Narrative:

The chart coverage for nrt/rjaa has gotten completely out of control. It has become so confusing and convoluted that choosing the correct chart is difficult at best and a guessing game at worst. As a relief first officer; the flying pilots and I spent over fifteen minutes debating which combination of arrival and approach charts were the correct ones to use. There are two separate issues I believe are creating most of the confusion. First; the number of temporary charts for the entire nrt/rjaa coverage makes it difficult to determine which chart is correct on any given day. There is not much guidance on some of the charts as to which ones should be used when. There were three separate charts available to fly the ILS to 34L; all of which we found a reasonable argument as to why it might be the proper chart to use. I am sure there is some rhyme or reason to the organization of the charts but it is not clear to the average line pilot what it is. I doubt I am the only one who finds it confusing and a ripe area for problems to develop when the wrong chart is used inadvertently.my suggestion for improvement is to find a reasonable balance between the lawyers' need to cover every possibility for charting and the pilots need to be able to figure out reasonably which chart to use. I understand the need for detailed charting when a navaid will be out of service for some time. But having three arrivals with the same name is begging for problems. If the cvc VOR will be out of service until june 2012; then issue the charts with procedures that do not require the cvc VOR and limit it to one chart per name; not two or three. Then reissue the charts in june when the navaid is returned to service. Additionally the ATC controllers should be briefed to be clear and specific in their issuance of clearances. 'Cleared for the ILS Z to 34L;' for instance and not just; 'cleared for the approach.'

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: B777 Relief Pilot expresses confusion over the letter designations of the various approaches at RJAA and the temporary revisions to all procedures due to a VOR outage.

Narrative: The chart coverage for NRT/RJAA has gotten completely out of control. It has become so confusing and convoluted that choosing the correct chart is difficult at best and a guessing game at worst. As a Relief First Officer; the flying pilots and I spent over fifteen minutes debating which combination of arrival and approach charts were the correct ones to use. There are two separate issues I believe are creating most of the confusion. First; the number of temporary charts for the entire NRT/RJAA coverage makes it difficult to determine which chart is correct on any given day. There is not much guidance on some of the charts as to which ones should be used when. There were three separate charts available to fly the ILS to 34L; all of which we found a reasonable argument as to why it might be the proper chart to use. I am sure there is some rhyme or reason to the organization of the charts but it is not clear to the average line pilot what it is. I doubt I am the only one who finds it confusing and a ripe area for problems to develop when the wrong chart is used inadvertently.My suggestion for improvement is to find a reasonable balance between the lawyers' need to cover every possibility for charting and the pilots need to be able to figure out reasonably which chart to use. I understand the need for detailed charting when a navaid will be out of service for some time. But having three arrivals with the same name is begging for problems. If the CVC VOR will be out of service until June 2012; then issue the charts with procedures that do not require the CVC VOR and limit it to one chart per name; not two or three. Then reissue the charts in June when the navaid is returned to service. Additionally the ATC controllers should be briefed to be clear and specific in their issuance of clearances. 'Cleared for the ILS Z to 34L;' for instance and not just; 'cleared for the approach.'

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of April 2012 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.