Changes: None. (Jeppesen)
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Cairo, Egypt
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Changes: None. (Jeppesen)
Hey.
I was wondering why sometimes on the bottom left corner of a Jepp they would add (Changes: None)
I read somewhere once that it was because the procedure on the back of the same sheet was changed thus the need to reissue the unchanged procedure with (Changes: None). Can anyone confirm this?
But what got my mind going is that sometimes there would be a newly issued chary with an effective date but then there would be no change. Why is there a need to add an effective date when it's practically the same procedure before and after the effective date.
I was wondering why sometimes on the bottom left corner of a Jepp they would add (Changes: None)
I read somewhere once that it was because the procedure on the back of the same sheet was changed thus the need to reissue the unchanged procedure with (Changes: None). Can anyone confirm this?
But what got my mind going is that sometimes there would be a newly issued chary with an effective date but then there would be no change. Why is there a need to add an effective date when it's practically the same procedure before and after the effective date.
Hey.
I was wondering why sometimes on the bottom left corner of a Jepp they would add (Changes: None)
I read somewhere once that it was because the procedure on the back of the same sheet was changed thus the need to reissue the unchanged procedure with (Changes: None). Can anyone confirm this?
But what got my mind going is that sometimes there would be a newly issued chary with an effective date but then there would be no change. Why is there a need to add an effective date when it's practically the same procedure before and after the effective date.
I was wondering why sometimes on the bottom left corner of a Jepp they would add (Changes: None)
I read somewhere once that it was because the procedure on the back of the same sheet was changed thus the need to reissue the unchanged procedure with (Changes: None). Can anyone confirm this?
But what got my mind going is that sometimes there would be a newly issued chary with an effective date but then there would be no change. Why is there a need to add an effective date when it's practically the same procedure before and after the effective date.
I use DAPS now but my previous company (Jepp) wording for the brief “ILS Z Runway 23 Adelaide South Australia (Chart ID) (Chart Date)”
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Cairo, Egypt
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But then why would it have an effective date later than its issuance date? It's the same chart and there are no changes. Why couldn't it be just effective from the very same day it was issued?
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: FL410
Posts: 860
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jeppesen in paper format has two charts on a page, one on either side.
If other side gets changed, page get renewed, with one side possibly without changes.
Updating the date on this page ensures the page is correctly updated each time even if procedure on reverse is the updated source of information.
It does appear to especially electronic chart users that the logic seems awkward or flawed, but there is reason for the reported madness.
Old school pilots may remember updating their own chart sets regularly, they will remember this...
If other side gets changed, page get renewed, with one side possibly without changes.
Updating the date on this page ensures the page is correctly updated each time even if procedure on reverse is the updated source of information.
It does appear to especially electronic chart users that the logic seems awkward or flawed, but there is reason for the reported madness.
Old school pilots may remember updating their own chart sets regularly, they will remember this...
Only half a speed-brake
For Jeppesen:
- issue date is when they come out of print-shop, based on their internal business processes. It is once a week I believe on Friday. Might differ between Denver and Frankfurt (or where else).
- effective date: regulated AIRAC cycle time base, that's when the newly published information becomes valid. Set by the relevant ANSP / CAA.
For small and irrelevant changes, Jepp decides i.a.w. their (audited) production and quality assurance systems what to change, when and how. As a customer, you can choose how frequently they will ship the updated charts: immediately, or bi-two weekly. Those are non-critical changes. Yes: one company (such as the CAA inspector
) may run on a weekly rotation and have charts in hand that have not been yet posted to your employer!
For AIRAC mandated changes with the EFFECTIVE date, of course, they need to be printed in advance (hence the issue date 2 weeks sooner on your example) to allow for the logistics all the way into pilot's clip. Interestingly, electronic delivery has identical challenges. Even in an EFB, the information is not complete without checking the CCNs.
That being said, back to your question: Why is there an EFF date on a chart that has "No Changes" ? - see above. Human factors (not) swapping pages where only the reverse has changed.
- issue date is when they come out of print-shop, based on their internal business processes. It is once a week I believe on Friday. Might differ between Denver and Frankfurt (or where else).
- effective date: regulated AIRAC cycle time base, that's when the newly published information becomes valid. Set by the relevant ANSP / CAA.
For small and irrelevant changes, Jepp decides i.a.w. their (audited) production and quality assurance systems what to change, when and how. As a customer, you can choose how frequently they will ship the updated charts: immediately, or bi-two weekly. Those are non-critical changes. Yes: one company (such as the CAA inspector
) may run on a weekly rotation and have charts in hand that have not been yet posted to your employer!For AIRAC mandated changes with the EFFECTIVE date, of course, they need to be printed in advance (hence the issue date 2 weeks sooner on your example) to allow for the logistics all the way into pilot's clip. Interestingly, electronic delivery has identical challenges. Even in an EFB, the information is not complete without checking the CCNs.
That being said, back to your question: Why is there an EFF date on a chart that has "No Changes" ? - see above. Human factors (not) swapping pages where only the reverse has changed.
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Cairo, Egypt
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thank you Skyjob for your input. At our airline, depending on the EFB on board, we might still actually use the paper format. I only took a screenshot from the EFB out of convenience. So I do understand the logic of having an issue date with (Changes: None)
Having agreed on that, I still don't really get the effective date part. Like in the example out of LTBA posted above, why do I have to use this chart on the first of March but not the 28th of Feb if either way there is no change to the previous chart of the ILS 05?
FlightDetent Do you mean that the chart on the back of this LTBA ILS 05 had the same effective date therefore they had to add it to the ILS 05 as well?
Having agreed on that, I still don't really get the effective date part. Like in the example out of LTBA posted above, why do I have to use this chart on the first of March but not the 28th of Feb if either way there is no change to the previous chart of the ILS 05?
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: FL410
Posts: 860
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Having agreed on that, I still don't really get the effective date part. Like in the example out of LTBA posted above, why do I have to use this chart on the first of March but not the 28th of Feb if either way there is no change to the previous chart of the ILS 05?
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Cairo, Egypt
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Am sorry but there seems be something that only I am missing...
"For AIRAC mandated changes with the EFFECTIVE date, of course, they need to be printed in advance"
What changes? Are these changes not shown on the chart? The chart is pretty much identical. I do understand the need to issue a new chart just cause the one on the back got changed but why not use it from the very first moment it gets issued. Why wait a couple of days to switch from chart A (older one before B's effective date) to chart B (newly issued one) when quite practically A=B.
Especially that there are a lot of cases in which there would be a chart WITH CHANGES yet with no effective date and we start using them right away.
"For AIRAC mandated changes with the EFFECTIVE date, of course, they need to be printed in advance"
What changes? Are these changes not shown on the chart? The chart is pretty much identical. I do understand the need to issue a new chart just cause the one on the back got changed but why not use it from the very first moment it gets issued. Why wait a couple of days to switch from chart A (older one before B's effective date) to chart B (newly issued one) when quite practically A=B.
Especially that there are a lot of cases in which there would be a chart WITH CHANGES yet with no effective date and we start using them right away.
How about this ?:
Some of the other changes in the illustration don’t seem quite so obvious. For example, why are some charts shipped with changes marked as “See Other Side?” When you see this change note, flip the approach chart to the reverse side and you will note that some type of change was made which required the reissuance of that approach sheet. We formerly used the words “None” for the Changes note on the side that had no changes, but the com-plaints were numerous - the solution? “See Other Side.” Occasionally a chart has been in the field so long that it should be revised even though there are no aeronautical changes to make a revision necessary. This type of chart is marked with the notation “Reissue.”
http://craigmorton.com/ifr/16-may99aopa.pdf
Some of the other changes in the illustration don’t seem quite so obvious. For example, why are some charts shipped with changes marked as “See Other Side?” When you see this change note, flip the approach chart to the reverse side and you will note that some type of change was made which required the reissuance of that approach sheet. We formerly used the words “None” for the Changes note on the side that had no changes, but the com-plaints were numerous - the solution? “See Other Side.” Occasionally a chart has been in the field so long that it should be revised even though there are no aeronautical changes to make a revision necessary. This type of chart is marked with the notation “Reissue.”
http://craigmorton.com/ifr/16-may99aopa.pdf
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Cairo, Egypt
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thank you bafanguy. This also only explains the (changes: none) which I think I got pretty clearly now. The only little part that I still couldn't grasp is having an effective date for an unchanged chart.
Only half a speed-brake
Hi. It is in SkyBob's first post, but all of us have been talking three independent things at the same time.
In your case, 11-2 is changed. Printed on 16 FEB 18 and carrying data that comes in force on EFF 1 MAR. If you open the physical binder, this 11-2 would be on the right side but overleaf, correct?
Now tt is Jeppesen's know-how, that humans are very fallible. To prevent incorrect update of the new 11-2 in paper form, they do a trick. For no other reason, just as a visual alert they put the identical time-stamp 16 FEB 18 / EFF 1 MAR on both sides of the paper sheet, i.e. on the front facing chart 11-1 as well.
Theoretically speaking you could use new-print 11-1 with "Changes: None" irrespective of the EFF date. I would advise against such practice, keep it simple and less confusing.
In your case, 11-2 is changed. Printed on 16 FEB 18 and carrying data that comes in force on EFF 1 MAR. If you open the physical binder, this 11-2 would be on the right side but overleaf, correct?
Now tt is Jeppesen's know-how, that humans are very fallible. To prevent incorrect update of the new 11-2 in paper form, they do a trick. For no other reason, just as a visual alert they put the identical time-stamp 16 FEB 18 / EFF 1 MAR on both sides of the paper sheet, i.e. on the front facing chart 11-1 as well.
Theoretically speaking you could use new-print 11-1 with "Changes: None" irrespective of the EFF date. I would advise against such practice, keep it simple and less confusing.
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: On the Beach
Posts: 3,336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That's an airline chart issued for some reason the day after there was a revised procedure. The general public chart is effective February 28 (start of AIRAC Cycle 1903), and states: "Missed apch text. Database identifiers"
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: FL410
Posts: 860
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Sep 1998
Location: wherever
Age: 55
Posts: 1,616
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some of us used to carry our own sets and updated them by hand. oh happy days. changes: none on a plate you frequently used meant no need for a cursory glance, just move on to the next one in the pile.
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Melbourne Australia
Posts: 308
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Skyjob "93' threshold elevation, crossing threshold 57' when on approach profile.
163' airport elevation."
But the chart in post #2 says "3 hPa".
I remember from my early training that 30" = 1016 mB (1016 hPa in today's money). so how do you get 93'?
Yes I realise the data is available elsewhere but pointing out the chart data.
MJG
163' airport elevation."
But the chart in post #2 says "3 hPa".
I remember from my early training that 30" = 1016 mB (1016 hPa in today's money). so how do you get 93'?
Yes I realise the data is available elsewhere but pointing out the chart data.
MJG
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 608
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Skyjob "93' threshold elevation, crossing threshold 57' when on approach profile.
163' airport elevation."
But the chart in post #2 says "3 hPa".
I remember from my early training that 30" = 1016 mB (1016 hPa in today's money). so how do you get 93'?
Yes I realise the data is available elsewhere but pointing out the chart data.
MJG
163' airport elevation."
But the chart in post #2 says "3 hPa".
I remember from my early training that 30" = 1016 mB (1016 hPa in today's money). so how do you get 93'?
Yes I realise the data is available elsewhere but pointing out the chart data.
MJG
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: FL410
Posts: 860
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
