legal to use home-printed IFR plates?

Jim Carter wrote:
Tim,
I don't think Scott was disagreeing with you -- the question is
what are "appropriate charts", as you wrote. Has anyone any reference to
a regulation or bulletin that directs the approach or departure plates
have to be printed by a specific and approved organization?

There is no such regulation, per se. For 121 ops the FSDO will approve
only charts that meet the aeronautical requirements of the FAA. Those
are policy proclamations, not regulations. That means a carrier could
use charts produced by a foreign chart maker, not just NOS or Jeppesen.
In fact, NOS is limited because they cover only the U.S.

As to printing, there is no such requirement but, as a practical matter,
your only source was the printed product. Not so with NOS and Jeppesen
electronic charts. In fact, Je Blue, a Part 121 carrier, is approved to
use Jeppesen electronic approach and departure charts.

No friendly who understands today's system would have any issue with me
using home-printed Jepps or NOS charts for light aircraft,
non-commercial IFR ops, provided they are current. Jeppesen helps me (I
use JeppView) by printing out the currency of the chart at the top of my
home-printed chart.

From somewhere I recall that it is a (part 91?) requirement to have the
textual description of the procedure in the cockpit. I can't find it
though.

Jose
--
You can choose whom to befriend, but you cannot choose whom to love.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

That is a common misperception. It is almost folklore now.

It is apparently the misconception of the FAA, as well:

============snip============


To whom it may concern:

In the interest of aviation safety and to ensure continuity and even
application of the law, the holder of this statement is presenting
this information to you in the spirit in which it was intended.

Title 14 Code of Federal Regulation part 91 does not require that a
general aviation pilot operating a small aircraft carry any charts on
board his/her aircraft while it is being operated. Not VFR in VMC nor
IFR (in either VMC or IMC).

The only requirements in the regulations that pertains to charts a

Title 14 CFR section 91.503 (Large and Turbojet powered aircraft)
Title 14 CFR section 135.83 (Air Carriers-Little Airplane)
Title 14 CFR section 121.549 (Air Carrier-Big Airplanes)

The FAA has rendered interpretations that have stated the foregoing.
The subject of current charts was thoroughly covered in an article in
the FAA's July/August 1997 issue of FAA Aviation News. That article
was cleared through the FAA's Chief Counsel's office. In that article
the FAA stated the following:

1. "You can carry old charts in your aircraft" "It is not FAA policy
to violate anyone for having outdated charts in the aircraft"

2. "Not all pilots are required to carry a chart" "91.503..requires
the pilot in command of large and multiengine airplanes to have
charts". "Other operating sections of the FAR such as Part 121 and
Part 135 operations have similar requirements".

3. "since some pilots thought they could be violated for having
outdated or no charts on board during a flight, we need to clarify an
important issue. As we have said, it is NOT FAA policy to initiate
enforcement action against a pilot for having an old chart on board or
no chart on board". That's because there is no regulation on the
issue.

4. "the issue of current chart data bases in handheld GPS receivers is
a non-issue because the units are neither approved by the FAA or
required for flight." "Nor do panel-mounted VFR-only GPS receivers
have to have a current data base because, like handheld GPS receivers,
the pilot is responsible for pilotage under VFR
..
5. "If a pilot is involved in an enforcement investigation and there
is evidence that the use of an out-of-date chart, no chart, or an
out-of-date database contributed to the condition that brought on the
enforcement investigation, then that information could be used in any
enforcement action that might be taken"

If you, as an FAA Safety Inspector, Designated Pilot Examiner, Flight
Instructor, or other aviation professional are telling pilots
something other than the foregoing then you are incorrect.

Sincerely,
Rick Cremer
FAA Aviation Safety Inspector (Operations and Airworthiness)
FAA Headquarters, AFS-20
Airline Transport Pilot, DC-9
Flight Instructor
Ground Instructor
A&P Mechanic
Aircraft Dispatcher
Air Traffic Controller


============snip============

On Sun, 01 Jan 2006 18:11:24 GMT, "Marty Ross"
wrote:

I've never seen the/a definitive answer to this question:

Are there any negative legal ramifications of using IFR plates obtained
from, for instance, the AOPA website, so long as the plate is current
(they're now printing the date range of the plate's validity in the
margins), printed properly/legibly and in good condition?

A related question: How about not printing the plate at all? What if
you just load the PDF into a suitable electronic device and read the
plate from the screen? Of course there are practical constraints to
this idea, a notebook computer on your lap may make it difficult to
actually fly the airplane, and you need power for the device. Still,
you could save help save a tree by not printing every plate. It has
the additional advantage of not requiring you to carry 30 pounds of
paper around while still keeping a handy copy of every plate you might
need.

RK Henry

textual description of the procedure in the cockpit

What you're remembering is a textual description of a SID or STAR
before you accept it, but that's changed to a graphic.

What you're remembering is a textual description of a SID or STAR
before you accept it, but that's changed to a graphic.

As a side issue, most SIDs I've seen or flown amount to "depart runway
heading, radar vectors to your initial fix" and a graphic showing a
bunch of VORs. I'm not sure what good they really do.

Jose
--
You can choose whom to befriend, but you cannot choose whom to love.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Scott Draper wrote:
That is a common misperception. It is almost folklore now.

It is apparently the misconception of the FAA, as well:

Rick Cremer did not issue legal interpretations when he worked for the
FAA. Rick is a good guy and always tried to place the best spin on that
stuff he could.

He has been retired for a few years now. ;-)

Maybe his cheery proclamation could be used as a exhibit for the
defense. ;-)

I have no quarrel with what he says about VFR operations. I do, though,
with IFR operations.

I don't issue legal interps, either, I just work with all the folks who
make the IFR system work. It ain't a chartless system. ;-)

In article ,
Jose wrote:
What you're remembering is a textual description of a SID or STAR
before you accept it, but that's changed to a graphic.

As a side issue, most SIDs I've seen or flown amount to "depart runway
heading, radar vectors to your initial fix" and a graphic showing a
bunch of VORs. I'm not sure what good they really do.

Most SIDs have a lot more than just that. The Westchester One
(http://www.airnav.com/airport/KHPN) is a pretty simple one, but it
still has:

A heading, a turn, and another heading, plus altitudes at which to
make the turns and at which to level off, for different runways

Radials you should expect to be vectored to, so you cna set up the
radios before you take off

Comm and Nav frequencies to use, and for each VOR, not only it's
identifier, but which en-route charts to find it on

Lost comm instructions

A speed restriction

That's a lot of stuff to have to read to every IFR departure. The SID
puts it all in one convenient place.

All IFR procedures have a text form, the chart office
converts the text to a graphic because a picture is worth a
thousand words.

To do an ILS, all that is needed is the ILS frequency, the
course, the initial approach altitude, the glide slope
intercept altitude and the DH and missed approach procedure.
You can even ask ATC for the pertinent numbers if the
"chart" blew out the window or was left on the table at the
last stop.



--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

"Scott Draper" wrote in message
...
| textual description of the procedure in the cockpit
|
| What you're remembering is a textual description of a SID
or STAR
| before you accept it, but that's changed to a graphic.

Jim Macklin wrote:
All IFR procedures have a text form, the chart office
converts the text to a graphic because a picture is worth a
thousand words.

That's not exactly the way it works. The text document is the amendment
to Part 97. It provides distances, courses, and minimum altitudes.

It does not provide nav or com frequencies, nor does it provide any
airport information. It is up to the chart maker to gather those
non-regulatory, but essential data from other sources.

The controller uses the NACO charts for his airspace, not the text
document.(the text document may be in a folder at his position, or it
may not..it is useless information to the controller, except for any
alternate missed approach procedure.) The controller may, or may not do
a good job of providing information from the approach chart. Sure would
tie up the comm frequency, though, and take away from the controller's
primary duties, especially during IMC weather.

The text that some controllers have at their position is an alternate,
non-radar missed approach procedure. When published, those are on the
source document, but they are not on the pilot's chart.

To do an ILS, all that is needed is the ILS frequency, the
course, the initial approach altitude, the glide slope
intercept altitude and the DH and missed approach procedure.
You can even ask ATC for the pertinent numbers if the
"chart" blew out the window or was left on the table at the
last stop.