scooter2525
Very well Member
I keep NASA forms with me when I fly... ya know... just incase
Why?
If you get ramped and don't have any charts in the airplane (as long as there isn't something else you've done wrong), the fed won't be able to do a damn thing to you.
-mini
It could be worse. You could be filling NASA forms with tail number/flt number/date before your first leg as part of your preflight paperwork. :crazy:I keep NASA forms with me when I fly... ya know... just incase
It could be worse. You could be filling NASA forms with tail number/flt number/date before your first leg as part of your preflight paperwork. :crazy:
-mini
Say it with me ...the new 60-1s will have a check box if you are me, so the next pilot will know to be extra careful on there preflight.
Why?
If you get ramped and don't have any charts in the airplane (as long as there isn't something else you've done wrong), the fed won't be able to do a damn thing to you.
i do see that is says that "determine if charts are available" but i would think then it would fall into the hands of the examiner. if he/she knows you just flew 300 miles w/o charts that will look less favorable than if i just hopped in the plane, flew 24 miles to an airport i am very familiar with.Take a look at this website http://fsims.faa.gov/PICDetail.aspx?docId=B31EC5608DF9D7798525734F00766694 which is an excerpt of FAA Order 8900. See section 6-101 Procedures, then look under part F, number 11 and let me know what you all think. I'm not saying that they will or will not be able to do anything to you because I really don't know, but there is no denying that it IS on the list. I always ask myself, in terms of operational decisions made in flying, "How is this going to sound in front of the judge," but that is just me.
there is no denying that it IS on the list.
<tt>
Charts are required for some Part 91 operations. See 91.503, 91.1033.
As for the rest, here's what's posted on the NACO website:
</tt>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 only FAA/FAR requirements that pertain to charts are:
- Title 14 CFR section 91.503[a] (Large and Turbojet powered aircraft)
- Title 14 CFR section 135.83 (Air Carriers-Little Airplane)
- Title 14 CFR section 121.549 (Air Carrier-Big Airplanes)
If you, as an FAA Safety Inspector, Designated Pilot Examiner, Flight Instructor, or other aviation professional are telling pilots something other than the foregoing then you are incorrect.
- The FAA has rendered interpretations that have stated the foregoing. The subject of current charts was thoroughly covered in an article in the FAA's July/August 1997 issue of FAA Aviation News. That article was cleared through the FAA's Chief Counsel's office. In that article the FAA stated the following:
- "You can carry old charts in your aircraft." "It is not FAA policy to violate anyone for having outdated charts in the aircraft."
- "Not all pilots are required to carry a chart." "91.503..requires the pilot in command of large and multiengine airplanes to have charts." "Other operating sections of the FAR such as Part 121 and Part 135 operations have similar requirements."
- ..."since some pilots thought they could be violated for having outdated or no charts on board during a flight, we need to clarify an important issue. As we have said, it is NOT FAA policy to initiate enforcement action against a pilot for having an old chart on board or no chart on board." That's because there is no regulation on the issue.
- ..."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."
not good . . .b-b-but how would that look in front of a judge!?
Outside of #6? Outside of #6 (the absence of current charts contributed to the violation), I'd think it'd be a non-issue. If you ball up the airplane on landing and get busted for, say, flying while drunk, I really don't think it will make it worse if you didn't have current charts on board.b-b-but how would that look in front of a judge!?
:insane:b-b-but how would that look in front of a judge!?
you'd think:yar:I am glad to have something in writing that says that I can legally carry obsolete charts.
Having said that, legalities aside (and I know this question was strictly a legal one, but I want to take it a step further), I would think that a safe and professional pilot would use a little bit of common sense
Thanks for pointing out the NACO website, I am glad to have something in writing that says that I can legally carry obsolete charts.
Having said that, legalities aside (and I know this question was strictly a legal one, but I want to take it a step further), I would think that a safe and professional pilot would use a little bit of common sense and carry current charts. I don't think it is such an outrageous request to walk into an FBO and purchase a new sectional, A/FD, etc. If you want to follow the letter of the law, you can carry a 20 year old sectional and be fine. Legal? Yes. Safe? I don't think so, but that is just me.
Please feel free to correct me if I am wrong, but a private pilot with 3 hours of instrument training can take an aircraft without an operating artifical horizon at night, with a high overcast, no moon, over open water with zero horizon reference. Legal? Yes. Safe? Well, I would advise my students against it, but who knows, I am just about to start as a CFI in this business, maybe there is something that I have yet to learn.
<TT>
</TT>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.
True, but you won't get CHUM or NOTAM updates on out-of-current-cycle charts.Neither will current charts, necessarily. When I was flying lots of low level VFR in the military, we had to CHUM our charts using the Chart Updating Manual, a publication that comes out once a month that informs you of changes between chart issues.
True, but you won't get CHUM or NOTAM updates on out-of-current-cycle charts.
btw, for an example of a case in which "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" check out http://ntsb.gov/alj/alj/O_n_O/docs/aviation/4449.PDF
That's right. I thought I said that.He busted airspace because he wasn't familiar with all of the necessary information regarding the flight. It wasn't like a fed showed up before his departure "to help" and said "sir, you don't have charts, I'm going to violate you".
It wasn't the charts that got him in trouble, it was busting the class B.
-mini
That's right. I thought I said that.
none - you needed a none, right there.having no charts probably didn't help the situation *none* (not sure how many negatives that was,