Source: http://www.oshkosh365.org/ok365_DiscussionBoardTopic.aspx?id=1235&boardid=147&forumid=181&topicid=5465
Timestamp: 2013-06-18 21:38:51
Document Index: 25845920

Matched Legal Cases: ['art 91', 'art 91', 'art 91', 'art 91', 'art 91', 'art 91', 'art 93']

Oshkosh 365 - Discussion Boards - Ramp inspection requirements - Charts
Ramp inspection requirements - Charts
#1 Posted: 9/18/2010 19:50:07
Modified: 9/19/2010 22:28:23
I can't find chart requirements discussion anyplace else on the forum, so if you know of one already in progress please direct me there.
Charlie Harrison (EAA 784108) wrote a letter to the Sport Aviation editor which was published in the Sept 2010 issue. Topic - FAA ramp inspection requirements. He says Greg Laslo's June 2010 article, "Ramp Check", didn't mention "pertinent and current aeronautical charts appropriate for the operations conducted must be available to the pilot." True, it didn't. Maybe because they vary depending on what FAR applies to the ops?
91.503 applies to Large and Turbine-Powered Multiengine Airplanes and Fractional Ownership Program Aircraft, 91.1033 to Fractional Ownership Operations, and of course 135 and 121 require charts aboard. But from what I have found, folks flying a light piston-powered personally-owned aircraft don't need current charts for VFR. Anybody have a CFR ref to the contrary?
Files Attachment(s):CURRENT charts for a VFR flight(2).doc (28672 bytes)
#2 Posted: 9/18/2010 20:34:22
#3 Posted: 9/21/2010 13:43:24
It's true that there is no specific requirement for any kind of charts for Part 91 operations. In fact, the word "Charts" does not appear in the regulations at all until you get to subpart F (Large and Turbine-Powered Multiengine Airplanes and Fractional Ownership Program Aircraft). That being said, the FAA would have the option of applying 91.13 (careless and reckless operation) and 91.103 (preflight action) to any pilot who does not have current charts on board.
#4 Posted: 9/21/2010 18:50:33
Modified: 9/21/2010 19:03:04
Joe, thanks. You said, "the FAA would have the option of applying 91.13 (careless and reckless operation) and 91.103 (preflight action) to ANY pilot who does not have current charts on board." I couldn't figure out why you wrote that, until I tried and failed to open the attachment to my first post. You couldn't read it either, could you?
I see a helo in your avatar. Here's a typical helo instructor mission - hover practice at the corner of the ramp at home field. Literally. Home field. Not an airport, not a designated heliport. Another typical helo mission - on a flatbed to the jobsite, fire up to set powerline towers fifty miles from nowhere, flatbed home. The inspector who wrote 91.13 or 91.103 for no charts on board might have to write a REAL long explanation on those.
In case the attachment doesn't open for others, below is the text:
VFR Aeronautical Chart Requirements FAA Order 8900.1 tells Inspectors
conducting a Part 91 ramp inspection to determine if pertinent and
current aeronautical charts are available. It also tells the
Inspector to check the radio station license, which isn't a valid
requirement for domestic operations. So. If that's not true, is the
rest? Must an aviator carry current aeronautical charts for every
Break that question down to component
1. What is a chart? Electronic
flight bags may count as charts. Check A/C 91-78 if in doubt. Charts need not be printed.
2. What is an aeronautical
chart? Many states issue charts as a convenience for aviators. A/C
61-84 paragraph 4.a (1) recommends using those charts. Beware, some
state-issued charts carry a disclaimer, "not for navigation."
Acceptable aeronautical charts include:
a. World Aeronautical Chart (WAC) -
Covers land areas at a standard size and scale for navigation by
moderate speed aircraft and aircraft operating at high altitudes.
b. Sectional Chart - Designed for
visual navigation of slow to medium speed aircraft.
c. Joint Operations Graphics Air
(JOG-A) - Supports tactical and other air activities including low
altitude visual navigation.
d. Operational Navigation Chart (ONC)
- Designed for medium altitude (2000' to 25,000' AGL) high-speed
visual and radar navigation. In the absence of TPCs, ONCs also
satisfy enroute visual and radar navigation requirements for low
e. Tactical Pilotage Chart (TPC) -
Designed for very low-altitude (below 500' AGL) through
medium-altitude high-speed visual and radar navigation.
f. Jet Navigation Charts (JNC) -
Designed for high-altitude computer assisted radar navigation/bombing
by strategic aircraft.
g. VFR Terminal Area Charts - Depict
3. What is a current aeronautical
chart? Most state charts carry a year of issue and have no specific
expiration date, revision date, or method to update. Most
aeronautical charts carry an expiration date, but some like the ONC
do not and thus do not expire until replaced. Even a chart with an
expiration date is usually NOT current until that expiration date. The National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency issues the Chart Updating
Manual (CHUM) in electronic or print versions, and FAA's Aeronav
Services team issues VFR Chart Update Bulletins. A chart which
has not been updated might NOT be current, regardless of the printed
4. Must an aviator carry current
aeronautical charts for every VFR flight? No.
a. CFR PT 91.103 requires that
each pilot in command shall become familiar with all available
information before beginning a flight, lists specific
information which must be included, and does not include current VFR
charts - obviously because there are other ways to get the
b. A/C 61-84B Paragraph 4.a (1) says basic preflight
preparation includes using current navigational charts on which
pilots can mentally review their intended route of flight.
c. A/C 61-84B Paragraph 4.a (2)
recommends (not requires) aviators carry appropriate and
current aeronautical charts on all cross-country flights, but is
silent concerning charts for local flights.
d. A/C 61-84B Paragraph 4.a (2) also
notes that having the information in current charts available will
enhance the PIC’s ability to safely complete the flight. "Having
available the information in current charts” is not the same as
carrying the charts. Kneeboard cards, strip charts, rote
memorization, there are many methods of having the information
e. CFR PT 91.503.a.3 requires current,
pertinent aeronautical charts for all large and turbine-powered
multiengine airplanes.
f. CFR PT 91.1033.a.3 requires at
least one set of pertinent aeronautical charts for all fractional
ownership program aircraft.
h. CFR PT 93.95 and 93.351 require
charts for VFR flight by all operators of all aircraft in designated
airspace, specifically because charts are not required by CFR
for some operators in most airspace.
5. Is it a violation to carry expired
charts? NO, it is a violation to USE expired charts WHEN the
operation requires current, pertinent aeronautical charts. It is not
a violation to carry expired charts which are not used for required
navigation. Condensed version - FAA Advisory
Circulars recommend charts for cross-country flights but are silent
on local flights. FAR Part 91 does not require pertinent current and
appropriate charts for small piston-powered single-engine airplanes
that are not fractionally owned. FAR Par t 93 does require charts in
two designated airspace areas. Thus by the letter of the regs, a VFR
pilot operating an individually-owned light piston-powered ASEL (or
any aircraft other than an airplane) in airspace where charts are not
specifically required may do so without any nav charts on board, and
if charts are carried, they need not be current.
I say don’t carry charts? NO, I DID NOT!!!!!!!!!!! It is NOT
fly with outdated charts or no charts at all. Any problem that
could have been avoided with current charts might result in an FAA
accusation of careless and reckless operation.
IF I MISSED AN FAR THAT REQUIRES CHARTS ON ALL FLIGHTS, PLEASE TELL ME!
my direct email is cdrmuetzel@juno.com
#5 Posted: 9/22/2010 13:50:10
Nope, don't think you missed a thing. I have done a similar search (as have others I have spoken to) and have not been able to come up with any specific regulatory requirement for charts (current or not) except for the references you mention in your post.
All that being said, I'd rather avoid the hassle and just carry a danged chart! It's well worth the $10 bucks or so (unless you like long arguments with FAA inspectors). As per your highlighted note in your post, I recommend pilots carry current charts on their flights. Makes life so much easier in so many ways.
#6 Posted: 9/22/2010 14:07:13
Good post Mike...like so much of our part 91 flying you can not and there is not a single place you can go to read exactly the rule or guidance to give you the answer you are looking for...as is often the case when an FAA Inspector is asked a question the answer is, "it depends". If I were out ramping a pilot who was locally based and just finished a flight in the traffic pattern, I wouldn't ask him to see current charts, but if the aircraft had just landed from a flight from California (I'm in Michigan) then I might. Remember you do have to do what ever it takes to become familiar with the flight you are about to take.Dan
#7 Posted: 9/27/2010 14:27:34
Thank you, Joe and Dan.
I guess I'm just a rebel. Bottom line, I'm not going to carry stuff that's not required just because somebody might ask to see it. If I don't need current aeronautical charts, I don't need to produce charts, so I won't carry them. If I'm rampchecked and asked for them, I guess I'll ask to see the FAR that requires me to have them. Because next they'd have to be current, with CHUM data entered, plus the NOTAM data transcribed - give a pencilpusher an inch, they'll take a nautical mile. EAA includes an Aeroplanner subscription flight planning etc service which generates a Trip-Tick. I've used it many times for out-of-area flights that kiss the edge of several Sectional charts. It's a lot better than a cockpit full of "fold it this way then that way" accordians. Their airport data is also printable. Several other sources of electronic data are also available, including the iFly GPS with annual subscription for unlimited chart updates.
DO have current nav info available, and check NOTAMS and TFRs before EVERY flight!!!!!!!!!!!!
#8 Posted: 9/28/2010 16:32:31
Mike, What is CHUM data?I guess I am a freedom rebel also, yesterday I bought my 5th pilot logbook. I got it at Walmart instead of buying a "real" pilot logbook from the airplane store. The Walmart notebook has a nice cover and a pen holder with an inside pocket, all for $3.I don't think there is any FAR that requires an "aviation approved" logbook, some of which cost $79+shipping . Should last my lifetime, unlike the previous four smaller logs that quickly filled.Bill
#9 Posted: 9/29/2010 12:23:30
Bill, I used CHUM generically to refer to both the Chart Update Manual and the VFR Chart Update Bulletins. If your chart is over 56 days from issue date, expect it MIGHT be out of date, so check CHUM or VFR Chart Update Bulletins before flight. If you're obsessive/compulsive, that is. Most people I know never heard of CHUM.
http://www.naco.faa.gov/index.asp?xml=naco/online/chart_bulletins
https://www1.nga.mil/ProductsServices/Aeronautical/ChartUpdatingManual/Pages/default.aspx
I think you're right about logbooks. No CFR14 requirement that your data must be kept in a particular format. Comply with CFR 14.61.(b) and you're fine. I've never heard of an approved logbook.
Anybody have a CFR reference that requires a PMA on a logbook?
#10 Posted: 9/30/2010 11:30:29
Nope, no such thing as an "approved" logbook. Pilots are not even required to log everything, or anything except minimum currency requirements and flight reviews, and any experience you plan to apply toward a future rating or certificate. If you don't want to log it you don't have to! And if you do, you can do it on bar napkins if you want, so long as you can produce the required records.
#11 Posted: 12/9/2010 07:08:02
an update to my previous post. our taxes already buy you charts that are posted on an FAA website for download
#12 Posted: 1/4/2011 20:26:41
Yes that is an excellent website. Downloadable Enroute Low Level, TAC and Sectionals, not to mention TERPs all of which store very nicely on a laptop or tablet.
#13 Posted: 2/17/2011 19:47:00
http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/flight_info/aeronav/faq/#q2f Looks like it doesn't "depend" - they just aren't required. What is the FAA policy for carrying current charts?
The term "charts" is not found in the FAA's Part 91 regulations (other than for large and turbine-powered multiengine airplanes in 91.503[a]). The specific FAA regulation, FAR 91.103 "Preflight Actions,"
states that each pilot in command shall, before beginning a flight, become familiar with all available information concerning that flight. What is not specifically addressed in the regulation is a requirement for charts. You should always carry a current chart for safety's sake. An expired chart will not show new frequencies or newly constructed obstructions, some of which could be tall enough to be a hazard along your route of flight.
..."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.
"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."
#14 Posted: 2/21/2011 11:07:14
It may be legally or not required to have certain charts on board for flights.But what is the practical and safe need for them? Making your flights safely is a whole lot more important than trying to outmaneuver the FAA on some regulation, it seems to me.I keep a few charts in my plane, all the time. I try to have a current sectional, and I have several wac charts, as well as the state chart. I keep the expired one until I have the new one. Very little changes on most charts that expire, so that if I have a current seciotnal I might have an older wac. I usually keep a set of the expired ones at home, if I am plannig a trip. I buy specific current ones if I am going to Oskhosh, etc.I subscribe to the NOAS ifr charts for my area for enroute and approach charts for my state. I almost never fly IFR , but if I ever do, or if there was an emergency, I want to have these, and I'd prefer the latest as these do change some.I keep an airport guide in my plane, so I have landing info like runway data, but also where motels are etc. I don't see any pride or advantage in avoiding flying without a chart at all. I weighs nothing, takes up little space, and has critical info like elevations, unicom, vor, runway data, etc.If you never go anywhere away from you home base, you may get by on just a sectional, but you are missing some fun and interest that comes from seeing our country by air.
#15 Posted: 2/22/2011 07:54:28
Bill, the reason i posted in the first place is that some folks get all legalistic about this charts stuff. You make good points about safety and sensibility. But you also said, "I try to have..." and "I keep the expired one..." which implies you, along with thousands of other Pt91 aviators, sometimes fly with expired flight information documents in your aircraft. and that's what prompted me to bring it up.
"i got violated for having an expired chart" "well I got violated for having an expired database in my panel-mount loran" "well I got violated for having an expired database in my handheld GPS" "well, i'll never get violated because i never carry charts at all" the stupid stuff i've heard about this junk! first off, ramp checks are few and far between in Pt91 flying to out-of-mainstream airports. but we hear horror stories about demonic FAA compliance inspectors. well, maybe i'm blessed, but the FAA folks i've dealt with over the last four decades are NOT out of control. fear of a ramp check is a lousy motivator. aviators comply with the regs because we know they are written in blood after lawsuits. nobody wants to do something dumb. don't believe the horror stories! preflight prudently. use the resources available, like aeroplanner and the FAA website. carry appropriate info for the planned flight and have a good alternative for when the plan sours. go forth and do good works!
#16 Posted: 2/22/2011 19:13:50
I have never heard of a proven instance nor do I know of any FAR that says it is a violation to have any chart in your airplane or flight bag.I think that is mostly myth.While the FAA , at their worst, might have some regs that we as pilots feel are petty, mostly I don't think they are nuts.While I try to have current charts for any trip,or even local flights; I might have a current sectional and an recent but out of date Wac. I don't think that is illegal, and it certainly is on illogical or dangerous. I would still have a current chart of one kind in the plane.BUT, IF I could not find an up to date chart, and the choice was to fly with no chart at all or rather a chart that was a few months out of date; I would certainly fly with the older chart. Flying VRF with an out of date chart should not be much of a safety factor. Let's say I fly from Boulder to Santa Fe. What is really important? Is it the things that change, like a airport frequency, or vor frequency or even a notam like a runway closing? No,those can be updated with your briefing from Flight Service. I am assuming you do get a real briefing, that is from an actual human, not just something on a cell phone. The items critical to making this trip, like headings, distance and max elevations to climb over, are not going to change. No matter if the chart is last years Wac or a current sectional, the mountain top is still at the same height , the towns are still in the same place, the same distance between places. And I subscribe to a service that gives me current airport data, like radio freqeuncies.I am not sure at all, but really doubt if it is a violation to fly with an expired data base in your Loran or Gps. What if your are flying VFR in good weather, why would you need a GPS anyway. I don't have one. I don't even have an electric system in my Cub. I can navigate by pilotage, by dead reckoning, ( a heading at a certain speed for a certain time, or use vors as pilots have for decades. None of this requires any database. And I have used a combination of these three methoids for years. A Loran just makes it a little easier.Now if you were going to fly IFR in IMC weather, and make an approach, that is a different matter. I am rated IFR and I am current, but I almost never fly real IMC weather. I do subscribe and do keep current IFR charts in my plane.
#17 Posted: 2/23/2011 06:18:18
Bill, you, Ron Dillard, Joe Norris, Larry Martin, and I all agree with the July/August 1997 issue of FAA Aviation News and the FAA's Chief Counsel's office. No legal requirement for charts in Part 91 ops EXCEPT as delineated in Part 93. And it's better to fly with an out-of-date chart updated by handwritten notes than with no chart at all. No, I don't get a verbal briefing unless I can't get one any other way. Duat.com is thorough, quicker, and documents that i received a proper brifing. dtn.com/dtnaviation/common/link.do?contentId=400099&parentId=500001 is a great visual supplement to that. And aeroplanner.com (included in your EAA membership benefits) allows printing out a triptick of current charts. No scribbles; neat, clean, complete, organized briefing printouts.
You and I disagree that flying VFR with an out of date (non-annotated) chart isn't much of a safety concern. Every so often the FAA commissions a new tower or something, and if it is on the current chart, FSS probably won't mention it in your telephone briefing. And that's just the non-lethal type of tower, there are others going up out there every day:
#18 Posted: 2/23/2011 18:55:50
Mike it is good to have current charts. However as for some new tower, well first of all, I usually fly high enough above the ground where I would miss a tower. There are many at 500' AGL, , quite a few at 1000' AGL, and even a few over 1000 feet AGL. But there are not many over 2000 feet, may be a few. I just came back from Boulder today , most of the way at 14,500, max at 16,000 and last part at 12,500. Not too many towers up there. When I go to Texas it would usually be at 9500 min or 11,500 at least, Same going to Osh. If I went in my Cub it would be lower.
Next, I mostly fly in good vfr weather, not in that grey stuff in in the North East that some people call air. I once flew up to New York and literally was navigating by looking behind me to see where I had come from, couldn't see much ahead. The visiblity today in Western , Colorado is probably at least 75 miles, maybe twice that. So if there is a tower sticking up a half mile AGL or so, I hope I can see it and that it is marked as it should be.Any obstacle that is going to be up 2000 feet over the ground is not going to pop up overnight. It takes awhile to build. And it will likely be marked on one of my current charts. If I have a current sectional , but a WAC that expired in Dec 2010, I don't see the safety issue if the WAC doesn't show the tower. And if you really think I am wrong about this, let's try something. We will both look at our next sectional and at our just expired one, and see how many new really tall towers have popped up on the new one?
If I was going to fly really low, below 1000 feet, AGL or certainly below 500 AGL and if the visibliity was poor and if I was going to fly into an area that I was not famiilar with, then I would probably scan the chart more for obstacles, like towers. Or go on an IFR flight plan, but it would not be that low.
And by the way, other airplanes are not on the chart, a pilot must look out the window for them when in VMC, and they are perhaps harder to see than a tower.
#19 Posted: 2/23/2011 21:43:20
Another thing to try to be safer is if you are flying low where obstacles are a factor, is to use the MEF ( think that is what it is called) Maximum Elevation Figure. It is the figure given on the sectional for the highest elevation for anything in a certain sector. So it is better not to fly low and to scud run, but if you do , if you stay higher than the MEF altitude , you are protected from hitting any towers or other things on the ground. If the figure is 2200 and you fly at 2500 you at least have that protection in that sector.
Scud running is certainly giving up some of the safety margin, bu there are times when it may work out ok. For instance if you have good visibility, perhaps 7 miles , but are under an overcast so that the ceiling is 3000 feet, you might be ok below the ceiling,and especially if you know the area and terrain. If you get a ceiling so low that you are below the MEF figures , then you are really depending on being able to see any obstacle in time to dodge it. Maybe not so hard in something slow like a Cub.
Flying really low , below MEF and in poor visibility is not good at all.
As for briefing, I am not good with computers,and don't find DUAT very usefull. It may be quicker, but I don't like to rush a flight and I'd rather talk to a person by phone so I can ask questions, not just take printed out data.
The best computer briefing that I have seen is WSI service. Unlike DUAT which is a lot of printed data, WSI also has photos so you can actually see where the weather problems are and where it is clear. Also you don't have to register or log in to use WSI when it is provided by the FBO, as it is here.
#20 Posted: 2/24/2011 07:41:38
Bill, thank you for re-proving the basic points. primary is - Pt 91 VFR not-for-hire, no charts are required except as listed in Pt 93.
secondary is - an out-of-date chart with updating annotations is better than no chart at all.
however - if your chart is out of date, the MEF on that chart may be out of date.
many PICs routinely and safely conduct flights which require that max enroute altitude does not exceed the MEF in weather that meets VMC minimums. EVERY flight has two portions below MEF.
how about we stop there, because we don't want to perpetuate misconceptions and
prejudices by debating whose judgement is better than whose and which hangar-flying story is more scary,
OK? that's how i got goaded into this in the first place - misconceptions, opinions, and tall tales. just the facts, ma'm - Pt 91 VFR not-for-hire, no charts are required except as listed in Pt 93. Log In or Register to Reply