Martin wrote:
So I could forget about paper maps.
I don’t use paper maps on many flights. For many countries, you won’t even find current VFR charts on paper any more.
I think you and I have wires crossed, Martin.
Peter wrote:
The US regs require the carriage of a VOR receiver (etc) but is there anything there which requires it to be used?
There is no requirement to have a CDI or navcom radio. In IFR flight the only equipement required is that necessary to fly the route. In VFR you can fly without radio, transponder, all but a mag compass.
I haven’t used, nor carried, any paper charts or plates since JeppView became available and reliable on the iPad.
Martin wrote:
I’m not saying all such products would have to be approved, I would just like some to be, to be considered by authorities as good as an official paper chart.
But the EASA rules make no mention of “official charts” they only says “appropriate charts”. In some countries there are no “official” charts.
What is an “official chart”?
The UK doesn’t have any. France has SIA, maybe, but they are no more “official” than the UK CAA ones, and France has IGN and Cartabossy too. Germany has the DFS ones.
in germany there is the “myth” that the DFS chart are the official ones
that is a lot of “old wifes tales”!!!!!!
there are no such thing as “official” charts FULL STOP
it comes i guess that a lot of schools use this “phrase” and it somehow got stuck
Peter wrote:
What is an “official chart”?
I would guess it is a chart published by the national CAA. Certainly such things exist in many countries but still there is no requirement to use them.
Hello,
coming back to my original question
what is the thought if i would install a Apollo GX50? and maybe later if i can find panel space and more $$$ a MX20?
is it true that there is still database updates availible for the GX50?
thanks
Airborne_Again wrote:
But the EASA rules make no mention of “official charts” they only says “appropriate charts”. In some countries there are no “official” charts.
Obviously, if there is no such thing, they can’t say you should have used it. This is really an ass covering exercise. One option I didn’t mention is for Eurocontrol to provide all the data in a nice format.
Peter wrote:
What is an “official chart”?
That’s my short for a chart produced by or on behalf of the owner or entity responsible for management of an airspace. You know, the people who decide what the airspace looks like. And the word also implies that the information is sort of binding. Don’t know the proper expression – what I’m trying to say: Just as with law it’s usually not hard to get the text, however, there are (at least some places) only a few ways how to get the authoritative version that has relevance in court. This distinction only makes a difference when it comes to errors.
The question it comes down to is whose fault is it when you violate an airspace because it’s not on a chart or is incorrectly depicted (provided there was no relevant NOTAM, etc.).
