New AIDU FLIPs
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: RAF
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
New AIDU FLIPs
Has anyone else experienced the complete c**k up with the new AIDU FLIPs? The last edition was supposed to be updated on the 23rd Nov, however, as usual our supply chain a***ed it up again. This is the kicker though, they have now completely changed. The Vols 1 - 3 that we knew and loved are no longer in use. There are now 2 volumes which cover the entire UK and Norway. The name of the FLIPs are 'Emergency and Unplanned Diversions' and only publish 1 approach to each runway.
You'll be glad to know that if you are planning to go IF or indeed take info on possible diversions on your route you are to either photocopy the loose leaf aerodrome plates or print them off the AIDU website. This will undoubtedly add some considerable time into the planning process of going anywhere. The pratt who came up with this idea needs a dam good shoeing, not just because the idea in itself is rubbish but because there was no liasion with front line squadrons(as far as I'm aware) no trial run in period and worst of all not even the common courtesy to inform anyone that this change was about to take place.
Set the scene, going flying, take FLIPs, oh great they aren't in date. Flt Planning don't have the in date ones, what's going on? "Oh, AIDU haven't sent them out yet, something to do with the supply chain. Use the out of date ones" Hmmmmmmm, you joking or what! Anyway, next thing you know we have these books that have the square root of nothing in them. Clearly they are going to be of little use to us slow movers as you'll endeavour to get the info on possible diversions along your route before you go anyway. As we discovered it's easier to use the loose leaf aerodrome book and photocopy the required plates, however, we only have 1 and on inspection it hadn't been properly updated for 2 years! (a flt planning issue I know)
This appears to be a cost cutting measure probably by some REMF who has given no apparent though to the people that use these documents day in day out. Is it just me or do you get the idea that aviation in the RAF is NOT important anymore. Thanks guys!
Sorry, end of rant, its been a long day. DCSA have a lot to answer to as well. That's another story!!!
You'll be glad to know that if you are planning to go IF or indeed take info on possible diversions on your route you are to either photocopy the loose leaf aerodrome plates or print them off the AIDU website. This will undoubtedly add some considerable time into the planning process of going anywhere. The pratt who came up with this idea needs a dam good shoeing, not just because the idea in itself is rubbish but because there was no liasion with front line squadrons(as far as I'm aware) no trial run in period and worst of all not even the common courtesy to inform anyone that this change was about to take place.
Set the scene, going flying, take FLIPs, oh great they aren't in date. Flt Planning don't have the in date ones, what's going on? "Oh, AIDU haven't sent them out yet, something to do with the supply chain. Use the out of date ones" Hmmmmmmm, you joking or what! Anyway, next thing you know we have these books that have the square root of nothing in them. Clearly they are going to be of little use to us slow movers as you'll endeavour to get the info on possible diversions along your route before you go anyway. As we discovered it's easier to use the loose leaf aerodrome book and photocopy the required plates, however, we only have 1 and on inspection it hadn't been properly updated for 2 years! (a flt planning issue I know)
This appears to be a cost cutting measure probably by some REMF who has given no apparent though to the people that use these documents day in day out. Is it just me or do you get the idea that aviation in the RAF is NOT important anymore. Thanks guys!
Sorry, end of rant, its been a long day. DCSA have a lot to answer to as well. That's another story!!!
Agree, complete bag of w**k. We knew that it was coming, but have been powerless to do anything. I Understand though, that the new system is already under review following many unfavourable comments!
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
You'll be glad to know that if you are planning to go IF or indeed take info on possible diversions on your route you are to either photocopy the loose leaf aerodrome plates or print them off the AIDU website.
This flies entirely in the face of the dictate from the then OC of No 1 AIDU and the chief nav at the ministry whose name will popup in the middle of the night:
"You cannot photocopy or use fax or eprints because the inks have not been tested for NVG and cockpit lighting compatibility."
The pratt who came up with this idea needs a dam good shoeing, not just because the idea in itself is rubbish but because there was no liasion with front line squadrons(as far as I'm aware) no trial run in period and worst of all not even the common courtesy to inform anyone that this change was about to take place.
As we discovered it's easier to use the loose leaf aerodrome book and photocopy the required plates, however, we only have 1 and on inspection it hadn't been properly updated for 2 years!
Ask the question or try the 'approved' copy at night. Just make sure you have someone who has a white light to see the RED warnings.
Champagne anyone...?
Be careful - the new vols 1 and 2 have fewer plates per airfield than the old books. So if you're looking for SIDs and STARs you better dig out the loose leaf ones before you go.
Usual FJ driven rubbish
Usual FJ driven rubbish
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Photocopying commercial plates is another issue.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: RAF
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This was a point that I wasn't fully aware of, thanks. However, if that is indeed the case then the whole system is surely even more seriously flawed than I first thought. I assume that the inks used in colour photocopiers are the same as our printers. So does that mean you can't even download the plate from the AIDU website and print them off either. Hmmmmm.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Chinnyrationcarrier,
That was indeed the case. You might be luck with, say, Epson, and unlucky with HP. It was all to do with the particular pigmentation of the ink.
The particular CO had been OC AIDU for more years than I can recall and was superb at his job. You can imagine how a small detail like that can be lost.
Couple of changes and it becomes history.
Easy enough to try out. Grab a selection of DIY plates or even ordinary colour prints and try it at night.
That was indeed the case. You might be luck with, say, Epson, and unlucky with HP. It was all to do with the particular pigmentation of the ink.
The particular CO had been OC AIDU for more years than I can recall and was superb at his job. You can imagine how a small detail like that can be lost.
Couple of changes and it becomes history.
Easy enough to try out. Grab a selection of DIY plates or even ordinary colour prints and try it at night.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: RAF
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To be honest, if we just forget all about this photocopying and printing off plates from the AIDU website because we want to stay legal. Our only option is for every aircraft nav bag(slow movers as we have the space) to contain a full set of loose leaf aerodrome plates. But Hang on I hear you say, this will cost more money. Yes that's probably true, but I suppose they didn't think of that as it's not AIDUs budget that it'll come out of. Nuts!!!!!
They're still producing the FJ TAP books as well (I saw some today) so I have no idea who ordered these skinny efforts. I agree with you all, bring back the old, thicker, books these new ones are w@nk!
I agree about the old CO (initials GB), his nickname was "The Fat Controller" I believe!
I agree about the old CO (initials GB), his nickname was "The Fat Controller" I believe!
Last edited by Lima Juliet; 1st Dec 2006 at 22:42. Reason: Addition
AIDU pointed out to me when I rang them that even the old books were only supoosed to be used in an emergency or on diversion and that any pre=planned sortie should use the proper TAP from the loose leaf binder as they are the source documents. It would appear that the working group in charge of monitoring AIDU didn't see fit to consult the customers before changing the product.
However, it is quite clear that the driver for this has been manpower - the concept of providing the front line with the best product they can has been completely ignored. So now all the SAR flights are having to order extra loose leaf TAPS so we can have the information we need in the cockpit as most SARops are either an emergency, an unplanned diversion or both. The workload has been pushed from AIDU to our already very busy Opsies.
Bring back the TAPS books!
However, it is quite clear that the driver for this has been manpower - the concept of providing the front line with the best product they can has been completely ignored. So now all the SAR flights are having to order extra loose leaf TAPS so we can have the information we need in the cockpit as most SARops are either an emergency, an unplanned diversion or both. The workload has been pushed from AIDU to our already very busy Opsies.
Bring back the TAPS books!
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bad Economic Move
Quite a few civil pilots subscribed to the "flip" service as it was a lot more used friedly in the cockpit of a small aircraft than the Aerad or Jeppesed airways manuals, the change in the "flip" manual has resulted in making the manual usless to these pilots.
One can only wonder what the economic result is of turning away this "spinoff" business? My guess is that in the long run making these books "cheaper" will put up the cost to the military due to the loss of civil sales.
One can only wonder what the economic result is of turning away this "spinoff" business? My guess is that in the long run making these books "cheaper" will put up the cost to the military due to the loss of civil sales.
My main objection is the apparent lack of consistency throughout the volumes eg: LHR has arrivals but only one approach or NDB plates rather than TACAN plates in some instances.
IMO, the FJ books are much better in that they at least offer ILS, TACAN and radar minima.
IMO, the FJ books are much better in that they at least offer ILS, TACAN and radar minima.
Usual FJ driven rubbish
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: in the mess
Posts: 195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This has really got me going as well recently.
1. Photocopying or printing from elec source is not approved.
2. There are 2 source documents.
i. The loose leaf TAP book
ii. The AIP
both of which differ greatly wrt the date the TAP was published.
"Ah, just look in the TC Amendment Bulletin I hear you say"
Did that, found yet more discrepancies in publishing date.
The upshot? Well, I just can't satisfy myself that I'm using the correct up-to-date info in the way that I used to be able to. It feels unprofessional.
Still, apparently the old system wasted a lot of paper, as people would bung the entire Vol 3, or whatever, in the bin on return from the sortie, rather than put it back in flt planning because the book got ripped/soggy from leaky cockpit/dog-eared etc.
So, in saving an arb amount of money, we've moved away from best practise in a big way.
I, for one, will be politely calling Aidu in the near future to see how to sort this out, within the constraints of their manning and budget etc; there has to be a better system than this!
1. Photocopying or printing from elec source is not approved.
2. There are 2 source documents.
i. The loose leaf TAP book
ii. The AIP
both of which differ greatly wrt the date the TAP was published.
"Ah, just look in the TC Amendment Bulletin I hear you say"
Did that, found yet more discrepancies in publishing date.
The upshot? Well, I just can't satisfy myself that I'm using the correct up-to-date info in the way that I used to be able to. It feels unprofessional.
Still, apparently the old system wasted a lot of paper, as people would bung the entire Vol 3, or whatever, in the bin on return from the sortie, rather than put it back in flt planning because the book got ripped/soggy from leaky cockpit/dog-eared etc.
So, in saving an arb amount of money, we've moved away from best practise in a big way.
I, for one, will be politely calling Aidu in the near future to see how to sort this out, within the constraints of their manning and budget etc; there has to be a better system than this!
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Wg Cdr Gary Barber
He must have had a permanent position at AIDU as it was he who was the one who said thou shall not copy TAPs because of the print pigmentation. He was still there last year and must have been there for a good 10 years.
http://www.agi.org.uk/pooled/article...NEWSART_177488
He has now been replaced by Wg Cdr Phil Speedy:
http://www.agi.org.uk/pooled/article...NEWSART_215034
and the story appears to be here:
http://www.aidu.mod.uk/terminal.html
He must have had a permanent position at AIDU as it was he who was the one who said thou shall not copy TAPs because of the print pigmentation. He was still there last year and must have been there for a good 10 years.
http://www.agi.org.uk/pooled/article...NEWSART_177488
He has now been replaced by Wg Cdr Phil Speedy:
http://www.agi.org.uk/pooled/article...NEWSART_215034
and the story appears to be here:
http://www.aidu.mod.uk/terminal.html
...and the story appears to be here:
http://www.aidu.mod.uk/terminal.html
http://www.aidu.mod.uk/terminal.html
The feedback page is amusing. Unfortunately it seems to be broken though.
LXGB