf

"The iPad mini’s compact footprint will enable exciting new options for space-constrained cockpit use. Its size is ideal for kneeboard use. The small mass should enable lighter-weight mounting systems that more easily meet retention requirements, including applicable RTCA DO-160 testing. For some, the iPad mini also may serve as a great backup source of EFB information for airplanes with full-size iPad EFB or traditional Class 2 and 3 EFBs. The form factor may also be ideal for other aviation users such as flight attendants and technicians.

Regulatory Authorization
Due in large part to the factors and observations noted here, we do not anticipate any issues for operators to gain regulatory authorization of Jeppesen Mobile apps on iPad mini according to the FAA AC 120-76B standard, or the EASA draft AMC 20-25 standard. In support of our customers, on November 6, 2012, Jeppesen successfully completed Rapid Decompression testing of a representative iPad mini, to 51,000 feet."

[RMC]

"we do not anticipate any issues for operators to gain regulatory authorization of Jeppesen Mobile apps on iPad mini according to the FAA AC 120-76B standard, or the EASA draft AMC 20-25 standard."

=

Not currently approved.

When it is I will have no problem using it.......until it is I will stick to our SOPs.

[ExSp33db1rd]

There will be some old grey hairs who cry, "being back the sextant", and the reply will be, "who's that? A sexy relative?"

Yes. A young student asked me recently: "wot's a sextant ? "

One could weep.

Question ? If you only have 2 FMC's, and they disagree, how do you know which one is inaccurate ?

"In My Day" we had 3 INS's - and a standby Artificial Horizon as well.

( but then we also had a Radio Officer, a Navigator, and a Flight Engineer - Ahh! - as well. Just sayin' )

Flying into Moscow we had to convert our "Imperial" altimeter by way of a graph table to arrive at the various correct "metric" altitudes that we were given by ATC on approach, or departure. We asked Management if we could have a metric altimeter fitted, just to make life a bit easier. No, was the answer, we'd have to fit two to cater for redundancy, and then we would have to fit a third to cater for the anomaly between two differing altimeters. Can't afford it.

I guess it is all different today ?

[galaxy flyer]

Once again showing EASA is a blockade to aviation. iPads and other tablets have been standard in the US for years, still a "draft" in Europe.

[fantom]

Keeps your chips on the fold-out table of the magnificent Airbus.

[wiggy]

I'll admit to being a bit confused by some of the above comments, FWIW iPads have been the prime/only source of documention for us on our UK CAA / EASA regulated operator for several years now.

[deltahotel]

Likewise confused. So...

Galaxy -EASA fully on board with EFBs.

Speedbird - still 3x inertials and sby instruments, but with a couple of GPS as well.

RMC - I'm assuming your beef is not with airlines using certified/approved EFBs and having appropriate EFB administration, but with individuals using private tablets and software. Like Wiggy, I stick to SOPs which includes the use of company provided ipads and software as EFB.

Plotting on paper across the ocean? One day it'll go the way of the sextant and almanac, but until then if the regulator wants it and my SOPs tell me to then I'll do it.

[BizJetJock]

Likewise, flying and training for multiple operators in various EASA countries, I can't remember the last time I used paper charts.

"we do not anticipate any issues for operators to gain regulatory authorization of Jeppesen Mobile apps on iPad mini according to the FAA AC 120-76B standard, or the EASA draft AMC 20-25 standard."

=

Not currently approved.
Not correct. The point is that the approval belongs to the operator, so all Jeppesen can do is provide you with all the evidence of testing that you require. If your company can't get the bits of paper together to get the approval issued then maybe there's a good reason they aren't approved!

[RMC]

Correct ....certified EFBs are great. Wish our aircraft had them.....it is private IPads (non SOP )I am referring to.

Biz jet - my issue is around certification of the hardware (not the jep software) IAW RTCA/DO-160....it mentions in the iPad mini text an iPad being subjected to a decompression test at 51,000' this is one of many environmental tests required before an item can be classed as certified. If someone can show me any proof of certification of an iPad as aircraft equipment great ( Even if it is only referred to in the MEL) otherwise my info is that this is not certified aircraft hardware ( kind of like an exploding Samsung isn't).

[JammedStab]

"we do not anticipate any issues for operators to gain regulatory authorization of Jeppesen Mobile apps on iPad mini according to the FAA AC 120-76B standard, or the EASA draft AMC 20-25 standard."

=

Not currently approved.

When it is I will have no problem using it.......until it is I will stick to our SOPs.

The ipad is approved. Approved by the FAA for use by many airlines. Operators have already gained regulatory authorization of Jeppesen mobile apps on iPads in accordance with FAA AC 120-76B.

[BizJetJock]

The only part of DO-160 that is required for Class 1 hardware that is not connected to the aircraft systems in any way is the decompression test. Initially NAAs required a practical non-interference demonstration, but now they have accepted that so many iPads have been used on every type of aircraft that it is taken as read. All the rest of the requirements are for units that interface with the aircraft systems in some way.

Part of the operator approval is to show that there are adequate procedures to minimise the risk of a battery fire, and deal with one if it happens. Those procedures are already there to deal with the several hundred iPads already on board!

As several people have already said on here, iPads are the main EFB for many EASA airlines, including such small fly-by-night operators as BA, so I am not sure why you are insisting that they are not approved!

[JammedStab]

As several people have already said on here, iPads are the main EFB for many EASA airlines, including such small fly-by-night operators as BA, so I am not sure why you are insisting that they are not approved!

Because he wants to continue using paper plotting charts forever when it is not necessary.

And most airline pilots ARE no longer using the paper plotting charts. Seems to me to still be a big thing in the bizjets based on the responses I have seen in this and other threads.

[500 above]

Seems to me to still be a big thing in the bizjets based on the responses I have seen in this and other threads. Possibly because many bizjet pilot's don't generally cross the pond that often? Belt and braces possibly - although, granted, it could all be done on an ipad.

Every single bizjet international procedures recurrent I've done at FSI for example, the instructor emphasizes the use of a paper plotting chart, ten minute plots etc. to avoid GNE's. In reality this could all be done on the ipad.

In my current type, everything is on the ipads (which were given by Gulfstream with the new aircraft, are 'sterile' and not used personally) so I don't see electronic plotting charts to be an issue either - although, my last crossing (last month) was plotted on paper.

From the latest North Atlantic ops and Airspace Manual (chapter 8)

c)
it is advisable to provide pilots with a simple plotting chart of suitable scale (1 inch equals
120 NM has been used successfully on NAT routes) in order to facilitate a visual
presentation of the intended route that, otherwise, is defined only in terms of navigational co
-ordinates

Don't see a requirement for paper in there.

[compressor stall]

If someone can show me any proof of certification of an iPad as aircraft equipment great
I can assure you that Airbus (and presumably Boeing) test iPads in a number of areas from decompression to cold temperatures and also for RF interference. It is in a document for each iPad model and is available for purchase and used to show the NAA that the iPad is approved model. I can't send you ours as it cost my company money.... It can be argued that it is part of the aircraft equipment when it is a no go item on an MEL. In the US with at least one operator, that day is here.

As an observation, there are a few people here going to be rather surprised when they find their Airbus QRH on the iPad before the year is out.

[RAT 5]

I'm not arguing either for or against plotting charts; but I do admit to being more a pencil & rubber guy than smart pone & iPad for visual presentations. I do like white board briefing in the sim rather than PPT's.
However, a plotting chart saved my bacon, once. A few days after a trans-Atlantic, W-E, I was called by CP to say that Canadian ATC were investigating a non-compliance with a climb instruction. We had entered NAT airspace, on HF, and ATC claimed we had been given a climb NOW from FL330 - FL350. But they said we did not comply. They included the time & Lat/Long of that ATC instruction.
I pulled my flight envelope and plotting chart. I found we, indeed, crossed the next Longitude at FL350, but the claim was we did not execute the climb immediately. First thought was, if they could see us on radar to notice we were still FL330 why could they not try & reach us on 121.5 or NAT chat frequency, or even SELCAL HF. I checked our plotting chart for position reports. This gave time, levels, ETA's. I could calculate our ground speed. My conclusion was that at the time of the alleged ATC instruction we were 20mins & 180nm east of the position they gave in their report. Thus it wasn't me M'Lud. Case closed, well for me anyway.
Can you store the 'plotting chart' in an iPad? Is it printed out on landing? What does go in the flight envelope? However, a piece of paper made my day.