Jepp Question
Seems like there is a whole bunch of whinging about Jepp's perceived lack of quality, and much asking of questions from people who can't answer - why not ask the source of the vexation - JEPPESEN themselves.
I have always found them very approachable
I have always found them very approachable
DA
Could you be specific as to where on 10-9a MEHT is notated?
On all runway approaches in the Jepps the TCH is notated wouldn't you just add your cockpit height to that to get MEHT?
Does MEHT only apply to visual slope indicators?
Could you be specific as to where on 10-9a MEHT is notated?
On all runway approaches in the Jepps the TCH is notated wouldn't you just add your cockpit height to that to get MEHT?
Does MEHT only apply to visual slope indicators?
Thread Starter
Aerocat S2A
You say
Well I find it a pain in the ass (other pilots have also said this) doing Jepp amendments every 2 weeks compared to DAP amendments only a few times/year.
DAP amendments are usually received well in advance of their effective date. This was if you haven't received them approaching this next effective date ( I kept track of when the next amendment was due in a normal diary), you can still chase them up and receive them in advance time so as to keep them up do date/amended at the effective date.
I have already missed several Jepp amendments and by the time they send you out a replacement copy from America, the effective date has already passed.
You also say
I can't work out why you couldn't work this out as I work it out very easy.
At the front of the DAPs it says "effective date" and it also says when the next amendment is due (mark this in your diary or on a calendar somewhere). It is then very easy to work it all out.
Just like the Jepps, the DAP amendments are all numbered in chronological order, which makes it easy again when doing amendments.
You also say
Yes, it all is within 2 folders but very difficult to use/amend as the folders are maybe too small for all the pages to fit. I had to purchase a 3rd Jepp folder at a cost of $70.
Another reason
I just found another reason why I believe DAPs are better then Jepps.
With every DAP amendment you get a checklist of all the pages/contents. This way you can check that you got every page and that it is current.
Jepps only send this checklist once a year (Annual Content Checklist). That is once every 26 amendments compared to once every amendment with DAPs.
I believe I got a few pages missing/out of order with my Jepps now but I have to wait unitl Jeppesen send me this "Annual Content Checklist".
This means it you could be almost 12 months until you realise you got some pages missing/out of date with your Jepps.
Direct Anywhere
The MEHT is not published on page 10-9a. I just had a look.
I already said I couldn't find the MEHT published anywhere, which
included page 10-9a and any other page.
You say :
But I am sorry to say that it is not there, even for SYD, MEL, BNE etc.
All that is published on page 10-9a is the VASIS/PAPI slope but not MEHT.
You say
1. I find the ammendments easier to deal with .
DAP amendments are usually received well in advance of their effective date. This was if you haven't received them approaching this next effective date ( I kept track of when the next amendment was due in a normal diary), you can still chase them up and receive them in advance time so as to keep them up do date/amended at the effective date.
I have already missed several Jepp amendments and by the time they send you out a replacement copy from America, the effective date has already passed.
You also say
I couldn't easily tell if my docs were current or not
At the front of the DAPs it says "effective date" and it also says when the next amendment is due (mark this in your diary or on a calendar somewhere). It is then very easy to work it all out.
Just like the Jepps, the DAP amendments are all numbered in chronological order, which makes it easy again when doing amendments.
You also say
The entire AIP is contained within two folders
Another reason
I just found another reason why I believe DAPs are better then Jepps.
With every DAP amendment you get a checklist of all the pages/contents. This way you can check that you got every page and that it is current.
Jepps only send this checklist once a year (Annual Content Checklist). That is once every 26 amendments compared to once every amendment with DAPs.
I believe I got a few pages missing/out of order with my Jepps now but I have to wait unitl Jeppesen send me this "Annual Content Checklist".
This means it you could be almost 12 months until you realise you got some pages missing/out of date with your Jepps.
Direct Anywhere
The MEHT is not published on page 10-9a. I just had a look.
I already said I couldn't find the MEHT published anywhere, which
included page 10-9a and any other page.
You say :
know they're there for SYD, MEL, BNE etc. what about everywhere else?
All that is published on page 10-9a is the VASIS/PAPI slope but not MEHT.
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Somewhere over the rainbow
Posts: 234
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maybe I'm missing something here, but reading the Sydney chart 10-9A, take rwy 16R for example, reading across the line, it says that the MEHT is 39' 
With regards to preference between Jepps and say, the DAPS, I suppose it depends on what you are used to. Whilst the DAPS have a common format for all approaches in Australia, if you were to fly overseas, the same format is not available, and its necessary to read an unfamiliar chart. Jeppesen have the advantage of providing the same form of chart for approaches all around the world.
When I flew using only DAPs, I had no problem reading them. Now I've flown using the Jepps, I'm used to them. Ask me which one I'd prefer to fly off, I'd say the Jeppesen, perhaps only for the fact that its what I'm used to. I like the MUCH more prominent missed approach on the Jepp plate, and the holding diagrams. Really, each to his own.
With regards to preference between Jepps and say, the DAPS, I suppose it depends on what you are used to. Whilst the DAPS have a common format for all approaches in Australia, if you were to fly overseas, the same format is not available, and its necessary to read an unfamiliar chart. Jeppesen have the advantage of providing the same form of chart for approaches all around the world.
When I flew using only DAPs, I had no problem reading them. Now I've flown using the Jepps, I'm used to them. Ask me which one I'd prefer to fly off, I'd say the Jeppesen, perhaps only for the fact that its what I'm used to. I like the MUCH more prominent missed approach on the Jepp plate, and the holding diagrams. Really, each to his own.
Thread Starter
Comfy chair
I must be blind, help me please. I have studied Sydney chart 10-9A (27 AUG 04, Eff 2 Sep) and I can not find the MEHT published anywhere.
Reading across the line for Rwy16R all I get is :
Am I looking in the right area ?
I just compared the missed approach and holding diagrams on both Jepps and DAPs and I don't see much difference there.
From memory, I don't believe Jepps even published holding diagrams a few years ago (whilst DAPs did !) and Jepp pilots had to calculate the sector entry using a variety of techniques such as your thumb etc.
The only point I agree with you/others is using the same chart format/familiarity anywhere in the world.
More reasons
I just found a few more areas where Jepps are inferior to DAPs :
1- Ever since I subscribed to DAPs, I no longer receive "AIP Supplements and AIC's"
What do I do now ? I got a valid reason not to read them ? What if I didn't have access to the internet ?
2 - The NOTAMS I read before flight make reference to Airservices documents and support Airservices documents but there is no reference/support to Jepps.
Just read this topic that was on pprune not too long ago.
Anyone using DAPs would never have this problem !
I must be blind, help me please. I have studied Sydney chart 10-9A (27 AUG 04, Eff 2 Sep) and I can not find the MEHT published anywhere.
Reading across the line for Rwy16R all I get is :
HIRL CL HIALS TDZ T-VASI (angle 3.0) 12,720' 11,788' 07/25 3875' 148'
I just compared the missed approach and holding diagrams on both Jepps and DAPs and I don't see much difference there.
From memory, I don't believe Jepps even published holding diagrams a few years ago (whilst DAPs did !) and Jepp pilots had to calculate the sector entry using a variety of techniques such as your thumb etc.
The only point I agree with you/others is using the same chart format/familiarity anywhere in the world.
More reasons
I just found a few more areas where Jepps are inferior to DAPs :
1- Ever since I subscribed to DAPs, I no longer receive "AIP Supplements and AIC's"
What do I do now ? I got a valid reason not to read them ? What if I didn't have access to the internet ?
2 - The NOTAMS I read before flight make reference to Airservices documents and support Airservices documents but there is no reference/support to Jepps.
Just read this topic that was on pprune not too long ago.
Anyone using DAPs would never have this problem !
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: WX at our destination is 32 deg with some bkn cld, but we'll try to have them fixed before we arrive
Posts: 302
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Seems to me like horses for courses.
For me, like A Comfy Chair says, I prefer the layout of Jepps plates. They are easy to read in low light situations. I recall doing a sim ride using DAPs and I was all at sea. I also like the fact that you don't have to carry a library as the AIP and ERSA are contained in 2 volumes.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not knocking DAPs, using Jepps is my preference because it has all the info I need in a layout that I'm used to.
For me, like A Comfy Chair says, I prefer the layout of Jepps plates. They are easy to read in low light situations. I recall doing a sim ride using DAPs and I was all at sea. I also like the fact that you don't have to carry a library as the AIP and ERSA are contained in 2 volumes.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not knocking DAPs, using Jepps is my preference because it has all the info I need in a layout that I'm used to.
Jepps only send this checklist once a year (Annual Content Checklist). That is once every 26 amendments compared to once every amendment with DAPs.
Bevan..
I've just realised it could be because my employer uses tailored charts.
My SYD 10-9a chart has slope and MEHT for all T-VASI installations at SYD - I've just looked at it but I can't post it here. I know this is of no help to anyone but me but it could explain the difference.
My SYD 10-9a chart has slope and MEHT for all T-VASI installations at SYD - I've just looked at it but I can't post it here. I know this is of no help to anyone but me but it could explain the difference.
PPRuNeaholic
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Cairns FNQ
Posts: 3,255
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, I was just getting ready to jump in here and ask DA if he's using tailored charts. That makes a huge difference to this whole situation. Many major airlines, including the FWR, pay big bucks for having the Jepp charts tailored to their needs.
Thread Starter
Ozexpat
You say :
Does this mean everyday pilots/subscribers don't ?
Why should someone pay extra to have the MEHT published on a chart if Airservices publishes this information at no extra cost, and is available to the normal everyday subscriber ?
Why can't Jepps match the same level of information provided by DAPs ?
Bevan666
Thanks for the info, I will have a look.
You say :
Many major airlines, including the FWR, pay big bucks for having the Jepp charts tailored to their needs.
Why should someone pay extra to have the MEHT published on a chart if Airservices publishes this information at no extra cost, and is available to the normal everyday subscriber ?
Why can't Jepps match the same level of information provided by DAPs ?
Bevan666
Thanks for the info, I will have a look.
I vastly prefer the flip-over/top ring binding format of DAPs. I loathe the ring binder used in Jepps (and Aerad). Their system seems to be based around the idea that you should go through & remove the desired pages before use & then re-insert them afterwards. Stuff that for a joke.
DAPs & the USA's FAA equivalent use a flip over style that I find preferable.
DAPs & the USA's FAA equivalent use a flip over style that I find preferable.
"Eaztside iz de best!"
"Weztside izz de best!"
Dude, you sound like Mr Jepp did something nasty to you as a child!
Ok, I'm not saying that Jepp shouldn't publish the info if it is available and operationally important, and I don't operate aircraft where it is a big deal, so can someone please explain; say the MEHT was 76' or whatever it is in DN, how does this change your approach? Fly a dot "fly up"
I can see the problem if the MEHT is low, which is when Jepps do publish it.
I prefer Jepps for 2 main reasons, the chart layout is a lot clearer to me, and the info does actually fit into 2 folders. Using that argument against Jepps is a tad hypocrytical, as I'm sure anyone who has tried to fit their Daps into 2 folders, and then had to lug around the 4 folders in their flight bag, would agree. You obviously prefer AsA pubs, for your own reasons.
So an interesting point you make JC, but lets stick to the facts.
"Weztside izz de best!"
Dude, you sound like Mr Jepp did something nasty to you as a child!
Ok, I'm not saying that Jepp shouldn't publish the info if it is available and operationally important, and I don't operate aircraft where it is a big deal, so can someone please explain; say the MEHT was 76' or whatever it is in DN, how does this change your approach? Fly a dot "fly up"
I can see the problem if the MEHT is low, which is when Jepps do publish it.I prefer Jepps for 2 main reasons, the chart layout is a lot clearer to me, and the info does actually fit into 2 folders. Using that argument against Jepps is a tad hypocrytical, as I'm sure anyone who has tried to fit their Daps into 2 folders, and then had to lug around the 4 folders in their flight bag, would agree. You obviously prefer AsA pubs, for your own reasons.
So an interesting point you make JC, but lets stick to the facts.
From what I undestand Airservices will change a chart if requested by an operator.
e.g Say No Scare Airlines comes along and says we want to reduce the minima at Canberra to 2100'. Our loads allow us to meet a 4.6% gradient on the missed approach. NoAirservices says yes for a fee we will change that.
Bad Luck for all the other operator that don't meet that gradient. Just adjust your DA height so you do.
Please feel free to disagree
e.g Say No Scare Airlines comes along and says we want to reduce the minima at Canberra to 2100'. Our loads allow us to meet a 4.6% gradient on the missed approach. NoAirservices says yes for a fee we will change that.
Bad Luck for all the other operator that don't meet that gradient. Just adjust your DA height so you do.
Please feel free to disagree
PPRuNeaholic
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Cairns FNQ
Posts: 3,255
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't work for Jepps JC, so you'd have to direct that question to them. I can tell you, however, that chart tailoring has been going on since at least 1986 to my knowledge. Maybe even longer.
Chart tailoring can be as simple as reducing the number of categories in the minima box and may include a slightly higher minima if the particular company requests it. If other information is specifically required by an airline, that will also be included on their tailored charts.
If you don't like this system, don't get angry with me, as your post smiley seems to suggest, do it with Jepps. I'm sure that they'll care more than I do.
Chart tailoring can be as simple as reducing the number of categories in the minima box and may include a slightly higher minima if the particular company requests it. If other information is specifically required by an airline, that will also be included on their tailored charts.
If you don't like this system, don't get angry with me, as your post smiley seems to suggest, do it with Jepps. I'm sure that they'll care more than I do.
Thread Starter
grrowler
Read the whole topic again carefully and do some research as I have already stated several facts here already.
Facts
1 - Jeppesen do not publish the MEHT the way Airservices does (forget about tailored charts)
2- Jepp subscribers DO NOT receive "AIP Supplements and AIC's"
3 - Jepp subscribers DO NOT receive the latest chart NOTAM service everytime they fly and receive their preflight briefing/NOTAMS - daily (Airservices) NOTAMS ( the ones you obtain when you submit your plan and get a preflight briefing through NAIPs/AVFAX or whatever other way) support the DAPs but not the Jepps
4 - With every DAP amendment you get a checklist of all the pages/contents. This way you can check that you got every page and that it is current. Jepps only send this checklist once a year (Annual Content Checklist). That is once every 26 amendments compared to once every amendment with DAPs.
Lets forget about the internet. What if you are out bush and got no access to the internet ? You submit your plan and get NOTAMS from AVFAX.
5 - Jepps do not fit "comfortably/easily" in 2 folders. I (and many other pilots I know) have had to purchase extra folders to accomodate all the pages. To be more specific, the Jepps "Terminal Section" does not fit comfortably/easily in one folder.
If you do not believe me, then put all the terminal pages in a 2" Jepp folder and then try and remove maybe the first few or last few pages !!
Grrowler, I have stated at least 5 facts in all my posts up to now. I now challenge you to proove me wrong please ( if you can. ) Please explain how these FACTS are NOT facts but they are only interesting points/opinions as you say they are.
Now I have to repeat myself again.
You say :
Look at your Darwin Jepp chart again. The MEHT is not published for Darwin. So how can you adjust your approach (like you say you can and fly a dot "fly up") if the MEHT IS NOT published ?
Ozexpat
Sorry, the smiley is not aimed at you. It is aimed at Jeppesen because according to your comment, everyday pilots don't pay enough to receive the full information (ie MEHT). According to your comment, you got to pay extra (like the airlines do) in order to receive MEHT information.
For everyone else
I am stating some FACTS which others might be intersted in. I am stating these FACTS so others can make whatever opinion they want knowing these facts. From these post, it is obvious some pilots were not even aware of some of the facts I have mentioned here.
Read the whole topic again carefully and do some research as I have already stated several facts here already.
Facts
1 - Jeppesen do not publish the MEHT the way Airservices does (forget about tailored charts)
2- Jepp subscribers DO NOT receive "AIP Supplements and AIC's"
3 - Jepp subscribers DO NOT receive the latest chart NOTAM service everytime they fly and receive their preflight briefing/NOTAMS - daily (Airservices) NOTAMS ( the ones you obtain when you submit your plan and get a preflight briefing through NAIPs/AVFAX or whatever other way) support the DAPs but not the Jepps
4 - With every DAP amendment you get a checklist of all the pages/contents. This way you can check that you got every page and that it is current. Jepps only send this checklist once a year (Annual Content Checklist). That is once every 26 amendments compared to once every amendment with DAPs.
Lets forget about the internet. What if you are out bush and got no access to the internet ? You submit your plan and get NOTAMS from AVFAX.
5 - Jepps do not fit "comfortably/easily" in 2 folders. I (and many other pilots I know) have had to purchase extra folders to accomodate all the pages. To be more specific, the Jepps "Terminal Section" does not fit comfortably/easily in one folder.
If you do not believe me, then put all the terminal pages in a 2" Jepp folder and then try and remove maybe the first few or last few pages !!
Grrowler, I have stated at least 5 facts in all my posts up to now. I now challenge you to proove me wrong please ( if you can. ) Please explain how these FACTS are NOT facts but they are only interesting points/opinions as you say they are.
Now I have to repeat myself again.
You say :
say the MEHT was 76' or whatever it is in DN, how does this change your approach ? Fly a dot "fly up" .
Ozexpat
Sorry, the smiley is not aimed at you. It is aimed at Jeppesen because according to your comment, everyday pilots don't pay enough to receive the full information (ie MEHT). According to your comment, you got to pay extra (like the airlines do) in order to receive MEHT information.
For everyone else
I am stating some FACTS which others might be intersted in. I am stating these FACTS so others can make whatever opinion they want knowing these facts. From these post, it is obvious some pilots were not even aware of some of the facts I have mentioned here.
Geez, settle down. Like I said before I'm not going to get into a discussion about why one is better than the other. I prefer Jepps for the reasons stated (perhaps I didn't give the ASA docs much of a chance, it really doesn't matter). I fully accept that you prefer the DAPS.
It would seem that the answer to your question is that Jepp does not have the MEHT on their charts. It would also seem that no one who uses them have noticed or care. I am guessing that those who don't need it have never noticed it's missing (e.g. me), and that those who do need it are probably working for RPT companies that have tailored charts.
Tailored charts is not supposed to be about paying extra money to get extra information, it's supposed to be paying extra money to get information tailored to your organisation. E.g. having higher minimums on the approaches or prehaps company specific information, whatever.
If you have a problem with the Jepps, then don't use them, no one is forcing you to.
If you have a problem with people saying that Jepps are better,then you seem to be talking to the wrong audience, there doesn't seem to be any rabid Jepp lovers here.
BTW, I get all AICs and AIP supps from the internet.
I prefer doing lots of small ammendments rather than a couple of big ones.
I like the way the ammendment master sheet is portrayed on the Jepps.
I have had the Jepps for longer therefore am used to them.
I have never had a problem with NOTAMs not being tailored for the Jepps. I'm not saying that they ARE tailored for the jepps, only that I have not had a problem with them NOT being tailored for the Jepps.
I only fly to a small number of airfields and so have a small folder (just an A5 binder) with the relevent charts plus my Jepp folder 1 with the Air Traffic Control and other sections in it. My terminal folder stays home.
To top it off, when I got my ASA docs there were AICs and SUPPS missing and one of the folders was broken. Also I had to do a heap of ammendments to bring it up to date as soon as I got it (the ammendments came with the docs).
The above point gave me the impression that the ASA version was less professional and it put me off (rightly or wrongly).
All of the other points are just about what is right for me, not about which is better.
To sum up. I accept all your facts and yet, for my own reasons, I still prefer the Jepps.
It would seem that the answer to your question is that Jepp does not have the MEHT on their charts. It would also seem that no one who uses them have noticed or care. I am guessing that those who don't need it have never noticed it's missing (e.g. me), and that those who do need it are probably working for RPT companies that have tailored charts.
Tailored charts is not supposed to be about paying extra money to get extra information, it's supposed to be paying extra money to get information tailored to your organisation. E.g. having higher minimums on the approaches or prehaps company specific information, whatever.
If you have a problem with the Jepps, then don't use them, no one is forcing you to.
If you have a problem with people saying that Jepps are better,then you seem to be talking to the wrong audience, there doesn't seem to be any rabid Jepp lovers here.
BTW, I get all AICs and AIP supps from the internet.
I prefer doing lots of small ammendments rather than a couple of big ones.
I like the way the ammendment master sheet is portrayed on the Jepps.
I have had the Jepps for longer therefore am used to them.
I have never had a problem with NOTAMs not being tailored for the Jepps. I'm not saying that they ARE tailored for the jepps, only that I have not had a problem with them NOT being tailored for the Jepps.
I only fly to a small number of airfields and so have a small folder (just an A5 binder) with the relevent charts plus my Jepp folder 1 with the Air Traffic Control and other sections in it. My terminal folder stays home.
To top it off, when I got my ASA docs there were AICs and SUPPS missing and one of the folders was broken. Also I had to do a heap of ammendments to bring it up to date as soon as I got it (the ammendments came with the docs).
The above point gave me the impression that the ASA version was less professional and it put me off (rightly or wrongly).
All of the other points are just about what is right for me, not about which is better.
To sum up. I accept all your facts and yet, for my own reasons, I still prefer the Jepps.
John Citizen,
I thought you were correct, until I saw this on NAIPS today!
PORT MACQUARIE (YPMQ)
C91/04
AMD JEPPESEN GPS ARRIVAL SECTOR B DATED 11 APR 03
EFFECTIVE 17 APR 03
STEP DOWN FM 3400FT TO 3000FT IS AT 10NM
FROM 09 060628 TO PERM
Very interesting!!! First time i've seen that and I am a Jepps user.
Cheers,
TL
2 - The NOTAMS I read before flight make reference to Airservices documents and support Airservices documents but there is no reference/support to Jepps.
AND
3 - Jepp subscribers DO NOT receive the latest chart NOTAM service everytime they fly and receive their preflight briefing/NOTAMS - daily (Airservices) NOTAMS ( the ones you obtain when you submit your plan and get a preflight briefing through NAIPs/AVFAX or whatever other way) support the DAPs but not the Jepps
AND
3 - Jepp subscribers DO NOT receive the latest chart NOTAM service everytime they fly and receive their preflight briefing/NOTAMS - daily (Airservices) NOTAMS ( the ones you obtain when you submit your plan and get a preflight briefing through NAIPs/AVFAX or whatever other way) support the DAPs but not the Jepps
PORT MACQUARIE (YPMQ)
C91/04
AMD JEPPESEN GPS ARRIVAL SECTOR B DATED 11 APR 03
EFFECTIVE 17 APR 03
STEP DOWN FM 3400FT TO 3000FT IS AT 10NM
FROM 09 060628 TO PERM
Very interesting!!! First time i've seen that and I am a Jepps user.
Cheers,
TL
JC, take it easy pal!
You prove my point, yes you have stated some facts, but how emotive are you getting!? I agree with the facts, I never said I didn't, however I prefer Jepps. Facts 1 through 4 don't really bother me, as I'm quite comfortable that I have all the information I need when I go flying.
Fact 5: I managed to fit my Jepps into 2 folders by splitting the content down the middle (after CD in the charts). I agree there could be more space, but the point I was making was, and I guess I'll need to repeat myself also, the DAPs do not fit in the folders supplied by ASA either. Plus you need to carry the 2 AIP folders and an ERSA (I guess that's a "fact"). I don't like that.
While we're on the subject of repeating ourselves, you obviously misread my question, so I'll ask you this again; If you were flying to DN, and you were "lucky" enough to have ASA charts, and you therefore knew
What I'm suggesting is that Jepps will publish an MEHT if it is operationally important information.
You prove my point, yes you have stated some facts, but how emotive are you getting!? I agree with the facts, I never said I didn't, however I prefer Jepps. Facts 1 through 4 don't really bother me, as I'm quite comfortable that I have all the information I need when I go flying.
Fact 5: I managed to fit my Jepps into 2 folders by splitting the content down the middle (after CD in the charts). I agree there could be more space, but the point I was making was, and I guess I'll need to repeat myself also, the DAPs do not fit in the folders supplied by ASA either. Plus you need to carry the 2 AIP folders and an ERSA (I guess that's a "fact"). I don't like that.
While we're on the subject of repeating ourselves, you obviously misread my question, so I'll ask you this again; If you were flying to DN, and you were "lucky" enough to have ASA charts, and you therefore knew
the MEHT was 76' or whatever it is in DN, how does this change your approach?
Thread Starter
Thanks TL
I withdraw Fact #3, because I admit I was wrong here, and did not get my facts right.
Thanks.
grrowler
Your question :
My answer :
I would maybe fly 1 or 2 dots low.
I remember once when I was in a jumpseat of a Bae146 landing in DN at night. One pilot briefed the other pilot that he will deliberately fly 1 dot low because of the MEHT.
1 dot low would place me at about 51\' to 67\'
2 dots low would place me at about 33\' to 51\'
This way I would cross the threshold at the normal (at about) 50\' and my aimpoint would be in the middle of the touchdown zone.
This now means I should now be able to land within the touchdown zone instead of well beyond it (which might necessitate a go-around for landing too far down the runway).
Take a look back what I said on page 1.
I withdraw Fact #3, because I admit I was wrong here, and did not get my facts right.
Thanks.
grrowler
Your question :
so I\'ll ask you this again; If you were flying to DN, and you were "lucky" enough to have ASA charts, and you therefore knew the MEHT was 76\' or whatever it is in DN, how does this change your approach?
I would maybe fly 1 or 2 dots low.
I remember once when I was in a jumpseat of a Bae146 landing in DN at night. One pilot briefed the other pilot that he will deliberately fly 1 dot low because of the MEHT.
1 dot low would place me at about 51\' to 67\'
2 dots low would place me at about 33\' to 51\'
This way I would cross the threshold at the normal (at about) 50\' and my aimpoint would be in the middle of the touchdown zone.
This now means I should now be able to land within the touchdown zone instead of well beyond it (which might necessitate a go-around for landing too far down the runway).
Take a look back what I said on page 1.
With the lights at Darwin with a MEHT of 76ft, the aim point is at 440m ! This is almost at the very end of the touchdown zone (97% of the way towards the end), which is nowhere near the middle.