Using free online approach plates

[mvgossman]

Anyone in the habit of going online for instrument approach plates
(terminal procedures), printing out only the plates you need for a trip
along with possible alternates and taking them in the plane?

This concept makes me uneasy, but perhaps it would be reasonable to
have the regular FAA plates, allowing them to expire but retain them
for, say, a year, bring them along, and print out absolutely current
plates for the destination and likely alternates. This way, you could
have "old but a heckuva lot better than nothing" plates for very
unlikely scenarios in the bag. This would help save much money via not
getting 99% duplicate plates every 56 days yet provide satisfactory
safety.

In case anyone does not know, very nice high quality plates are
available free at:

www.aeroplanner.com/flightplanning/approachplates.cfm

This has the additional advantage of being able to print out larger
copies for those with imperfect reading vision and on higher quality
white paper.

Mitch

[A Lieberma]

"mvgossman" > wrote in oups.com:

> Anyone in the habit of going online for instrument approach plates
> (terminal procedures), printing out only the plates you need for a trip
> along with possible alternates and taking them in the plane?

Hey Mitch,

Do this all the time! See

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.aviation.ifr/browse_frm/thread/8e643414634fc998/4a5649b55b09fe4f?lnk=st&q=%22trip+pack%22+lieberma+&rnum=1&hl=en#4a5649b55b09fe4f

for what I use in my trip planning and experiences with an IFR trip planning program.

Been several upgrades since my posting in January.

As stated in my original post, just an EXTREMELY satisfied user of this program.

Allen

[Mitty]

On 10/28/2006 7:20 PM, mvgossman wrote the following:
> Anyone in the habit of going online for instrument approach plates
> (terminal procedures), printing out only the plates you need for a trip
> along with possible alternates and taking them in the plane?
>
Yes. I have used Seattle Avionics' plate pack tool in the past but am presently
using Aviator Trip Pack. This is a lot easier than manually downloading each one.

> This concept makes me uneasy, but perhaps it would be reasonable to
> have the regular FAA plates, allowing them to expire but retain them
> for, say, a year, bring them along, and print out absolutely current
> plates for the destination and likely alternates. This way, you could
> have "old but a heckuva lot better than nothing" plates for very
> unlikely scenarios in the bag. This would help save much money via not
> getting 99% duplicate plates every 56 days yet provide satisfactory
> safety.
>
I use Air Chart Systems for the backup. IIRC it's like $75/year for a
region/half dozen books of plates and the updating service. Plus you can buy
additional books any time you go outside your region and since the monthly
updates cover the whole nation your additional books are covered too for the
balance of the year.

[A Lieberma]

A Lieberma > wrote in
. 18:

> Hey Mitch,
>
> Do this all the time! See
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/rec.aviation.ifr/browse_frm/thread/8e643
> 414634fc998/4a5649b55b09fe4f?lnk=st&q=%22trip+pack%22+lieberma+&rnum=1&
> hl=en#4a5649b55b09fe4f
>
> for what I use in my trip planning and experiences with an IFR trip
> planning program.
>
> Been several upgrades since my posting in January.
>
> As stated in my original post, just an EXTREMELY satisfied user of
> this program.
>
> Allen

Let me also add, if you use the latest Adobe program with the ATP
program, you can print out 2 approach charts on one sheet (landscape
mode) which puts the charts in a knee board size format after cutting the
page in half.

This was something that I didn't have in my original posting as I was
running it on a very, very tired computer. I have since upgraded my
computer :-)

Also, one of the many upgrades since my original posting is that airspace
is now displayed on the maps.

It is Vista ready as I am running Vista RC2 on my computer.

Allen

[Sam Spade]

mvgossman wrote:

> In case anyone does not know, very nice high quality plates are
> available free at:
>
> www.aeroplanner.com/flightplanning/approachplates.cfm
>
Or, better yet, download them directly from the NACO/FAA site.

http://www.naco.faa.gov/index.asp?xml=naco/online/d_tpp

[M[_1_]]

mvgossman wrote:
> Anyone in the habit of going online for instrument approach plates
> (terminal procedures), printing out only the plates you need for a trip
> along with possible alternates and taking them in the plane?
>

Why not?

BTW, just because a chart says it's valid between say 9/28/06 thru
10/26/06 doesn't mean the chart expires after 10/26/06. On the lower
left hand of each the NACO chart there's a chart sequence number, and
it looks like "Amdt 10A 05328". As long as that number hasn't changed
in the respective most update-to-date chart on the NACO website, your
2-year chart for that procedure is still valid.

In this example, the number 05328 means the instrument approach chart
was last revised on the 328th day of 2005.

[Andrew Sarangan[_1_]]

mvgossman wrote:
> Anyone in the habit of going online for instrument approach plates
> (terminal procedures), printing out only the plates you need for a trip
> along with possible alternates and taking them in the plane?
>
> This concept makes me uneasy, but perhaps it would be reasonable to
> have the regular FAA plates, allowing them to expire but retain them
> for, say, a year, bring them along, and print out absolutely current
> plates for the destination and likely alternates. This way, you could
> have "old but a heckuva lot better than nothing" plates for very
> unlikely scenarios in the bag. This would help save much money via not
> getting 99% duplicate plates every 56 days yet provide satisfactory
> safety.
>
> In case anyone does not know, very nice high quality plates are
> available free at:
>
> www.aeroplanner.com/flightplanning/approachplates.cfm
>
> This has the additional advantage of being able to print out larger
> copies for those with imperfect reading vision and on higher quality
> white paper.
>
> Mitch

Your uneasiness is justified. However, it doesn't take much to print a
couple of extra airports in the vicinity as well as one or two airports
along your route. That should cover all but the most extreme scenarios.
In those cases you can ask FSS or ATC to read you the nav frequency and
the minimums. Carrying an expired book is not a bad idea either.

[mvgossman]

Thanks! Last time I checked the FAA sites, they were crummy scanned
documents,now they're nice perfect PDF's.


Mitch


Sam Spade wrote:
> mvgossman wrote:
>
> > In case anyone does not know, very nice high quality plates are
> > available free at:
> >
> > www.aeroplanner.com/flightplanning/approachplates.cfm
> >
> Or, better yet, download them directly from the NACO/FAA site.
>
> http://www.naco.faa.gov/index.asp?xml=naco/online/d_tpp

[mvgossman]

My goal though is to have current charts available that are likely to
be needed with a minimum of hassle. The easiest way is to, as I do now,
subscribe to the procedures Volumes that you may need. This is very
wasteful and expensive. If you go to the internet and download them
that is great but only for those you take the time to do. To check the
actual change date on the plate and compare to the online one can
relieve you of the need to print out a single plate.

The software mentioned about, ato automatically keep track of plates
and print them for you, is very interesting! But for a pilot who flies
as much as I do, even the modest fee for that I'm afraid exceeds what
I'm willing to pay at this time, and if I do this paper-saving, it will
be on a case-by-case manual basis. But for a pilot who flies a great
deal or a pro, certainly looks like a great time-saver.

Mitch





M wrote:
> mvgossman wrote:
> > Anyone in the habit of going online for instrument approach plates
> > (terminal procedures), printing out only the plates you need for a trip
> > along with possible alternates and taking them in the plane?
> >
>
> Why not?
>
> BTW, just because a chart says it's valid between say 9/28/06 thru
> 10/26/06 doesn't mean the chart expires after 10/26/06. On the lower
> left hand of each the NACO chart there's a chart sequence number, and
> it looks like "Amdt 10A 05328". As long as that number hasn't changed
> in the respective most update-to-date chart on the NACO website, your
> 2-year chart for that procedure is still valid.
>
> In this example, the number 05328 means the instrument approach chart
> was last revised on the 328th day of 2005.

[Dave S]

Andrew Sarangan wrote:
Carrying an expired book is not a bad idea either.
>

I thought expired charts could bust you on a ramp check... yes? no?

[Andrew Sarangan[_1_]]

Dave S wrote:
> Andrew Sarangan wrote:
> Carrying an expired book is not a bad idea either.
> >
>
> I thought expired charts could bust you on a ramp check... yes? no?

No.

[Jim Macklin]

Part 91, no, Part 121-135, yes.



"Dave S" > wrote in message
link.net...
| Andrew Sarangan wrote:
| Carrying an expired book is not a bad idea either.
| >
|
| I thought expired charts could bust you on a ramp check...
yes? no?

[Jose[_1_]]

> | I thought expired charts could bust you on a ramp check...
> yes? no?

> Part 91, no, Part 121-135, yes.

So for part 121-135, expired charts are contraband? They cannot be
carried even as cargo?

Jose
--
"Never trust anything that can think for itself, if you can't see where
it keeps its brain." (chapter 10 of book 3 - Harry Potter).
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Sam Spade]

Jose wrote:
>> | I thought expired charts could bust you on a ramp check... yes? no?
>
>
>> Part 91, no, Part 121-135, yes.
>
>
> So for part 121-135, expired charts are contraband? They cannot be
> carried even as cargo?
>
> Jose

You can carry all the expired charts you want on a Part 135 or 121
flight. But, that in no way negates the requirement to have current
charts for the operation at hand. In the case of scheduled operations
that would be all the charts required to be in the manual. And, the FAA
has a copy of that manual in their office.

[Michael[_1_]]

mvgossman wrote:
> This concept makes me uneasy, but perhaps it would be reasonable to
> have the regular FAA plates, allowing them to expire but retain them
> for, say, a year, bring them along, and print out absolutely current
> plates for the destination and likely alternates. This way, you could
> have "old but a heckuva lot better than nothing" plates for very
> unlikely scenarios in the bag. This would help save much money via not
> getting 99% duplicate plates every 56 days yet provide satisfactory
> safety.

This is exactly what I've been doing for years. Works fine.

One time I did wind up landing IFR at an airport for which I had no
current plates (I thought). Of course it was a diversion (huge
headwinds). I simply asked the controller to verify the revision
number of the plate for the approach I was assigned. Turned out I had
a current chart after all (they don't change that much).

I used to use AirCharts but found that it didn't take me any longer to
do what you are contemplating, it cost less, and it was actually more
convenient (I would staple the plates together in a trip book, and
would have all the charts I was likely to need for the whole trip in
one custom book).

Michael

[pgbnh]

Printing copies of the anticipated approach plates makes a lot of sense -
usually larger, easier to read, fit better on the clipboard, etc etc.
However, carrying old plates for the unanticipated diversion does NOT meet
the requirements of the FAR's and would, I suspect, be cause for the FAA to
bust you and/or the insurance company to disallow a claim in case of an
incident/accident.
"mvgossman" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> Anyone in the habit of going online for instrument approach plates
> (terminal procedures), printing out only the plates you need for a trip
> along with possible alternates and taking them in the plane?
>
> This concept makes me uneasy, but perhaps it would be reasonable to
> have the regular FAA plates, allowing them to expire but retain them
> for, say, a year, bring them along, and print out absolutely current
> plates for the destination and likely alternates. This way, you could
> have "old but a heckuva lot better than nothing" plates for very
> unlikely scenarios in the bag. This would help save much money via not
> getting 99% duplicate plates every 56 days yet provide satisfactory
> safety.
>
> In case anyone does not know, very nice high quality plates are
> available free at:
>
> www.aeroplanner.com/flightplanning/approachplates.cfm
>
> This has the additional advantage of being able to print out larger
> copies for those with imperfect reading vision and on higher quality
> white paper.
>
> Mitch
>

[Andrew Sarangan[_1_]]

Sam Spade wrote:
> Jose wrote:
> >> | I thought expired charts could bust you on a ramp check... yes? no?
> >
> >
> >> Part 91, no, Part 121-135, yes.
> >
> >
> > So for part 121-135, expired charts are contraband? They cannot be
> > carried even as cargo?
> >
> > Jose
>
> You can carry all the expired charts you want on a Part 135 or 121
> flight. But, that in no way negates the requirement to have current
> charts for the operation at hand. In the case of scheduled operations
> that would be all the charts required to be in the manual. And, the FAA
> has a copy of that manual in their office.

And if you happen to use an expired chart during an emergency or
unexpected diversion, even under part 121, I doubt the FAA would ding
you for that, as long as you flew the approach correctly and did not
cause an incident.

[Sam Spade]

Andrew Sarangan wrote:

> And if you happen to use an expired chart during an emergency or
> unexpected diversion, even under part 121, I doubt the FAA would ding
> you for that, as long as you flew the approach correctly and did not
> cause an incident.
>

That would be a problem for Part 121. Diversions are supposed to be
made to authorized airports. Even alternate-only airports have to be
listed in the op specs and have performance data in the flight manual.

An emergency is a different matter, but for most carriers a listed
airport is usually close enough to be the best plan for an emergency.

No approach charts for an emergency would be far more likely than
expired approach charts.

[Mark Hansen]

On 10/30/06 09:02, pgbnh wrote:
> Printing copies of the anticipated approach plates makes a lot of sense -
> usually larger, easier to read, fit better on the clipboard, etc etc.

Okay...

> However, carrying old plates for the unanticipated diversion does NOT meet
> the requirements of the FAR's and would, I suspect, be cause for the FAA to
> bust you and/or the insurance company to disallow a claim in case of an
> incident/accident.

Are you saying that the FAA requires that a part 91 pilot carry current
approach plates for airports to which he didn't anticipate he might be
diverted?

Which FAR is that?

> "mvgossman" > wrote in message
> oups.com...
>> Anyone in the habit of going online for instrument approach plates
>> (terminal procedures), printing out only the plates you need for a trip
>> along with possible alternates and taking them in the plane?
>>
>> This concept makes me uneasy, but perhaps it would be reasonable to
>> have the regular FAA plates, allowing them to expire but retain them
>> for, say, a year, bring them along, and print out absolutely current
>> plates for the destination and likely alternates. This way, you could
>> have "old but a heckuva lot better than nothing" plates for very
>> unlikely scenarios in the bag. This would help save much money via not
>> getting 99% duplicate plates every 56 days yet provide satisfactory
>> safety.
>>
>> In case anyone does not know, very nice high quality plates are
>> available free at:
>>
>> www.aeroplanner.com/flightplanning/approachplates.cfm
>>
>> This has the additional advantage of being able to print out larger
>> copies for those with imperfect reading vision and on higher quality
>> white paper.
>>
>> Mitch
>>
>
>



--
Mark Hansen, PP-ASEL, Instrument Airplane
Cal Aggie Flying Farmers
Sacramento, CA

[pgbnh[_1_]]

I would vote for 91.13, 91.175, and common sense. You would probably not
want to fly on a commercial flight where the guys up front are using
approach plates that are known to be expired. Why expect that YOUR
passengers would want to do otherwise?
"Mark Hansen" > wrote in message
...
> On 10/30/06 09:02, pgbnh wrote:
>> Printing copies of the anticipated approach plates makes a lot of sense -
>> usually larger, easier to read, fit better on the clipboard, etc etc.
>
> Okay...
>
>> However, carrying old plates for the unanticipated diversion does NOT
>> meet
>> the requirements of the FAR's and would, I suspect, be cause for the FAA
>> to
>> bust you and/or the insurance company to disallow a claim in case of an
>> incident/accident.
>
> Are you saying that the FAA requires that a part 91 pilot carry current
> approach plates for airports to which he didn't anticipate he might be
> diverted?
>
> Which FAR is that?
>
>> "mvgossman" > wrote in message
>> oups.com...
>>> Anyone in the habit of going online for instrument approach plates
>>> (terminal procedures), printing out only the plates you need for a trip
>>> along with possible alternates and taking them in the plane?
>>>
>>> This concept makes me uneasy, but perhaps it would be reasonable to
>>> have the regular FAA plates, allowing them to expire but retain them
>>> for, say, a year, bring them along, and print out absolutely current
>>> plates for the destination and likely alternates. This way, you could
>>> have "old but a heckuva lot better than nothing" plates for very
>>> unlikely scenarios in the bag. This would help save much money via not
>>> getting 99% duplicate plates every 56 days yet provide satisfactory
>>> safety.
>>>
>>> In case anyone does not know, very nice high quality plates are
>>> available free at:
>>>
>>> www.aeroplanner.com/flightplanning/approachplates.cfm
>>>
>>> This has the additional advantage of being able to print out larger
>>> copies for those with imperfect reading vision and on higher quality
>>> white paper.
>>>
>>> Mitch
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Mark Hansen, PP-ASEL, Instrument Airplane
> Cal Aggie Flying Farmers
> Sacramento, CA

[Mark Hansen]

On 10/31/06 09:25, pgbnh wrote:
> I would vote for 91.13, 91.175, and common sense. You would probably not
> want to fly on a commercial flight where the guys up front are using
> approach plates that are known to be expired. Why expect that YOUR
> passengers would want to do otherwise?

Actually, we weren't talking about what my passengers expect. We were
talking about your claim that the FAA requires part 91 pilots to carry
charts for destination they have not considered going to.

That's just silly.



> "Mark Hansen" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On 10/30/06 09:02, pgbnh wrote:
>>> Printing copies of the anticipated approach plates makes a lot of sense -
>>> usually larger, easier to read, fit better on the clipboard, etc etc.
>>
>> Okay...
>>
>>> However, carrying old plates for the unanticipated diversion does NOT
>>> meet
>>> the requirements of the FAR's and would, I suspect, be cause for the FAA
>>> to
>>> bust you and/or the insurance company to disallow a claim in case of an
>>> incident/accident.
>>
>> Are you saying that the FAA requires that a part 91 pilot carry current
>> approach plates for airports to which he didn't anticipate he might be
>> diverted?
>>
>> Which FAR is that?
>>
>>> "mvgossman" > wrote in message
>>> oups.com...
>>>> Anyone in the habit of going online for instrument approach plates
>>>> (terminal procedures), printing out only the plates you need for a trip
>>>> along with possible alternates and taking them in the plane?
>>>>
>>>> This concept makes me uneasy, but perhaps it would be reasonable to
>>>> have the regular FAA plates, allowing them to expire but retain them
>>>> for, say, a year, bring them along, and print out absolutely current
>>>> plates for the destination and likely alternates. This way, you could
>>>> have "old but a heckuva lot better than nothing" plates for very
>>>> unlikely scenarios in the bag. This would help save much money via not
>>>> getting 99% duplicate plates every 56 days yet provide satisfactory
>>>> safety.
>>>>
>>>> In case anyone does not know, very nice high quality plates are
>>>> available free at:
>>>>
>>>> www.aeroplanner.com/flightplanning/approachplates.cfm
>>>>
>>>> This has the additional advantage of being able to print out larger
>>>> copies for those with imperfect reading vision and on higher quality
>>>> white paper.
>>>>
>>>> Mitch
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Mark Hansen, PP-ASEL, Instrument Airplane
>> Cal Aggie Flying Farmers
>> Sacramento, CA
>
>



--
Mark Hansen, PP-ASEL, Instrument Airplane
Cal Aggie Flying Farmers
Sacramento, CA

[Gary Drescher]

"pgbnh" > wrote in message
...
> You would probably not want to fly on a commercial flight where the guys
> up front are using approach plates that are known to be expired. Why
> expect that YOUR passengers would want to do otherwise?

For the same reason that your passengers would settle for your having a
private pilot license rather than an ATP. We expect more rigorous safety
standards from commercial operations, in part because the higher volume of
passengers makes rigorous precautions more cost-effective. (We're only
discussing bringing expired plates--rather than no plates--for places you
have no intention or likelihood of landing.)

--Gary

[Andrew Sarangan[_1_]]

pgbnh wrote:
> I would vote for 91.13, 91.175, and common sense. You would probably not
> want to fly on a commercial flight where the guys up front are using
> approach plates that are known to be expired. Why expect that YOUR
> passengers would want to do otherwise?

This is a pointless discussion. If the flight was completed without
incident, then no one cares whether you had expired charts, or no
charts at all. If you caused an incident, then it doesn't matter that
you had brand new charts with you during the incident. You will be
busted anyway, unless you can prove that the incident was due to a
misprint in the new charts, which is a very unlikely event. These tales
about FAA inspectors ticketing pilots because he saw expired charts
through the cockpit window are just tales.