Expired database, legal?
 

From a forum in the US:

Anyone ever heard of such a (let's face it - practical) rule applying in our not-regulated-quite-enough-yet country?

Typical Yank...

Legal?, all depends on the function you want it to perform.

Aid to situational awareness and not for navigational use, knock your socks off. :ok:

For IFR Navigation, see CAO 20.18 Para 9A. :=

Sounds like a Mooney pilot :E

I dare say that he might be correct (in the USA) IF he does all the verification. For VFR no problem.But when the subscription is an annual one……you might as well do it every month anyway.

Lets look at the CAO20.18 reference though.
Two points here to consider. (A) provided by an approved supplier i.e Jepp and (B) must be current ???

Well if point A is met, all that is needed is proof the data is current. So if you sat down with your current Jepp IA plate and verified the data was current for all the waypoints in the data base for the flight you were about to take, you could argue that you met the requirements of CAO20.18 as written.

Not sure why you would bother though :rolleyes:

Mental exercise: Perhaps the trip you are making is out bush, no internet, and you want the Birdsville RNAV, so you check this before you launch. We all know it worked yesterday legally, we have phoned ASA/JEPP and the plate is still current, so we have met the requirements of the regs.

Of course CASA plod will have his view of the world, and it is easy to prove an up to date database, but it may actually be legitimate here too with up to date verification of the data. Again I stress why would you bother, but if you got snookered by a few days or some other reason, you could still be legally able to proceed.

Interesting question for Creampuff to think about with his outside the Aussie box hat on.

An out of date database is allowed on the A320 where I operate, if everything is double checked against the charts. It's sometimes necessary if the update is corrupted.

It legal in New Zealand for IFR for, .......provided the database date is later than the date on the approach plate. Here, like many parts of OZ and the US I suspect, there are no changes to the airspace and approaches from one year to the next. If you're only operating in those areas, updating the database on a monthly basis is a big waste of money.

Yeah…until ATC clear you for a new approach or SID or whatever is not in your database.

Keep em up to date is easier. ;)

FAA & NZ have it right. Light aircraft, privately flown, don't need a current database for safety reasons.

If ATC clear you for a STAR not in your database, decline it & use a different arrival. But if you stay away from major airports and exercise common sense, it's unlikely to happen. Remember, it's easy & free to print out current AIP plates for the few airfields you use as a private pilot, to guard against surprises mid-flight.

In Australia, it's my interpretation that a pilot must have a full current database, not just current with respect to the airfields you may use. I'm interested to hear that others have a different interpretation!

9A.5 The reference in paragraph 9A.4 to currency does not apply to an aircraft (an exempted aircraft):
(a) during flight — if the navigation database expires because it has not been updated for the requirements of a new AIRAC cycle which commenced during the flight;
or
(b) for a period of not more than 72 hours from the time the navigation computer database expires — but only if currency is not required under the MEL for the aircraft.
9A.6 If an aircraft’s navigation computer database is to be used for the navigation purposesof an exempted aircraft under paragraph 9A.5, then:
(a) before each flight, the computer’s database navigation fixes, and the coordinates, frequencies, status (as applicable), and suitability of navigation facilities, required for the intended route must be verified by approved sources of navigation information other than the navigation computer database itself; and
(b) radio navigation aids that are used for departure, arrival and approach procedures must be tuned in to and identified; and
(c) despite paragraph 9A.5, an RNAV departure, arrival or approach procedure must not be used if it is one that has been changed in the latest AIRAC cycle and the aircraft’s navigation computer database is not current for the change; and
(d) if an aircraft is to commence, or continue, a flight with a navigation computer database that is not current for the AIRAC cycle, the operator or the pilot in command must advise air traffic control before the flight commences, or on first contact during continued flight.
9A.7 For an aircraft:
(a) that is engaged in en route or terminal navigation; and
(b) whose navigation computer database complies with paragraphs 9A.3 and 9A.4;
and
(c) that is not an exempted aircraft under paragraph 9A.5;
each navigation computer database selected track and distance between way points is
to be cross-checked for accuracy and reasonableness by reference to:
(d) current en route and area charts; or
(e) the flight plan; or
(f) the navigation log

Dang seems like them mooney pilots are on the money.

So if we take off out of Cairns for Burketown where the RNAV has not been changed in the latest AIRAC and we tell ATC our database is not current then we are legal?

No, unless you are an exempted aircraft ie 9A.5 a or b applies to you. I think.

I'm going to disagree here bloggs, 9A.6 c&d apply despite 9A.5 a or b

KLN89B database updates
 

This is an old thread but,

If anyone is still using the old KLN89B's and doesn't have a current database...

I have 2 or 3 Australian database updates for the KLN89B that you can have - I won't use before my subscription expires.