Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

Jeppesen Mobile Flite Deck VFR / MFDVFR / Foreflight Mobile

The first thing I would ask is what people want to use elevations for.

In VMC you should never fly into the ground

In IMC, you need to have the actual numbers, to know your clearance.

To do the potentially dodgy thing and descend in IMC until you are VMC, without hitting anything, you also need the numbers.

Finally, in my PPL training, one planned a VFR flight by using spot elevations 5nm either side of the track, and added 1000ft.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

Finally, in my PPL training, one planned a VFR flight by using spot elevations 5nm either side of the track, and added 1000ft.

You an do that in the flat lands of SE UK

In many areas you’d never get off the ground with that rule! We did the same calculation, but it was only used as a safety altitude. If you inadvertently end up in cloud and the 180 degree turn doesn’t work, then you climb to at least this level. Almost all flights during my training took place below this level.

EIKH Kilrush

@Peter were you taught to use IFR terrain clearance for VFR flights during PPL training?
What about 600m laterally and 500ft vertically?

ESTL

Finally, in my PPL training, one planned a VFR flight by using spot elevations 5nm either side of the track, and added 1000ft.

…2000’ in mountainous region….

Oxford (EGTK)

Peter wrote "
Finally, in my PPL training, one planned a VFR flight by using spot elevations 5nm either side of the track, and added 1000ft."

This is what I was taught as well.

@Peter were you taught to use IFR terrain clearance for VFR flights during PPL training?
What about 600m laterally and 500ft vertically?”

This is confusing legal minima and practice taught in the days before Pontius was a pilot. Things may have changed in that respect.

EHLE / Lelystad, Netherlands, Netherlands

All different points of view but my point was that spot elevations are useful.

Of course one could argue that in VFR you must maintain VMC and since “nobody” will fly into a hill in VMC then maps don’t need to show elevations.

That’s why I fly with the old style VFR maps, converted into a GPS moving map.

Also I think that one should plan a VFR flight as if it was IFR and make sure before departing that the route is obstacle safe. Anyone who doesn’t do that might find a surprise down the route and then what?

Also you can fly VFR down to 1500m vis which is practically IMC. At 5000ft you have no ground vis… and you have no forward vis.

BTW I think about the only spot in the UK where you would apply the +2k would be around Ben Nevis

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

All different points of view but my point was that spot elevations are useful.

Of course one could argue that in VFR you must maintain VMC and since “nobody” will fly into a hill in VMC then maps don’t need to show elevations.

I full agree with Peter. When VFR, I want to have as many spot elevations as possible, in order to get a picture of what is coming up ahead. Likewise, I don’t like those “terrain-safe” features where terrain is just coded into green-yellow-red, as it’s too “digital” for me.

EVFR would be unsuitable for me in the mountains.

But how much altitude do you need to make it through those valleys? Which way is best? If there was an overcast cloud layer with perfect visibility underneath, could you make it through any of the valleys safely at 8000ft? Which ones? As I look at the chart, from the comfort of my sofa, with all the time in the world, I can’t really tell. I can of course take a guess, and by reading all the spot elevations, I can take an educated guess, but I can’t be sure.

Sure, and I do see your point. But then, serious flying in the mountains does require some deeper prior planning or some local knowledge anyway. You first determine which passes you will take along your route and then check their summit altitudes. All elevations along the valleys will be lower than those.

Last Edited by boscomantico at 05 Dec 10:20
Mainz (EDFZ), Germany

@Boscomantico Have you tried the “SkyDemon 3” style of charts? I like the contrast it has compared tothe default map.

ESMK, Sweden

Sure that I have tried it, but I liked it even less than the others. Mind you, I am a heavy user of Skydemon, because JMFDVFR is simply lacking in too many other regards. But when flying in the mountains, I use JMFDVFR, in addition to SD. Not ideal, but that’s the way it is.

Last Edited by boscomantico at 06 Dec 18:42
Mainz (EDFZ), Germany

An update: Greece, Hungary and Slovakia and the Canary Islands have recently been released for JMFDVFR.
So, almost 5 years after they stopped doing the paper charts, we now have a substitute which covers probably 95% of all European VFR GA flying.

Still missing: the Baltics and several Balkan countries. Hence, Greece is still “isolated”, i.e. one can’t fly from say Germany to Greece with JMDFVFR alone.
Also, for whatever reason, Ireland is still “enroute data only”. Morocco would also be fine to round things off.
With all the above, probably some 99% of all European VFR GA flying would be covered.

In terms of “flightplanning” functions, nothing has changed / evolved though.

Last Edited by boscomantico at 01 Mar 18:38
Mainz (EDFZ), Germany
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top