Leaderboard

Jeppesen began publishing the "DA/MDA (H)" several years ago when ICAO and EASA adopted the "Aerodrome Operating Minima" concept, which you see by the "Standard" annotation in the upper left corner (cut off here in this graphic") is applied to this procedure. It is one of the approaches where the pilot, if they do not have use CDFA techniques, they must add visibility penalty to the approach's minima, which also affects the approach ban. The attached Jeppesen Briefing Bulletin from 2015 was written by Ted Thompson, Jeppesen's former Direct of Standards and Corporate Technical Lead. I worked with Ted a number of years in various FAA and industry groups. Ted was able to explain how Jeppesen came to charting the DA/MDA minima on their charts. Rich Briefing_Bulletin_JEP_15A_Aerodrome_Operating_Minimums_Web_Version.pdf

Yep I believe most school house want *first* to emphasize to young pilots the conceptual difference between non precision approaches (2D Apps) and precision approaches, where for ages everybody did the same way, ie dive to the MDA and maintain it until the missed approach point. The schools don't want pilots to confuse between approach types and may teach [the traditional] different techniques to make the pilot behavior help differentiate APPs types. I would bet it's a pedagogical approach rather than a complete course an all the developing stories on how to fly an approach with CDFA to MDA + addendum. Then later in the airlines, and depending on SOP and budget, the CDFA may be seen as a supplementary technique to teach in order to bring commonalty of operation for all approach types, but the aware pilot still is able to discern between the various approach categories. Maybe just reassure them that you have perfectly understood the underlayin concept... and nevertheless will apply CDFA techniques. Also, in accordance with the evolution of flying techniques, private providers and State chart depictions may differ for the same approaches. Approach_minimums_LIDO_Jeppesen.pdf

As I understand it, the engines never suspend consumption from the mains--they feed *only* from the main tanks, never directly from the aux tanks. Though the collector tanks are physically located in the aux tank, they remain functional components of the main tank system, in that they only receive fuel from the mains. As long as a main tank is below 93% full, the aux tank feeds the main tank to maintain the level at 93%. Once a main drops to 93%, the main quantity will remain constant and the aux level will drop. It will appear that the engines are burning from the aux tank, but in reality the engines are burning from the mains and that fuel is being simultaneously replaced in the main tank from the aux tank ejector xfer pumps. Regards Bob

Is anyone else having this same type of issue with offline services? I am encountering a differential when using offline ATC. (Pilot2ATC)

Okay folks that’s enough, stay on topic and stop with the ad hominem please.

FWIW, the same altitude discrepancy issue exists for users of Pilot2ATC, not just vatsim and pilotedge. Would be great to have a way to handle for those users as well as true online networks.