Yes that is the real issue.
So, why not?
It is to protect Jeppesen’s business. The UK then head of charts told me (when I asked why the AIP plates are A4 and basically unusable in a cockpit) that the CAA is not in the business of competing with commercial providers! Then there was the legal settlement with Jeppesen, which was totally under an NDA. I am not necessarily saying that Jeppesen are paying the European (and Australian) CAAs money for this “business protection” but it certainly looks like some sort of deal was done, and the highly confidential nature of it is quite smelly. That conversation was also about the Australian legal action which a UK CAA guy said he was very familiar with.
The FAA manages to do it right but the other CAAs keep publishing deliberately poor data. The A4 size, for a start, is not suitable for flying because it is too big, and if you reduce it to A5 the fonts are too small.
The A4 size, for a start, is not suitable for flying because it is too big, and if you reduce it to A5 the fonts are too small.
With plates on tablet that not issue anymore.
Each AIP plate is approved by governing CAA. That means that in case above French CAA hasn’t done its job properly (reference to non-existing chapter in AIP). I’m pretty sure that AIP (documents and plates) is source for Jeppesen plates.
Reducing to A5 makes the text very small, on paper or on a tablet. The Jepp plates were designed for the early 800×600 tablets, so they print/display fine in A5 size.
Indeed, Jepp get all their stuff from the national AIPs (everybody does nowadays, either from the PDFs or via Eurocontrol) which is why they got sued in Australia. The CAA there claimed copyright.
Reducing to A5 makes the text very small, on paper or on a tablet.
Zooming? 
gallois wrote:
Taking LFMT ILS Z Atis is on the plate
Nav frequencies ADT2.18
Comms frequencies AD 2.19
Am I missing something here.
According to international standards (ICAO Annex 4) COM and NAV frequencies should be on the chart itself.
Zooming?
True but the “art” behind the Jepp plate design, and especially their choice of fonts, is that you don’t have to waste your time zooming and panning. Even on the oldest tablet, 800×600, the whole chart is there and is clearly legible.
And same when printed out in A5.
The following is 977×573 pixels
Here is the AIP one, same 573 pixels wide. Compare the legibility:
Peter wrote:
Here is the AIP one, same 573 pixels wide. Compare the legibility:
This also illustrates some of my complaints about the text on French AIP plates.
“Then, except opposite ATS clearance, join ESPIG holding…”
“Base OCH LOC+DME: NIL (position MAPT)”.
“VSP”
I can figure out what the first and third means, although it is strange/unusual ways of expressing it. I have no idea what the second one is supposed to mean.
I don’t know why the legibility on your device is different @Peter mine is perfectly clear.
The Jeppesen only takes account of English speakers.
LFMT is used very much for training purposes and therefore everything is dual language which takes up a bit more space.
If you look at the frequencies, I think you’ll find or at least you used to, French language tower frequency and possibly some others
I will have a look at ICAO Annexe 4 to see exactly what it says, it would be unusual for SIA to contravene an annexe without a derogation or a differences recorded.
I realise that most people use Jeppesen and many pilots like it because it is standardised across Europe if not the world but I like the French eAIP and it suits my operating procedures working alongside the G1000 or the 430 or 530.
I tend to check the list of frequencies before the flight and then select frequencies from the frequency page as I need them to be ahead in IFR. Sometimes ATC will give a different frequency as in the cases between Iroise approach and Landivisieu.
Where do they put transition altitude on the Jepp charts these days?
