Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 2 Eng; Retractable Gear
Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Flight Crew Last 90 Days 30; Flight Crew Total 3940; Flight Crew Type 800
Other / Unknown
Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach
Procedure; Human Factors; Aircraft
During FSS briefing for IFR flight to BUU I was not told that there was a NOTAM that the VOR Runway 29 approach was not authorized at night.  I was planning to use the RNAV 11 or RNAV 29 approach depending on winds but discovered in flight; 50 miles from BUU; that my Garmin 530W database did not have the approaches even though the unit is described in my flight handbook as being capable of providing both approaches.  I therefore selected the VOR Runway 29 approach and reviewed the approach notes to ensure there were no limitations against using it.  No limitations were shown on the approach plate.  I use an iPad and Foreflight for my maps and approach plates.  I did not actually land at BUU since the ceiling was below MDA altitude.  I diverted to another airport and landed without incident.  I discovered the NOTAM for BUU VOR 29 approach not authorized at night when reviewing events that occurred the next day to try and determine why the 530W did not have the RNAV approach plates. A few issues: 1) The NOTAM system can be much improved.  The VOR 29 NOTAM is months old and is advertised as being in effect until next year.  With electronic downloads of approach plates occurring every 60 days; and the cost of updating the approach plate for electronic download being essentially 'free;' why not update the approach plates for NOTAMs expected to be in-effect for the entire 60 days?  FSS will then have fewer NOTAM's to read and provide to pilots (or pilots to read during online briefings) and the NOTAM information will have a much higher probability of being communicated.  In addition; if the information is published on the plate; then the information will be located where and when needed by the pilot.2) The 'change' to delete the RNAV approaches apparently started with the FAA and per FAA direction GARMIN eliminated the approaches from the database.  This is the subject of Special Airworthiness Information Bulletin HQ-14-25 issued four days after the above flight.  After discussing with Jeppesen and Garmin; Garmin says it published on its website the approaches that are not available.  However; I get my database updates from Jeppesen and no information was provided that the database was missing information.  Important information like published approaches not provided should be provided by the database update provider at the time the database update is downloaded on the same screen used to perform the download so no further work by the user is needed to identify critical missing information.3) The FAA removed important RNAV approaches without prior notice.  The SAIB and other communication from Garmin and Jeppesen should have been provided BEFORE removing the approaches; not after.
Light twin pilot on a night IFR flight to BUU discovers enroute that the RNAV 11 and RNAV 29 approaches are not in his Garmin 530W database. The VOR 29 is selected but a missed approach and divert ensues due to low ceilings. Post flight reveals that the VOR 29 approach is not available at night by Notam and that per FAA direction GARMIN eliminated the RNAV approaches from the database. The RNAV approach information is only available on the Garmin web site.