Another approach question...

[Guest]

It's been a while since I've done this but I can remember flying published approaches using charts with GA. Today I wanted to fly into ENVA Trondheim using this approach:

https://ais.avinor.no/no/AIP/View/17/aip/ad/enva/EN_AD_2_ENVA_5-5_en.pdf

but I can't for the life of me remember how I used to do this in the past. The thing is: how the heck do I know where for instance the IAF XILDA is...? There is no VOR information so I have no clue how to find that point. Or can you only fly approaches like this with a GNS that can load approaches...? I am trying to do this with VOR only and no GPS.

As I said, I did fly approaches in the past, with DME arcs and all, but right now I cannot even get this one right... I must be missing something obvious again.

[SierraDelta 1,337]

Top left text box on the plate says GNSS required, so yes you'd use a gps to find XILDA.

[Guest]

Thanks. Someone PM'd me the same: I need to relearn a few things about reading charts... I want to fly using VOR and NDB only, no GPS, so I suppose that limits my options for airports to fly too.

[vgbaron 3,505]

This may be overkill but

https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/flight_info/aeronav/digital_products/aero_guide/media/Chart_Users_Guide_12thEd.pdf

Vic

[skelsey 765]

1 hour ago, J van E said:

I want to fly using VOR and NDB only, no GPS, so I suppose that limits my options for airports to fly too.

For this particular approach, you only need GPS to fly the XILDA and INSOD transitions: if ATC vector you to the ILS, no GPS required.

However, you are absolutely right -- RNAV is very much here to stay, and it's only increasing. The biggest problem you will have, actually, is enroute navigation: almost all airways in Europe now require BRNAV, which in a GA context generally means GPS.

[Guest]

Yes, things are looking bad for VOR and NDB lovers. I did do another flight today using charts but almost all I could use was the FAF they showed (using the DME info from the chart). The route towards that point was totally up to me... Flying entire approaches (let alone a SID ir STAR) with GA is becoming impossible, or it already is in Norway. (Flying entire SIDs and STARs with GA is a bit odd, I presume, but well...) Of course I can still use VOR to find my way around, and I will certainly do so, but it would have been fun to use official approach charts: it adds something extra. You have to look at them, figure out what things mean, take care of where you going, etc. But well, that's progress...

[pete_auau 1,154]

have  you  checked out  navigraph   charts  5   at all

[Guest]

7 hours ago, pete_auau said:

have  you  checked out  navigraph   charts  5   at all

Not really because I don't like subscriptions... Are those charts better than real world charts? Can you actually download the charts or are they always in the cloud? If you can download them I could take a month subscription and download all I need...  What is the main advantage? That you have all charts in one place? Or that they all use the same lay out (unlike real charts)? Or that they are based on data from the sim...?

EDIT I just read that Navigraph will switch to Jeppesen. Has this already been done? I don't want to take a subscription and then have to get used to an all new system of charts within a month. If I take a subscription now, will I get those Jeppesen charts? I also understand Navigraph has tutorials: have they been updated already to show Jeppesen info?

[JRBarrett 3,048]

Almost all of the pilots who own GA aircraft at my local airport now use some form of GPS.

For VFR flying, you can even use a relatively inexpensive portable GPS mounted to the yoke. Flying GPS/RNAV IFR procedures in actual instrument conditions does require a panel mounted GPS that is certified for IFR.

Having GPS is pretty much a necessity in any aircraft large or small. Here in the US, VORs and NDBs are being permanently decommissioned at an ever-increasing rate, and Europe appears to be even farther down the "GPS required" road.

[skelsey 765]

6 hours ago, J van E said:

Are those charts better than real world charts?

They are real world charts. When you look at a Navigraph Lido chart you are looking at exactly the same thing the airline boys are (except the airlines will have paid Lido an awful lot more for the privilege!)

The big advantage they have over using local AIP charts is that the Lido/Jeppesen charts are designed for use by pilots, whereas the AIP charts are not - they are designed as a reference for all sorts of groups of users and so are not very 'flight deck friendly'. Your Avinor charts are an excellent example: two of the pieces of information most vital to the pilot (the DME frequency on the other one for instance, and the lat/long coordinates of the RNAV points in this one) aren't on the chart! My guess as to why would be because this data is available in the text AIP somewhere, which is fine if you want to cross-reference as a procedure designer etc in a nice, warm, well-lit office, but doesn't help much in a cramped flight deck at 3am...

Another advantage is that you get worldwide enroute IFR charts, and I've not found anything free yet which can match the Lido/Jepp enroute charts as far as usability and quantity of information is concerned (Skyvector, for instance, doesn't have airway MEA, MSA or MORA information outside of the US).

Plus you get a consistent layout which makes life much easier.

One point I would make is that if you primarily/only fly light aircraft, the Lido charts are designed for airline use which means that only Cat C/D minima and tracks are shown. Not sure about the Jepps as I'm putting off looking at them for as long as possible .

6 hours ago, J van E said:

I just read that Navigraph will switch to Jeppesen. Has this already been done? I don't want to take a subscription and then have to get used to an all new system of charts within a month. If I take a subscription now, will I get those Jeppesen charts?

The Jepp charts (urgh) are in beta - I can access them as well as the Lidos but I'm not sure if it's now an 'open' beta or not (I think I had to sign up).

I believe if you use the charts desktop app you can download the charts are save them for ever. Obviously the Web and iPad apps are tied to your subscription. I must say I've found the web access ('Charts Cloud') a million times more useful than I thought I would when it first came out, particularly for reference purposes (I use the iPad app 'in flight').

I don't know about the tutorials: I've never used them. Navigraph supplied a full legend for the Lido charts and the Aerads before them, and that was plenty - I'm sure they'll supply one for the Jepps (urgh) as well.

[Guest]

Thanks for the info, Simon! Yes, those AIP charts aren't the best for use in an airplane... and I do like it that with Navigraph ALL charts have the same layout and way of naming things.

Right now I am only flying GA so maybe it would be better to wait a while until I have a good airliner for P3D v4. Having all these charts just for VOR flying in a Cherokee is a bit too much, I think, but when I got something like the FSLabs Airbus I do think I will at least give it a try.

BTW I do own the GTN 750 and could add it to the Cherokee but that GTN won't work with Navigraph data and the Garmin data usually is out of sync and/or different. I don't like that at all. And it's a bit useless to get Navigraph for that. Besides, a 750 in a Cherokee feels a bit out of place.

[Nyxx 6,993]

Navigraph Charts Cloud looks amazing will re active my full sup after Holidays. 

Love how your aircraft shows on charts, great for big airport taxing

On my iPad happy days.

youtube vid I found when in beta