Others have posted links to the FAA's website where these raster charts can be downloaded. But did you know that the US Government also used to make this kind of data available in a structured computer-readable format called DAFIF[1]? You could (I did) write a parser that chewed through these files and produced most of the information contained on these charts yourself, render them as vector graphics, and do all kinds of exciting aviation data mining on them. It was worldwide, too, not limited to the US. Sadly the NGA ended publication of this format in 2006 citing vague intellectual property issues. For a brief, beautiful moment, though, you could build your own electronic charts.
Awesome. I'll have to check it out--wonder if the raw data is freely available and the format is documented. You can tell my knowledge of the state of the art is 15 years old.
This is awesome, it's such a shame they don't make this available anymore. The act of flying has plenty of great public data, but sadly the charts are bit anachronistic in that sense.
My absolute guess is it comes from the Digital Chart Supplement data published here[1]. Notably this supplement does not contain things like airspace boundaries, airways, obstructions, and so on which would be required to produce a useful sectional chart. This is more like the kind of data that you'd use to print your own Airport Facility Directory.
If you play flight sims it's a lot of fun planning and then actually flying to a new destination using only those paper charts (or Skyvector as indicated by another commenter). No GPS or in-game maps allowed, just use your compass, clock, radionavigation and possibly visual landmarks like the old days.
Then try that at night or during a storm for a even more intense challenge.
I remember flying VOR radials in Microsoft Flight Simulator 5.1, released in 1995. It came with a printed Pilot's Handbook [1] that included IFR procedures, explained how navaids work, and included various sectional charts.
At this point, full global navaid and aerodrome databases are almost at the table-stakes level for hardcore flight simuation. You might well have a fully-functioning flight planning system that has all the approaches and an autopilot that will fly them in coupled mode.
The simbrief and navigraph integrations directly into the working title Garmin avionics is amazing. I can link my flight plan easily and see charts on the screen in the glass cockpit in VR. And if I'm flying steam gauge I can have a VR overlay located near my lap that is like having an iPad with Foreflight on my kneeboard.
That's why it's so rewarding to learn how to do all this the manual way. I started playing with the G1000 which basically did everything via GPS, then I tried some older planes which required the use of separate charts and VOR.
Also, the sims can introduce error and distance matters (too far away and you won't receive the VORs signal --- mountain in the way, you won't get the signal). Like in a real plane.
These resources, particularly in machine-readable format, have been invaluable for the simulator community, and for simulated ATC in particular.
For an example, check out https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vlauVZ_5Le0, a virtual controller operating a chunk of New York airspace. As he moves around the screen (for example, around 21:30), you can see he has various fixes displayed. Those will be important fixes from various approaches, and their coördinates will be coming from machine-readable data, ultimately (in the US, at least) coming from the FAA.
All of this is possible thanks to these materials, as products of the U.S. Government, not being subject to copyright in the United States.
I will say, one important thing that's missing is publicly-available mappings of three-dimensional airspace (latitude, longitude, and altitude) to ATC sectors, and mappings of ATC sectors to frequencies. If you had that, you could (for example) look at your flight's location (in FlightAware or the ADS-B Exchange), work out the likely frequency for the airspace, and (if it's available) listen to your flight on LiveATC).
Source: Was a VATSIM controller, controlling up to & including Indianapolis Center.
The nice thing with the digital charts is you can print out a cut up bit of your cross country, scribble it all full of notes and frequencies, and chuck that page of the flight behind you when it is no longer relevant. A nice, zoomed in sectional and entirely disposable.
Because batteries die, stuff overheats and shit hits the fan, sometimes. I always carry backup paper charts even if I am flying with a EFB and a glass cockpit.
personally I carry a second efb (eg. my phone) and spare power banks rather than try to deal with a mess of paper charts. it's certainly cheaper than trying to keep my sectionals up to date (which, now that I think about it, I don't think I've actually bought since I took my private checkride).
Yeah as much as I love the graphic design of VFR sectionals, I have to admit it’s an end of an era of sorts. ForeFlight etc. with proper backup devices have the entire database at your fingerprints at all times. And it’s a good thing, anything that makes GA easier/safer is a welcome change.
ever heard of software bugs and gps jammers? Your second EFB idea is still having a common point of failure, the E.F.B. And being a software engineer, I really do not trust software. :)
GPS availability for the tablet/phone is a nice-to-have and not absolutely necessary for using an EFB. Intentional GPS jamming by the military happens from time to time in many parts of the US (esp. Socal) and it doesn't prevent people from using EFBs.
Personally, I fly with two EFB apps on my ipad and a backup on a separate device. The avionics in the airplane is probably a lot more robust than either device as well.
Having ff on an ipad and phone is really not having a “common point of failure”
You do you, but I find relying on a second device (third really, the plane has gps and nav radios) and battery backups much easier than buying a new chart supplement and a bunch of charts every 2 months. Plus I have all the approach plates for every airport …
trying to duplicate the functionality that I get from my setup with paper charts and plates is just practical.
> Having ff on an ipad and phone is really not having a “common point of failure”
The “common point of failure” is GPS, which does have regular local/regional outages. Your instruments may be able to use VOR/DMEs, and hopefully you're able to use the VOR MON:
MON just means that there are a certain number of VORs that aren't going to be decommissioned. it's not a different kind of VOR. and they're decommissioning all of these VORs precisely because GPS is so reliable.
Having the same software app running on two devices is still subject to any faults in that software package (or their compilation of their database). I think it’s fair to call that a common point of failure.
You can judge that failure mode to be unlikely, of course, but you’re still making a judgment about an uncertainty.
For me, I do that too. The tablet is my primary and tied to my stratux for ADSB/weather/GPS for navigation and awareness.
Having a list of frequencies and VOR settings on the old junk I use, a marked up map is really handy. I like doing a loop around MSP (KFCM > KLVN > KSGS > KSTP > KANE > KMIC > KFCM) so a lot of frequency jumps. You can see what the EFB is more or less going to look like - so a sharpie on paper to supplement a 7" screen helps. Especially at night when everything is harder to read.
I truly believe aviation, mostly general, is one of the things the U.S. does best, by far. I have no idea if other countries have these kinds of charts available to the public, printed or digitally (I assume many do) but combined with the relative freedom you have to fly as a regular private citizen and the sheer # of public airports, it's amazing. I highly recommend a demo to anyone who can afford it and has even a passing interesting.
When I was learning to fly, I loved combing over these VFR sectionals. Hell, I still do!
Sadly, the WAC (world aeronautical chart, 1:1,000,000) is no longer available digitally or printed. Great map for a wall, just for casual planning and what ifs, for real and wannabe pilots alike.
The TAC (terminal area chart, 1:250,000). These are only available for congested areas.
All three are VFR charts sharing the same (or similar) legend.
From one of the examples in the article:
http://airnav.com/
click on the airports tab. Enter KATL then enter. Scroll down about 3/4 of the way (or search for jedi) and to the right you'll see pages 1 and 2 of the JJEDI THREE standard terminal arrival. In general, when your airline flight starts to descend, it's starting an arrival transition (from enroute to terminal). These are a bit more text oriented than terminal arrivals, essentially containing just speeds and altitudes at specific way points, so that ATC doesn't have to keep repeating the same arrival instructions to everyone.
Anyway, you do not need to download the entire TPP booklet for a region to find IAPs, SIDs, and STARs, you can navigate to an airport on airnav.com and they have individual "plates" kindof an archaic term today but no doubt at one time these were metal plates, rolled with ink, and pressed onto paper, before desktop publishing came along and turned everything into PDF.
This is a nice website, however there are factual inaccuracies and watered down information. For example, "Visual Flight Rules” (VFR) apply when there is generally good visibility, and features on the ground can be discerned by the pilot." Well, NO. There are speciifc requirements. 14 CFR § 91.155, states (in the worst case scenario) you need 3 statute miles of visibility; 500 feet below, 1000 feet above 1 statute mile horizontal separation from clouds. The previous limits are dependent on the airspace type you are in.
But it is nothing like, yeah, looks about right, so we can fly with VFR. Best case scenario, your wings will be clipped, at least for a while; worst case scenario, you will get a headstone earlier than you should have and your next of kin would be sued for damages.
I think “good visibility” is fine for a general audience. Having a detailed definition for pilots is necessary; explaining those details to the layperson isn’t.
I can relate to the author's story about discovering his dad's charts as a kid and being fascinated by them. I'd forgotten how much I poured over those things, especially with how dense they are. I'm sort of prompted to visit an FBO and grab some expired charts for my kids. (Do FBOs even still have that stuff just lying around? It has been decades.)
I feel like this is going to get me on a list since they're likely classified military data, but I've always wanted to see modern submarine charts (not cables). Mostly for the notation and aesthetics and whether it differs from nautical charts.
There is (was?) a shop in Washington DC that sells/sold these OTC. A pleasure to browse. I had a North Atlantic chart that I'd pass to cabin crew, and pilots would chart the flight. I had quite a collection of flights on that chart. Dates & names.
9 months ago I wrote a data pipeline to clip the ttp maps to their “neet line”. Pretty fun project. This was so our mapping software would allow users to toggle visibility of different legends or change the opacity of different legends.
1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DAFIF