No Charts OK

[tgrayson]

Years ago, on another aviation forum, an FAA Inspector provided a letter to the members demonstrating that there were no regulations requiring most Part 91 operators to carry charts on the aircraft and it was against FAA policy to violate anyone for the lack of charts or expired charts. Interestingly, the almost identical text now appears on the NACO site under the FAQ's. I wonder how it got there?

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)

1. 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:
2. "You can carry old charts in your aircraft." "It is not FAA policy to violate anyone for having outdated charts in the aircraft."
3. "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."
4. ..."since some pilots thought they could be violated for having outdated or no charts on board during a flight, we need to clarify an important issue.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.
5. ..."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.
6. "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."

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.

[Doug Taylor]

Depends on your FOM.

[tgrayson]

Originally Posted by Doug Taylor

Depends on your FOM.

This doesn't pertain to Part 121, 135, etc.

[MidlifeFlyer]

Good post and good find.

There are two provisos. One is at the very end of the material you posted from NACO:

"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."

Lack of current charts has been used in that very way, as in this NTSB case from 1996 in which a VFR pilot took off from Norwood MA without VFR charts and busted the Boston Class B airspace. The pilot tried to argue that he knew he was near the Class B and repeatedly tried to contact ATC, so the FAA should go easy on him. No dice. From the NTSB opinion upholding a 90-day suspension:

==============================
We agree with the law judge that this was egregious conduct for any pilot. Taking off without necessary familiarization and without proper charts into an obviously congested airspace such as the Boston area, and continuing the flight after failing to obtain a clearance obviously justified a finding of carelessness, at a minimum. Even an assumption that further FAA tapes would show that respondent made multiple attempts to reach ATC would not lessen the seriousness of his actions.
==============================

The second proviso involves ramp checks. The GA Inspector manual that FAA inspectors use for ramp checks tells the inspector to check for current charts. I'd bet that some inspectors =think= it's a violation if you don't have them.

[tgrayson]

Originally Posted by MidlifeFlyer

Lack of current charts has been used in that very way

And that seems fair. If you think you don't need charts, you'd better be right.

Originally Posted by MidlifeFlyer

The GA Inspector manual that FAA inspectors use for ramp checks tells the inspector to check for current charts. I'd bet that some inspectors =think= it's a violation if you don't have them.

I suspect so too. I'm not sure how widely promulgated the "No charts" thing is. I had posted the letter on my flight school bulletin board years ago. An FAA Inspector saw it and had it removed. She never said anything to me about it, but has been very unfriendly since. Someone else had to tell me why. I hate the idea that you need to keep people ignorant in order to make them behave as you wish. Telling people that you don't have to have charts is not the same as telling them that you should not carry charts.

[nosehair]

Originally Posted by tgrayson

Telling people that you don't have to have charts is not the same as telling them that you should not carry charts.

But it almost is. Given the current level of self-discipline that I see in most young folks today, (boy, does that sound familiar) some folks may take that as an excuse to not have current charts when they need them.

I make that information available to individual students whom have demonstrated enough maturity to know that they are responsible for EVERYTHING as is stated by 91.3. And that they are responsible to know EVERYTHING as is stated by 91.103.

As long as that is covered, you don't need to have current charts just because you think there is a reg requiring it like there is to have the airworthiness on board.

...and on a side note, having a current chart shows evidence of some compliance with 91.103. Not having a current chart would put the burden of evidence on you to show that you know what should be known from that chart. Now the FAA can accept or reject your evidence that you know what's on and not on the chart. Do you want to be there?

I really like seperating 'required' from 'recommended', but I have also found that some persons just will not do anything unless it is 'required'. They do not have a sense of 'community' - doing what's best for the community. They are so self-centered, they think they are the only ones in the sky and only they can determine what they think they need to do, without regard for the consequences sufferd by others.

[MidlifeFlyer]

Originally Posted by nosehair

But it almost is. Given the current level of self-discipline that I see in most young folks today, (boy, does that sound familiar) some folks may take that as an excuse to not have current charts when they need them.

I make that information available to individual students whom have demonstrated enough maturity to know that they are responsible for EVERYTHING as is stated by 91.3. And that they are responsible to know EVERYTHING as is stated by 91.103.

I'm sorry but that sounds an awful like "I withhold certain knowledge from my students for the reason that knowledge only encourages bad behavior."

Of course, you may feel that way. I know a lot of people do on a wide variety of subjects ("sex education encourages promiscuity" is a popular variation), but it's a bit too authoritarian for my tastes.

But, I guess, after all, you could say about young folks today that they

"...love luxury; they have bad manners, contempt for authority; they show disrespect for elders and love chatter in place of exercise. Children are now tyrants, not the servants of their households. They no longer rise when elders enter the room. They contradict their parents, chatter before company, gobble up dainties at the table, cross their legs, and tyrannize their teachers."

[tgrayson]

Originally Posted by MidlifeFlyer

"...love luxury; they have bad manners, contempt for authority; they show disrespect for elders and love chatter in place of exercise. Children are now tyrants, not the servants of their households. They no longer rise when elders enter the room. They contradict their parents, chatter before company, gobble up dainties at the table, cross their legs, and tyrannize their teachers."

Ah, Socrates. I've been looking for that quote for years, but didn't have any key words to search for.

[MidlifeFlyer]

Glad to oblige. Although apparently there's a "dispute" over whether Socrates actually said it or whether it's only that Plato said Socrates said it.

[nosehair]

Originally Posted by MidlifeFlyer

I'm sorry but that sounds an awful like "I withhold certain knowledge from my students for the reason that knowledge only encourages bad behavior."

It also sounds like "I withhold certain knowledge from my students until they are ready to receive that knowledge."

Yes, it is your responsibility, as an instructor, to feed the student at the rate he is capable of absorbing the information.

You cannot tell little children that they are free individuals who are protected by the constitution to do anything they want to.

First, they have to learn some basic rules and accepted practices and learn to be a part of the community. Nobody is free to act on their own will. We all are in the same boat and must learn to work together.

Students are not robots that only receive technical programming. They are humans full of human error and it is the instructor's job to mentor/monitor that human factor in education.

[tgrayson]

Originally Posted by MidlifeFlyer

Glad to oblige. Although apparently there's a "dispute" over whether Socrates actually said it or whether it's only that Plato said Socrates said it.

Or whether Socrates' existence was a figment of Plato's imagination.

[E6BAV8R]

Ahh Socrates... I'm still contemplating whether or not he helped anyone

Anyway, back to the topic!

[fish314]

Originally Posted by E6BAV8R

Ahh Socrates... I'm still contemplating whether or not he helped anyone

Anyway, back to the topic!

He sure helped those kids from San Dimas High School, in California, do well on their history project and kept the band Wild Stallions (random guitar noises) together.