Jepp MobileFD Matures, Slowly

As a company, Jeppesen is an enigma. A division of Boeing with a long history of quality and innovative chart products, they seem to have been dragged, kicking and screaming, into the EFB revolution. Jeppesen was a year late to the iPad EFB app party and while the latest update to MobileFD adds cool features, Jepp is so far behind their competition it's embarrassing. Still, the latest release does add some value to an already pricey app.

No-no, Geo-Ref

The most obvious feature that Jepp users have been waiting for - geo-referenced approach procedures - is still not available. You can get geo-referenced airport diagrams, so it obvious that Jepp knows how to provide this feature, they just haven't. And that makes the situation even more puzzling.

Rubber-Band, Man!

With the latest version you can do route planning with taps on the en route chart. The you can change your route on the same en route chart with rubber-banding - Tap, drag, drop to re-route. A dialog will appear with the available waypoints.

Chart Printing

Jeppesen has done something fairly radical (for them) in this release: Users now have the ability to print approach charts, SIDs and airport diagrams directly from the iPad without having to install and use Jepp's infamously buggy PC software. Printing from the iPad is especially handy if you aren't a PC user (the CD-ROMs that Jepp sent with my MobileFD subscription were never opened). For my printing needs I use Printopia running on my MacBook Pro, which allows me to print from my iPad to my HP LaserJet 2015. It works like a champ.

DO NOT USE FOR NAVIGATION!

Other Enhancements

A new screen lock button prevents inadvertent screen input during critical phases of flight. Especially handy to prevent unwanted tap input while flying in turbulence.

Readers may recall my lamenting about the Clear button on the route window deleting everything; The route, origin, and the destination as well as the all the alternates. Jepp developers have done the sensible thing and Clear now just clears the route, which is a big improvement.

There's a new GPS status icon that is always visible near the top of the screen, but the maddening part is you have exit the app and to go to the iPad Settings to enable the GPS. What's more, there isn't just one setting, but two; one for en route position display and one for terminal (though you only get geo-referencing on airport diagrams). It's beyond me why the app can't just recognize when a GPS receiver is available and use it. Perhaps Jeppesen's larger customers don't want their flight crews using unapproved GPS receivers?

Once your GPS receiver is configured, you can proceed direct-to anywhere on the map by tapping, but the interface is quirky: Proceeding direct-to a waypoint actually alters the waypoints contained in the route; waypoints you may have spent a lot of time entering. Bummer about that. And try as I might, I couldn't find a way to activate a leg in the route. Jeppesen implementation of this commonly understood feature borders on the bizarre.

Documents in the Cloud

If you subscribe to Jeppesen's Document Management Service you can upload your documents and have them pushed to authorized devices via a proprietary cloud interface. You need to enable this feature in iPad Settings and then you'll see a login dialog appear in Jeppesen MobileFD. This document feature will be very useful for operators who need to distribute OpSpec manuals and other company documents, though one wonders how much that service costs. At any rate, the document cloud doesn't appear to offer much utility to the average GA pilot.

Uncertain Conclusions

Jepp MobileFD has the dubious distinction of being the priciest iPad EFB solution out there, yet it seems that Jeppesen is more interested in the Big Fish than the average instrument pilot. If you still must have Jeppesen charts, then this is what you have to work with. It ain't all bad, but Jeppesen certainly could and should offer more given the app's price tag.

Jepp, Aeronav and You

Active instrument instructors are frequently asked by their students, "Should I use Jeppesen charts or Aeronav charts?" The easy answer for career-oriented pilots is to use Jeppesen because that's probably what you'll be using once you land your dream flying job. For non-career pilots, the cost-effective answer is Aeronav (at least for the time being). It's fascinating to see pilots become attached to one brand of chart or the other in a Chevy/Ford, Honda/Toyota sort of way. Instrument instructors should ideally be adept at using both types of charts, but even non-instructor pilots may find themselves confronted with a brand of chart with which they aren't accustomed to seeing. Here's an overview of just how different Jepp and Aeronav are, the advantages each has to offer, and some tips for moving back and forth between the two formats.

Name and Version

All approach charts start to look alike when you're tired or stressed, so before briefing an approach it's a good idea to first verify the name and version. Both Jepp and Aeronav put the approach name in the upper right corner, but Aeronav also puts the same information in the lower right corner. Jepp puts the city/state in the upper left corner while Aeronav uses the upper and lower right corners. Locating the city and state on a chart may seem unimportant, but it's a surefire way to be sure you have the right chart given the tradition of assigning multiple names to an airport (e.g. John Wayne/Santa Ana/Orange County or Charles M. Shultz/Sonoma County/Santa Rosa).

Jeppesen Naming Conventions

Aeronav Naming Conventions

The airport identifier on Jepp charts is in the upper left corner and includes both the FAA and ICAO format. Aeronav charts show the same information (sans the ICAO identifier) in the right corner. Aeronav really needs to standardize on ICAO format for airports: It would certainly remove the common confusion between GPS waypoints representing an airport and those representing a VOR with the same name as the airport.

Flying an approach with an out-of-date chart is ... well, stupid. Jepp puts the revision and an optional effective date on the top of the chart in day-month-year format. This is inherently problematic because by themselves, these dates are meaningless. They tell you when the chart you are reading became effective, but they don't tell you if a more current version is available. The assumption is that you've applied any Jepp updates that have been released and while this works fine for electronic charts, you know what happens when you assume ... Jepp also has a proprietary indexing schema that you can memorize if you wish and they may put an amendment number on the lower left edge and the reason for the revision at the bottom of the plate. This stuff may be interesting, but it doesn't really answer the question "Is this chart the current one?"

Jepp Revision and Effective Dates

Aeronav prints a valid date range for the chart on both the left and right edge of the plan view. If today's date isn't in the range shown on the chart, the chart is out of date. Simple, straightforward, and (dare I say it?) fool proof.

Aeronav Valid Dates

Briefing Information

The BriefingStrip™ was a Jeppesen innovation designed to provide the essential information for the approach in a consistent format. Many pilots begin briefing an approach by reading this strip, though I find this technique can overlook some important information. A few years back, the Aeronav (nee NACO) folks began incorporating a similar feature they named Pilot Briefing Information. Whether you call them strips or information, they mostly contain the same stuff in a slightly different order.

Jepp Briefing Strip™

Aeronav Pilot Briefing Information

Jeppesen's Briefing Strip starts with the radio communication frequencies, then the WAAS channel or navaid frequency and approach course. Aeronav puts the WAAS channel or navaid frequency and the approach course first. Jepp includes the minimum altitude at the final approach fix and the minimum descent altitude or decision altitude. The missed approach descriptions are virtually identical. Aeronav charts display the minimum safe altitudes on the plan view. Jepp puts them in the briefing strip, except for RNAV approaches that have a terminal arrival area where Jepp also shows the MSA sectors on the plan view: There's not a lot of difference between the two products, until you consider the Notes section.

Noteworthy

Jepp, being an internationally oriented product, starts the Notes section with the units used for the altimeter setting and the transition altitude (where the flight levels start). In the US this information is superfluous, but outside the US it is indeed important. Jeppesen prefixes each note with a number, which increases readability.

Jepp Notes Format

Aeronav charts add an inverse T to indicate when non-standard takeoff minima are present or to indicate that a charted departure procedure is available for the airport.

The inverse A indicates when an approach has non-standard alternate minima. And to be consistently inconsistent, the N/A suffix can be used with the inverse A to indicate that an airport is not authorized for filing as an alternate. Jepp buries the fact that the airport can't be filed as an alternate on the separate airport info page, which is also where you'll find the airport's obstacle departure procedure. Not too handy, but it kinda makes sense.

Jepp Airport Diagram, Alternate and ODP info

Aeronav may include an inverse W on RNAV approaches to indicate that WAAS NOTAM service is not available for an airport. Translation? WAAS may not be available at all times, you may only get LNAV precision, and there won't be any WAAS service NOTAM to warn you during pre-flight planning.

Consistencies between both brands of charts in the Notes include (but are not limited to):

• Procedure is not authorized at night
• Visibility reduction by helicopters not authorized
• Required equipment or when simultaneous reception of two navaids is required
• Alternate altimeter settings
• Approach course out of alignment with runway
• Visual glide slope and descent angle or electronic glide slope not coincident
• Conditions under which a visual descent point is not authorized

Pilot-Controlled Lighting:

• Jepp lists lighting limitations in the notes section
• Aeronav depicts it with an inverse L in the communications section

Circling Restrictions:

• Aeronav puts circling restrictions in the Notes
• Jepp puts them in the minima section, which makes a whole lot more sense

One maddening convention both charts follow is that if a different airport's surface weather is to be used, they don't provide that ATIS, ASOS, or AWOS frequency. In an age of electronic cross-referencing, this is simply criminal.

Aeronav uses the Notes section to tell you how many feet to add to the DA or MDA when using a different altimeter setting, but Jepp courteously does the math for you in the minima section.

Jepp Circling Restrictions and Minima with Alternate Alitimeter Setting

Plan View

Both charts have a North-up plan view depicting information a pilot needs to get established on a segment of the approach. Relevant obstructions are depicted on both types of charts. Note that there seem to be some discrepancies in obstruction heights on the Jepp and Aeronav charts.

Jeppesen Plan View

The highest obstruction are designated with a bold black arrow on Jepp charts and with a bold, black dot on Aeronav charts. One advantage of Jepp charts is that the Morse code for all navaids is shown, but Aeronav just gives you the navaid identifier.

Aeronav Plan View, missing some Morse Code ...

Profile View

Once established on a segment of the approach, the profile view depicts approach fixes (waypoints) and crossing restrictions for each fix. Both charts follow the convention of showing the profile from right-to left for final approach courses between 360 and 179 degrees, otherwise the profile moves from left-to-right. Given that the English language is written from left-to-right and English is the official language of aviation, changing the flow of the profile view to fit the magnetic course has always seemed a bit strange to me. Whatever ...

Neither chart product shows the profile view to scale. Aeronav just shows a diagonal line for each segment. Aeronav depicts glide slope intercept with a lightning bolt arrow and in this example, puts the graphical depiction of the missed approach procedure in a more logical and intuitive location since it is near the graphical depiction of the missed approach point on the profile view. And for those occasions when you need to conduct a circling approach, the inset map is a very handy feature.

Aeronav Profile View and Minima Section

Jeppesen clearly depicts step-downs with a level-off. Crossing restrictions are shown above the profile line, which is much more user friendly. The graphical depiction of the missed approach is located below the profile view, which is less intuitive. And when multiple minima are possible, Jepp does a thorough job of depicting those on the profile view.

Jeppesen Profile View and Minima Section

Approach Minima

Another area where these products differ is in the minima section. Jepp clearly depicts the changes in the minima when approach lighting or other components are out-of-service. With Aeronav, you must reference the Inop Components table in the front of the approach booklet - This is a really bad arrangement and one that most GA pilots hope they seldom have to deal with. Having to locate the Inop Components table when using electronic charts is B-A-D for single-pilot operations.

Jepp provides a wider range of speeds, timing from the FAF to the MAP (if appropriate), and descent rates than the Aeronav counterpart. Jepp will also depict the approach lighting that is installed, if any.

STARs and SIDs

Minor differences exist in charted arrival and departure procedures, but they aren't that big of a deal. Jepp scores some extra points by putting crossing altitude expectations next to the fix on the plan view while Aeronav buries it in the narrative.

Airport Diagrams

Aeronav provides a single airport diagram. Jepp may provide several pages of information in addition to the airport diagram, such as low-visibility taxi routes. On the airport diagram, Jepp may include Lat/Long for various parking gates, which is helpful to airline flight crews. Both products depict Hot Spots - areas where pilots historically have become confused or where runway incursions have occurred.

Extra Cost Justified?

Jeppesen has claimed that the extra cost for their product is a result of the quality control/assurance functions they perform, but the claim seems a bit hollow given how Jepp was tardy in including current RNAV approach charts for several smaller airports in California. Most recently, Jepp published an ASOS frequency for the Rio Vista airport before it was certified. I pointed this out and they removed the ASOS from the two approach charts. Then, when the ASOS was officially put into service, Jepp was one cycle behind in adding the frequency back to the charts. On several occasions I've notified Jepp about errors in their charts, but they never told me I was part of their QA team.

For their part, Aeronav makes their share of mistakes and does some weird things, too. In the case of the Rio Vista approaches, even though the ASOS frequency is published on the chart, the notes tell you to use either the Vacaville or Concord surface weather (and of course they don't give you that frequency). I've also found errors in Aeronav charts and like the Jepp folks, they are generally very receptive to feedback. After a jet blast encounter with a wayward biz jet crew a few months back, I suggested to the Aeronav folks that the depiction of one hot spot on the Oakland airport diagram wasn't in the best location. Lo and behold, they listened and changed it!

I've said it before and I'll say it again: Jeppesen is much more expensive than Aeronav. Of course, if/when Aeronav products pricing structure is modified, this could change.

Keeping it All Straight

If you're an active instrument instructor or a pilot who needs to occasionally use both types of charts, you've got your hands full. Your best bet is to practice using both types of charts on a regular basis. And you don't need to be in a real aircraft to practice: You can fly any approach in your arm chair or in a simulator for little or no cost. It's certain that I haven't covered all the differences, advantages and disadvantages of each brand of chart product. If you think I have missed something important or have your own tips and tricks to share, I'm all ears.

Let Your Little Light Shine

Apologies to my loyal readers for the lack of updates recently. I've been super busy, but I do appreciate the emails and comments I receive each day. I do my best to respond to each and every email, but it might not be immediate and your patience is appreciated.

Brinksmanship

Everyone knows by now that after weeks of tough talk from Republicans and Democrats, the federal debt ceiling has finally increased. If you consider yourself a fiscal conservative, you may be asking questions that few others seem to be willing to address. How can any nation fight two wars for 10 years, bail out their financial industry, and not run out of money? Without additional income (read tax revenues), how could anyone expect the bills to be paid. Adherents to simplistic pledges to never raise taxes are the latest incarnation of the Flat Earth Society. Those unwilling to pay their share refuse to share the pain that every citizen in our nation has inherited. It seems everyone wants someone else to do the hard work. How's that for personal responsibility and patriotism?

Even though the debt ceiling was raised, the FAA authorization bill has been stalled. The consequences of this stalemate are obvious at my home airport: Construction on the new Oakland Metropolitan International Airport control tower has ceased. Wonder how many construction workers have been laid off by that one ...

For their part, AOPA seems to have developed multiple personalities when it comes to funding the FAA. On one hand, they don't want GA user fees to fund "bureaucracy." On the other hand, they'd like their members to believe that NextGen will be the best thing since  ... the iPad. So government is bad when it costs money to operate, but government is good when in provides cool toys we like. I'm thinking my AOPA membership probably won't be renewed next year ...

Jepp Mobile FlightDeck

Speaking of toys, Jeppesen recently released a replacement for their iPad Jeppesen Mobile TC app. It has some good features, but is maddeningly incomplete, not terribly intuitive, and in some cases, offers up out-of-date data. Still, it's a big step forward for Jeppesen.

Should be simple and intuitive, right? Right?

Downloading and installing the app was simple enough. I opened the Jepp Mobile TC app I had purchased, copied the serial number, and pasted it into Mobile FlightDeck. The app didn't complain, but I saw plenty of weird behavior. For instance, entering in an origin airport and tapping on SEARCH resulted in ... no results. Odd, so I just entered a destination airport and went directly to the route field. Entering a VOR or an airway in the route field, resulted in a message saying that they didn't exist.

But I was there just yesterday!

So I did the reasonable thing and called Jeppesen tech support. While listening to what has to be the longest voicemail announcement/disclaimer/reference-to-the-support-website I've ever heard, I got the idea that I should delete the serial number from the older Jeppesen Mobile TC app and then delete the old app entirely from my iPad. That proved to be a good choice. Suddenly the features in Mobile FlightDeck started to work and it knew all about the VORs and airways that previously were non-existent. Okay ...

Mobile FlightDeck understands Victor Airways, as long as you first enter a VOR or waypoint/intersection on the airway. If you want to enter multiple airways, you have to enter the waypoint/intersection that those airways have in common.

That's better!

Let's say you're tinkering, trying to decide which route you'd like to fly between two airports. If you want to change routes, tapping on the CLEAR button above the route will ... wait for it ... clear out the route and the origin and destination airport. Geez Louise! Is anyone at Jeppesen doing usability testing?

Do a looong tap on the chart and you can access information about things like special use airspace, airports and such. Unfortunately, the information often uses a boilerplate format that needlessly repeats field names that aren't needed and simply create visual noise. Amazingly, the Jepp chart for Northern California still lists the Travis VOR. That puppy was decommissioned at least two years ago. Yikes!

Scully? Mulder?

Mobile FlightDeck provides pure electronic charts that are both flexible and useful, but they don't have the same feel as Aeronav charts. You can choose which types of navigation data you want included, but the charts still seem a bit cluttered at times. Zooming in often makes the situation better.

Complicated ...

Better ...

I plan to use Mobile FlightDeck in the air tomorrow and hope to provide some more observations afterward. For now, Jeppesen's Mobile FlightDeck app is a step in the right direction, but it needs work. Jeppesen still trails the competition and their products are still far too costly for the features offered. Sorry if that sounds blunt.

Big Changes at OAK

Contract negotiations between KasierAir and the Port of Oakland resulted in the FBO contracting in a big way. KaiserAir started as the flight department for the companies created by Henry J. Kaiser. It's been around for more than a half century and a fixture at the Oakland North Field for as long as I can remember.

The old KasierAir executive terminal now sits empty and the self-serve 100LL fuel pump was rendered inoperative. Many aircraft owners who rented tie-down space from KaiserAir were sent scrambling to find new arrangements with only a few days notice. KaiserAir still occupies the smaller executive terminal near Hangar 4, but I doubt I'll be rubbing elbows with the employees I used to see all the time. I have many memories of sitting standby in the old KaiserAir pilot lounge, getting a Caravan refueled on short notice, getting a ride to and from the South Field terminal with Tony. I always appreciated the efforts of the frontline workers at KaiserAir. Things just won't be the same ...

More to Come

I hope to continue my series on VFR flight planning and to provide observations on new products and services for pilots, but it may have to wait for crummier weather to arrive in Northern California. For now, I'm swamped with work and a full-time, freelance CFI has to make hay while the sun is shining.

Is Cross-Country Flight Planning Passé?

The widespread availability of sophisticated GPS receivers, digitized aviation charts, and internet-based weather information is changing the way student pilots are learning cross-country flight planning. The introduction of new technology and techniques always raises questions: Should student pilots be taught to use paper charts, plotter, pencil, and a slide rule E6B or encouraged to switch entirely to electronic charts, calculators, GPS and computer-based weather briefings? Don’t throw out that plotter and slide rule just yet because the best approach to learning the complicated process of cross-country flight planning involves combining old school with waay cool. Here’s the first installment of a multi-part series on the revolution in VFR cross-country flight planning, written with student pilots and their instructors in mind.

Drawing the Line

One of the first steps in cross-country flight planning is to get a rough idea about the general direction and the distance involved. With a current paper chart, just plop your plotter down and draw a course line between your departure and destination airports with a pencil. Sounds easy enough until you need to plan a route that begins on one side of the chart and continues on the other side, which actually provides a good scenario for comparing paper and digital charts.

FAA VFR charts include instructions for extending a course line from one side of a chart to the other using a pencil and a spare sheet of paper, but it's a Catch 22: You determine the magnetic course by drawing a line between the two points, but you can’t draw the course line because the points are on opposite sides of the chart.

One solution is to purchase a World Aeronautical Chart (WAC), which covers a larger geographic area at a scale of 1 to 1,000,000 as opposed to the sectional chart scale of 1 to 500,000. Good luck finding a WAC anywhere but on-line. One could purchase two versions of the same sectional and piece them together, being careful to account for the 2 minutes of longitudinal overlap on each side. You could cut the Gordian Knot by using Victor airways or choosing a landmark that appears within the overlap on each side of the chart. Or you could use your current chart and an expired chart that you just happened to have saved, just don’t mix them up!

Or simply combine paper with plastic: Use a handheld GPS or any of a variety of web sites to determine the magnetic course between the two airports, then use your pencil and plotter to replicate that course. Which approach is best? That's really up to the pilot. The goal in teaching student pilots is not to preserve hallowed aviation traditions for their own sake. Whether a student is using paper or plastic or a combination of the two, the goal is for them to understand what they're doing and why they're doing it. Using a combinational approach with old and new products may actually end up teaching the student to a correlative level of knowledge.

Digitized charts provide a big, mostly seamless chart and you'd think that would make plotting a course line on a digitized chart easier, but plotting a digital course line can be less flexible and more abstract than doing it by hand with pencil and paper. EFB apps like Skycharts Pro and ForeFlight Mobile as well as online planners like FltPlan or FlightAware will draw a course line representation, but your choice of waypoints may be limited to the VFR reporting points, intersections, navigation aids, and airports contained in the application’s navigation database. Some products allow you to define your own waypoints using lat/long, but that's not terribly convenient.

VFR Sectional and Course line using FltPlan.com

Doing the Coursework

With the course drawn on a paper chart, you use your plotter to measure the true course, locate the nearest isogonic line and apply the magnetic variation shown (subtract Easterly variations, add Westerly variations) to determine the magnetic course. If your destination or departure airport has a VOR on the field, get the magnetic course from the compass rose surrounding that VOR. Either way, with a bit of care and attention will provide the magnetic course on a paper chart within ±1˚, though simple arithmetic errors can result if you’re in a rush.

Old school pilots and instructors rightly claim that never drawing a course line on a paper chart can rob student pilots of an important learning experience about Magnetic declination. Yet with the right input data, computers tend to do a faster and more accurate job with arithmetic and geometry than humans: Waypoints entered, the digital course line drawn, determining the magnetic course is a foregone conclusion. A good approach for student pilots is to plan first on paper, then check your results using a digital source.

Go the Distance

Plotters offer a variety of scales and if you mistakenly measure using the wrong scale ... you won’t be the first pilot to do so. So look carefully, choose the correct scale for your chart and line up the correct marks.

Getting the distance on a digitized chart is a forgone conclusion, but errors are still possible. You can enter the wrong waypoint or misspell the waypoint. One tipoff is a digital course line that makes a sudden, severe turn off the edge of the map you're viewing.

If the digital product you are using provides recently assigned ATC routes, remember that these are instrument flight rules (IFR) clearances and these routes may involve altitude requirements that are beyond capability of the average GA aircraft. If you will be flying IFR, remember that there may not be any recently assigned ATC routes for the departure and destination airport that you have chosen.

Some EFB apps are better than others at drawing a course line that is visible, yet doesn't obscure important information.

FFM course line obscures airway radial

SCP course line is more ... subtle

Overcoming Obstacles

With a preliminary course line drawn, consider the appropriate altitudes one could fly. You'd think that pilots would know and apply the hemispheric rule, but it's surprising how many pilots (intentionally or unintentionally) fly WAFDOF (wrong altitude for direction of flight).  Whether you remember "Odd birds fly East" or simply refer to the diagram etched into many kneeboards, do other pilots a favor: Fly the correct altitude for your magnetic course.

Minimum elevation figures are shown on VFR charts and these provide the lowest altitude that will clear the highest charted obstacle within a specific quadrangle by 300 to 400 feet. Depending on how close your route is to that highest obstruction, flying at or just above that altitude may be the safe thing to do or it may be hopelessly foolhardy. I don't know of any app that will make the assessment of a safe altitude for you: You're going to have to use your little gray cells.

Whether you are using paper or digital charts, a nifty course line that goes to your destination won't necessarily keep you clear of special use airspace. One cool feature in SkyCharts Pro is the ability to get information on special use airspace by tapping. Locate the red circle next to an MOA, prohibited, or restricted area and tap twice to get the effective times, altitudes and the frequency of the controlling agency.

ForeFlight offers a similar feature, but it requires more taps to get the same information. ForeFlight does offer a quick way to create or change course lines by tapping and dragging.

Acquire, Combine, Conquer

Paper chart adherents often claim that paper is foolproof because paper charts don’t require batteries, they can be folded and handled, and are less intimidating to pilots who may be less computer savvy. True, but paper charts have some serious disadvantages: They can be torn, damaged, lost, or hopelessly riddled with marks from previous flight planning efforts. Last, but not least, all paper charts eventually expire and become obsolete.

Even before the FAA changed the structure for chart retailers, it was often difficult to get a paper chart unless you planned ahead. With a reduced number of chart retailers, your odds of acquiring a current paper chart at the last minute from a local retailer is tantamount to winning the lottery. A chart subscription is obviously the best bet, but that’s not much help if you’re away from home on a longer trip, need an oddball chart, or you lost your chart a week before it was set to expire.

The chart retailers who remain have to deal with unsold, expired paper charts. Charts have to be printed and physically shipped which adds to the cost and carbon-loading. Old school pilots are familiar with the various paper chart subscription services available through Aeronav or a variety of on-line retailers, but they may not be up-to-speed on the various options for digital charts.

Digitized charts, whether viewed on-line or on an iPad, tablet, laptop or desktop computer can be acquired at a lower cost (some are available on-line for free), they are easy to update, and they can cover large geographic areas without folding, flipping, or ripping. There’s no physical shipping required and no paper to recycle. The disadvantages of electronic charts basically boil down to all the possible failures to which electronic devices are heir to, including screen readability in bright light, software/hardware failures, and drained batteries. There are also some problems with how digitized charts are stitched together, but that really just reflects the limitations with how the FAA generates the charts. Hopefully that process will continue to be modernized and soon we'll see seamless VFR and IFR charts become a reality.

FAA VFR charts can be downloaded to your computer as raster files for free, and a simple, free, and platform-independent solution for viewing them is Google Earth. Follow the instructions in this WikiHowTo  and overlay sectionals and terminal area charts in Google Earth. While this approach has limitations, it does offer pilots the ability to view charts for large geographic areas at little or no cost. You can even do some rudimentary flight planning activities, like determining the course and distance between airports.

Several products are available for the iPad that allow you to access VFR charts, including ForeFlight and Skycharts. The cost of these products varies from $20 per year to $80 per year or more. Like all cockpit resource management issues, one size does not fit all. Both of these apps allow you to create flight plans that will draw course lines on the digital charts and give you magnetic courses, but old school paper chart planning provides more flexibility and, dare I say it, precision.

If you are a Mac user, MacGPS Pro provides another option for importing FAA raster charts. MacGPS Pro lets you define user waypoints, integrate with an external GPS receiver, and measure distances and courses. Similar solutions probably exist for the Windows world, but not being a Windows user, well ...

Paper and Plastic

After a student pilot has been through the flight planning process a half dozen times using paper charts, it's not clear that any more learning is likely to take place by restricting them to old school planning. While I do believe that a students' primary experience should involve pencil, plotter, and paper chart, that doesn't mean they should be discouraged from branching out to the high-tech solutions once they understand flight planning basics. Looking at the strengths and weaknesses of paper and digitized charts it’s easy to conclude that the best approach is to understand and use both. Having a paper back-up strategy in flight is the prudent advice offered by the FAA’s AC on Electronic Flight Bags.

Some pilots may still resist using digitized charts for the understandable reason that they simply prefer holding a chart in their hands. Nothing wrong with that, but charting and flight planning is changing. Time waits for no one, not even old school pilots, so don't be afraid to explore and experiment.

In future installments, I'll discuss how technology is changing calculators, navigation log preparation, and in-flight diversions.

ForeFlight Geo-referencing and OpSpec Approval

Don't Use for Navigation

Even if you're an old school pilot who secretly thinks the road to hell is what's displayed on a moving map, I'll still wager that you'll find geo-referenced approach charts and airport diagrams compelling once you see them in action. ForeFlight's new geo-referencing feature is the result of licensing of original technology developed by Seattle Avionics. This option increases the yearly ForeFlight subscription from $74.95 to $149.99, but you can also buy subscriptions for more than one iPad or inquire about a corporate subscription plan. And while a Jeppesen has generated a lot of buzz by announcing OpSpec approval for at least one operator using their iPad app, you should know that the same approval for ForeFlight Mobile HD (FFM) on the iPad has also been accomplished. More on that later.

Required Ingredients

To use ForeFlight's geo-referencing feature, you'll need two ingredients. You'll need to pay the additional fee and you must have some sort of GPS. If the additional fee seems costly, consider this: The annual FFM subscription includes all of the Aeronav charts and procedures one could want for a cost that is only slightly more that what you'd pay for a Jeppesen Mobile TC subscription for California only (sans geo-referencing, by the way). That makes FFM a pretty good value, if you ask me.

The built-in GPS-A found in the 3G iPad may work okay on the ground, then again it may not. In the air, relying on the built-in GPS-A would be a pretty dicey plan. For my testing, I used the GNS 5870 bluetooth GPS which I've been flying with for several weeks now. To date the GNS 5870 has performed flawlessly: It has achieved satellite lock reliably and quickly and the data it provides to ForeFlight Mobile HD has basically matched the GPS data I've seen displayed on panel-mounted GPS receivers like the Garmin G1000, 530W and King KLN 94. I certainly don't sanction relying on a bluetooth GPS for primary navigation, but it's a nice back-up to have on board.

You are ... Here

The geo-referencing in FFM is provide on approach procedures and airport diagrams only. When this feature is available, you'll see a light blue box drawn around the plan view on the approach chart or around the airport diagram. Once you are within the area being covered by the chart, your location will be shown with a little blue airplane surrounded a pulsating animation.

If you want to see your groundspeed, track and other GPS-derived information, you'll need to go into the settings and disable the Auto-Hide Toolbar option. Otherwise, the navigation tab will disappear after a few seconds and you'll have to tap on the center of the chart to get it back. Displaying navigation information during an approach is overkill if you have a panel-mount GPS, but on the taxiway diagrams it provides a good indication if you are taxiing too fast (a bad habit that many pilots have).

There are some accuracy limits to the taxiway diagrams. On a couple of occasions I noticed the airplane's position was being shown slightly off the taxiway we were actually on, but most of the time it was spot on.

On the Main Ramp, but showing "in the dirt"

In the air, I found the accuracy with the GNS 5870 was quite good. In particular, the map gives you a good idea when you're about to intercept an approach while being vectored and helps you maintain situational awareness when flying a full approach with a procedure turn or hold-in-lieu-of-procedure-turn. I even tried it out on a circle-to-land approach: I zoomed in on the approach chart, saw the aircraft's position as being abeam the touchdown zone, and the position was spot on.

Right downwind, abeam RWY 20

One minor gripe is that when you zoom in on a geo-referenced chart, the blue airplane that represents your position is not scaled to match the new chart scale. The result is that the more you zoom in, the smaller the airplane symbol appears.

To Buy or Not to Buy

If you have a panel-mounted GPS and are on a tight budget, you can probably forego the geo-referenced approach chart and taxiway option in FFM. But for not a lot of extra dough, I find this option to be useful enhancement to safety and situational awareness. You'll also need to invest in either a bluetooth GPS like the GNS 5870 MFI Bluetooth GPS Receiver or something like the Bad Elf GPS Receiver.

Getting Approved

Operators who want to get approval to use an iPad solution from their FAA Flight Standards District Office may be interested to know that Cutter Flight Management, Inc. has received authorization to use the iPad with ForeFlight Mobile HD and Jeppesen Mobile TC. Cutter will use ForeFlight to provide domestic en route charts and terminal procedures with Jeppesen providing terminal procedures for international operations. The process for operators gaining OpSpec approval for an EFB is detailed in AC 120-76A, the EFB Job Aid, and in Order 8900.1, volume 4, Chapter 15, Section 1: Electronic Flight Bag Operational Authorization Process.

The EFB evaluation process usually takes about six months with an additional two months for the approval process. Currently, operators must demonstrate the iPad can withstand rapid decompression and that the device doesn't interfere with aircraft avionics and systems. Seeing it has already been demonstrated that the iPad meets these requirements, it seems odd that each individual operator must go through this. Operators must also develop a training program for their flight crews in how to use the device and the EFB software.

Less Paper, More Bytes

It looks like the dream of a paperless cockpit continues to evolve and the rate of acceptance of EFBs in the cockpit is on the rise. In the coming months it should become clear if EFBs really do reduce the time, effort, and expense associated with maintaining navigational charts and procedures. And just imagine how much lighter all those pilot's brain bags will be.

Jeppesen Jumps on the Wagon

Do Not Use For Navigation

Maintaining, carrying and accessing current paper charts can be a royal pain, which is the whole raison d'être for the electronic flight bag (or EFB). Awareness of the EFB reached a critical mass in the last year when the iPad was introduced. A simple-to-use, reliable, off-the-shelf device that could be acquired at a reasonable price without the necessary software (aka "app") is a non-starter. Lucky for us pilots, there were a variety of EFB apps that came out of the gate with the iPad. The one I've been testing lately is Jeppesen Mobile TC. I will get to my review of their iPad app and subscription, but first some commentary.

Again with that Old Chestnut?

Years ago I wrote on my now-defunct freight dog blog, comparing and contrasting the FAA's Aeronav (nee NACO) terminal procedures with Jeppesen's products. Some operators and flight departments provide specific chart products to their flight crews, while others let their pilots choose which products they want to use and reimburse them accordingly. I am familiar with and use both Aeronav and Jeppesen chart products since, as an instrument instructor, I need to be able to teach both. I may be like a sax player who doubles on flute, but I find that some pilots have a strong preference for Jeppesen.

My aversion to Jeppesen's products stems historically from two main issues: Price/value and customer service. Jepp charts have always come at a premium and many pilots were willing to pay the extra price for the value-added features. For example, Jepp SIDs list the required climb gradients in feet/minute for a variety of airspeeds and that saves the pilot from having to convert feet/nautical mile to something more useful. On approach charts, Jepps provide a wider range of airspeeds/timings/descent rates and the effects of inoperative equipment (like approach lighting systems being out of service) are conveniently shown in the minima section for each chart. And if you're flying outside the US, you'll probably be using Jeppesen products. All these thoughtful features show initiative and innovation, something that adds value and justifies a higher purchase price.

The thing is, the FAA charts have always offered several distinct advantages: Low cost, easy revision process (just throw the old book in the recycling bin), and inset maps on each approach chart. The inset map is particularly helpful on approaches that involve a circle-to-land maneuver since you don't have to pull out and refer to a separate airport diagram. Things got a bit more difficult when Aeronav changed the policies for chart retailers, which dramatically reduced the number of authorized dealers and made it difficult to obtain oddball charts or a chart that was close to its expiration date.

Things really began to sour for me when Jepp stopped including new en route charts with each update. This was an understandable cost saving move and customers were initially assured that if we ever needed any chart replaced, we only needed to ask. On one occasion, I damaged an en route chart. I asked for and was promptly sent a replacement. What surprised me was that I was charged for that replacement! And there was the occasional problem of missing or incorrect procedures, again understandable seeing the amount of manual labor required to collate each "brick" of charts. On several occasions, I or one of my students found a procedure was missing in a complete brick of new charts. Then there was the time I found an approach for an airport in Ohio in my California subscription. When I quit flying freight, I decided to let my Jepp subscription lapse. I just couldn't justify the cost.

Phoenix Rising

When the Jepp Mobile TC app was announced, I surmised that most (if not all) of the aforementioned problems would be ameliorated. After all, any EFB app worth its salt should be easy to update accurately. What kept me from trying Jepp Mobile TC when it first became available was ... wait for it ... the cost structure. Instead of offering subscriptions for individual states at a cost similar to the old paper subscription, Jeppesen initially required the purchase of at least a major region. That would have cost more than twice the price of my old California paper subscription. To add insult to injury, my inquiry about getting a trial version of Jeppesen's app to review on this blog never garnered any response whatsoever. All this gives one the impression that Jeppesen is a big company (they are owned by Boeing after all) with a big payroll, a lot of procedures, numerous layers of management, and a desire to go after the big fish (part 121 and 135 operators). So much for the vaunted efficiency of the private sector.

Recently Jeppesen saw the light and offered electronic subscriptions for smaller geographic areas at a lower cost. I purchased a subscription for California at a cost similar to the lapsed paper subscription - about $120/year. Downloading the app via iTunes was uneventful. Purchasing the subscription on Jepp's web site was a bit irritating, but I finally got it to work.

Like most any other electronic subscription or purchase, a receipt was sent via email. Thing is, it didn't contain the serial number required to activate the iPad app. An inquiry email to Jepp's support was promptly answered and I had my serial number. Another pilot I know called Jeppesen to order and was given his serial number over the phone. The email I received said it could take up to an hour for the subscription to be activated, so I waited. After 30 minutes or so, I tried activating the iPad app with my serial number and it worked. However, the download screen informed me I was waiting in line to download. Wow! Somebody has figured out how to translate phone support concepts to the internet download process! Once the download actually started, it completed quickly and without any problems.

Executive Jet Charter recently received OpSpec approval for using Jeppesen Mobile TC on the iPad as a sole means of carrying chart data. One would assume that this has generated significant interest in Jeppesen product, but readers should be aware that there are other iPad solutions out there that have received the same approval, namely ForeFlight Mobile HD. So if you believe that Jeppesen has a lock on the approved EFB market for the iPad, you'd be wrong.

Jepp Charts on the iPad

The Jepp Mobile TC app is a well-designed yet surprisingly bare-bones chart viewer so my review is going to be brief. The charts themselves appear crisp, you can zoom in or out using the usual gestures, and setting up favorite airports in straightforward and intuitive. Tap on the airplane icon in the upper left to access either your list of favorite airports or a list of all airports in your subscription.

You can setup favorite charts within a particular airport by tapping on the star next to the procedure. This allows you to exclude procedures at a particular airport that you're not capable of using (like RNP approaches).

Once you have selected a chart for viewing, you can use the red slider at the bottom of the screen to quickly page through other procedures for the selected airport. It helps if you have the Jepp chart numbering scheme committed to memory.

The app also provides an easy-to-access brightness control for night flying.

Needed Enhancements

There are several things missing from Jepp's Mobile TC app, the most glaring omission being support for displaying en route charts. Paper versions are shipped as part of the subscription. En route chart support is said to be in the works for a future release, but for now you'll still need to carry, use, and update some number of paper charts.

Jepp Mobile TC didn't recognize my GNS 5870 bluetooth GPS receiver so that means no geo-referencing on any chart, at least with this release. I've yet to receive the software that is shipped with the subscription purchase, but I'm told it will not run under MacOS. That means if I want to print out paper copies of any of the procedures, I'll need to access a Windoze machine or use an emulator like VMware Fusion or Parallels. The only other way around this would be to print directly from the iPad, but ... wait for it ... Jepp Mobile TC doesn't support printing from the iPad.

One hopes that Jepp will address these shortcomings in future releases of their product, but for now Jepp Mobile TC is relatively expensive for what it offers. If you cannot tolerate any other chart representation and simply must have Jepp charts, this is the app for you. If you are more flexible and willing to accept Aeronav charts, more cost-effecive and feature-rich apps are available.