Jepp no longer in the GA business...?

John Harper wrote:
I went to get my new IFR charts today and my local pilot shop told me they
will no longer be carrying Jepp products. I know that some places have
already stopped, but at PAO/RHV they thought up until a few days ago that
they would be able to carry on.

Seems someone at Jepp has had the brilliant idea to stop retail sales of
their chart products to force people to subscribe. I don't like being
blackmailed at any time, and the NOS charts are fine - I prefer Jepp but not
THAT much - so that's the end of Jepp as far as I'm concerned.

Some quick math suggests that Jepp have just kissed goodbye to $10-20M of
business/year. What are they thinking?

John



I don't know what they are thinking, but I learned with NOS charts and
have stayed with them. Since returning to flight after a 4+ year
layoff, it seems to me (maybe just my imagination) that the new NOS (or
is it NACO now?) charts seem to be of higher quality than before with
clearer and darker print and better paper. I stuck with NOS because I
can find them almost anywhere if I need another chart while "on the road."

In the past, I always had a chart subscription direct with NOS and will
likely do so again, but for now I am buying as needed at the local FBO
and that is working fine so far and they maintain a decent selection and
inventory.

Matt

In article ,
Matt Whiting wrote:

In the past, I always had a chart subscription direct with NOS and will
likely do so again, but for now I am buying as needed at the local FBO
and that is working fine so far and they maintain a decent selection and
inventory.

I did my original training with Jepp, and used them for a bunch of
years. I wasted a huge amount of time doing the revision filing thing,
then spent a bit more money and got a Jepp Express subscription which
killed more trees, but saved a lot of time.

A while ago, I wasn't flying much and let my Jepp subscription lapse.
When I picked up again, I decided to go with NOS/NACO/whatever, if only
to force myself to become proficient at reading their charts. I still
think Jepp does a better approach plate, but the new style NOS charts
with the briefing strip are a big improvement over what they used to be.

The recent availability of on-line vector PDF charts sold me for good.
The convenience and cost just can't be beat. I print out what I want,
when I want it, and pick up the en-routes at the FBO once in a while.

Roy Smith wrote:

The recent availability of on-line vector PDF charts sold me for good.
The convenience and cost just can't be beat. I print out what I want,
when I want it, and pick up the en-routes at the FBO once in a while.

There are two rules to properly use NACO charts, which apply less to Jepps.

1. You must check the FDC NOTAMs without fail because NACO is not allowed to
chart "T" FDC NOTAMs, whereas Jeppesen selectively charts them. And, just
because a 28-day cycle passes doesn't mean that NACO will now chart such a
NOTAM. They won't.

2. You absolutely need to subscribe to the AF/D because NACO provides none of
the important data, such as VGSI limitations, etc, that Jeppesen provides
(sometimes incorrectly, I may add) on its airport pages.

With those two caveats, you're probably better off with today's NACO charts.
Also, a subscription to NACO's en route charts from Sporty's is probably a
good idea. NACO's en route charts have always been crisper, easier to read
than Jepp's so far as I am concerned.

In article , wrote:
1. You must check the FDC NOTAMs without fail because NACO is not allowed to
chart "T" FDC NOTAMs, whereas Jeppesen selectively charts them. And, just
because a 28-day cycle passes doesn't mean that NACO will now chart such a
NOTAM. They won't.

Good point. Is there any easy way for the general public to access
notams other than through duats? Duats is OK for human use, but it's a
pain if you're trying to automate anything.

One of the problems with FDC notams is there's so much volume, and so
little of it is actually relevant to any flight. It would be nice to
have a system that let you tick of which airports you were interested
in, and it would just gather up the approach plate PDFs and find any
associated FDC notams automatically.

2. You absolutely need to subscribe to the AF/D because NACO provides none of
the important data, such as VGSI limitations, etc, that Jeppesen provides
(sometimes incorrectly, I may add) on its airport pages.

I suppose I've been living dangerously, but I havn't looked at an AFD in
years. When I was a Jepp user, the added info came with the Jepp kit.
Now, I find that I get everything I need to know about an airport from
one or another web site. I can't remember the last time I got someplace
and didn't know something I needed to know in advance.





With those two caveats, you're probably better off with today's NACO charts.
Also, a subscription to NACO's en route charts from Sporty's is probably a
good idea. NACO's en route charts have always been crisper, easier to read
than Jepp's so far as I am concerned.

Roy Smith wrote:



Good point. Is there any easy way for the general public to access
notams other than through duats? Duats is OK for human use, but it's a
pain if you're trying to automate anything.


I don't know of any automated method. But, one of the DUAT vendors, I don't recall
which one off-hand, makes it pretty easy by requesting a single location briefing
and including FDC NOTAMs specific to that location. It you err and include general
FDC NOTAMs you end up with all that mostly useless BS.


One of the problems with FDC notams is there's so much volume, and so
little of it is actually relevant to any flight. It would be nice to
have a system that let you tick of which airports you were interested
in, and it would just gather up the approach plate PDFs and find any
associated FDC notams automatically.

I suppose I've been living dangerously, but I havn't looked at an AFD in
years. When I was a Jepp user, the added info came with the Jepp kit.
Now, I find that I get everything I need to know about an airport from
one or another web site. I can't remember the last time I got someplace
and didn't know something I needed to know in advance.


Give your method a test. Check both Runway 3 at PHLI (Lihue, Hawaii) and Runway 15
at KASE (Aspen, Colorado) and see if you get the VGSI restrictions for both of
those runways. If you do, you likely don't need the AF/D either.

Neither AOPA's nor Aeroplanner airport directories for those two airports provide
that information.

Give your method a test. Check both Runway 3 at PHLI (Lihue, Hawaii) and Runway 15
at KASE (Aspen, Colorado) and see if you get the VGSI restrictions for both of
those runways. If you do, you likely don't need the AF/D either.

Did you mean PLIH? What's VGSI? If I didn't get the VGSI restrictions for an
airport, I wouldn't even know what I didn't have.

Dave

Dave Butler wrote:


Give your method a test. Check both Runway 3 at PHLI (Lihue, Hawaii)
and Runway 15
at KASE (Aspen, Colorado) and see if you get the VGSI restrictions for
both of
those runways. If you do, you likely don't need the AF/D either.


Did you mean PLIH? What's VGSI? If I didn't get the VGSI restrictions
for an airport, I wouldn't even know what I didn't have.

Dave


I hadn't heard the term either, but according to this article
(http://www.jeppesen.com/download/aopa/nov99aopa.pdf)
it is just a new term for VASI or PAPI.


Matt

Dave Butler wrote:


Give your method a test. Check both Runway 3 at PHLI (Lihue, Hawaii) and Runway 15
at KASE (Aspen, Colorado) and see if you get the VGSI restrictions for both of
those runways. If you do, you likely don't need the AF/D either.

Did you mean PLIH? What's VGSI? If I didn't get the VGSI restrictions for an
airport, I wouldn't even know what I didn't have.

Dave

PHLI is Lihue, Hawaii, the main airport on Kauai. The domestic identifier is LIH. VGSI
(visual glide slope indicator) is the generic term for PAPI or VASI.

From the AIM:

"Pilots should be aware that the published angle is for information only - it is strictly
advisory in nature. There is no implicit additional obstacle protection below the MDA.
Pilots must still respect the published minimum descent altitude (MDA) unless the visual
cues stated in 14 CFR Section 91.175 are present. In rare cases, the published procedure
descent angle will not coincide with the Visual Glide Slope Indicator (VGSI); VASI or
PAPI. In these cases, the procedure will be annotated: 'VGSI and descent angle not
coincident.' "

wrote in message ...
But, one of the DUAT vendors, I don't recall
which one off-hand, makes it pretty easy by requesting a single location
briefing
and including FDC NOTAMs specific to that location. It you err and
include general
FDC NOTAMs you end up with all that mostly useless BS.


DTC DUAT has that feature. However, it has pitfalls.

You must know the identifier to use to get NOTAMs, and it is not always the
airport identifier. For example, a nearby (to me) airport 5M0 has an
instrument approach but no weather reporting. If you use the "Specific
Location" feature of DUAT with identifier 5M0 in an attempt to find NOTAMs
for that airport, you will get an error message that it is not a valid
weather reporting identifier. The way around this is to use the identifier
lookup feature on the Specific Location page (the binoculars over the
"Location ID" box). Enter the airport identifier (or name) into the lookup
dialog box and you will get a response that gives you the identifier to use
to get NOTAMs. It will usually be the AFSS serving that airport if there is
no weather reporting from that airport. For 5M0 NOTAMS, I would use ANB as
the identifier in the "Specific Locations" Location ID box.

Seems like the software ought to look up the proper ID for NOTAMS and use
that. I discussed this at length with the DTC folks at Oskosh last year,
and once they understood the confusing aspect of this for someone just
wanting to look up NOTAM info, they seemed interested in changing it. But
so far, nothing.

Another problem is that even when you enter the correct ID to get NOTAMs for
a specific airport, there may be no NOTAMs for that airport, but you will
still get a long list of NOTAMs for navaids, GPS, LORAN, and airports
hundreds of miles away, even selecting just NOTAMs and FDC NOTAMs,
deselecting General FDC NOTAMs and everything else. You have to use your
browser text search feature to see if there is anything for the airport of
interest embedded in that long list.

Stan

Roy Smith wrote:

In article , wrote:

1. You must check the FDC NOTAMs without fail because NACO is not allowed to
chart "T" FDC NOTAMs, whereas Jeppesen selectively charts them. And, just
because a 28-day cycle passes doesn't mean that NACO will now chart such a
NOTAM. They won't.


Good point. Is there any easy way for the general public to access
notams other than through duats? Duats is OK for human use, but it's a
pain if you're trying to automate anything.

One of the problems with FDC notams is there's so much volume, and so
little of it is actually relevant to any flight. It would be nice to
have a system that let you tick of which airports you were interested
in, and it would just gather up the approach plate PDFs and find any
associated FDC notams automatically.


2. You absolutely need to subscribe to the AF/D because NACO provides none of
the important data, such as VGSI limitations, etc, that Jeppesen provides
(sometimes incorrectly, I may add) on its airport pages.


I suppose I've been living dangerously, but I havn't looked at an AFD in
years. When I was a Jepp user, the added info came with the Jepp kit.
Now, I find that I get everything I need to know about an airport from
one or another web site. I can't remember the last time I got someplace
and didn't know something I needed to know in advance.

I've been doing the same. I always carry the AOPA airport guide, but I
realize it isn't the same as the AF/D.


Matt