Govt Plates

wrote:
Sam Spade wrote:

When Phil Boyer makes those statements he is speaking in terms of ATC
and FSS services. I doubt AOPA's bean counters have even considered
NACO chart services.



Aren't the DOD charts damn similar to the NACO ones? Doesn't that mean
that there is some sharing of money and manpower between FAA and DOD?


No, they are similar because both NACO and the DOD are bound by very
formal interagency charting specifications, which go to the detail of
font size and type, method of portraying graphics, what is to be in the
plan and profile views, and so forth.

Also, the military does its own procedures design so it is all a
standalone operation and quite seperate from both the FAA procedures
design function and the subsequent design of charts.

The last I knew the DOD charting function was in St. Louis. NACO is in
Maryland.

The FAA does get involved with a very small number of military
procedures, typically at joint use airports.

In a previous article, Sam Spade said:
Also, the military does its own procedures design so it is all a
standalone operation and quite seperate from both the FAA procedures
design function and the subsequent design of charts.

The last I knew the DOD charting function was in St. Louis. NACO is in
Maryland.

The FAA does get involved with a very small number of military
procedures, typically at joint use airports.

As an example, a few years ago I was flying my wife to "parents weekend"
at Mt. Holyoke College. I was looking at the instrument approaches in CEF
(Westover MA) and saw a step down fix that I couldn't see how to identify.
I asked here, and somebody alerted the FAA, and they alerted the military
(and I got CC'ed in the conversation which was fascinating) and it turns
out you could only identify it with TACAN. The chart was modified, and
the military got a separate chart for a TACAN approach.

--
Paul Tomblin http://blog.xcski.com/
Surely the 98% of DNA we share with monkeys must be enough to stop
people from sinking this low.
-- Frossie