Flying with a tablett : feed backs welcomed
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: schermoney and left front seat
Age: 57
Posts: 2,438
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Those of you wth an EFB in EASA land, are you commercial or non comm ?
The LBA won´t give us (non comm guys) the right to use an EFB / Ipad, they says there is no legit path they could do it. (this statement is ca. 6month old)
The LBA won´t give us (non comm guys) the right to use an EFB / Ipad, they says there is no legit path they could do it. (this statement is ca. 6month old)
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Worldwide
Posts: 1,468
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Miramas
Age: 54
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Once again, thank you guys for all those informations.
@ Flydive 1, from what I read, this is not JeppView, but it looks quite similar to it. Haven't found anything about that Jeppesen Mobile TC on the Jepp' official site (which is not that easy to navigate...).
The one limitation I can figure out is that, according to the vid in your link, the own ship position is only for platform diagramm... Not much use to enhance your SA during an arrival or depart procedure !
Seems also that Jepp FlightDeck is not yet available on Android platforms ... Asked the Jeppesen commecial support, waiting for their answer.
Wondering whether we could use that as an aid without actually switching to an official EFB ...
@ Flydive 1, from what I read, this is not JeppView, but it looks quite similar to it. Haven't found anything about that Jeppesen Mobile TC on the Jepp' official site (which is not that easy to navigate...).
The one limitation I can figure out is that, according to the vid in your link, the own ship position is only for platform diagramm... Not much use to enhance your SA during an arrival or depart procedure !
Seems also that Jepp FlightDeck is not yet available on Android platforms ... Asked the Jeppesen commecial support, waiting for their answer.
Wondering whether we could use that as an aid without actually switching to an official EFB ...
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: I wouldn't know.
Posts: 4,499
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
iPad approved without paper backup? Really interesting if the LBA approved that. Although our company issues iPad 5s to all crews we cannot certify and use it as an EFB, have to use a windows tablet in the flightdeck which is kinda stupid.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Near Stuttgart, Germany
Posts: 1,096
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Those of you wth an EFB in EASA land, are you commercial or non comm ?
what next - as a matter of interest, what framework did your company use to start the Trial Evaluation Period? did you use the TGL 36 doc., or the AMC 20-25 draft? or another method? be interesting to know what people are using at this current time, and see what is really happening out there at the coal face so-to-speak (In EASA Land, AOC Ops).
Cheers,
F/o
Cheers,
F/o
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Near Stuttgart, Germany
Posts: 1,096
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Hello!
We did start based on this one about two years ago. Using "real" EFBs on one aircraft that is large enough for them. After completing the trial period successfully and gaining approval, we derived our own procedures for the iPad from it and got them approved as well. Pending completion of the trial period, but this has been completely uneventful so far. Today, I think the detour via the TGL 36 should no longer be necessary. There are already so many approvals for iPad based electronic charts that the authorities can hardly refuse them any longer.
...did you use the TGL 36 doc.
Ah, many thanks for the reply......the framework that we are currently using is based on the AMC20-25 Draft (which I believe is the latest step in EFB implementation in EASA Land).....I take it your using your EFB for items other than charting? (FCOM's/Perf etc.?) - with regard to EMI and HMI considerations, did you get an outside agency for EMI tests? or rely on existing documentation from suppliers like Jeppesen? HMI I take it was proved by actual operational feedback, as well as initial ORA?
Sorry for all the questions.......;-)
F/o
Sorry for all the questions.......;-)
F/o
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: schermoney and left front seat
Age: 57
Posts: 2,438
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Email sent, Max.
Is anyone out there having the ipad mini approved ? That would be much nicer to handle in the small Sovereign cockpit me thinks...
Somehow I dread to wade through all that sh.., how could I fly with one paper Jepp without crashing ? Now I have 2 Ipads and the Jeppview cards installed in the airplane through the Honeywell EPIC and still have to use paper... to top it off I have my laptop with me as well, so I do have 4 independent sources and that needs to be approved but flying with a single paper jepp is acceptable ?
Is anyone out there having the ipad mini approved ? That would be much nicer to handle in the small Sovereign cockpit me thinks...
Somehow I dread to wade through all that sh.., how could I fly with one paper Jepp without crashing ? Now I have 2 Ipads and the Jeppview cards installed in the airplane through the Honeywell EPIC and still have to use paper... to top it off I have my laptop with me as well, so I do have 4 independent sources and that needs to be approved but flying with a single paper jepp is acceptable ?
Not had any experience wrt the iPad Mini, am guessing that depressuriation testing, EMI stuff etc. is mainly done on full-size iPads - the chassis is slightly smaller (weaker?) and therefore may necessitate separate testing?.
And yes, wading through it all is tiresome....but ultimately necessary for commercial ops....something so simple to use, made complicated ;-)
F/o
And yes, wading through it all is tiresome....but ultimately necessary for commercial ops....something so simple to use, made complicated ;-)
F/o
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: FL006
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would also appreciate some more detailed review of "how to" get those iPads certified? What applications do you use on iPad and what is still on paper-I prefer to have a checklist on paper....an so on..My intend is to use iPad mini with some kneeboards....Lear60 ....
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Near Stuttgart, Germany
Posts: 1,096
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Hello!
Charting, company documents (Operating manuals and suchlikes), briefing packages (fully paperless apart from the flight log and w&b). Airplane documents, checklists, performance not yet because no certified (at least not by our authority) versions are available.
EMI was actually measured inside the aircraft by a certified avionics maintenance company. No test flight was necessary, it could be done on the ground.
I take it your using your EFB for items other than charting? (FCOM's/Perf etc.?) -
...with regard to EMI and HMI considerations, did you get an outside agency for EMI tests?
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: EASA side of the globe
Posts: 294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EASA private operator, but with Ops manual etc. Have gotten an accept for paperless ops based on AMC 20-25 draft with a remark that if AMC 20-25 draft is changed we have to change our procedures.
Global nav source has of the shelf mini iPads with FAA rapid decompression tested, but the test was accepted for the iPad 2 by the local (EASA) CAA.
Global nav source has of the shelf mini iPads with FAA rapid decompression tested, but the test was accepted for the iPad 2 by the local (EASA) CAA.
Thanks for the reply What Next.....interesting stuff....
Good thread this......can't see the AMC 20-25 Draft changing at all really, think it's pretty much cut and dried from the sounds of things, but will have to wait and see I guess...
F/o
Good thread this......can't see the AMC 20-25 Draft changing at all really, think it's pretty much cut and dried from the sounds of things, but will have to wait and see I guess...
F/o
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: EASA side of the globe
Posts: 294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
First officer:
I sadly tend to disagree about AMC 20-25 not changing that much (wish for our sakes it wouldnt change).
The EASA CRD (comment response document) that was published after the release of AMC 20-25 (or NPA 2012-02 as it is called for the EASA law change) is 470 pages long and has a whopping 921 comments/objections from EASA memberstates. It makes for some interesting friday night reading. http://www.easa.europa.eu/rulemaking...%202012-02.pdf
I sadly tend to disagree about AMC 20-25 not changing that much (wish for our sakes it wouldnt change).
The EASA CRD (comment response document) that was published after the release of AMC 20-25 (or NPA 2012-02 as it is called for the EASA law change) is 470 pages long and has a whopping 921 comments/objections from EASA memberstates. It makes for some interesting friday night reading. http://www.easa.europa.eu/rulemaking...%202012-02.pdf
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: EASA side of the globe
Posts: 294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
First officer
now that's funny. Me quoting you on something you published beforeSo much for me reading carefully
. I thought you previously posted just AMC 20-25. Sorry!But in all seriousness, don't you think that all these comments will change AMC 20-25? If only for the 3 classes, testing criteria and that most of the authorities don't want approach charts on class 1 (I think the new term is mobile) devices.
I hope you're right, cause than we skip the whole hassle of applying all over again, but I'm afraid we will see some changes.
SOAB.
Ah, I was under the impression that the AMC 20-25 Draft (as part of CRD 2012-02) is actually the document that takes into account the 913 comments from 45 commentators, as was originally a response to NPA 2012-02, so given that the Draft is due to be enshrined into legislation by the end of the year, and that the CRD 2012-02 (containing AMC 20-25 Draft) came out at end of July this year, this relatively short period (legislatively speaking) would limit pretty much all changes I would have thought.....and to be fair, any major changes would require re-canvassing of opinion once again.....sound sensible?
And yes, classes as I now understand are either "Portable" or "Installed" and with either Type A or B Applications....and charting function would most definitely be a Type B Application - i.e. it's malfunction, or misuse is are limited to a minor failure condition - and charting I believe is also listed in the Appendices as an example of Type B Applications.
F/o
F/o
And yes, classes as I now understand are either "Portable" or "Installed" and with either Type A or B Applications....and charting function would most definitely be a Type B Application - i.e. it's malfunction, or misuse is are limited to a minor failure condition - and charting I believe is also listed in the Appendices as an example of Type B Applications.
F/o
F/o
