Aeronautical Chart Sheet 2171CD South Eng. ed40

[Jerry B]

Has anyone else found the quality of print in this new chart dificult to read. My chart looks like it had been over inked in a band running from top to bottom, from Manchester, Birmingham, Bristol etc.

[Brian Hope]

There is a lot more line shading on the new chart to define more clearly more of the controlled airspace, it's a change which came in recently and this chart is the first to use it. It does make the chart look a bit on the busy side, particularly through the area you mention, but my new chart looks fine as far as print quality goes - and I did go to Specsavers.

[Ian Melville]

There was a print issue highlighted on the Flyer forum. Look at Rochester name and you will see it change mid word, actually mid letter.
http://forums.flyer.co.uk/viewtopic.php ... t#p1270414

[Brian Hope]

Well Ian, having compared the chart with the old one I have to agree that there is a fuzziness in some of the lettering. To be honest I don't think it's bad enough to be a problem though.

[Ian Melville]

I don't thinks it's an issue either, just pointing out that it is an error rather than sending everyone to SpecSavers.

[Richard Fitzpatrick]

I personally do think it an issue. We have all paid good money to purchase the latest chart. It is inferior to earlier versions. Not only does it look more cluttered (we could get used to that) but the script is fuzzy and makes for hard work at times in a busy cockpit, trying to decipher what should be, and has been in the past, clear printed information. At the risk of sounding melodramatic, I think it should be withdrawn, if only to avoid misreading what is in essence vital information.

[mikehallam]

Just don't see what all the hyperbole is about - it's a jolly good 1/2 mill and I defend it !

mike hallam.

[Richard Fitzpatrick]

Well for me it is not hyperbole; I am far from prone to exaggeration. The chart is inferior to previous versions and, if others feel they can accept this, then that is their prerogative; I do not decry this. My critique of the current chart is based on what I perceive personally, a subjective view of course, but nonetheless a valid one.
Richard

[Jerry B]

Just received the leaflet for Commonwealth Game 2014 airspace restriction. The reproduction of the 1:500,000 chart is how the printing should be done. Busy airspace but all readable.

[James Chan]

I quite like the look of my new chart.

It really shows how unnecessarily complicated lots of base levels of controlled airspace has become over the years.

[AlanR]

Well I agree in thinking it is awful...overly cluttered, and, mine at least, has a washed out faded look to it. At the moment I find I can't just take a quick glance at it like the old one when flying along.
Thinking of dumping mine and continuing with last years chart!

[gregorp]

My only comment is that it looks washed out and is not clear to read in bright sunshine. Print etc I think is fine.

[Jerry B]

From NATS Web site.

VFR Chart Clarity Issues
It has been identified that there is a variation of clarity in certain areas on the 1:500,000 Southern UK VFR charts and that the product is not up to the normal high standards. The charts have been independently assessed and the variation is not considered a safety risk. To endeavour that there is no repeat of this in the future NATS are working closely with all parties involved in the preparation and printing of these charts.


No Refunds then