Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

Jeppesen approach plates vs AIP plates

Printing CAA AIP Plates on A5 - my 'work-around'.

Even when printing the above on A4 their size is not maximized due the large margins. Print to A5, and as already mentioned, the situation is even worse and not very cockpit readable.

My 'workaround' using MS Word is:-

Set a 'custom paper size' of 17.1 (or18.1) cm x 24.1cm - I arrived at these dimensions by trial and error, but ensuring to keep the aspect ratio approximately correct e.g.

A4 is 21 x 29.7 = aspect 0.71 A5 is 14.85 x 21 = aspect 0.71 Custom 17.1 x 24.1 = aspect 0.71

Load your printer with A4 paper and 'print'.

The result can be 'cut' (Stanley Knife & steel straight edge or Guillotine) to A5 resulting in maximum image and minimum margins.

I use a 'Self Healing Mat' calibrated in cm's

You can increase image size a bit more by using a 'custom size' of 18.1 x 24.1 (the ratio error is not noticeable) and is my default.

May sound fiddle, but once set-up, very quick and if you use a Guillotine you can print 'many' and guillotine 'all'.

The image area is noticeable larger than opting for a straight A5 print in the first place.

Regret no current medical
Was Sandtoft EGCF, North England, United Kingdom

I download ICAO plates to iPad as primary source and have them printed on A4 as backup in case iPad suddenly decides to die (happend last summer due to overheating during ILS approach). I always check if I have recent plates on iPad for my departure, destination, alternates and few en-route airports and have departure, destination and alternates printed.

LDZA LDVA, Croatia

There is no problem printing the A4 AIP plates to A5, but a lot of the text in them is then too small to read by "old" pilots i.e. those over 49

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

There is no problem printing the A4 AIP plates to A5, but a lot of the text in them is then too small to read by "old" pilots i.e. those over 49

Agreed if you just 'select' A5, but do it as described in No.61 and you'll have a fighting chance of making it readable.

Regret no current medical
Was Sandtoft EGCF, North England, United Kingdom

That's why I print them on A4 ...

That's why I print them on A4 ...

Yes, understand advantages of that - but for those who want an A5 size, the 'work around' at No.61 is a good compromise to get 'max image' and 'zero margins'.

Most printers can't print right to the edge - the dodge I use gets round that as well.

Regret no current medical
Was Sandtoft EGCF, North England, United Kingdom

Jepp does have a Deps chart for LZZI, and on cursory glance it matches the textual description in the AIP.

@achim and tomjnx: Obviously Jepp has done and still does good job with plates but somehow it still seems to me that it's too expensive for private pilot to pay for this subscription.

LDZA LDVA, Croatia

To keep this thread alive
Compared Jepp mobile FD pricing it’s horribly expensive for an average GA IFR PPL if you want to cover West and Central Europe.
So yes I like Jepp’s lay out etc.. but if your IFR Data Maintenance becomes more expensive then an annual inspection something is wrong! As Emir mentioned I’d better print some more AIP plates then
Now if Sky Demon would make the AIP plates geo referenced !!!!

EBST

Now if Sky Demon would make the AIP plates geo referenced !!!!

My impression from discussing this with the protagonist is that VFR remains the focus of the product and there is concern about increased risk and liability. It’s one thing if a charting mistakes happens while you are visual or whether it happens while you are inside a cloud.

There’s a chance we might tackle this issue as part of autorouter. Not made up our mind yet.

That would a great initative.
E.g when the Route is generated to be able as part of briefpack have list of IAC’s put into some kind of pre-packed folder…making the geo-refrence x-check possible in advance before flying to assure alignement e.g overlay with google maps (just brainstorming..;-)

Garmin Pilot just offers that somehow but geo referenced. To my understanding non of the commercial products covers liability….
On the other hand what is more dangerous a VFR airspace bust into a busy TMA or noticing the needles do not correspond fully with a map error during an IMC approach
ohh well..;-))..I would follow the needles as my instructor told me several times..

Last Edited by Vref at 28 Apr 14:37
EBST
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top