Neil wrote:
In the olden days before integrated nag systems one had to actually verify (ident) the nav aid.
This still is the only safe way to make sure the navaid you are using is operating correctly IMHO. Since when has that changed? Modern nav systems listen for the morse code themselves and display the identifier to you on the screen, but that still comes down to identifying the navaid, just with the help of some technology that does the listening for you. (Bonus question: If you have a G1000, can that waive the requirement for pure tone audiometry for class 2 medical holders? ;) )
Question to the experienced pilots: Do you always identify the navaids you use?
Do you always identify the navaids you use?
I do because it is easy to set the wrong frequency.
Very rarely, it leads to the discovery of an INOP navaid, which usually means you didn’t check the airport notams 
If you have a G1000, can that waive the requirement for pure tone audiometry for class 2 medical holders? ;) )
You will have turkeys voting for Xmas before anything happens to reduce AME income.
achimha wrote:
I personally can do well with the national charts and would not pay Jeppesen for the whole coverage I fly to.
Definitely agree, Hope my post did not come across as advertising. The homework needed to do the same work as jeppesen does pays off pretty well for those on the cheap as yours truly :)
The homework needed to do the same work as jeppesen does pays off pretty well for those on the cheap as yours truly :)
It’s actually an interesting Q how many people would be required to maintain the worldwide Jepp terminal charts now. I vaguely recall hearing it is about 50. Jepp have around 10k-20k customers and at a guess they are paying several k each.
For sure if somebody wanted to enter the market now, they would have to allocate massive resources to it. IMHO nobody will bother especially as all the people who use it commercially are evidently happy to pay the few k/year (€15k or so for IFR WW) and those who don’t use it commercially are (a) a miniscule market and (b) most of them will never pay for it anyway because they get it from friends, airline pilots, etc
And if somebody did the obvious thing (reverse engineer the Jepp database and change the few least significant bits of all the coordinates in a random way, while keeping any change down to about 1ft ) Jepp would sue them under copyright.
Hope my post did not come across as advertising
No; this is an old and very valid topic, to which nobody I know knows the answer.
Rwy20 wrote:
Question to the experienced pilots: Do you always identify the navaids you use?
When I made my comment about identifying the navaids in the olden days, I was referring to listening to the morse and confirming it was correct.
These days I fly with an integrated nav system and it displays the ident as you described. A check that the system is correctly tuned, identified, the correct final approach course is set. and setting the minima in the system are all part of the approach briefing, which is best practice.
Peter wrote:
For sure if somebody wanted to enter the market now, they would have to allocate massive resources to it.
I don’t see the need for non AIP plates so I don’t see a market opportunity. People use Jeppesen because they get told to use them and then get used to the charts. I see nothing wrong flying with AIP charts.
Neil wrote:
Question to the experienced pilots
I just noticed this could be misunderstood to mean that I thought you weren’t experienced, but I meant “as opposed to me” because I am not very experienced with IFR.
achimha wrote:
In reality this calculation is mostly absolutely trivial
Yes, the OCA calculation is trivial, but the visibility calculations are not.
Rwy20 wrote:
Question to the experienced pilots: Do you always identify the navaids you use?
Always!
huv wrote:
The MDA/DA on Jepp charts are usually not consistent with national regulation in my country (Denmark), except for ILS. So when I use Jepp pltes with its clearly stated MDA/DA, I still have to read the fine print in the national OPS regulation with all its tables and footnotes and definitions to work out what is legally correct. Of course I do that even when sitting in a dark cockpit in turbulence handflying and just been thrown a different approach from the one I have just briefed, anything else would be illegal … but I have noticed that if I had just concentrated on flying instead, and used the easily found Jepp minima, it seems I would have been safe every time.
The Jepp minima are according to EU-OPS, so when part-NCO replaces the national regulations next year, the Jepp minima should be correct.
