As Richard mentioned, Navigraph needs an official real-world source if they are to report the supposedly outdated approaches to Jeppesen.
Said approaches that suppsedly should not exist are currently charted by Jeppesen and the corresponding charts have been updated in June 2022 or more recently:
ILS Y 31 | Chart 11-2 | Last updated 17 Jun 2022
RNP W 13 | Chart 12-5 | Last updated 25 Nov 2022 | Effective 1 Dec 2022
RNP Y 13 | Chart 12-3 | Last updated 25 Nov 2022 | Effective 1 Dec 2022
RNP W 31 | Chart 12-5 | Last updated 25 Nov 2022 | Effective 1 Dec 2022
RNP X 31 | Chart 12-4 | Last updated 25 Nov 2022 | Effective 1 Dec 2022
Jeppesen doesn’t update charts for no reason, it is much more likely that Jeppesen’s data and charts are correct and your data source is not.
As to the date, that’s my mistake, I was hasty (since in my mind the exact date didn’t really matter) and only looked at ILS Y 31 (hence June). But the fact remains that those extra approaches should not exst in the current AIRAC, irrelevant whether that’s since June or since November.
In general, this seems to be a widespread issue (mismatch between AIP and FMS Data) with Jeppesen and/or Navigraph. I have witnessed this with multiple airports throughout the years. Just a few weeks/months ago I reported the same issue at LPMA (which you yourself confirmed Richard) as well as SKBO. There are other instances I’ve personally experienced over the years, but I’ve only recently started reporting them.
we report all, where we have a reference and/or where we find a reference. In general, the most issues comes directly from the country itself. We don’t use any airline/carrier specific data in our source. Therefore it’s important for us and also for Jeppesen, to get the references.
Unfortunately, I haven’t found any public reference to FSIA …
Your Charts app is set to CAO mode (where only charts for which a Jeppesen airline-optimized “commercial airline overlay” version exists are presented). Presumably your operator’s charts app only presents such charts as well.
That does not mean other charts or approaches do not exist in the “standard” mode:
If you look at the corresponding charts, the additional approaches are only applicable and available to category A and category B aircraft, which would explain why your operator does not have them in its database and/or charts.
Operator-specific references (e.g. those of a specific airline) are not sufficient and/or appropriate, as they (very often) omit approaches available to the general public (e.g. those only available to smaller, non-airline aircraft, as above) or the opposite, sometimes they include private approaches only available to specific operators but not the general public.
Without any additional data from the official Seychelles AIP, it would be foolish to assume Jeppesen just came up with and/or updated charts for non-existent approaches.
The Seychelles AIP data appears to be available for 25 dollars (without precision as to whether it comes in electronic or printed form), but I am not going invest my own money just to verify this, and while it’s their decision, I suspect it would not make good business sense for Navigraph to do so either, just to address one user’s report (especially since there is a high likeliness that the approaches do exist, since they are charted by Jeppesen).
Now this is very interesting indeed. I knew of the existence of the CAO format in Jeppesen, and that I was using it. I knew that it merged certain approaches into a single chart (most commonly all the ILS categories etc), I did not however know that it also completely filtered out certain procedures.
Thank you for this information, in that case, it would seem I was incorrect with my report.