Lido Chart Question

Minuteman

Minuteman

I HAVE STRONG OPINIONS ABOUT AUTOMOTIVE LIGHTING!
Lido charts are still a strange and colorful beastie to me. :)

On the chart below, how do you determine the TCH? Or, alternatively, what the heck are those numbers in the box just below the depiction of the runway environment: "29 / 1hPa"?

(all units are metric)
LIBR-VOR13.gif

(No, I have no plans on flying off a Lido chart anytime soon.)
 
Minuteman said:
Lido charts are still a strange and colorful beastie to me. :)

On the chart below, how do you determine the TCH?
Click to expand...

On your particular chart, the TCH is not depicted, but is in all reality 50ft. (from LIDO: Non precision approaches are calculated to cross the runway threshold at 50ft. This value is not shown in the profile.

If it was, it would be in a small box on top of the black horizontal line they use for the runway depiction. Like so...

TCH.jpg




Minuteman said:
Or, alternatively, what the heck are those numbers in the box just below the depiction of the runway environment: "29 / 1hPa"?
Click to expand...

29 is the Threshold Elevation and the 1hPa is the pressure difference is hectopascal units.
 
Thanks, that almost all makes sense ... except for the pressure difference.

What would that be used for? I have ideas, but they don't seem like good ones. :)
 
Minuteman said:
Thanks, that almost all makes sense ... except for the pressure difference.

What would that be used for? I have ideas, but they don't seem like good ones. :)
Click to expand...

Never understood the need for the pressure difference myself. All I know is 1hPA is equal to 1 mb, so maybe it is the conversion for the atmospheric pressure at that particular airport, who knows :panic:

If you have any other questions, feel free to ask away.
 
I'm still amazed the FAA lets 121 operations fly around with those things. They are SO error prone and seem (from the bit that I've used them) to be completely random in their organization.
 
BobDDuck said:
I'm still amazed the FAA lets 121 operations fly around with those things. They are SO error prone and seem (from the bit that I've used them) to be completely random in their organization.
Click to expand...

Apparantly Jepps are about as error prone - when we were running dual ops we found mistakes, or differences, between them, and it turned out in some cases that the Jepps had it wrong. The paper charts are clunky, but the Vector-based graphic EFB program promises to be much much better than Jeppview FliteDeck.

surreal1221 said:
Excuse my ignorance, but what US operators are using this coloring books?
Click to expand...

AFAIK, Fedex and Pinnacle.
 
surreal1221 said:
Interesting, these things not on paper or what's the deal?
Click to expand...

Fedex has EFBs, we don't (yet - or ever, take your pick!). So while they supposedly look real good on computer (because that's what they're designed for, and they are all to scale), it's kinda annoying having fold out charts for a ton of stuff (or even a fold out and flip over chart, in the case of the DCA ELDEE4, but the chart doesn't say, hey flip me over to see the rest of the fixes)....
 
surreal1221 said:
Gotcha. Thanks, certainly sounds interesting.

What was the cost savings to Pinnacle?
Click to expand...

Well when we first got them, they were free, but now with all the new cities and the end of the "free" trial, I think we're spending as much on the paper as we were with Jepps..... we won't start to save money again until EFBs come out - which mainly depends on the FAA Reauthorization Bill.
 
cencal83406 said:
Well when we first got them, they were free, but now with all the new cities and the end of the "free" trial, I think we're spending as much on the paper as we were with Jepps..... we won't start to save money again until EFBs come out - which mainly depends on the FAA Reauthorization Bill.
Click to expand...


Hearing now that the only airplanes to get the EFBs are going to be the -900s. Not sure if there is any truth at all to that, just what I heard.
 
BobDDuck said:
I'm still amazed the FAA lets 121 operations fly around with those things. They are SO error prone and seem (from the bit that I've used them) to be completely random in their organization.
Click to expand...

We found a lot of Jepp errors during the transition, don't think either has the corner on that, one way or the other!

The organization is actually more logical than Jepp. It is based on the ICAO framework, the basic rules, ICAO, than regional, then country, then local (airport specific). It allows you to use the same methodology regardless of where in the world you're going.

They are much better than Jepp for the electronic flight bag, as you can do things, such as take out various overlays to declutter, etc., that Jepp cannot. They are clearly designed for the EFB.
 
BobDDuck said:
I'm still amazed the FAA lets 121 operations fly around with those things. They are SO error prone and seem (from the bit that I've used them) to be completely random in their organization.
Click to expand...

Organization is actually not random at all. AFCs are all the same color tabs (and are killer charts if you have an emergency or a quick divert), The AGC is ALWAYS gonna be on the back of the AFC or the very next page, then you've got low vis taxi charts, followed by SIDs (always green) with a text description of the SIDs. STARS are next (orange), and then IAPs are last (blue tabs).

As far as how they're organized on the pages, all of them are pretty much the same. They're all oriented in the same direction and the radio freqs are all in the same place on every chart. To brief an approach, you can go clockwise (for a west bound approach) or counter clockwise (for an east bound approach) and it'll come out almost exactly the same as reading the Jepp Briefing Strip. Plus I like having MSAs right there so I don't have to play "which radial am I on?"

Pilots just fear change. :)
 
I like Lido, but I have seen it in the electronic version with is 100% intuitive and easy to use so EFB's would be ideal (and right up there with my pony) ;). Pretty colors!

I have no problem using Lido, I would just prefer the books to be in the plane and not have to lug more binders around than before. 2 Jepp binders and a trip (hub) binder became 3 jepp binders + trip binder for Lido. Also add a solid 10 pounds. Not that it matters to my back (some small people have issues) but the added weight in the flight kit is beginning to bend my roller back attachment point.... :mad:
 
higney85 said:
I like Lido, but I have seen it in the electronic version with is 100% intuitive and easy to use so EFB's would be ideal (and right up there with my pony) ;). Pretty colors!
Click to expand...

I get the feeling that the -900s will get them, but us -200 guys will be left holding the OJI form.

I have no problem using Lido, I would just prefer the books to be in the plane and not have to lug more binders around than before. 2 Jepp binders and a trip (hub) binder became 3 jepp binders + trip binder for Lido. Also add a solid 10 pounds. Not that it matters to my back (some small people have issues) but the added weight in the flight kit is beginning to bend my roller back attachment point.... :mad:
Click to expand...

The only major complaints I have are the lack of bolded speeds restrictions on the STARs and the lack of info on the graphic depiction of the SIDs. I just brief off the text version now. That and the sheer size and weight are the only complaints I have. My bag handle is a LIDO victim, but it gives me an excuse to get a Coyote Works bag now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top