Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

Official vs Unofficial IFR charts

Timothy wrote:

I guess that using simmer’s plates marked “Not for Aviation Use” might be thought to fall somewhat short of the ideals set by the word “ensure”

Yes, though Part-ORO is not applicable to NCO.

I guess that my EBAW case in point demonstrates that that operator would be better advised to audit BCAA!

Indeed.

I do have a thought though. If were to club together to pay a company (such as @AeroPlus ?) to employ someone to do a reasonably sensible but non-exhaustive QA process on http://www.navigraph.com/ sufficient to satisfy us that they are adequate, it would save us a fortune on Jepp.

EGKB Biggin Hill

bookworm wrote:

The operator shall ensure that when contracting or purchasing any part of its activity, the contracted or purchased service or product conforms to the applicable requirements.

I guess that using simmer’s plates marked “Not for Aviation Use” might be thought to fall somewhat short of the ideals set by the word “ensure

bookworm wrote:

Can you imagine a one-aircraft air taxi company arranging an audit of Jepp?!

I guess that my EBAW case in point demonstrates that that operator would be better advised to audit BCAA!

EGKB Biggin Hill

Timothy wrote:

I believe, but am not certain, that part of the PBN certification is to use plates from an approved source. Does anyone have access to that bit of legislation?

Nope. Charts are not certified, though some believe they should be. For the CAT operators the operator is responsible for the quality of the chart it uses.

ORO.GEN.205 Contracted activities
(a) The operator shall ensure that when contracting or purchasing any part of its activity, the contracted or purchased service or product conforms to the applicable requirements.

Can you imagine a one-aircraft air taxi company arranging an audit of Jepp?!

But nav database providers, which are currently subject to a Letter of Approval are, as of 1 Jan 2019, to be certified under Part-DAT:

AMC1 NCO.IDE.A.205 Management of aeronautical databases
AERONAUTICAL DATABASES
When the operator of an aircraft uses an aeronautical database that supports an airborne navigation
application as a primary means of navigation used to meet the airspace usage requirements, the
database provider should be a Type 2 DAT provider certified in accordance with Regulation (EU)
2017/373 or equivalent

Anders wrote:

Isn’t the main problem with the Navigraph plate product aimed at simmer that it is only updated every third month? This makes those plates hard to use since you need to double check that the plates are current.

There must be some “problem” with them, or people would use them for real flight…

ESKC (Uppsala/Sundbro), Sweden

Isn’t the main problem with the Navigraph plate product aimed at simmer that it is only updated every third month? This makes those plates hard to use since you need to double check that the plates are current.

ESTL

JasonC wrote:

In FAA land for RNP, the database must be from a supplier who holds an LOA. And for Part 91 ops it must be current.

If you are using RNP in the general sense to include RNAV (GPS) approaches (RNP APR), then it depends on the GPS AFMS wording. Some are worded to permit use of an expired database as long as the data is retrieved from the database and the data that is retrieved is verified to be current. Later AFMS have similar wording but only with respect to AIRAC rollover procedures.

KUZA, United States

Incidentally, and this is a bit of a tangent, but relevant, I know of a (potentially dangerous) error on an AIP plate that has been corrected by Jepp.

Look at the RNAV approach to runway 11 at EBAW Antwerp. It is a 3.5° slope, but the AIP published RODs commensurate with a 3° slope. This would put someone above the slope all the way down and not going around until too late, potentially popping out and seeing the runway too close. While this is mitigated by them getting the check altitudes right, pilots cannot be relied on to use all the information on the plate.

The numbers are correct on the Jepp plate, presumably demonstrating the value of their own QA department and that they don’t blindly copy what the AIP says.

I wonder if the same is true of other sources?

EGKB Biggin Hill

Timothy wrote:

Timothy23-Mar-17 08:07 #17
I believe, but am not certain, that part of the PBN certification is to use plates from an approved source. Does anyone have access to that bit of legislation?

All RNAV approaches and procedures will form part of PBN, so if that is right, it would scupper unapproved suppliers. But this needs to be checked. @bookworm ?

In FAA land for RNP, the database must be from a supplier who holds an LOA. And for Part 91 ops it must be current. I do not know of any regulations re a plate. It is all about the GPS/FMS database.

Plates there are essentially just part of the briefing process you must do before each flight. My understanding is that strictly speaking you do not even have to carry them if you are adequately briefed. Question how you could be adequately prepared for IFR flight in IMC without them but that is a seperate issue.

Last Edited by JasonC at 23 Mar 09:54
EGTK Oxford

I believe, but am not certain, that part of the PBN certification is to use plates from an approved source. Does anyone have access to that bit of legislation?

All RNAV approaches and procedures will form part of PBN, so if that is right, it would scupper unapproved suppliers. But this needs to be checked. @bookworm ?

EGKB Biggin Hill
26 Posts
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top