NACO and Jepp

[dmccormack]

(I searched and didn't find an existing thread -- but perhaps there has been one I missed...)

I'm building up a huge pile of NACO approach books -- have more than enough for training, etc.

Jepp's revision service is sounding better and betetr -- and may be less costly in the long run.

Thoughts?

What do you do with old approach books?

Anyone switch to Jepp for this same reason?

 

[tonycondon]

ive always that that a bonfire at the airport with nothing but expired sectionals, far/aims, approach plates, AFDs, etc would be a fun time.

 

[Trapper John]

ive always that that a bonfire at the airport with nothing but expired sectionals, far/aims, approach plates, AFDs, etc would be a fun time.

Hmmm...maybe someone could make a biofuel from all that stuff that could power a homebuilt something or other. :wink2:


Trapper John

 

[poadeleted20]

I still prefer NACO because it's significantly cheaper and the coverage is easier to customize by area. It's particularly cheaper and easier to obtain extra coverage when going out of my subscribed area. And we recycle -- right in there with the newspapers.

 

[dmccormack]

I still prefer NACO because it's significantly cheaper and the coverage is easier to customize by area. It's particularly cheaper and easier to obtain extra coverage when going out of my subscribed area. And we recycle -- right in there with the newspapers.

Yeah -- I've found them more flexible as well. Also, you can't beat free download and print!

But those Jepp binders look so cool old school...


Our area is very bad about recycling.... I might have to fly them out to LNS where they actually do recycling!

 

[Ted]

Somehow, I'm not sure exactly about the environmental benefit of flying to LNS for the sole purpose of recycling...

But somehow, I don't think that was the point.

I, too, love Jepp books. I also like the Jepp format. However, the third option (which is not only earth-friendly but cost-effective) is the Air Chart Systems setup. I just got mine in the mail today. I first was exposed to it when visiting Ames, as they had it for the 421. For $400, you get your sectionals and approach plates for the year for the entire lower 48. These are updated by them mailing you the NOTAMs, and you have to make the corrections yourself. Much more environmentally friendly.

You can order smaller sets, but I figured I might as well get the whole country. I have this weird habit of flying all over at the last minute, and it was not uncommon for me to do last-minute orders from Sporty's for charts that I needed for some part of the country I've never been to before. I liked this solution since it has everything.

 

[flyersfan31]

I used to be a confirmed NACO user, 'til I got the Jepp subscription with the Matrix. Man - the low altitude charts are superior! I had no idea what I was missing. The plates are superior too (although the newer NACO ones have really closed the gap). Plus, as Dan says, the Jepp binder is very old-school cool.

Since you can download NACO for free, I still use them in a pinch. I don't like AirCharts for IFR enroute, but I do use them for VFR. Just keep the book in the plane and I'm golden.

 

[HPNPilot1200]

I second everything Andrew mentioned. The Jeppesen enroute charts are superior. The latest NACO charts are much closer to the Jeppesen format than they used to be. The Briefing Strip concept exists on both charts, but I like how Jepp formats minima increases (tabular form below profile view) unlike NACO which notes the increases in the notes at the top and expects you to add correctly in hard IMC or whatever the circumstance may be.

The one thing I really like about the NACO charts that Jepp doesn't have is the mini airport diagram in the lower right hand corner with an arrow that shows the final approach course as it relates to the runway configuration. This is really helpful for those approaches that are considered straight in (aligned within 30º of the runway), but approach the runway at an angle (25º, etc).

I am really okay with either, but prefer the Jeppesen if I had to chose. Fortunately I am fluent in both formats so I can easily print off the NACO charts for an airport if I need to.

 

[midlifeflyer]

I agree with most of the pro-Jepp comments. But for me it's not the en routes so much. I do like the Jepp en routes better but don't find them that much superior to the NACO.

For me it's the plan view on the Jepp that makes the biggest difference. I find the Jepp plan view much, much, easier to use than the NACO. That's a major difference for me and the way I read a chart and brief an approach.

I use both. I'm cheap and I use NACO downloads as sort of a self-made update service to my Jepp charts.

Price-wise, I've heard that which ends up actually being cheaper depends on where you fly. I'm in a pretty expensive area for Jepp - a state on the the edge of Jepp's choices of state combinations. I would need 3-4 Jepp Express sets to include a reasonable flight area. Jepp talked about being able to get custom subscriptions - pick your states - at one time, but it never happened. Probably too small a market segment to make it worthwhile.

 

[Ted]

Bit of an update. This past weekend I did my first trip with the AirChart Systems charts. We ended up using both the VFR and IFR charts. The IFR charts were the primary use, since we were on filed flight plans most of the time. The VFR charts were used when I had my electrical failure and we then navigated via (mostly) pilotage back to Williamsport, about a 200 nm trip from where we were.

The charts are somewhat cumbersome, as you have to flip pages fairly frequenly on long trips. Also, lines aren't necessarily continuous and pages don't line up perfectly, so finding the airway that you're on can be difficult. Like anything else, it takes some getting used to, but after about 13 hours of flying with them, I'm enjoying them more and more.

 

[sky1949]

I only fly about 5-8 hours per year IFR, plus hood time to keep current; so take that into consideration. However, I debated this issue for awhile, until I realized that the only answer to the queston is what suits ME best. ctually, I liked the NACO enroute charts and the Jepp terminal charts, for awhile. However, considering the amount of time I flew IFR, and the cost, I eventually went with NACO all the way. The free online update ability is a big plus for the NACO terminal charts, although I still find no other reason to prefer it to the Jepp ones. (Actually, I use the AirCharts booklet for enroute charts, which are simply copies of the NACO charts.. It's a very convenient way to have all the charts available at a reasonable price). Botom line...choose what you like best given your preferences as to understandibility and necessity.

 

[dmccormack]

I only fly about 5-8 hours per year IFR, plus hood time to keep current; so take that into consideration. However, I debated this issue for awhile, until I realized that the only answer to the queston is what suits ME best. ctually, I liked the NACO enroute charts and the Jepp terminal charts, for awhile. However, considering the amount of time I flew IFR, and the cost, I eventually went with NACO all the way. The free online update ability is a big plus for the NACO terminal charts, although I still find no other reason to prefer it to the Jepp ones. (Actually, I use the AirCharts booklet for enroute charts, which are simply copies of the NACO charts.. It's a very convenient way to have all the charts available at a reasonable price). Botom line...choose what you like best given your preferences as to understandibility and necessity.

If you're looking to economize, the best deal in IFR flying is the IFR Low Altitude Enroute Chart.

Whole country for $8