Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Easy Airspace initiative

Expand Messages
  • flyingppg
    Now that Ozi supports Google maps, perhaps at least the pilots on the group would like to support my petition: http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/Easyairspace/
    Message 1 of 12 , Oct 1 6:40 AM
      Now that Ozi supports Google maps, perhaps at least the pilots on the group would like to support my petition:

      http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/Easyairspace/

      It's up to 32 after a couple of days, please add your support and publicise it as part of your email signature or something like. When they get to 500, you get an email response from No.10 when it ends, and the Ghurka petition achieved 50,000 names, and look what that achieved! Does anyone know if Joanna Lumley is available?

      Should anyone feel moved to put their oar in and write, the contacts at the Airspace and Safety Initiative are listed here: http://www.airspacesafety.com/content/contact.asp as:
      jonathan.nicholson@...
      richard.wright@...

      also the following put out a general letter titled "NATS Airspace Infringement letter to flying clubs", here:
      http://airspacesafety.com/content/download.asp?u=-2147483588 described as "the team" and soliciting ideas:
      Jonathan.smith@... Infringement lead, SwanwickCentre
      Anthony.smoker@... Manager Safety Performance and Improvement, Swanwick (and I wonder if he is giving up)
      William.leipnik@... Head of ATC Investigations, Swanwick
      Simon.hocquard@... General Manager, Swanwick

      The crux of it is that this is a serious safety issue, and by failing to address the issue the CAA are failing in their primary responsibility. The information being put out by the CAA, NATS and AIS is onerous and difficult to use and prone to human error. The CAA are years behind current technology. They have to address this issue, and this could be done quickly if there was the will.

      My wish is for a freely available download, probably a KML or KMZ, that details all airspace, and NotAMs in a form that can be imported directly into the freely or inexpensive computer tools most of us are now using for flight planning, like Google Earth, OziExplorer and so on. By specifying a date range, the download should include information applicable within this time window. Even if it is not perfect, has limitations and comes with caveats, it would still represent a significant safety enhancement, and mean you get out on your XC sooner and safer. Standard NotAMs, paper charts, pdf's and Twitter gimmicks directing you to the same is not acceptable anymore and we are all entitled to much better now within the GA community.

      Rich
      --
      Richard
      Flyingppg at yahoo dot co dot UK

      PS: the restriction on the group over sending HTML messages makes it very difficult. Would the moderator like to remove this stipulation?
    • kiwino1@gmail.com
      Good initiative and it would be nice to have the NOTAMs in electronic form, but certainly NOT in Google form or any connection with Google. Google is far too
      Message 2 of 12 , Oct 1 6:13 PM
        Good initiative and it would be nice to have the NOTAMs in electronic form,
        but certainly NOT in Google form or any connection with Google.

        Google is far too inaccurate and unreliable to be connected with any
        aeronautical and air navigation.

        The Google maps are commonly considerably off. and we need accuracy and
        reliability up there. So far I have also heard of an array of problems with
        Ozi in connection with Google.

        I remember the recent case where a motorist ended up down a steep slope and
        I think he stopped in a pigsty, or the guy who trusted his GPS and one
        parson died when he his boat hit a rock. You don't want to "land" into a
        hillside.

        This said by a guy who has been flying airplanes since the 60's.


        At 01:40 p.m. 1/10/2009 +0000, you wrote:
        >
        >
        >Now that Ozi supports Google maps, perhaps at least the pilots on the
        >group would like to support my petition:
        >
        ><http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/Easyairspace/>http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/Easyairspace/
        >
        >It's up to 32 after a couple of days, please add your support and
        >publicise it as part of your email signature or something like. When they
        >get to 500, you get an email response from No.10 when it ends, and the
        >Ghurka petition achieved 50,000 names, and look what that achieved! Does
        >anyone know if Joanna Lumley is available?
        >
        >Should anyone feel moved to put their oar in and write, the contacts at
        >the Airspace and Safety Initiative are listed here:
        ><http://www.airspacesafety.com/content/contact.asp>http://www.airspacesafety.com/content/contact.asp
        >as:
        ><mailto:jonathan.nicholson%40caa.co.uk>jonathan.nicholson@...
        ><mailto:richard.wright%40nats.co.uk>richard.wright@...
        >
        >also the following put out a general letter titled "NATS Airspace
        >Infringement letter to flying clubs", here:
        ><http://airspacesafety.com/content/download.asp?u=-2147483588>http://airspacesafety.com/content/download.asp?u=-2147483588
        >described as "the team" and soliciting ideas:
        ><mailto:Jonathan.smith%40nats.co.uk>Jonathan.smith@... Infringement
        >lead, SwanwickCentre
        ><mailto:Anthony.smoker%40nats.co.uk>Anthony.smoker@... Manager
        >Safety Performance and Improvement, Swanwick (and I wonder if he is giving up)
        ><mailto:William.leipnik%40nats.co.uk>William.leipnik@... Head of
        >ATC Investigations, Swanwick
        ><mailto:Simon.hocquard%40nats.co.uk>Simon.hocquard@... General
        >Manager, Swanwick
        >
        >The crux of it is that this is a serious safety issue, and by failing to
        >address the issue the CAA are failing in their primary responsibility. The
        >information being put out by the CAA, NATS and AIS is onerous and
        >difficult to use and prone to human error. The CAA are years behind
        >current technology. They have to address this issue, and this could be
        >done quickly if there was the will.
        >
        >My wish is for a freely available download, probably a KML or KMZ, that
        >details all airspace, and NotAMs in a form that can be imported directly
        >into the freely or inexpensive computer tools most of us are now using for
        >flight planning, like Google Earth, OziExplorer and so on. By specifying a
        >date range, the download should include information applicable within this
        >time window. Even if it is not perfect, has limitations and comes with
        >caveats, it would still represent a significant safety enhancement, and
        >mean you get out on your XC sooner and safer. Standard NotAMs, paper
        >charts, pdf's and Twitter gimmicks directing you to the same is not
        >acceptable anymore and we are all entitled to much better now within the
        >GA community.
        >
        >Rich
        >--
        >Richard
        >Flyingppg at yahoo dot co dot UK
        >
        >PS: the restriction on the group over sending HTML messages makes it very
        >difficult. Would the moderator like to remove this stipulation?
        >
        >


        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Dennis Pogson
        What happens in the USA? Is this another case where the UK lags sadly behind the USA, whose sea charts are freely available to download? Dennis. ... From:
        Message 3 of 12 , Oct 2 12:56 AM
          What happens in the USA? Is this another case where the UK lags sadly behind the USA, whose sea charts are freely available to download?


          Dennis.
          ----- Original Message -----
          From: flyingppg
          To: OziUsers-L@yahoogroups.com
          Sent: Thursday, October 01, 2009 2:40 PM
          Subject: [OziUsers-L] Easy Airspace initiative


          Now that Ozi supports Google maps, perhaps at least the pilots on the group would like to support my petition:

          http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/Easyairspace/

          It's up to 32 after a couple of days, please add your support and publicise it as part of your email signature or something like. When they get to 500, you get an email response from No.10 when it ends, and the Ghurka petition achieved 50,000 names, and look what that achieved! Does anyone know if Joanna Lumley is available?

          Should anyone feel moved to put their oar in and write, the contacts at the Airspace and Safety Initiative are listed here: http://www.airspacesafety.com/content/contact.asp as:
          jonathan.nicholson@...
          richard.wright@...

          also the following put out a general letter titled "NATS Airspace Infringement letter to flying clubs", here:
          http://airspacesafety.com/content/download.asp?u=-2147483588 described as "the team" and soliciting ideas:
          Jonathan.smith@... Infringement lead, SwanwickCentre
          Anthony.smoker@... Manager Safety Performance and Improvement, Swanwick (and I wonder if he is giving up)
          William.leipnik@... Head of ATC Investigations, Swanwick
          Simon.hocquard@... General Manager, Swanwick

          The crux of it is that this is a serious safety issue, and by failing to address the issue the CAA are failing in their primary responsibility. The information being put out by the CAA, NATS and AIS is onerous and difficult to use and prone to human error. The CAA are years behind current technology. They have to address this issue, and this could be done quickly if there was the will.

          My wish is for a freely available download, probably a KML or KMZ, that details all airspace, and NotAMs in a form that can be imported directly into the freely or inexpensive computer tools most of us are now using for flight planning, like Google Earth, OziExplorer and so on. By specifying a date range, the download should include information applicable within this time window. Even if it is not perfect, has limitations and comes with caveats, it would still represent a significant safety enhancement, and mean you get out on your XC sooner and safer. Standard NotAMs, paper charts, pdf's and Twitter gimmicks directing you to the same is not acceptable anymore and we are all entitled to much better now within the GA community.

          Rich
          --
          Richard
          Flyingppg at yahoo dot co dot UK

          PS: the restriction on the group over sending HTML messages makes it very difficult. Would the moderator like to remove this stipulation?





          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • flyingppg
          I think I must respectfully disagree as being a VFR GA pilot since the 1990 s I can pretty much see the hill sides coming from a good way off, or the pigstys
          Message 4 of 12 , Oct 2 10:00 AM
            I think I must respectfully disagree as being a VFR GA pilot since the 1990's I can pretty much see the hill sides coming from a good way off, or the pigstys when driving for that matter too. I don't think these tools are ever intended to be a substitute for looking around, whatever you happen to be doing. This isn't about hillsides anyway, it's about an ability to present information in an intuitive and easily usable form for use within OziExplorer for, in my case, flight planning. I am entirely happy with OziExplorer, the excellent functionality and ease of use is self evident, the Achilles heel for me is the availability of timely map information in a form that I can readily use.

            In reality, every NotAM or airspace restriction I have ever come across grabs far more airspace that it needs too and I don't think anyone is bothered about 200 feet or so when in the air. I'm also not sufficiently exercised to quibble about another 50ft error when using Goggle maps in Ozi, and if any pilot can or even wants to fly that well along a GPS route, I'd like to meet him. We all build these minor accuracy issues into our flight planning, or should do, and I have a hunch that anyone instrument rated, flying in cloud and in real danger of hitting the hillside already has other systems that they are using, and not in need of a Google Map and KML overlay to use in OziExplorer.

            And if Des happens to be reading, as a feature request, I'd like to be able to specify the KML, or something, to overlay over my Google, or other map so that it displays within Ozi when I am using it, and use the Satellite view too, so I can plan interesting things to fly over. This appears to happen with the Google Earth map, but I agree with the views of others that it is slow in this mode and the Internet maps are faster to use.

            At the risk of going a touch off topic for a second and getting a ticking off from the moderators again, the issue with NotAM's is that they don't import into anything and have the appearance of 1970's computer output, cryptic to read and prone to human error. Airspace restrictions in electronic form is not available at all in any kind of open format in the UK at least. The result is that instead of maybe being a bit out with your flight plan at the periphery, pilots make quite bad translational mistakes, or miss a relevant NotAM altogether, even can't be bothered or don't understand at all and end up flying right through it, however well intentioned due to unintended mistakes. My argument is that accessibility and presentation is at least as important as acuracy, when an overbearing obsession with the latter makes for data being put out in unintelligible form and so not used at all.

            At the end of the day, if OziExplorer can do this stuff, more copies get sold within the GA community. I know lots of people have bought it following my demos to them of what it can do.

            The petition is up to 95 after 5 days, which is not bad going! Strictly for UK residents and nationals only, but how would I know. There is a Main Street in most UK towns and cities. ;-)
            http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/Easyairspace/
            or start your own in your own country!

            Richard



            --- In OziUsers-L@yahoogroups.com, kiwino1@... wrote:
            >
            >
            > Good initiative and it would be nice to have the NOTAMs in electronic form,
            > but certainly NOT in Google form or any connection with Google.
            >
            > Google is far too inaccurate and unreliable to be connected with any
            > aeronautical and air navigation.
            >
            > The Google maps are commonly considerably off. and we need accuracy and
            > reliability up there. So far I have also heard of an array of problems with
            > Ozi in connection with Google.
            >
            > I remember the recent case where a motorist ended up down a steep slope and
            > I think he stopped in a pigsty, or the guy who trusted his GPS and one
            > parson died when he his boat hit a rock. You don't want to "land" into a
            > hillside.
            >
            > This said by a guy who has been flying airplanes since the 60's.
            >
            >
          • flyingppg
            Hi Dennis, Alas yes, the UK CAA seem to do much twiddling of their handlebar moustaches, discussion and meetings rather than implement anything that gets
            Message 5 of 12 , Oct 2 10:07 AM
              Hi Dennis,

              Alas yes, the UK CAA seem to do much twiddling of their handlebar moustaches, discussion and meetings rather than implement anything that gets anyone in the GA community the maps in open format they need for use in applications like Ozi.

              Not only can you not download these maps, but if you scan them and give them to your friends to use so making the skies safer, they tear you up over it for copyright infringements.

              Can you download current airspace maps in the US? Can you direct me to that?

              Richard


              --- In OziUsers-L@yahoogroups.com, "Dennis Pogson" <dennis_pogson@...> wrote:
              >
              > What happens in the USA? Is this another case where the UK lags sadly behind the USA, whose sea charts are freely available to download?
              >
              >
            • kiwino1@gmail.com
              A awful lot of people did not see that hillside in the past. We don t know why because they did not live to tell. (Steve Fossett???) The error on Google maps I
              Message 6 of 12 , Oct 2 5:19 PM
                A awful lot of people did not see that hillside in the past. We don't know
                why because they did not live to tell. (Steve Fossett???)
                The error on Google maps I have seen is about 0.5 to 2 Km. (Sat images are
                much better)
                Don't know about you, but even if flying VFR, you do get into situations
                where you have to just cant look out the window to see where you are.
                I don't know about GB because I don't fly there, but I agree in general,
                CAA anywhere need a wake up call.

                In the end, don't trust gadgets, and especially not Google, for air or sea
                navigation, even the battery has limitations.

                At 05:00 p.m. 2/10/2009 +0000, you wrote:
                >
                >
                >I think I must respectfully disagree as being a VFR GA pilot since the
                >1990's I can pretty much see the hill sides coming from a good way off, or
                >the pigstys when driving for that matter too. I don't think these tools
                >are ever intended to be a substitute for looking around, whatever you
                >happen to be doing. This isn't about hillsides anyway, it's about an
                >ability to present information in an intuitive and easily usable form for
                >use within OziExplorer for, in my case, flight planning. I am entirely
                >happy with OziExplorer, the excellent functionality and ease of use is
                >self evident, the Achilles heel for me is the availability of timely map
                >information in a form that I can readily use.
                >
                >In reality, every NotAM or airspace restriction I have ever come across
                >grabs far more airspace that it needs too and I don't think anyone is
                >bothered about 200 feet or so when in the air. I'm also not sufficiently
                >exercised to quibble about another 50ft error when using Goggle maps in
                >Ozi, and if any pilot can or even wants to fly that well along a GPS
                >route, I'd like to meet him. We all build these minor accuracy issues into
                >our flight planning, or should do, and I have a hunch that anyone
                >instrument rated, flying in cloud and in real danger of hitting the
                >hillside already has other systems that they are using, and not in need of
                >a Google Map and KML overlay to use in OziExplorer.
                >
                >And if Des happens to be reading, as a feature request, I'd like to be
                >able to specify the KML, or something, to overlay over my Google, or other
                >map so that it displays within Ozi when I am using it, and use the
                >Satellite view too, so I can plan interesting things to fly over. This
                >appears to happen with the Google Earth map, but I agree with the views of
                >others that it is slow in this mode and the Internet maps are faster to use.
                >
                >At the risk of going a touch off topic for a second and getting a ticking
                >off from the moderators again, the issue with NotAM's is that they don't
                >import into anything and have the appearance of 1970's computer output,
                >cryptic to read and prone to human error. Airspace restrictions in
                >electronic form is not available at all in any kind of open format in the
                >UK at least. The result is that instead of maybe being a bit out with your
                >flight plan at the periphery, pilots make quite bad translational
                >mistakes, or miss a relevant NotAM altogether, even can't be bothered or
                >don't understand at all and end up flying right through it, however well
                >intentioned due to unintended mistakes. My argument is that accessibility
                >and presentation is at least as important as acuracy, when an overbearing
                >obsession with the latter makes for data being put out in unintelligible
                >form and so not used at all.
                >
                >At the end of the day, if OziExplorer can do this stuff, more copies get
                >sold within the GA community. I know lots of people have bought it
                >following my demos to them of what it can do.
                >
                >The petition is up to 95 after 5 days, which is not bad going! Strictly
                >for UK residents and nationals only, but how would I know. There is a Main
                >Street in most UK towns and cities. ;-)
                ><http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/Easyairspace/>http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/Easyairspace/
                >or start your own in your own country!
                >
                >Richard
                >
                >--- In <mailto:OziUsers-L%40yahoogroups.com>OziUsers-L@yahoogroups.com,
                >kiwino1@... wrote:
                > >
                > >
                > > Good initiative and it would be nice to have the NOTAMs in electronic
                > form,
                > > but certainly NOT in Google form or any connection with Google.
                > >
                > > Google is far too inaccurate and unreliable to be connected with any
                > > aeronautical and air navigation.
                > >
                > > The Google maps are commonly considerably off. and we need accuracy and
                > > reliability up there. So far I have also heard of an array of problems
                > with
                > > Ozi in connection with Google.
                > >
                > > I remember the recent case where a motorist ended up down a steep slope
                > and
                > > I think he stopped in a pigsty, or the guy who trusted his GPS and one
                > > parson died when he his boat hit a rock. You don't want to "land" into a
                > > hillside.
                > >
                > > This said by a guy who has been flying airplanes since the 60's.
                > >
                > >
                >
                >


                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              • Dennis Pogson
                Hi Richard, Being a sailor, I am totally unfamiliar with the needs of you flyers, but the NOAA website has mountains of seacharts, both vector and raster type,
                Message 7 of 12 , Oct 3 1:40 AM
                  Hi Richard,

                  Being a sailor, I am totally unfamiliar with the needs of you flyers, but the NOAA website has mountains of seacharts, both vector and raster type, for free download, the latter being compatible with Ozi. A good starting point is http://www.nauticalcharts.noaa.gov/staff/chartspubs.html, and you will find that ONLY US coastal areas are covered (I think).

                  The UKHO (hydrographic office) has been a prime protector of Crown Copyright since heaven knows when, whereas the NOAA have taken the view that as they are largely funded by the US taxpayer, they cannot claim copyright as their products are financed by revenues from the very people who keep them in jobs!

                  The argument as to which attitude is correct in a modern democracy has been raging for some time and is, as yet, unresolved.

                  Dennis.
                  ----- Original Message -----
                  From: flyingppg
                  To: OziUsers-L@yahoogroups.com
                  Sent: Friday, October 02, 2009 6:07 PM
                  Subject: [OziUsers-L] Re: Easy Airspace initiative


                  Hi Dennis,

                  Alas yes, the UK CAA seem to do much twiddling of their handlebar moustaches, discussion and meetings rather than implement anything that gets anyone in the GA community the maps in open format they need for use in applications like Ozi.

                  Not only can you not download these maps, but if you scan them and give them to your friends to use so making the skies safer, they tear you up over it for copyright infringements.

                  Can you download current airspace maps in the US? Can you direct me to that?

                  Richard

                  --- In OziUsers-L@yahoogroups.com, "Dennis Pogson" <dennis_pogson@...> wrote:
                  >
                  > What happens in the USA? Is this another case where the UK lags sadly behind the USA, whose sea charts are freely available to download?
                  >
                  >





                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                • rwcx183
                  ... Dennis, Things have not always been so rosey for NOAA charts in the past. For many years, the exclusive right to sell them in electronic form was granted
                  Message 8 of 12 , Oct 3 2:18 AM
                    --- In OziUsers-L@yahoogroups.com, "Dennis Pogson" <dennis_pogson@...> wrote:
                    >
                    > Hi Richard,
                    >
                    > Being a sailor, I am totally unfamiliar with the needs of you flyers, but the NOAA website has mountains of seacharts, both vector and raster type, for free download, the latter being compatible with Ozi. A good starting point is http://www.nauticalcharts.noaa.gov/staff/chartspubs.html, and you will find that ONLY US coastal areas are covered (I think).
                    >
                    > The UKHO (hydrographic office) has been a prime protector of Crown Copyright since heaven knows when, whereas the NOAA have taken the view that as they are largely funded by the US taxpayer, they cannot claim copyright as their products are financed by revenues from the very people who keep them in jobs!
                    >
                    > The argument as to which attitude is correct in a modern democracy has been raging for some time and is, as yet, unresolved.
                    >
                    > Dennis.

                    Dennis,

                    Things have not always been so rosey for NOAA charts in the past. For many years, the exclusive right to sell them in electronic form was granted to Maptech and they abused the privelege greatly in the form of high prices. It's only been more recently that NOAA have seen the light and now freely distribute their charts.

                    As for FAA sectional charts, free availability of those is neither sanctioned nor prohibited by the FAA. The problem of course is that the FAA themselves don't feel the need to provide them directly to users for free, but rather to charge for them on disk, while making no objection (as far as I can tell) to anyone redistributing those for free or charge. There is nothing stopping anyone from doing this for free, other than it still costs money for the electronic maps in the first place. So, it tends to be a losing game. I have run across websites from time to time that do have a good selection of charts for free, but the issue there is that FAA sectionals are updated and re-issued quite often, sometimes every couple of months. The free websites that I've seen rarely keep their sectionals up to date. I'm no aviator, but it's a little scary to think that the FAA sees fit to update these maps so often. I assume it's because there are changes and I sure wouldn't want to be unaware of important changes in an area that I was flying.

                    To inject a little Ozi content here, the FAA sectionals are projected in Lambert Conformal Conic and are easily importable into Ozi as I recall. Whatever website I had gotten them from tended to split up large charts into 2 chunks and that was a bit inconvenient. I'm pretty sure that I found the link to that website from a posting on this very forum. Perhaps a search is in order, as a google web search turned up nothing useful in the way of generally available free FAA sectionals. Having said that, the snipers will now wake up to prove me wrong. I guess I'm ok with that, if it gets them to post a link to freely available up to date sectionals. Really, I don't understand why people sit on this kind of info refusing to post until someone says it wrong. On the other hand, I can understand the special thrill some people get from proving me wrong.

                    A quick search of this group turns up:

                    http://aviationtoolbox.org/raw_data/FAA/sectionals/current/

                    That is the one I remember and the charts there are some 4 years old. Ok for use with flight simulator games, but I'll leave it to actual aviators to decide whether charts this old are to be trusted.

                    J.G.
                  • dennispogson
                    ... Sounds to me that Mr Obama should sanction a takeover of the FAA by the NOAA! Surprising that whenever these discussions on the availablity of maps/charts
                    Message 9 of 12 , Oct 3 3:17 AM
                      --- In OziUsers-L@yahoogroups.com, "rwcx183" <lgalvin@...> wrote:
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > --- In OziUsers-L@yahoogroups.com, "Dennis Pogson" <dennis_pogson@> wrote:
                      > >
                      > > Hi Richard,
                      > >
                      > > Being a sailor, I am totally unfamiliar with the needs of you flyers, but the NOAA website has mountains of seacharts, both vector and raster type, for free download, the latter being compatible with Ozi. A good starting point is http://www.nauticalcharts.noaa.gov/staff/chartspubs.html, and you will find that ONLY US coastal areas are covered (I think).
                      > >
                      > > The UKHO (hydrographic office) has been a prime protector of Crown Copyright since heaven knows when, whereas the NOAA have taken the view that as they are largely funded by the US taxpayer, they cannot claim copyright as their products are financed by revenues from the very people who keep them in jobs!
                      > >
                      > > The argument as to which attitude is correct in a modern democracy has been raging for some time and is, as yet, unresolved.
                      > >
                      > > Dennis.
                      >
                      > Dennis,
                      >
                      > Things have not always been so rosey for NOAA charts in the past. For many years, the exclusive right to sell them in electronic form was granted to Maptech and they abused the privelege greatly in the form of high prices. It's only been more recently that NOAA have seen the light and now freely distribute their charts.
                      >
                      > As for FAA sectional charts, free availability of those is neither sanctioned nor prohibited by the FAA. The problem of course is that the FAA themselves don't feel the need to provide them directly to users for free, but rather to charge for them on disk, while making no objection (as far as I can tell) to anyone redistributing those for free or charge. There is nothing stopping anyone from doing this for free, other than it still costs money for the electronic maps in the first place. So, it tends to be a losing game. I have run across websites from time to time that do have a good selection of charts for free, but the issue there is that FAA sectionals are updated and re-issued quite often, sometimes every couple of months. The free websites that I've seen rarely keep their sectionals up to date. I'm no aviator, but it's a little scary to think that the FAA sees fit to update these maps so often. I assume it's because there are changes and I sure wouldn't want to be unaware of important changes in an area that I was flying.
                      >
                      > To inject a little Ozi content here, the FAA sectionals are projected in Lambert Conformal Conic and are easily importable into Ozi as I recall. Whatever website I had gotten them from tended to split up large charts into 2 chunks and that was a bit inconvenient. I'm pretty sure that I found the link to that website from a posting on this very forum. Perhaps a search is in order, as a google web search turned up nothing useful in the way of generally available free FAA sectionals. Having said that, the snipers will now wake up to prove me wrong. I guess I'm ok with that, if it gets them to post a link to freely available up to date sectionals. Really, I don't understand why people sit on this kind of info refusing to post until someone says it wrong. On the other hand, I can understand the special thrill some people get from proving me wrong.
                      >
                      > A quick search of this group turns up:
                      >
                      > http://aviationtoolbox.org/raw_data/FAA/sectionals/current/
                      >
                      > That is the one I remember and the charts there are some 4 years old. Ok for use with flight simulator games, but I'll leave it to actual aviators to decide whether charts this old are to be trusted.
                      >
                      > J.G.
                      >
                      Sounds to me that Mr Obama should sanction a takeover of the FAA by the NOAA!

                      Surprising that whenever these discussions on the availablity of maps/charts etc., take place, no one seems to mention Garmin or Magellan.

                      Granted their software is vector-based, but it's not that difficult to convert and use with Ozi, provided the stuff is for one's own use and not for general distribution or resale.

                      Their maps and charts are expensive of course, which is where we came in!

                      Dennis.
                    • rwcx183
                      ... Surprising that whenever these discussions on the availablity of maps/charts etc., take place, no one seems to mention Garmin or Magellan. ... Dennis, I m
                      Message 10 of 12 , Oct 3 8:03 AM
                        --- In OziUsers-L@yahoogroups.com, "dennispogson" <dennis_pogson@...> wrote:
                        Surprising that whenever these discussions on the availablity of maps/charts etc., take place, no one seems to mention Garmin or Magellan.
                        >
                        > Granted their software is vector-based, but it's not that difficult to convert and use with Ozi, provided the stuff is for one's own use and not for general distribution or resale.
                        >
                        > Their maps and charts are expensive of course, which is where we came in!
                        >
                        > Dennis.
                        >

                        Dennis,

                        I'm pretty sure that the NOAA marine data is also freely available in ENC vector format. I don't think Ozi can load it, but there are at least a few programs available that can read ENC format and perhaps convert it to something usable by various GPS receivers.

                        http://www.nauticalcharts.noaa.gov/mcd/enc/index.htm

                        J.G.
                      • Roger
                        Dennis, I downloaded the Port Townsend RNC and unzipped it. It turns out the graphic is a file with a .KAP extension. How do you convert this to a more common
                        Message 11 of 12 , Oct 3 8:34 AM
                          Dennis,

                          I downloaded the Port Townsend RNC and unzipped it. It turns out the
                          graphic is a file with a .KAP extension. How do you convert this to a
                          more common raster image, say .JPG or .GIF? Can Ozi use this format
                          directly?

                          Roger
                          Palmer Lake, CO


                          Dennis Pogson wrote:
                          >
                          >
                          > Hi Richard,
                          >
                          > Being a sailor, I am totally unfamiliar with the needs of you flyers,
                          > but the NOAA website has mountains of seacharts, both vector and
                          > raster type, for free download, the latter being compatible with Ozi.
                          > A good starting point is
                          > http://www.nauticalcharts.noaa.gov/staff/chartspubs.html,
                          > <http://www.nauticalcharts.noaa.gov/staff/chartspubs.html,> and you
                          > will find that ONLY US coastal areas are covered (I think).
                          >



                          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                        • rwcx183
                          ... Roger, What you downloaded is a BSB marine chart. Ozi can import this directly via File= Import Map= Single BSB or NOS/GEO chart. If I remember
                          Message 12 of 12 , Oct 3 8:49 AM
                            --- In OziUsers-L@yahoogroups.com, Roger <maps-1@...> wrote:
                            >
                            > Dennis,
                            >
                            > I downloaded the Port Townsend RNC and unzipped it. It turns out the
                            > graphic is a file with a .KAP extension. How do you convert this to a
                            > more common raster image, say .JPG or .GIF? Can Ozi use this format
                            > directly?
                            >
                            > Roger
                            > Palmer Lake, CO

                            Roger,

                            What you downloaded is a BSB marine chart. Ozi can import this directly via File=>Import Map=>Single BSB or NOS/GEO chart. If I remember correctly, once imported, they're not exportable in standard formats, but perhaps ozf is allowed via mapmerge or img2ozf?

                            There are other programs GDAL/OpenEV that can translate to standard formats. At one time NOAA had a BSB chart reprojector that saved in tiff format. There is also a BSB2xxx (can't remember the name exactly) convertor out there, that oddly enough doesn't handle BSB charts but rather the close cousin NOS format.

                            J.G.
                          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.