What does the “DO NOT USE FOR NAVIGATION” indication mean?

The name of the pictureThe name of the pictureThe name of the pictureClash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP

up vote
26
down vote

favorite

1

Sometimes when I’m browsing IAC charts online I find a “DO NOT USE FOR NAVIGATION” notice printed on the chart. Not always though.

For example, have a look at the chart for Queenstown RNAV (RNP) Y RWY 05.
See the notice there?

Queenstown RNAV (RNP) Y RWY 05

I have always wondered why do procedure designers put these notices on their charts. I find it almost contradictory, since I think these charts are the best source of information that an aircrew can have to navigate/maneuver. Isn’t it ironic?

I’m sure I must be missing something.

Can anybody shed some light on this?

PS: These are not SIM charts. These are real charts from the AIP.

share|improve this question

  • 17

    I suspect these notices appear on the online versions of charts, because the online versions are not guaranteed accurate. The notice probably doesn’t appear on the paper version.
    – DJClayworth
    Nov 29 at 16:48

  • 4

    Can’t say authoritatively as I’m not familiar with NZ rules but in the US, IFR charts are published every 28 days, thus any chart older than that would be ‘Not for navigation’. This one was effective 9 Nov 17. Also, redaining the NZ AIP web site disclaimer, the charts are for ‘personal use’. This approach is restricted in that it requires GE Aviation approval as well as CANNZ RNP-AR approval. Basically, this is a PBN RNAV approach for airliners with a GE Aviation FMS. So there’s no real reason to keep a valid copy on the web site since most of the public can’t use it.
    – Gerry
    Nov 29 at 17:06

  • 2

    It means that you shouldn’t use it for navigation.
    – Richard
    Dec 1 at 17:44

  • Queenstown NZ is an interesting area – as you can tell from the chart! youtube.com/watch?v=7mxmFCw-Dig nose video of a landing.
    – Criggie
    Dec 1 at 18:30

up vote
26
down vote

favorite

1

Sometimes when I’m browsing IAC charts online I find a “DO NOT USE FOR NAVIGATION” notice printed on the chart. Not always though.

For example, have a look at the chart for Queenstown RNAV (RNP) Y RWY 05.
See the notice there?

Queenstown RNAV (RNP) Y RWY 05

I have always wondered why do procedure designers put these notices on their charts. I find it almost contradictory, since I think these charts are the best source of information that an aircrew can have to navigate/maneuver. Isn’t it ironic?

I’m sure I must be missing something.

Can anybody shed some light on this?

PS: These are not SIM charts. These are real charts from the AIP.

share|improve this question

  • 17

    I suspect these notices appear on the online versions of charts, because the online versions are not guaranteed accurate. The notice probably doesn’t appear on the paper version.
    – DJClayworth
    Nov 29 at 16:48

  • 4

    Can’t say authoritatively as I’m not familiar with NZ rules but in the US, IFR charts are published every 28 days, thus any chart older than that would be ‘Not for navigation’. This one was effective 9 Nov 17. Also, redaining the NZ AIP web site disclaimer, the charts are for ‘personal use’. This approach is restricted in that it requires GE Aviation approval as well as CANNZ RNP-AR approval. Basically, this is a PBN RNAV approach for airliners with a GE Aviation FMS. So there’s no real reason to keep a valid copy on the web site since most of the public can’t use it.
    – Gerry
    Nov 29 at 17:06

  • 2

    It means that you shouldn’t use it for navigation.
    – Richard
    Dec 1 at 17:44

  • Queenstown NZ is an interesting area – as you can tell from the chart! youtube.com/watch?v=7mxmFCw-Dig nose video of a landing.
    – Criggie
    Dec 1 at 18:30

up vote
26
down vote

favorite

1

up vote
26
down vote

favorite

1
1

Sometimes when I’m browsing IAC charts online I find a “DO NOT USE FOR NAVIGATION” notice printed on the chart. Not always though.

For example, have a look at the chart for Queenstown RNAV (RNP) Y RWY 05.
See the notice there?

Queenstown RNAV (RNP) Y RWY 05

I have always wondered why do procedure designers put these notices on their charts. I find it almost contradictory, since I think these charts are the best source of information that an aircrew can have to navigate/maneuver. Isn’t it ironic?

I’m sure I must be missing something.

Can anybody shed some light on this?

PS: These are not SIM charts. These are real charts from the AIP.

share|improve this question

Sometimes when I’m browsing IAC charts online I find a “DO NOT USE FOR NAVIGATION” notice printed on the chart. Not always though.

For example, have a look at the chart for Queenstown RNAV (RNP) Y RWY 05.
See the notice there?

Queenstown RNAV (RNP) Y RWY 05

I have always wondered why do procedure designers put these notices on their charts. I find it almost contradictory, since I think these charts are the best source of information that an aircrew can have to navigate/maneuver. Isn’t it ironic?

I’m sure I must be missing something.

Can anybody shed some light on this?

PS: These are not SIM charts. These are real charts from the AIP.

aeronautical-charts

share|improve this question

share|improve this question

share|improve this question

share|improve this question

edited Nov 30 at 9:36

asked Nov 29 at 16:12

codeaviator

348415

348415

  • 17

    I suspect these notices appear on the online versions of charts, because the online versions are not guaranteed accurate. The notice probably doesn’t appear on the paper version.
    – DJClayworth
    Nov 29 at 16:48

  • 4

    Can’t say authoritatively as I’m not familiar with NZ rules but in the US, IFR charts are published every 28 days, thus any chart older than that would be ‘Not for navigation’. This one was effective 9 Nov 17. Also, redaining the NZ AIP web site disclaimer, the charts are for ‘personal use’. This approach is restricted in that it requires GE Aviation approval as well as CANNZ RNP-AR approval. Basically, this is a PBN RNAV approach for airliners with a GE Aviation FMS. So there’s no real reason to keep a valid copy on the web site since most of the public can’t use it.
    – Gerry
    Nov 29 at 17:06

  • 2

    It means that you shouldn’t use it for navigation.
    – Richard
    Dec 1 at 17:44

  • Queenstown NZ is an interesting area – as you can tell from the chart! youtube.com/watch?v=7mxmFCw-Dig nose video of a landing.
    – Criggie
    Dec 1 at 18:30

  • 17

    I suspect these notices appear on the online versions of charts, because the online versions are not guaranteed accurate. The notice probably doesn’t appear on the paper version.
    – DJClayworth
    Nov 29 at 16:48

  • 4

    Can’t say authoritatively as I’m not familiar with NZ rules but in the US, IFR charts are published every 28 days, thus any chart older than that would be ‘Not for navigation’. This one was effective 9 Nov 17. Also, redaining the NZ AIP web site disclaimer, the charts are for ‘personal use’. This approach is restricted in that it requires GE Aviation approval as well as CANNZ RNP-AR approval. Basically, this is a PBN RNAV approach for airliners with a GE Aviation FMS. So there’s no real reason to keep a valid copy on the web site since most of the public can’t use it.
    – Gerry
    Nov 29 at 17:06

  • 2

    It means that you shouldn’t use it for navigation.
    – Richard
    Dec 1 at 17:44

  • Queenstown NZ is an interesting area – as you can tell from the chart! youtube.com/watch?v=7mxmFCw-Dig nose video of a landing.
    – Criggie
    Dec 1 at 18:30

17

17

I suspect these notices appear on the online versions of charts, because the online versions are not guaranteed accurate. The notice probably doesn’t appear on the paper version.
– DJClayworth
Nov 29 at 16:48

I suspect these notices appear on the online versions of charts, because the online versions are not guaranteed accurate. The notice probably doesn’t appear on the paper version.
– DJClayworth
Nov 29 at 16:48

4

4

Can’t say authoritatively as I’m not familiar with NZ rules but in the US, IFR charts are published every 28 days, thus any chart older than that would be ‘Not for navigation’. This one was effective 9 Nov 17. Also, redaining the NZ AIP web site disclaimer, the charts are for ‘personal use’. This approach is restricted in that it requires GE Aviation approval as well as CANNZ RNP-AR approval. Basically, this is a PBN RNAV approach for airliners with a GE Aviation FMS. So there’s no real reason to keep a valid copy on the web site since most of the public can’t use it.
– Gerry
Nov 29 at 17:06

Can’t say authoritatively as I’m not familiar with NZ rules but in the US, IFR charts are published every 28 days, thus any chart older than that would be ‘Not for navigation’. This one was effective 9 Nov 17. Also, redaining the NZ AIP web site disclaimer, the charts are for ‘personal use’. This approach is restricted in that it requires GE Aviation approval as well as CANNZ RNP-AR approval. Basically, this is a PBN RNAV approach for airliners with a GE Aviation FMS. So there’s no real reason to keep a valid copy on the web site since most of the public can’t use it.
– Gerry
Nov 29 at 17:06

2

2

It means that you shouldn’t use it for navigation.
– Richard
Dec 1 at 17:44

It means that you shouldn’t use it for navigation.
– Richard
Dec 1 at 17:44

Queenstown NZ is an interesting area – as you can tell from the chart! youtube.com/watch?v=7mxmFCw-Dig nose video of a landing.
– Criggie
Dec 1 at 18:30

Queenstown NZ is an interesting area – as you can tell from the chart! youtube.com/watch?v=7mxmFCw-Dig nose video of a landing.
– Criggie
Dec 1 at 18:30

7 Answers
7

active

oldest

votes

up vote
35
down vote

Unless it’s an obsoleted procedure chart, it usually means that it’s not complete. The example you show has only the features pertinent to that approach, and its missing (for clarity) the features needed for any other aviation in that area.

You must use a sufficiently complete chart for navigation; the approach diagram is supplementary to your navigation chart.

share|improve this answer

  • 1

    What exactly you find missing and which is present at other approach plates to the very same aerodrome like aip.net.nz/pdf/NZQN_43.1_43.2.pdf ? What kind of navigation would you expect from an IFR approach plate?
    – Vladimir F
    Nov 29 at 22:39

up vote
28
down vote

When an aviation chart is marked with “DO NOT USE FOR NAVIGATION”, it means that … umm … it should not be used for navigation.

The question is why it should not be, because it appears that the chart/map is very accurate and hence it is thought that it can provide details for navigation.

There are several reasons:

  • A newer version might be available and hence making older versions obsolete.
  • It may not be according to scale and can cause confusion.
  • It may not show air routes.

On the contrary, a chart can be used for navigation when it has the following (yes, AOPA said it):

  • topographic features
  • hazards and obstructions
  • navigation routes and aids
  • airspace
  • airports
share|improve this answer

  • 1

    If these reasons are true, why the RNAV RNP approach has it, but the VOR DME approach chart aip.net.nz/pdf/NZQN_43.1_43.2.pdf ?
    – Vladimir F
    Nov 29 at 22:37

up vote
10
down vote

In some countries, administrative and legal reasons require that label, because maps officially usable for navigation may need

  • process used for completion including various warranties, for example:

    • included map layers collected from their respective sources can be no more than 3 months old

    • the map got reviews and approvals prescribed by the process – all documented, with clear responsibilities

    • by adhering with the process, the map received official certification and then catalogization etc.

The same company can produce ad-hoc maps from similar sources, of similar quality which still did not go through the entire (quite expensive) process and therefore they are mandatorily marked as “DO NOT USE FOR NAVIGATION” which is also connected to various legal implications.

So such a label might not inevitably mean that the map is missing something. Even after closer look, it can appear 100% complete. But it should not be used as official navigation aid. For example, if an insurance event will occur where navigation can be at least slightly involved (or even theoretically), finding out that such a map was used for navigating will give aces into hands of the insurance company.

share|improve this answer

    up vote
    8
    down vote

    I do not believe the reasons stated in other answers. The only difference between this approach plate http://www.aip.net.nz/pdf/NZQN_45.1_45.2.pdf and other approach plates for the very same aerodrome in the same AIP like

    http://www.aip.net.nz/pdf/NZQN_43.1_43.2.pdf

    or

    http://www.aip.net.nz/pdf/NZQN_45.3_45.4.pdf (also RNAV, but RNAV GNSS, not RNP)

    is the type of the approach. The level of details of the map, for example, is exactly the same.

    One needs special equipment and a special approval for this approach and cannot just fly it according to the map or select it in a normal Garmin.

    The plate misses something important and it is NOT the details of the map. These are the actual minima to be used for the approach (I do not get what other navigation some suggest other than the approach for which the map only exists…). Notice the important notice: Minima figures are indicative only. See CAANZ RNP-AR operator approval for specific procedure minima.

    So this approach plate is not enough, more information is needed to properly perform the approach. Not to do other unspecified navigation, no-one would do that, but to fly the approach (or the associated missed approach procedure).

    share|improve this answer

      up vote
      5
      down vote

      In addition to the other excellent answers, because the publisher expects to be compensated for creating the charts. In other words, they don’t want you downloading free stuff, they want to sell you approach plates needed for actual flight. They put this tag on any print or electronic version promulgated for training or general reference.

      share|improve this answer

      • Right, in addition the publisher is not the CAA itself, but a private company Aeropath, owned by Airways New Zealand, the national ANSP. They have obviously an agreement.
        – mins
        Dec 2 at 18:21

      up vote
      4
      down vote

      The simple answer is that the chart is or will become outdated. As a pilot you need to have current charts when flying.

      The marking shows that the publisher does not take any responsibility for the currency or accuracy of the free chart found on internet or in training material.

      You can buy sets of current charts and subscribe to updates to always have a current set. Not to promote this here, but one example of company selling charts is Jeppesen. http://ww1.jeppesen.com/documents/aviation/business/ifr-paper-services/glossary-legends.pdf

      share|improve this answer

        up vote
        0
        down vote

        The really simple answer is that the chart does not contain everything a pilot needs to know to navigate safely. That could be because it is missing features for clarity, is a training tool, or, as is this case for Queenstown, because pilots must have additional certifications in advance. It is very rarely because a chart is out-of-date since why would anyone update a chart that is out of date?

        Whatever the reason for the warning, a chart with this prohibition on it is intended to be used to assist a pilot who already knows whatever it is they need to know (as highlighted on this one with the text boxes in the lower left corner), but can not be used safely by anybody who does not already know how to navigate here.

        share|improve this answer

          Your Answer

          StackExchange.ifUsing(“editor”, function () {
          return StackExchange.using(“mathjaxEditing”, function () {
          StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
          StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [[“$”, “$”], [“\\(“,”\\)”]]);
          });
          });
          }, “mathjax-editing”);

          StackExchange.ready(function() {
          var channelOptions = {
          tags: “”.split(” “),
          id: “528”
          };
          initTagRenderer(“”.split(” “), “”.split(” “), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using(“externalEditor”, function() {
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
          StackExchange.using(“snippets”, function() {
          createEditor();
          });
          }
          else {
          createEditor();
          }
          });

          function createEditor() {
          StackExchange.prepareEditor({
          heartbeatType: ‘answer’,
          convertImagesToLinks: false,
          noModals: true,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: null,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: “”,
          imageUploader: {
          brandingHtml: “Powered by u003ca class=”icon-imgur-white” href=”https://imgur.com/”u003eu003c/au003e”,
          contentPolicyHtml: “User contributions licensed under u003ca href=”https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/”u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href=”https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy”u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e”,
          allowUrls: true
          },
          noCode: true, onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: “.discard-answer”
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          });

          }
          });

          draft saved
          draft discarded

          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin(‘.new-post-login’, ‘https%3a%2f%2faviation.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f57547%2fwhat-does-the-do-not-use-for-navigation-indication-mean%23new-answer’, ‘question_page’);
          }
          );

          Post as a guest

          Required, but never shown

          7 Answers
          7

          active

          oldest

          votes

          7 Answers
          7

          active

          oldest

          votes

          active

          oldest

          votes

          active

          oldest

          votes

          up vote
          35
          down vote

          Unless it’s an obsoleted procedure chart, it usually means that it’s not complete. The example you show has only the features pertinent to that approach, and its missing (for clarity) the features needed for any other aviation in that area.

          You must use a sufficiently complete chart for navigation; the approach diagram is supplementary to your navigation chart.

          share|improve this answer

          • 1

            What exactly you find missing and which is present at other approach plates to the very same aerodrome like aip.net.nz/pdf/NZQN_43.1_43.2.pdf ? What kind of navigation would you expect from an IFR approach plate?
            – Vladimir F
            Nov 29 at 22:39

          up vote
          35
          down vote

          Unless it’s an obsoleted procedure chart, it usually means that it’s not complete. The example you show has only the features pertinent to that approach, and its missing (for clarity) the features needed for any other aviation in that area.

          You must use a sufficiently complete chart for navigation; the approach diagram is supplementary to your navigation chart.

          share|improve this answer

          • 1

            What exactly you find missing and which is present at other approach plates to the very same aerodrome like aip.net.nz/pdf/NZQN_43.1_43.2.pdf ? What kind of navigation would you expect from an IFR approach plate?
            – Vladimir F
            Nov 29 at 22:39

          up vote
          35
          down vote

          up vote
          35
          down vote

          Unless it’s an obsoleted procedure chart, it usually means that it’s not complete. The example you show has only the features pertinent to that approach, and its missing (for clarity) the features needed for any other aviation in that area.

          You must use a sufficiently complete chart for navigation; the approach diagram is supplementary to your navigation chart.

          share|improve this answer

          Unless it’s an obsoleted procedure chart, it usually means that it’s not complete. The example you show has only the features pertinent to that approach, and its missing (for clarity) the features needed for any other aviation in that area.

          You must use a sufficiently complete chart for navigation; the approach diagram is supplementary to your navigation chart.

          share|improve this answer

          share|improve this answer

          share|improve this answer

          answered Nov 29 at 18:30

          Toby Speight

          500210

          500210

          • 1

            What exactly you find missing and which is present at other approach plates to the very same aerodrome like aip.net.nz/pdf/NZQN_43.1_43.2.pdf ? What kind of navigation would you expect from an IFR approach plate?
            – Vladimir F
            Nov 29 at 22:39

          • 1

            What exactly you find missing and which is present at other approach plates to the very same aerodrome like aip.net.nz/pdf/NZQN_43.1_43.2.pdf ? What kind of navigation would you expect from an IFR approach plate?
            – Vladimir F
            Nov 29 at 22:39

          1

          1

          What exactly you find missing and which is present at other approach plates to the very same aerodrome like aip.net.nz/pdf/NZQN_43.1_43.2.pdf ? What kind of navigation would you expect from an IFR approach plate?
          – Vladimir F
          Nov 29 at 22:39

          What exactly you find missing and which is present at other approach plates to the very same aerodrome like aip.net.nz/pdf/NZQN_43.1_43.2.pdf ? What kind of navigation would you expect from an IFR approach plate?
          – Vladimir F
          Nov 29 at 22:39

          up vote
          28
          down vote

          When an aviation chart is marked with “DO NOT USE FOR NAVIGATION”, it means that … umm … it should not be used for navigation.

          The question is why it should not be, because it appears that the chart/map is very accurate and hence it is thought that it can provide details for navigation.

          There are several reasons:

          • A newer version might be available and hence making older versions obsolete.
          • It may not be according to scale and can cause confusion.
          • It may not show air routes.

          On the contrary, a chart can be used for navigation when it has the following (yes, AOPA said it):

          • topographic features
          • hazards and obstructions
          • navigation routes and aids
          • airspace
          • airports
          share|improve this answer

          • 1

            If these reasons are true, why the RNAV RNP approach has it, but the VOR DME approach chart aip.net.nz/pdf/NZQN_43.1_43.2.pdf ?
            – Vladimir F
            Nov 29 at 22:37

          up vote
          28
          down vote

          When an aviation chart is marked with “DO NOT USE FOR NAVIGATION”, it means that … umm … it should not be used for navigation.

          The question is why it should not be, because it appears that the chart/map is very accurate and hence it is thought that it can provide details for navigation.

          There are several reasons:

          • A newer version might be available and hence making older versions obsolete.
          • It may not be according to scale and can cause confusion.
          • It may not show air routes.

          On the contrary, a chart can be used for navigation when it has the following (yes, AOPA said it):

          • topographic features
          • hazards and obstructions
          • navigation routes and aids
          • airspace
          • airports
          share|improve this answer

          • 1

            If these reasons are true, why the RNAV RNP approach has it, but the VOR DME approach chart aip.net.nz/pdf/NZQN_43.1_43.2.pdf ?
            – Vladimir F
            Nov 29 at 22:37

          up vote
          28
          down vote

          up vote
          28
          down vote

          When an aviation chart is marked with “DO NOT USE FOR NAVIGATION”, it means that … umm … it should not be used for navigation.

          The question is why it should not be, because it appears that the chart/map is very accurate and hence it is thought that it can provide details for navigation.

          There are several reasons:

          • A newer version might be available and hence making older versions obsolete.
          • It may not be according to scale and can cause confusion.
          • It may not show air routes.

          On the contrary, a chart can be used for navigation when it has the following (yes, AOPA said it):

          • topographic features
          • hazards and obstructions
          • navigation routes and aids
          • airspace
          • airports
          share|improve this answer

          When an aviation chart is marked with “DO NOT USE FOR NAVIGATION”, it means that … umm … it should not be used for navigation.

          The question is why it should not be, because it appears that the chart/map is very accurate and hence it is thought that it can provide details for navigation.

          There are several reasons:

          • A newer version might be available and hence making older versions obsolete.
          • It may not be according to scale and can cause confusion.
          • It may not show air routes.

          On the contrary, a chart can be used for navigation when it has the following (yes, AOPA said it):

          • topographic features
          • hazards and obstructions
          • navigation routes and aids
          • airspace
          • airports
          share|improve this answer

          share|improve this answer

          share|improve this answer

          answered Nov 29 at 18:20

          Farhan

          24.3k1484156

          24.3k1484156

          • 1

            If these reasons are true, why the RNAV RNP approach has it, but the VOR DME approach chart aip.net.nz/pdf/NZQN_43.1_43.2.pdf ?
            – Vladimir F
            Nov 29 at 22:37

          • 1

            If these reasons are true, why the RNAV RNP approach has it, but the VOR DME approach chart aip.net.nz/pdf/NZQN_43.1_43.2.pdf ?
            – Vladimir F
            Nov 29 at 22:37

          1

          1

          If these reasons are true, why the RNAV RNP approach has it, but the VOR DME approach chart aip.net.nz/pdf/NZQN_43.1_43.2.pdf ?
          – Vladimir F
          Nov 29 at 22:37

          If these reasons are true, why the RNAV RNP approach has it, but the VOR DME approach chart aip.net.nz/pdf/NZQN_43.1_43.2.pdf ?
          – Vladimir F
          Nov 29 at 22:37

          up vote
          10
          down vote

          In some countries, administrative and legal reasons require that label, because maps officially usable for navigation may need

          • process used for completion including various warranties, for example:

            • included map layers collected from their respective sources can be no more than 3 months old

            • the map got reviews and approvals prescribed by the process – all documented, with clear responsibilities

            • by adhering with the process, the map received official certification and then catalogization etc.

          The same company can produce ad-hoc maps from similar sources, of similar quality which still did not go through the entire (quite expensive) process and therefore they are mandatorily marked as “DO NOT USE FOR NAVIGATION” which is also connected to various legal implications.

          So such a label might not inevitably mean that the map is missing something. Even after closer look, it can appear 100% complete. But it should not be used as official navigation aid. For example, if an insurance event will occur where navigation can be at least slightly involved (or even theoretically), finding out that such a map was used for navigating will give aces into hands of the insurance company.

          share|improve this answer

            up vote
            10
            down vote

            In some countries, administrative and legal reasons require that label, because maps officially usable for navigation may need

            • process used for completion including various warranties, for example:

              • included map layers collected from their respective sources can be no more than 3 months old

              • the map got reviews and approvals prescribed by the process – all documented, with clear responsibilities

              • by adhering with the process, the map received official certification and then catalogization etc.

            The same company can produce ad-hoc maps from similar sources, of similar quality which still did not go through the entire (quite expensive) process and therefore they are mandatorily marked as “DO NOT USE FOR NAVIGATION” which is also connected to various legal implications.

            So such a label might not inevitably mean that the map is missing something. Even after closer look, it can appear 100% complete. But it should not be used as official navigation aid. For example, if an insurance event will occur where navigation can be at least slightly involved (or even theoretically), finding out that such a map was used for navigating will give aces into hands of the insurance company.

            share|improve this answer

              up vote
              10
              down vote

              up vote
              10
              down vote

              In some countries, administrative and legal reasons require that label, because maps officially usable for navigation may need

              • process used for completion including various warranties, for example:

                • included map layers collected from their respective sources can be no more than 3 months old

                • the map got reviews and approvals prescribed by the process – all documented, with clear responsibilities

                • by adhering with the process, the map received official certification and then catalogization etc.

              The same company can produce ad-hoc maps from similar sources, of similar quality which still did not go through the entire (quite expensive) process and therefore they are mandatorily marked as “DO NOT USE FOR NAVIGATION” which is also connected to various legal implications.

              So such a label might not inevitably mean that the map is missing something. Even after closer look, it can appear 100% complete. But it should not be used as official navigation aid. For example, if an insurance event will occur where navigation can be at least slightly involved (or even theoretically), finding out that such a map was used for navigating will give aces into hands of the insurance company.

              share|improve this answer

              In some countries, administrative and legal reasons require that label, because maps officially usable for navigation may need

              • process used for completion including various warranties, for example:

                • included map layers collected from their respective sources can be no more than 3 months old

                • the map got reviews and approvals prescribed by the process – all documented, with clear responsibilities

                • by adhering with the process, the map received official certification and then catalogization etc.

              The same company can produce ad-hoc maps from similar sources, of similar quality which still did not go through the entire (quite expensive) process and therefore they are mandatorily marked as “DO NOT USE FOR NAVIGATION” which is also connected to various legal implications.

              So such a label might not inevitably mean that the map is missing something. Even after closer look, it can appear 100% complete. But it should not be used as official navigation aid. For example, if an insurance event will occur where navigation can be at least slightly involved (or even theoretically), finding out that such a map was used for navigating will give aces into hands of the insurance company.

              share|improve this answer

              share|improve this answer

              share|improve this answer

              edited Nov 30 at 12:32

              answered Nov 29 at 19:06

              miroxlav

              503414

              503414

                  up vote
                  8
                  down vote

                  I do not believe the reasons stated in other answers. The only difference between this approach plate http://www.aip.net.nz/pdf/NZQN_45.1_45.2.pdf and other approach plates for the very same aerodrome in the same AIP like

                  http://www.aip.net.nz/pdf/NZQN_43.1_43.2.pdf

                  or

                  http://www.aip.net.nz/pdf/NZQN_45.3_45.4.pdf (also RNAV, but RNAV GNSS, not RNP)

                  is the type of the approach. The level of details of the map, for example, is exactly the same.

                  One needs special equipment and a special approval for this approach and cannot just fly it according to the map or select it in a normal Garmin.

                  The plate misses something important and it is NOT the details of the map. These are the actual minima to be used for the approach (I do not get what other navigation some suggest other than the approach for which the map only exists…). Notice the important notice: Minima figures are indicative only. See CAANZ RNP-AR operator approval for specific procedure minima.

                  So this approach plate is not enough, more information is needed to properly perform the approach. Not to do other unspecified navigation, no-one would do that, but to fly the approach (or the associated missed approach procedure).

                  share|improve this answer

                    up vote
                    8
                    down vote

                    I do not believe the reasons stated in other answers. The only difference between this approach plate http://www.aip.net.nz/pdf/NZQN_45.1_45.2.pdf and other approach plates for the very same aerodrome in the same AIP like

                    http://www.aip.net.nz/pdf/NZQN_43.1_43.2.pdf

                    or

                    http://www.aip.net.nz/pdf/NZQN_45.3_45.4.pdf (also RNAV, but RNAV GNSS, not RNP)

                    is the type of the approach. The level of details of the map, for example, is exactly the same.

                    One needs special equipment and a special approval for this approach and cannot just fly it according to the map or select it in a normal Garmin.

                    The plate misses something important and it is NOT the details of the map. These are the actual minima to be used for the approach (I do not get what other navigation some suggest other than the approach for which the map only exists…). Notice the important notice: Minima figures are indicative only. See CAANZ RNP-AR operator approval for specific procedure minima.

                    So this approach plate is not enough, more information is needed to properly perform the approach. Not to do other unspecified navigation, no-one would do that, but to fly the approach (or the associated missed approach procedure).

                    share|improve this answer

                      up vote
                      8
                      down vote

                      up vote
                      8
                      down vote

                      I do not believe the reasons stated in other answers. The only difference between this approach plate http://www.aip.net.nz/pdf/NZQN_45.1_45.2.pdf and other approach plates for the very same aerodrome in the same AIP like

                      http://www.aip.net.nz/pdf/NZQN_43.1_43.2.pdf

                      or

                      http://www.aip.net.nz/pdf/NZQN_45.3_45.4.pdf (also RNAV, but RNAV GNSS, not RNP)

                      is the type of the approach. The level of details of the map, for example, is exactly the same.

                      One needs special equipment and a special approval for this approach and cannot just fly it according to the map or select it in a normal Garmin.

                      The plate misses something important and it is NOT the details of the map. These are the actual minima to be used for the approach (I do not get what other navigation some suggest other than the approach for which the map only exists…). Notice the important notice: Minima figures are indicative only. See CAANZ RNP-AR operator approval for specific procedure minima.

                      So this approach plate is not enough, more information is needed to properly perform the approach. Not to do other unspecified navigation, no-one would do that, but to fly the approach (or the associated missed approach procedure).

                      share|improve this answer

                      I do not believe the reasons stated in other answers. The only difference between this approach plate http://www.aip.net.nz/pdf/NZQN_45.1_45.2.pdf and other approach plates for the very same aerodrome in the same AIP like

                      http://www.aip.net.nz/pdf/NZQN_43.1_43.2.pdf

                      or

                      http://www.aip.net.nz/pdf/NZQN_45.3_45.4.pdf (also RNAV, but RNAV GNSS, not RNP)

                      is the type of the approach. The level of details of the map, for example, is exactly the same.

                      One needs special equipment and a special approval for this approach and cannot just fly it according to the map or select it in a normal Garmin.

                      The plate misses something important and it is NOT the details of the map. These are the actual minima to be used for the approach (I do not get what other navigation some suggest other than the approach for which the map only exists…). Notice the important notice: Minima figures are indicative only. See CAANZ RNP-AR operator approval for specific procedure minima.

                      So this approach plate is not enough, more information is needed to properly perform the approach. Not to do other unspecified navigation, no-one would do that, but to fly the approach (or the associated missed approach procedure).

                      share|improve this answer

                      share|improve this answer

                      share|improve this answer

                      answered Nov 29 at 22:49

                      Vladimir F

                      29117

                      29117

                          up vote
                          5
                          down vote

                          In addition to the other excellent answers, because the publisher expects to be compensated for creating the charts. In other words, they don’t want you downloading free stuff, they want to sell you approach plates needed for actual flight. They put this tag on any print or electronic version promulgated for training or general reference.

                          share|improve this answer

                          • Right, in addition the publisher is not the CAA itself, but a private company Aeropath, owned by Airways New Zealand, the national ANSP. They have obviously an agreement.
                            – mins
                            Dec 2 at 18:21

                          up vote
                          5
                          down vote

                          In addition to the other excellent answers, because the publisher expects to be compensated for creating the charts. In other words, they don’t want you downloading free stuff, they want to sell you approach plates needed for actual flight. They put this tag on any print or electronic version promulgated for training or general reference.

                          share|improve this answer

                          • Right, in addition the publisher is not the CAA itself, but a private company Aeropath, owned by Airways New Zealand, the national ANSP. They have obviously an agreement.
                            – mins
                            Dec 2 at 18:21

                          up vote
                          5
                          down vote

                          up vote
                          5
                          down vote

                          In addition to the other excellent answers, because the publisher expects to be compensated for creating the charts. In other words, they don’t want you downloading free stuff, they want to sell you approach plates needed for actual flight. They put this tag on any print or electronic version promulgated for training or general reference.

                          share|improve this answer

                          In addition to the other excellent answers, because the publisher expects to be compensated for creating the charts. In other words, they don’t want you downloading free stuff, they want to sell you approach plates needed for actual flight. They put this tag on any print or electronic version promulgated for training or general reference.

                          share|improve this answer

                          share|improve this answer

                          share|improve this answer

                          answered Nov 30 at 1:28

                          Michael Hall

                          54128

                          54128

                          • Right, in addition the publisher is not the CAA itself, but a private company Aeropath, owned by Airways New Zealand, the national ANSP. They have obviously an agreement.
                            – mins
                            Dec 2 at 18:21

                          • Right, in addition the publisher is not the CAA itself, but a private company Aeropath, owned by Airways New Zealand, the national ANSP. They have obviously an agreement.
                            – mins
                            Dec 2 at 18:21

                          Right, in addition the publisher is not the CAA itself, but a private company Aeropath, owned by Airways New Zealand, the national ANSP. They have obviously an agreement.
                          – mins
                          Dec 2 at 18:21

                          Right, in addition the publisher is not the CAA itself, but a private company Aeropath, owned by Airways New Zealand, the national ANSP. They have obviously an agreement.
                          – mins
                          Dec 2 at 18:21

                          up vote
                          4
                          down vote

                          The simple answer is that the chart is or will become outdated. As a pilot you need to have current charts when flying.

                          The marking shows that the publisher does not take any responsibility for the currency or accuracy of the free chart found on internet or in training material.

                          You can buy sets of current charts and subscribe to updates to always have a current set. Not to promote this here, but one example of company selling charts is Jeppesen. http://ww1.jeppesen.com/documents/aviation/business/ifr-paper-services/glossary-legends.pdf

                          share|improve this answer

                            up vote
                            4
                            down vote

                            The simple answer is that the chart is or will become outdated. As a pilot you need to have current charts when flying.

                            The marking shows that the publisher does not take any responsibility for the currency or accuracy of the free chart found on internet or in training material.

                            You can buy sets of current charts and subscribe to updates to always have a current set. Not to promote this here, but one example of company selling charts is Jeppesen. http://ww1.jeppesen.com/documents/aviation/business/ifr-paper-services/glossary-legends.pdf

                            share|improve this answer

                              up vote
                              4
                              down vote

                              up vote
                              4
                              down vote

                              The simple answer is that the chart is or will become outdated. As a pilot you need to have current charts when flying.

                              The marking shows that the publisher does not take any responsibility for the currency or accuracy of the free chart found on internet or in training material.

                              You can buy sets of current charts and subscribe to updates to always have a current set. Not to promote this here, but one example of company selling charts is Jeppesen. http://ww1.jeppesen.com/documents/aviation/business/ifr-paper-services/glossary-legends.pdf

                              share|improve this answer

                              The simple answer is that the chart is or will become outdated. As a pilot you need to have current charts when flying.

                              The marking shows that the publisher does not take any responsibility for the currency or accuracy of the free chart found on internet or in training material.

                              You can buy sets of current charts and subscribe to updates to always have a current set. Not to promote this here, but one example of company selling charts is Jeppesen. http://ww1.jeppesen.com/documents/aviation/business/ifr-paper-services/glossary-legends.pdf

                              share|improve this answer

                              share|improve this answer

                              share|improve this answer

                              answered Nov 30 at 6:52

                              ghellquist

                              69528

                              69528

                                  up vote
                                  0
                                  down vote

                                  The really simple answer is that the chart does not contain everything a pilot needs to know to navigate safely. That could be because it is missing features for clarity, is a training tool, or, as is this case for Queenstown, because pilots must have additional certifications in advance. It is very rarely because a chart is out-of-date since why would anyone update a chart that is out of date?

                                  Whatever the reason for the warning, a chart with this prohibition on it is intended to be used to assist a pilot who already knows whatever it is they need to know (as highlighted on this one with the text boxes in the lower left corner), but can not be used safely by anybody who does not already know how to navigate here.

                                  share|improve this answer

                                    up vote
                                    0
                                    down vote

                                    The really simple answer is that the chart does not contain everything a pilot needs to know to navigate safely. That could be because it is missing features for clarity, is a training tool, or, as is this case for Queenstown, because pilots must have additional certifications in advance. It is very rarely because a chart is out-of-date since why would anyone update a chart that is out of date?

                                    Whatever the reason for the warning, a chart with this prohibition on it is intended to be used to assist a pilot who already knows whatever it is they need to know (as highlighted on this one with the text boxes in the lower left corner), but can not be used safely by anybody who does not already know how to navigate here.

                                    share|improve this answer

                                      up vote
                                      0
                                      down vote

                                      up vote
                                      0
                                      down vote

                                      The really simple answer is that the chart does not contain everything a pilot needs to know to navigate safely. That could be because it is missing features for clarity, is a training tool, or, as is this case for Queenstown, because pilots must have additional certifications in advance. It is very rarely because a chart is out-of-date since why would anyone update a chart that is out of date?

                                      Whatever the reason for the warning, a chart with this prohibition on it is intended to be used to assist a pilot who already knows whatever it is they need to know (as highlighted on this one with the text boxes in the lower left corner), but can not be used safely by anybody who does not already know how to navigate here.

                                      share|improve this answer

                                      The really simple answer is that the chart does not contain everything a pilot needs to know to navigate safely. That could be because it is missing features for clarity, is a training tool, or, as is this case for Queenstown, because pilots must have additional certifications in advance. It is very rarely because a chart is out-of-date since why would anyone update a chart that is out of date?

                                      Whatever the reason for the warning, a chart with this prohibition on it is intended to be used to assist a pilot who already knows whatever it is they need to know (as highlighted on this one with the text boxes in the lower left corner), but can not be used safely by anybody who does not already know how to navigate here.

                                      share|improve this answer

                                      share|improve this answer

                                      share|improve this answer

                                      edited Dec 1 at 23:09

                                      answered Dec 1 at 22:28

                                      Paul Smith

                                      34526

                                      34526

                                          draft saved
                                          draft discarded

                                          Thanks for contributing an answer to Aviation Stack Exchange!

                                          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                                          But avoid

                                          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
                                          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

                                          Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.

                                          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.

                                          Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you’re in danger of being blocked from answering.

                                          Please pay close attention to the following guidance:

                                          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                                          But avoid

                                          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
                                          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

                                          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.

                                          draft saved

                                          draft discarded

                                          StackExchange.ready(
                                          function () {
                                          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin(‘.new-post-login’, ‘https%3a%2f%2faviation.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f57547%2fwhat-does-the-do-not-use-for-navigation-indication-mean%23new-answer’, ‘question_page’);
                                          }
                                          );

                                          Post as a guest

                                          Required, but never shown

                                          Required, but never shown

                                          Required, but never shown

                                          Required, but never shown

                                          Required, but never shown

                                          Required, but never shown

                                          Required, but never shown

                                          Required, but never shown

                                          Required, but never shown

                                          Related Post

                                          Leave a Reply

                                          Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *