Red Arrows display cancelled due to airspace infringement (merged)

[NineEighteen]

BBC Online (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/north_yorkshire/3177813.stm) reporting. I guess some people didn't read the NOTAM's today. :ouch:
Air show threat to prosecute pilots


The Red Arrows were set to top the bill
Four pilots could be prosecuted after the Red Arrows were forced to abort an air show display at the last minute over safety fears.

The world-famous RAF display team were on their final approach to the annual Yorkshire Air Show at Elvington, near York, when a series of airspace infringements made it too dangerous to fly.

A microlight aircraft, a glider and a large flock of birds all strayed into the restricted airspace in addition to one other, as yet, unspecified infringement.

The display team were forced to stand-off four miles from the airfield before cancelling their appearance altogether on safety grounds.

Rare occurrence

Furious air show organiser Ken Cothliff said the Civil Aviation Authority had been informed and the pilots of the rogue aircraft could expect to be prosecuted.

He added: "The Red Arrows can probably count on the fingers of one hand how often this has happened in the past."

The Red Arrows were the top attraction at the two-day event which is expected to attract more than 30,000 people.

Aircraft taking part in the displays will include the Utterly Butterly Wingwalkers, DeHavilland Sea Vixen, B-25 Mitchell Bomber, North American T-6 Harvard, Blue Eagles and the SAR Sea King.

There are also trade stands, craft stalls, classic cars, military vehicles, a funfair, helicopter rides and a static aircraft park.

The Red Arrows are still due to perform at the show on Monday.

[Evo]

A microlight aircraft, a glider and a large flock of birds all strayed into the restricted airspace in addition to one other, as yet, unspecified infringement.


Ah, that must be who BIRDTAMs are for... :)

[knobbygb]

Hmmm.. After cancelling my trip to Compton Abbas yesterday, I was just about to depart north to Bagby - routing overhead Elvington :uhoh: - when an instructor overheard me discussing the route and warned me about the airshow. I had checked the NOTAMS's for the trip south, but not for my new route! There but for the grace of god etc etc.....

[Pilotage]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/north_yorkshire/3177813.stm

Somebody's in trouble, and presumably it's not the large flock of birds.

Does anybody have any intelligence or gossip? The normal sources of reliable rumour seem remarkably quiet.

P

[Flyin'Dutch']

Similar happened last year on the coast and cost the microlight pilot £600.

Suspect that this will go a similar way (vis-a-vis a prosecution) but that the monetary stakes will be higher.

FD

[Aussie Andy]

Surely most people traversing the area would have contact with, say, Fenton APP or some other LARS unit in the area... even if they hadn't seen the NOTAM?

[DB6]

Forget it, Andy. Light aircraft yes but microlights and particularly gliders not generally. It wasn't uncommon to see gliders well within the Fenton MATZ (not illegal I know) and occasionally within the ATZ, without so much as a peep. Lots of gliding around there from Rufforth, Pocklington and Burn. Never spoke to Fenton.

[Wily Coyote]

Well, I was there.

We spent 3 hrs in traffic (2.5 of which was within a mile of the airfield) and 12 quid to get in, specifically to see the Red Arrows. I haven't seen them for years and my g/f has never seen them so I'd like to offer my thanks to the ***hole microlight and glider pilots who ruined my day, along with 30,000 other people.

Judging by the comments I overheard, those 30,000 people are not likely to be sympathetic to GA in the future, so well done my friend, you couldn't have picked a better day - you've made 30,000 enemies of GA today. Thanks.

As far as I know, there were 4 infringements, 2 of which were contacted by radio but the othe two could not be contacted. I assume this was the glider and the microlight.

Thanks to all the other pilots there today - they ensured it wasn't wasted trip, the flying was incredible, especially the aerobatic glider and the two Extra displays. Amazing!!

Sorry for the rant everyone, I am EXTREMELY angry about this but it's the other 29,999 that you need to be worried about, not me :*

Wily

[Aussie Andy]

Fair enough if non-radio... but don't gliders / microlighter's read NOTAM?

[Evo]

En-route to Compton Abbas yesterday Bournemouth were asking all traffic if they were aware of an airshow/ATZ at Cowes - based on the response that we heard while we were on frequency nobody reads NOTAMs.... :(

[Saab Dastard]

Evo,

I can assure you that I read the Notams, and was aware of the West Cowes temp ATZ for the heliport and airshow. Actually changed my flight plan as a result.

Also that Compton's NDB was U/S - not that I could have picked it up anyway, 'cos the ADF in the A/c I was flying can't pick up the decimal 5!

So apart from you, me and Mike Cross... ;)

Cheers

SD

[Speedbird252]

Evo, not to mention the increase in CHIRP reports.....

:rolleyes:

[Aussie Andy]

Oi! ... and me!

Andy :ok:

[Irv]

I think birds find it difficult to dial freephone numbers. :rolleyes: what was the excuse from the others?

ps: Anyone particularly surprised?? (which is the 'deep sigh' emoticon?)

[Fly Stimulator]

The NOTAM system doesn't always make it easy.

I posted the NOTAM here about the mass microlight Channel crossing on Saturday, but, as far as I can see, you'd only have been aware of it normally if you'd happened to specify Lashenden/Headcorn in your route briefing, in spite of the fact that the event affected a corridor form there to Abbeville via Ashford, Cap Gris Nez and L2K.

[Flyin'Dutch']

There is no doubt that the Notam service is now considerably better than at its inception.

The main feature which is sadly lacking is a visual presentation of the information.

That is a big shame.

FD

[Ex Oggie]

Just to even the balance a little, and lift the mood. I was keeping a listening watch on Wellesbourne on Saturday. The Arrows were displaying at a local event, and Wellesbourne was just encompassed in the Restriction (6nm/8k IIRC). I was thoroughly impressed that all based and visiting aircraft seemed to be up to speed on the NOTAM and everyone was down a good 15 minutes before the slot time. At Wellesbourne, that usually means quite a few a/c!

The only 2 transitting a/c I heard who were not aware sounded like dual training flights, although I might be mistaken, I wasn't really paying much attention. If that was indeed the case, it would certainly raise a few questions in my mind if I was the student (or the CFI!).

[Mike Cross]

While these infringements are almost certainly the fault of the pilots concerned we should also look at the possible underlying contributory factors.

An example of what I mean:- A pilot may raise his flaps on the landing roll and inadvertantly raise the wheels instead. Although it's his fault, a contributory factor might be that the switches are similar and next to each other and a change to the layout would improve safety.

I must confess to a certain sympathy for the glider pilot and a feeling that a contributory factor to his infrimgement might be the format of the data available to him, and that a change might improve safety.

Gliders can cover very wide areas, never in a straight line. The tools available on the AIS site are geared toward a pilot flying in a straight line from A to B. It is also possible to use them to provide a brief for a local area, but a glider pilot needs information on a much wider area so he is stuck with the FIR brief.

It is not easy to build a geographic picture in your mind from this brief, and maybe 3 hours from take-off, while concentrating on finding and staying in lift while at the same time keeping a very good lookout (gliders tend to gaggle together when lift is found) it must be very difficult to simultaneously re-read copious pages of brief to find out what the hazards are in the particular area that you have ended up in.

What is deparately needed in this situation is some sort of graphical reference. An outline map with the hazards marked on it that can be referenced to the chart and which gives references to the individual items in the brief (e.g. a mark on the map with the NOTAM number next to it). This would allow the pilot to rapidly locate the items relevant to his location.

I suspect depictions of Nav Warnings will be all that is needed, remaining items that might affect the flight can be picked up from scanning the brief before take-off.

Producing the geographic plot is not particularly difficult, given good data to work from. Several people have produced software to do the job, the best known being Ian Fallon with NotamPlot and Ian Bennett with NotamPro. Unfortunately they and everyone else are hamstrung by the CAA witholding essential information.

What most pilots call NOTAM are in fact Pre-Flight Information Bulltetins (PIB's). These are produced from NOTAM but data included in the original NOTAM and which is essential to the process of selection sorting and display is omitted from the output.

This is a deliberate policy by the CAA. NATS have no objection to the release of the data, it is the CAA who are deliberately blocking its release, despite requests from myself and others.

This is a real "Catch 22". "We welcome safety improvements but we won't give you the information that you need to produce them, therefore we cannot condone the use of your product."

If you would like to make representations on this subject the person responsible for the CAA policy in this area is

Phil Roberts
Assistant Director, Airspace Policy 1
Room K 603, CAA House
45-59 Kingsway
London WC2B 6TE

Further contact details can be found in Chaper 4 of CAP 723 (http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP723.pdf)

Mike

[Another_CFI]

SD,

Most ADFs cannot be tuned to point 5. The solution in the case of Compton Abbas which is on 349.5 is to try both 349 and 350 and find out by listeneing to the ident which is the stronger and leave the ADF tuned to that frequency.

[stillin1]

I agree that the present NOTAM system is very unuser-friendly. However these idiots are trying to soar with eagles whilst flying like turkeys. Fact - infringment was - 1x glider, 1x microlight & a Cessna. There is no excuse. They were just plain negligent in planning and or navigational awareness. Ground em! I prefer not to be in the air with dip-s##ts.

[englishal]

Comptons NDB has been U/S for ages hasn't it.....at least I remember reading a Notam about it ages ago, then remembering this Notam a couple of weeks ago when I was trying to track the NDB.....:D

Prehaps more people would heed Notams if there was such as thing as being able to speak to a pre-flight briefer [without having to apply for an overdraft first] ? Notams are very difficult to trawl through, and I must admit I didn't see the Sea Harrier display at Weymouth last Wednesday Notamed at all, and I deliberately looked for it beforehand [although the Arrows were there though judging by the number of light aircraft in the vicinity just before the display, I wonder how many people actually do read Notams?]

EA

[MasterCaution]

Temporarily reserved airspace is also notified in AICs, so even if the pilots in this incident had problems with the NOTAM system, they did read the AICs... didn't they?

MC.

[gasax]

I wonder how many people read the NOTAMs and still don't get it? Well some of us try but........

Aberdeen to Kemble - 31 pages of almost completely useless NOTAMS. Tucked away in all that crap a couple of displays and TRAs. The good thing? two pilots and plenty of time to read through it all. But this is not the way to do anything in the 21st century.

NOTAMS ae supposed to be useful and accessible. I know some people have put in huge personal efforts to sort out the shambles that the AIS created. My sincere thanks to them. But 31 pages of which possibly 2 were in anyway relevant to our flight?????

And yes I used the narrow route option, yes I tried to filter. The end result is we still have information being disseminated in the same manner as in 1950. All we have is a lot of our personal hardware ( and costs) used to do that.

What we need is a sensible website that gives us a graphical output - you could browse it quickly online and then go.

Did I assimulate all the items on the 31 pages correctly - of course not, should I have been looking out of the window instead of reading this stuff - of course I should.

So long as the AIS insist on Stone Age presentation of mostly irelevant information which is supposed to aimed at PPLs there but for the grace of god go you and I.

[Circuit Basher]

What's an AIC??!! ;)
<fx: Ducks and runs for cover, donning fireproof suit as he runs!!>

[fireflybob]

Absolutely no excuse for this infringement, in my opinion, and I hope the CAA through the book at the culprits.

Never mind reading the NOTAMS, what about calling the FreePhone Royal Flights Number which also includes Restriction of Flying Info when the Red Arrows are operating. I rang the number before I went flying yesterday and the information was clearly on the recording. How often is anyone not near a phone these days?!

[Floppy Link]

What's the number again?
I had it but lost it when changing mobile phones...
thanks
Russell
Russell's half scale P47 (http://www.espotlight.co.uk/gbtbi)

[chrisN]

I don't think there is a viable excuse for glider (or microlite) pilots to not read NOTAM data before going on a cross country flight. It can be done relatively easily once one is used to the system, much improved through Mike Cross's and others' efforts, though still far from perfect, and yes, the graphical data would be a big help.

I pull a list of NOTAM's (OK, PIB, to be pedantic) using Narrow Route option for my gliding club each flying day. It runs to about 2-3 pages worth (not the 31 pages I have heard of others getting, including a mention on the other thread started about this Red Arrows infringement). I then filter out warnings about Iraq flights, unusable comms and nav things etc., bird of prey training. I am left with a list about 1/2 to 1 page long - e.g. today there are 5 things worth noting in Suffolk and Norfolk.

This process takes about 5-10 minutes.

I don't look at AIC's - I no longer am able to have paper ones sent to me, apparently (they just stopped coming years ago) and no way am I going to trawl through every AIC on the AIS website, even if I could find them, to see what is a daily nav warning - that's not the right place for such data.

My standard narrow route to cover a decent local gliding area is Cambridge to Great Yarmouth (ECSC-ECSD), 40 miles wide, FL 40. It picked up an event in Hornchurch, Essex, today, among other things.

On a good gliding day with long distances possible to the North for instance, I put in a diversion to Sheffield or somewhere like that. (From my club, all long flights tend to be northerly.)

The output from all this is posted up in our briefing room for any local glider pilot to see. Any other gliding club could do the same - or indeed any individual with internet access (not all have).

Chris N.

[Evo]

For the first time in ages I'm perfectly satisfied with the NOTAM system - the last couple of narrow route briefings I've used were short, concise and 95% relevant. I'm not saying that it's perfect, but it's much much better.

BUT - if you end up with pages of cr@p about Brest control and the Welshpool NDB then why not check when you are talking to someone en-route? I had my skills test very shortly after the new system became mandatory and after half an hour myself, my examiner and the CFI could not be sure that we had spotted all the important NOTAMs (IIRC there were over 80 pages in what seems to be random order). We just asked every station that we talked to if there was anything we should know about - there was, a gliding competition from Lasham to Devizes (we were going to fly through the middle of it. It was NOTAMed but we missed it) and Farnborough were happy to tell us about it.

There are ways around the poor availability of NOTAMs, always have been. Better sorting, graphical displays of NOTAMs etc. may help some people, but the real problem is people making no effort at all to check their route is clear and then wandering around no talking to anyone (apart from their mate on 123.45 ;) ). Maybe the best thing would be for the CAA to recommend 'extensive retraining' for a few people, to make the rest of us try harder...

[Evo]

I then filter out warnings about Iraq flights


Did you select VFR/IFR? I find that a lot of the 'rubbish' is part of the IFR brief and selecting VFR only cuts out most of them

[PPRuNe Radar]

I must confess to a certain sympathy for the glider pilot and a feeling that a contributory factor to his infrimgement might be the format of the data available to him

I have no sympathy with someone who is unable to pick up a phone and dial a freephone number to obtain information on Red Arrows or Royal Flight information.

Airmanship 0/10

PS the number is 0500 354802

[chrisN]

Evo, I forgot to select VFR only this morning. I usually get it right, having read that tip before on PPRuNe. Thanks for the reminder.

I don't call the 0500 number - that is done by a "duty pilot" as part of a daily checklist at my gliding club. (We also have other duties including daily calls to Essex Radar to alert them to start and finish of gliding, as required by a Letter of Agreement, mandated by our CAA permission to winch launch.)

Chris N.

[bertiethebadger]

A couple of things.

I flew from Blackbushe to the Bembridge fly in yesterday. Checked the Notam's & the Cowes event + others near route were clear to see. Cowes was mentioned more than once. But did anything actually happen there? I know the weather wasn't good for aero's most of the time, but I never saw (or heard on Solent) anything there.

Also, when I set off (11:50), the Farnborough controler was having to spend all her time routing a guy out of the Londonm TMA. It was very obvious that he was interfering with Heathrow movements.

Not only was he interupting Heathrow, but the Farnborough controler was too busy with him to even talk to most other traffic or offer an FIS. All this at a time when there was a lot of traffic & a cloud base of >2000'

Top marks to her though in a very serious situation.

The last thing I heard her say to him was an advisory that he'll be reported.

[Saab Dastard]

the Farnborough controler was having to spend all her time routing a guy out of the Londonm TMA. It was very obvious that he was interfering with Heathrow movements.

Curious to know if there is a mechanism for Farnborough to pass such an infringement directly to Heathrow on 119.9 or some such.

(Hasten to add - absolutely no criticism of the controller who did an excellent job, just wondering, is all)

SD

[Vere de fakawee]

I chatted to the CAA Air Display inspector who was at Elvington. He said the RAF are always keen to have infringements investigated in ‘a most thorough way’. 2 fixed wing aircraft, both high-wing Cessnas, one microlight and a glider, all happened to be in the Red Arrows TRA as they ran in to display. Red 1 spotted all of them as he led the formation past and called a halt to the display, which he seemed to agree with as the safest option open to the Arrows (I agree!). Obviously, quite a few people may be getting an interview without tea & biccies this week…

There’s absolutely no excuse for this one. Poor nav, poor airmanship, maybe poor use of GPS and failing to read the NOTAMs are almost certainly the causes.

The GA community got a VERY bad name yesterday at Elvington, all because of a few f*ckwits.

[HelenD]

I dont think many people do read NOTAMS and that includes instructors. Maybe it is because very few people understand all the abbreviations. As Instructors may not have been trained to read NOTAMS they may not feel comfortable trying to teach a PPL student how to read them which leaves contientious pilots to teach themselves. Do airline pilots have to read NOTAMS or is that the job of the ops person?

[gasax]

The crux of the issue is that the vast majority of commercial pilots have some level of operational support. So the NOTAMS AICs etc pretty much come ready for consumption.

As a PPL you used to have 40-ish pages of the old A8 briefing to read through - which covered the whole of the UK and was in more of less lattitude order.

Now you need a PC, internet connection and still have to read through a good deal of irrelevant verbiage - and this 'service' is supposedly aimed directly at our requirements!!!!!

It can be a great deal easier. All this has been thrashed out in this and outer fora. Perhaps it needs our flying lawyer to defend some of these people - showing just how poor these arrangements are?

[Evo]

I dont think many people do read NOTAMS and that includes instructors. Maybe it is because very few people understand all the abbreviations. As Instructors may not have been trained to read NOTAMS they may not feel comfortable trying to teach a PPL student how to read them which leaves contientious pilots to teach themselves.


I really hope this isn't true. It's not like the rest of the aviation world would get a clear English award - we all have to learn to understand TAFs & METARs (and we all read those before flight... don't we?), V_speeds in the POH and all sorts of abbreviations for Nav. There is just no excuse for not being bothered to read the NOTAMs or not understanding them. If it's a bit opaque, and some certainly are, then ask!

Maybe many people can get away with it for a long time without anything going wrong, but if one day you go bust a TRA because you don't know it is there then you deserve everything you get.

As for Instructors, if they cannot understand NOTAMs and explain them then they shouldn't be instructing!

[rustle]

Perhaps it needs our flying lawyer to defend some of these people - showing just how poor these arrangements are?

You're having a laugh, right?

Let's picture the courtroom drama unfolding....

Prosecution: "So you were, were you not, PIC of an aircraft on the afternoon of Sunday 24th August near the Elvington Aerodrome?"

Pilot: "Erm, yes..." :O

Prosecution: "And you were aware, were you not, that a temporary restricted area, a 'TRA', was in force around that area at the material time?"

DOH!

Pilot: "No. The NOTAM briefing system is rubbish, the lack of a graphical output is hopeless, and it is just too many pages of irrelevant rubbish to wade through I was not aware of the TRA"

Prosecution (in his most incredulous/indignant tone): "So, in other words, you were not in receipt of all the information necessary for the safe conduct of a flight as required by the Air Navigation Order!"

Prosecution, continuing his indignation: "Red Arrows flights/Royal Flights/TRAs all these can be ascertained from a free phone call!! You are aware of this facility are you not?"

Pilot: "Um, err" :O :O

Prosecution: "So you didn't check the AIS provided pre-flight "NOTAM" briefing, you didn't call the free-call number, and you chose to speak to no-one enroute notwithstanding the fact that a crowd of 30,000+ at a usually quiet aerodrome may have been noticeable from the air!!"

Pilot: "Can I change my plea?" :O :O :O

Prosecution: "The prosecution rests, m'lud... And we would seek the maximum penalty available, sir... "

------------------------------------------

The tools are not perfect, but they are getting much better.

But if you don't read them it doesn't matter how good the output is.

[Whirlybird]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I dont think many people do read NOTAMS and that includes instructors. Maybe it is because very few people understand all the abbreviations. As Instructors may not have been trained to read NOTAMS they may not feel comfortable trying to teach a PPL student how to read them which leaves contientious pilots to teach themselves.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I really hope this isn't true.

I rather suspect that it might be. When I was doing my PPL(A), I never heard of NOTAMS until I was well into doing cross countries. When it was eventually mentioned it was quite clear that my instructor didn't have a clear idea how to interpret them, and their importance certainly wasn't emphasised. The place was full of low hours hour-building instructors, which may or may not be relevant here. When I was doing my PPL(H), I was assumed to have done some navigation, but do you know, I can't recall anyone mentioning NOTAMS, ever. And you would have thought someone would have checked that I was reading them, wouldn't you? :eek: :eek: :eek:

Now, of course by the time I came to do my instructors course no-one mentioned NOTAMS, because I'd been using them for years, hadn't I? Well, yes, actually I had. But I well might not have been, under those circumstances.

So I rather think HelenD's statement might be true. And I do find myself wondering how many people are reading this, keeping quiet, and thinking: "There but for the Grace of God..."

Now don't go and flame me; I'm just stating what I think may be the case. Shooting the messenger will help no-one. :(

[Capt BK]

Just got back from covering Fire+Rescue at Elvington.

I've got to admit we didn't hear anything about Cessna's but there was a lot of talk about the microlight and a few people mentioned the glider. Word on the street is that the microlight pilot is to be fined £2000 by the CAA and be grounded for a while however I personally don't believe this rumour, i can't believe the CAA would dish out a penalty so quickly.

I have heard however that the air show organisers are planning to sue the pilot and knowing what they are like they probably will!

The Red Arrows did do a superb display today (along with the rest of the aircraft) but with the weather not being as good today as it was yesterday it would have been nice to see the full display.

CBK

[Evo]

I rather suspect that it might be. When I was doing my PPL(A), I never heard of NOTAMS until I was well into doing cross countries.


Different places, different methods then I guess. I got a briefing on them before my first Navex, and afterwards my instructor made sure that I had checked the NOTAMs before signing me out (he'd check them first, so he would know if I hadn't :) ).

Still, I doubt that there are many people that can get a PPL without ever discovering NOTAMs - IIRC there are questions on them in three of the PPL exams (Air Law, Flight Perf & Planning and Nav). They are no more obscure than Rule 5 or Class-A airspace, but the difference is that you can usually get away with ignoring the NOTAMs ... so I guess people do.

[Vere de fakawee]

Amazing how quickly rumours get started. Unbelieveable how, almost less than 24 hours after the incident, that a summary £2000 fine is announced? The paperwork would not have even got to the desk of the CAA yet, let alone decide whether or not to investigate, let alone go to court and, if found guilty, announce the fine. I reckon on a fairly hefty fine but surely in about 6 months time maybe at the earliest? Unless the CAA have now got a 'fast-track' fines system, just like their fast track license issue system, not.

I'm not sure on what grounds the organisers are going to sue the pilot? Loss of earnings? Does this mean I can sue an Air Display organiser if I don't like the display?

Its a wacky world we live in:ugh:

[bluskis]

To be fair to the RAF they did investigate when I reported a formation of three Hercules for flying through the circuit of an unlicenced but active aerodrome at 600 ft while I was in the circuit.

They eventually let me know some months later that the Hercs had me in sight. Good I thought.

On the subject of the air display infringement, it seems to highlight the advisability of talking to appropriate ATC services, who might have advised the pilots concerned before they infringed.

I am surprised at how many posters diligently read the notams and are confident they have taken into account all those affecting them. I am never so confident.

[vintage ATCO]

Word on the street is that the microlight pilot is to be fined £2000 by the CAA and be grounded for a while . . . . .

You've got to be kiddin'!! Air Regulation Enforcement will not be back in the office until tomorrow! Will be months.

I don't know why the surprise, we regularly get the airspace around Old Warden busted during displays. No TRA admittedly but it is always notfied in the Daily Nav Warning summary and I wrote an AIC at the start of the season giving all the dates and asking people to stay clear. Can't be difficult to spot, a few thousand cars and lots of aeroplanes on the ground!!


VA

[WorkingHard]

"the RAF are always keen to have infringements investigated in ‘a most thorough way’."

Are they just as keen when it is they that infinge or step outside the legal limits? It was very very stupid of the pilots to go anywhere near a TRA and cannot be condoned at all.

"Red 1 spotted all of them as he led the formation past and called a halt to the display, which he seemed to agree with as the safest option open to the Arrows (I agree!). "

As for Red 1 seeing the a/c in the TRA why was he not informed earlier by the appropriate radar unit? Surely the Reds were in receipt of some kind of service from the nearest military radar or were they assuming that the TRA would protect them from idiots (oh and birds)?

[vintage ATCO]

I wouldn't assume the Reds get a radar service for every display they do (I have no idea in this particular case). A TRA is, after all, suppose to be a TRA.

VA

[Capt BK]

I thought about leaving out the rumour i'd heard but had to put it in to see what response it got! If the organisers did sue I don't have a clue on what grounds? I don't think they would have lost any money, all displays are normally subject to change (isn't everything these days:rolleyes: ) so i doubt they would have given anyone their money back. Like it or not were going the same way as the Americans when it comes to suing.

I can't be certain but I'm sure I heard on the radio before the Monday display that the Reds were in touch with Humberside Radar checking for any possible conflicting traffic, don't know whether they did that on the Sunday though.

I would have thought they would have been in touch with Church Fenton (if they were open). They usually supply LARS in the York area so should have been aware of most things in the air even if it only gave a small echo. The hold for the display was also to the west of Elvington which must have pretty much put them on top of it! We will probably never know.

Incidentally I have to admit during my PPL training NOTAMS were never really emphasised as much as I now know they should.

[BEagle]

Some diametrically opposed views on this site. However, the current NOTAM system really is rubbish, it has to be said. Pages and pages about rocket firing in some obscure corner of the Outer Hebrides, kite flying for birds of prey training etc etc. The previous system was vastly better - if a pilot misses a particular NOTAM because it's buried amongst the garbage, then I wouldn't be totally surprised.

Plus why does one have to register to access the AIS website in order to check the AICs for TRAs? If it's safety information, it should be freely available.

Sorry that the show was ruined for you; perhaps this might persuade the CAA to make availability and dissemination of NOTAMs more straightforward than it currently is?

I've just tried to access the AIS website; after 5 minutes the TRA list still hadn't loaded. Eventually it did - the locations are listed, but not the times. For that you are directed to the general website - which doesn't have a hotlink to the TRA times. So I told it I was due to fly from Wombleton to Barton tomorrow (in that stupid back-to-front format) and asked for general VFR information. The result? Pages and pages of crap about London City airport, Culdrose etc etc. So yes, if a pilot said that he couldn't easily find out about the Red Arrows TRA times these days thanks to the crazy NOTAM format, then I wouldn't be at all surprised!

GET THIS NONSENSE SORTED OUT!!

[Genghis the Engineer]

As for Red 1 seeing the a/c in the TRA why was he not informed earlier by the appropriate radar unit? Surely the Reds were in receipt of some kind of service from the nearest military radar or were they assuming that the TRA would protect them from idiots (oh and birds)?

However, it is very obvious that many controllers these days have an aversion to use of primary Radar except when it's very quiet. Since it's highly unlikely that the villains of this piece were squawking (except maybe the birds, and then almost-certainly on the wrong frequency and not loudly enough) it's entirely possible that a controller won't have seen them.

About a year ago I saw a microlight make a precautionary to a prohibited disused airfield under Solent CTA from within Bournemouth. I reported it to the Solent controller who had clearly had no sight of the aircraft in question on his Radar at-all.

G

[QNH 1013]

I think a lot of us have been short-changed in our training. I was told about the notams when I did my PPL but never taught how to understand them. I was, however, taught about the freephone "Royal Flights" number and expected to use it before any cross-country flight. At that time, the freephone number seemed to be prominently displayed at every airfield and in every briefing room both in posters and in the diamond shaped sticker. I'm not certain, but I don't think it has so much prominence now. Could this be a factor?

I didn't learn how to understand the NOTAMS until I was training for my Instrument Rating (5 years after getting a licence) and it was a revelation to me when I was shown that all the information was in lattitude order and therefore easy to quickly find the relevent bits. In the meantime I had done IMC and Night ratings, but it is a sad reflection on the training organisations that I was never shown how to interpret notams properly and was still just "muddling through". For the IR, however, it was essential to be able to use notams quickly because for the CAA IR flight test the examiner only gives you 45 mins to plan his route (including answering questions on danger areas active etc), book the approaches, file the flight plan, and do the weight and balance and fuel logs. I wouldn't like to have to meet this deadline with the present system, but presumably some people have to.

I preferred the old notams in lattitude order because I could rapidly locate relevent information. With the new system it seems (to me) to be too mixed up, and takes (me) much longer.

We need to look for solutions, and I think one of those is for flight training organisations to ensure their instructors understand, and then teach, how to best access and interpret the notams (and other pre-flight information).

[Whirlybird]

Maybe I've missed this, both when training and on this thread, but....

If you were a pilot who didn't own a PC, operating from a farm strip or small club with no facilities (like a lot of microlight clubs), how would you get hold of NOTAMS? Is there another way?

[Circuit Basher]

Seems to be a great deal of polarisation going on here. The AIS system has been greatly improved thanks to the efforts of some dedicated people who regularly contribute on PPRuNe plus some of the enlightened from some of the other agencies involved.

The present NOTAM system has, I believe, been taken about as far as it can within the constraints of the software package selected. It is still not as good a way of disseminating complex information as the old NotamPlot / NotamPro graphical displays. Even knowing the route I am about to fly, I frequently haven't even looked at the lat / long coordinates of every point along the route and then manually cross-checked to the PIB. I try to just focus on which look closest to me and then read the text to see whether it's in the same vertical box as I plan to be in.

The only time I check NOTAMs these days is where I plan to fly outside the local flying area or on a route which is close to known danger areas / remote from an ATSU. As for reading AICs - I did make a deliberate attempt yesterday to read some of the newer ones for the first time in over a year. As I don't fly as part of a 'school' environment, all the flight preparation is down to me (no quick check of weather / NOTAM clipboards) and is done in the 24 hrs leading up to a flight. I can also say that I have *never* even considered ringing the Royal Flights number (during training, I used to fly from Bournemouth and I just checked the Royal Flights clipboard). I have not come up with a routine for doing that these days.

I can put on the rose coloured :cool: shades and hypothesize that this will prompt the sudden dissemination of NOTAMs in a format compatible with NOTAM Pro, together with free Met telephone briefings, free access to briefing terminals at all GA airfields, reduced landing fees, no IFR enroute charges, etc.... ;) [have just been searching for a flying pink pig smiley like Danny's, but haven't found it!]... anyway, I've had some caffeine and woken up now!

Doubtless, the current NOTAM situation has not reduced the likelihood of this sort of thing occurring. I recognise that there are some who will continue to be in the "They're in the wrong and should be punished" camp and that is technically right. What I am saying is that there are contributory factors behind this occurrence that have increased the likelihood of it happening and the system should be reviewed to see how this risk can be mitigated. The human mind will always instinctively look for the easy route for doing anything - if the system makes it unecessarily complicated, then short cuts *will* be taken, resulting in occurrences like this.

I know I'm going to face http://www.click-smilies.de/sammlung/teufel/devil-smiley-029.gif for this post, but at least it's honest!! :)

[fireflybob]

Beagle, I am with you 100 % on this one!

I know that several Ppruners have been working with CAA etc to improve the system but I still think the whole thing is an abortion compared to the old system. Why on earth they had to change it I really do not know.

Whilst transgressing any TRA is serious I can understand any GA pilot giving up trying to get sensible NOTAM info. One day the authorities will have blood on their hands because of this change.

[witchdoctor]

Whilst the NOTAM system can no doubt be improved, I think part of the problem lies in pilots leaving too little time in their pre-flight prep to have a thorough read of all the relevant info. Ironic really when you consider the number of postings from PPls relating to wind/fuel/whatever calculations to the nth degree.

We have one poster who was seemingly reading his NOTAMs in the a/c whilst flying (kind of defeats the point really), and plenty more who see it as lists of endless cr@p, rather than potentially important info.

I will do a couple of different search combinations before my flights to ensure that I haven't missed that one important NOTAM which might allow me to keep my licence, even if it means reading several pages of stuff that isn't relevant to my exact route, or which hasn't changed in weeks. I'm not perfect, and I don't want to come across as 'holier than thou', but I'm also not prepared to allow anyone to take the licence I worked hard for away due to a simple omission on my part.

On the subject of FIs and NOTAMs, I trained for a CPL at a well-respected school, and it would seem that checking NOTAMs, as well as all other elements of flight planning, were left to the students. No bad thing, but we did often receive info from ATC while under RIS about para-dropping activity which hadn't been NOTAMed (we always double-checked on return to make sure we hadn't cocked up) and the FI always asked us if it was on NOTAMs as he clearly hadn't checked for himself.

[NineEighteen]

I agree that relevant NOTAM information is far from easy to spot but it certainly helps if you're aware of the major hazards that you are likely to encounter.

It's August and we're well into airshow season. Pilots should be aware of this and look hard for the obvious hazards. This information is not exclusive to NOTAM's/PIB's. Lists of upcoming airshows appear in flying magazines, local/national press, flying clubs etc...Isn't this part of our process before every flight?? For example, the weather is CAVOK, therefore it's likely that more air traffic will be about. The wind is westerly so traffic patterns can be anticipated on passing airfields; and that's the direction I'm working on if the engine goes quiet; there's an airshow down the road so it might be wise to avoid the area...It's all part of flight planing, isn't it?

It's amazing how relevant information leaps out at you (from any source) when you know what you're looking for.

[Wily Coyote]

I'm not sure on what grounds the organisers are going to sue the pilot? Loss of earnings? Does this mean I can sue an Air Display organiser if I don't like the display?

Presumably the organisers paid for a RA display and then didn't get one. I know that as the public, we paid for it initially but I would imagine the organisers would have a case. Don't really know though... personally I hope they try, but then I'm still pretty angry and upset about all this :(

I would have thought they would have been in touch with Church Fenton (if they were open). They usually supply LARS in the York area so should have been aware of most things in the air even if it only gave a small echo. The hold for the display was also to the west of Elvington which must have pretty much put them on top of it! We will probably never know.

Don't think Fenton are open at the weekend.

Wily

[Flyin'Dutch']

The notam system has improved to the stage that it is now more or less useable.

It is still not very userfriendly and certainly does not meet any reasonable standard of being pilot proof. QED.

It's a bit like using an ADF. It works but is not really of these times. What we need is the GPS equivalent (with map)

FD

PS: I think they want you to register to keep an eye on use. And in cases like this if you claim you did look it will be a lot easier to defend yourself if you actually looked and logged on.

[Mike Cross]

Circuit Basher

It's good to see someone recognising that despite the fact that blame can be ascribed fairly and squarely to the offender there are nonetheless still things that can be done by others to reduce the likelyhood of infringements.

For those who are having problems with the AIS site here are a number of pointers.

Guidance on which type of briefing to use can be found here (http://www.telecall.uk.com/ais/how_to_get_a_briefing.htm). You will also find details on alternative methods of getting briefs. Not having Internet access is no excuse for not briefing. You can get them by fax or telephone.

For those who hanker after a geographic sort it is still available, look at the VFR FIR briefs.

Background reading here (http://www.telecall.uk.com/ais/)

Print the FAQ's and PIB Help off the website. These documents are very useful and once you have gone through them you will be able to use the site to its full potential. By default the site will give you everything (the safest option). Understanding and using the tools available enables you to filter the data down to exclude irrelevant info. If having used the tools you still getting irrelevant info contact AIS. They are very good at responding. Remember, they don't write the NOTAM, every man and his dog can do that so errors do creep in. AIS do offer advice to promulgators but some just won't be told and have enough clout to override them.

The requirement to register allows NATS to monitor usage and the requirements of different types of user. Registration is free and only takes a few moments. It's no different to the Met Office site but no-one seems to gripe about registering for that. It also allows briefs to be traced. A pilot recently complained that the TRA for the Bournemouth Airshow was not included in his brief. Knowing his username and password AIS were able to trace his brief and find out what went wrong. (He had entered the date incorrectly).

The format and syntax of the information required (including the date) is exactly the same as that for an ICAO Flight Plan. 030826 may not match the normal date format (26/08/03) in the UK but aviation is an international business and we should conform to the internationally agreed format.

AIC's are distributed to aircraft owners. They are not generally regarded as required reading before flight. Among other things AIC's are used when complex or graphical information needs to be disseminated where the NOTAM format is unsuitable. In these cases a NOTAM will be issued referring to the AIC and the AIC should then be consulted for details. A prime example of this is the AIC for the PFA Rally. You will not find an AIC being issued on its own for a TRA. There will always be a NOTAM referring you to the AIC.

I hope this helps clear up some of the confusion

Mike

[Genghis the Engineer]

A correction if I may Mike. AIC (and until recently, ANs) are sent to registered owners of aircraft with a CofA. CAA does not send them to owners of either microlights or gliders (that's about 1/4 of all aircraft in UK airspace). (ANs now aren't sent to anybody, you are expected to look it up on the web too.)


And a thought, I personally regard NOTAMS as "weather", that is things in the sky that may affect my safe flying, and are bookmarked on my web browser accordingly. Now weather information is certainly more easily, cheaply and widely available than NOTAM information - okay, that's at-least partly because far more people than just aviators are interested in weather.

However, two main sources of Wx for aviators are ATIS and VOLMET. Although it might add, say 30 seconds onto the ATIS tape and a minute or so onto the VOLMET tape, I don't think that many people would find that unacceptable. If, say, each station transmitted NOTAMS (and of-course purple/sparrows data) for a fixed radius determined to ensure that we have complete UK coverage, then we could dial up before flight on radio or phone, or by RT, and equally call up NOTAMS en-route if considering a diversion. For that matter anybody planning a local trip should be able to get all the information they need from their base ATIS.

Worth exploring perhaps? Speaking as somebody who does often fly from grass-strips in the middle of nowhere, I'd use the facility - even more so if the met office can be persuaded to stop using a premium rate number for Volmet!

Expanding upon that thought slightly, if you look at the LARS coverage diagram - that only runs to 30nm radius and gives very wide coverage - presumably all the LARS servicing airfields provide ATIS and tying LARS and NOTAM coverage would simplify the issue of understanding where to go for information.

G

[Flyin'Dutch']

Hi Mike,

Thanks for the explanation once more.

As I said before it is now useable but still not user friendly.

It still produces reams of paper if you (like me) want to print it off to take with you with duplications. You can not edit that out to save a few trees.

Is there any progress with a visual representation of the information?

FD

[chrisN]

"AIC's are distributed to aircraft owners. "

As the owner of 2 gliders, I certainly don't get them. I wonder what definition of aircraft the CAA use to determine who "needs" them, and why. Maybe it's owners who are registered (i.e. the G-Axxx etc. lot) - gliders are exempt from such registration for flights in the UK, so virtually no gliders are so registered.

As a BGA official, I used to get them wearing that hat, but they stopped coming years ago without prior notice.

Chris N.

[Genghis the Engineer]

See my last. I think that BGA gets one set to the Secretary and BMAA gets one set to it's Chief Exec. Not a lot for 5000 odd aircraft is it.

G

[gasax]

I'm impressed by the number of people who seem to undertake hours of preparation before bravely seting forth upon an aerial voyage. I'm sure they get a lot out of it.

Perhaps they could tell me how without a computer (both at home and work) I can get NOTAMS for my farm strip?

Now luckily I have these things - but do not tell me that getting hold of 'essential flight information' should entail the considerable expense of having to do this.

I do have a telephone, so I could ring 0500 354 803 or I suppose I could ring the military on 01895 426153.

I unlike those mentioned above, cannot remember 31 pages of 'information', plus the TAFS and METARS and minor trivia like my routing - so my cockpit is strewn with paper.

But I can bin the forecast when airborne getting local conditions on the ATIS and that further away on the VOLMET. I suggested a similar arrangement to Genghis on the OnTrack website - but it didn't get carried forward.

The crux of all is that it is very easy to miss things, the whole idea of making information hard to access and interprete is hopelessly counter-productive.

I can get weather from dozens of sources - all at least as good at the MetOffice. Getting NOTAMS should not be so hard - if the weather can be got by phone so can the NOTAMS, I have a comm radio I can use it for weather - I cannot use it for anything else without tying up a controller. Which is largely I suspect what a lot of people actually rely on - talk to someone - if there is something on he/she will prbably let you know.

Like it or not most people do not/will not undertake preparations that last longer than their flights. But that is the situation we now have.

It is long past time where the hiding information in complex codes to reduce the cost of telex transmission, in an awkward and slow website can in anyway be considered an acceptable way of 'giving' pilots information

[Reichman]

I think a few of you are missing the point. I agree that the NOTAM system isn't ideal - but it is there and if you make a little effort you can get the information you need.

I was displaying both days at Elvington and would take great pleasure in throwing the 4 idiots who spoilt the Saturday into the crowd.

There is no excuse for their total lack of airmanship. Every mode of transport has rules, whether it be land sea or air. Sadly, ignoring them doesn't stop with Darwin's theory - it kills innocent people too.

I look forward to them being named and shamed.

And as for microlight pilots:

Put the engine back in the lawn mower.

[Mike Cross]

FD

Progress on graphical representation is stalled because of ADAP 1's decision to withold the information required to allow software developers to go to work - see my earlier posts in this thread.

Chris
Apologies to you and all the other owners of aircraft which do not hold a CofA issued by the CAA. AFIK they are the only ones who get AIC's sent to them (but for how much longer?)
I spent a very enjoyable one and half hours in a DG505 over Gloucestershire yesterday so don't write me off yet!

And in case anyone mistakenly assumes that I am pleading mitigating circumstances for the infringers I am not, I can't see any from where I sit. I'm just trying to gather support for improvements to the system so more people use it rather than put it in the "too difficult" tray.

Genghis & GASAX. Nice idea on the Volmet front but not practical. Not enough frequencies and how do you deal with wide area stuff? A lot of NOTAM affect a wide area and so would have to be repeated over many stations meaning you would get it all over and over again on the same flight. NOTAM is quite rightly part of PRE-FLIGHT plannning and should remain so.

I flew from Popham to Nympsfield and back yesterday. NOTAM for the route took very little longer than the weather to obtain and peruse and ran to I think 2-3 pages.

GASAX
Perhaps they could tell me how without a computer (both at home and work) I can get NOTAMS for my farm strip?
Oh dear, your report is annotated "must try harder"

Briefings are available by fax download on the following numbers:-

London FIR VFR Area Briefing: 020 8557 0064
Scottish FIR VFR Area Briefing: 020 8557 0065
London FIR Aerodrome Briefing: 020 8557 0051
Scottish FIR Aerodrome Briefing: 020 8557 0052

If you have neither Internet or Fax access call the AIS duty officer (H24) on 020 8745 3450/3451.

Will that do?:O

Mike

[Aussie Andy]

gasax:Perhaps they could tell me how without a computer (both at home and work) I can get NOTAMS for my farm strip? So, if you don't have internet access at home or work, then how do you post to PPRUNE!?!?!?!?!?

Lets just get over the fact that there is NO excuse not to read NOTAM, even if it is "bothersome" or "inconvenient"!

Sheesh!!!

Andy :D

[NineEighteen]

Aussie Andy says...So, if you don't have internet access at home or work, then how do you post to PPRUNE!?!?!?!?!?and gasax actually said...Perhaps they could tell me how without a computer (both at home and work) I can get NOTAMS for my farm strip?

Now luckily I have these things...Oops Aussie Andy, doesn't say much for your NOTAM reading skills :ouch:

(Apologies to AA and gasax but I couldn't resist wading in! :p)

[PPRuNe Radar]

I'm impressed by the number of people who seem to undertake hours of preparation before bravely seting forth upon an aerial voyage. I'm sure they get a lot out of it.

Perhaps they could tell me how without a computer (both at home and work) I can get NOTAMS for my farm strip?

How did people in such situations get their NOTAMs before the Internet service from AIS came in ?? Or didn't they bother then either ?? :ooh:

[Aussie Andy]

NineEighteen: I am both happy and unashamed to report that I take more care with pre-flight planning than when PPRUNing!

I think my further points still stand ;)

[fireflybob]

Pprune Radar, We got the info via snail mail at most aerodromes.

Just one sheet of A4 to check the Daily Nav Warnings for the London FIR. You could eliminate many by there altitude/time listings and it was a lot quicker than the current system via the internet.

I am all for having the info on the web but let's have it in a style which is quick and convenient.

Beagle above has said it all - the system is still far too unwieldy!

[PPRuNe Radar]

Thanks Fireflybob.

I guess that farm strip flyers would phone their local airfield then to get the info (which was the scenario gasax put) ? Presumably they can still do that, so from their prespective nothing has changed ??

I agree wholeheartedly that a more user friendly presentation is exactly what is needed for all users. Lets hope a pragmatic approach eventually dawns on the CAA.

That said, I still have no sympathy with the crews involved in this incident who had a system which is simple to use and predates the change to Internet AIS briefing by many years. The Freephone number. Their stupidity fortunately resulted in little more than inconvenience and disappointment this time around. But anything more serious could have had far reaching impacts on the thing we all enjoy. I would throw the book at them.

[bar shaker]

I'm rather amazed that people are printing out reams of Notams when software such as NotamPro exists. Its so dead easy to use, gives graphical displays of where the Notams refer to and makes the job a PoP. In fact it makes you wonder why the AIS website doesn't use a similiar system.

And as for microlight pilots:

Put the engine back in the lawn mower.

I'm not aware of any lawn mowers that use a 912S so I looked at your profile Mr Reichman. I'm sure the RAF Microlight Flying Association will be proud to read such a statement from a fellow services pilot :(

Infringements are not limited to any type of aircraft, they are the exclusive domain of people who don't fully plan their flight. That includes the 50+ GA pilots that wanted to transit Southend's airspace when it was TRA'd for their airshow this year and the Herc's that beat up Bluskies' circuit.

[Flyin'Dutch']

BS,

AFAIK any program which generates a graphic representation of the Notams relies on 3rd party information which needs to be cut and pasted into the software.

How reliable is that?

I think it is upon NATS to provide something better.

FD

[bar shaker]

FD

I completely agree.

As for the reliability of cutting and paste'ing... there will always be a weakness somewhere, but this doesn't strike me as a big one. You could print them out and get a printer error losing a page. Where do you draw the line?

BS

[Genghis the Engineer]

Affirm re: lawnmowers, presumably there must be something out there that cuts grass with a 100hp supercharged engine, it would certainly make short work of my lawn, but the technology of lawnmowers and microlights I suspect largely diverged before most of us learned to fly! I'm sure if you gave the RAFMFA's CFI a ring, a pleasant and professional chap with an MBE for services to microlighting, based at Cosford I believe, he'd be delighted I'm sure to set you straight - whilst possibly agreeing with views on poor airmanship on the part of a few aviators of any flavour.


Re: Mike Cross on AFIS/NOTAM, I'm not sure I agree that it would be unwieldy. Phrasing like:-

"NOTAMS, 30nm radius of XXX, airshow at yyyy avoid by 5nm, tethered balloon to 3000ft 5nm South of zzzz, danger area aaaa active to FL80, NOTAMS end" . Would be brief, and contain enough information to stay out of trouble, even if for full knowledge of what is going on you'd need the printed word. If you ignore airfield NOTAMS (runway serviceabilities and the like) the number of notices in any 30nm radius circle will be pretty small. I certainly think it would be worth trying at one airfield to see how it works if the powers that be could be persuaded.

G

[bar shaker]

FD

I missed a point in your post. NotamPro decodes the text as presented on the AIS website and doesn't rely on any third party info.

NotamPro demo download (http://www.notampro.com/download.htm)

[Wot No Engines]

Genghis,

nice idea, but I guess (strongly suspect) that the glider involved had no radio, or had it switched off. The arrows regularly call on gliding frequencies when transiting known busy areas and I have read elsewhere that another pilot heard their calls to the glider in this situation.

These are sadly the same people who believe that as they are not going far from their home field, NOTAMs are unimportant - they are for those who fly cross country. They are unlikely to use a radio to get them.

I had initially though that the state of the NOTAM system could be used in mitigation for these pilots, however, the more I read and think about it, the more I believe that even a perfect NOTAM solution wouldn't have helped - pity, a Judge blasting the CAA for inaction might just get a result

[Mike Cross]

Bar Shaker

NotamPro relies on the NATS backup PIB's which are not as up to date as the AIS site. Crucial information is missing from the data that NotamPro and NotamPlot use.

For example, I'm flying near Farnborough but remaining clear of their zone therefore a mark at Farnborough won't affect me.

Oh bu:mad:er! I infringed the TRA for the Farnborough air show and now they're throwing the book at me! The TRA extends well beyond the CTA. If the raw data was available it would be possible to plot the maximum extent.

For these programs to work properly we need access to the raw data, not the PIB's and to get that I need the support of pilots writing to the CAA to request the data. Have a look at my first posting on this thread please. I am in contact with the writers of these and other programs and am trying to assist but it requires the help of you and others.

Genghis

Take your point. If selected stuff were broadcast a la Volmet it could be useful. I suspect the devils advocates would say that numpties would take the easy way out and not bother reading the NOTAM.

I've got an idea, let's give the QFE, wind and runway in use as well and call it an ATIS!:E

Still got the problem of no frequencies being available though.

And wouldn't it be nice if MATZ controlling authorities had a broadcast on the contact freq saying the MATZ was inactive. Then you'd know rather than just getting no answer. (thinking Boscombe here)

Mike

[bar shaker]

Mike

I actually cut and paste from UK FIR Brief which gives a current header of... (copied below)

Is there a better list I can use?

BS




Aeronautical Information Service - BRITISH ISLES INFORMATION Welcome Bar Shaker
NOTAM PUBLICATIONS SERVICES SEARCH HELP




UK Pre-Flight Information Bulletin


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PRE-FLIGHT AREA U N I T E D K I N G D O M
INFORMATION AERONAUTICAL INFORMATION SERVICE (NATS LTD)
BULLETIN R2701319 03/08/27 10:34 UTC
UK AIS Telephone: +44 (0) 20 8745 3464. WEB SITE: WWW.AIS.ORG.UK
EMAIL: [email protected]

PERIOD: 03/08/27 10:04 UTC TO 03/08/27 16:34 UTC

PIB INCLUDES NOTAM/SNOWTAM/BIRDTAM/ASHTAM

TRAFFIC: VFR PURPOSE: GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS
LOWER: 000 UPPER: 245 SUBJECT:

FIR : EGTT
INCLUDES ALL NOTAM AVAILABLE
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

THIS VFR ONLY AREA BRIEFING CONTAINS NOTAM SORTED BY RADIUS OF
INFLUENCE INTO TWO SECTIONS. THE FIRST SECTION CONTAINS NOTAM
WHICH HAVE A RADIUS OF INFLUENCE OF 30 NM AND LESS AND THE SECOND
THOSE NOTAM WITH A RADIUS OF INFLUENCE GREATER THAN 30 NM.
BOTH SETS OF NOTAM MUST BE STUDIED CLOSELY BEFORE FLIGHT.




[edited to remove the menu from the header]

[Spiney Norman]

Notwithstanding the points here about wether pilots do/don't bother to read NOTAMS. Wether they find the AIS.org site unwieldy, or whatever, there seems to be one major point I don't understand. Surely if you're flying VFR you look out of the window to navigate!! Now, anyone who has flown near Elvington will tell you it's not an easy airfield to miss! Let's imagine the thought processes here, even if you hadn't read the NOTAMS... Oooh look! There's a dirty great big airfield with an enormous runway... Interesting static aircraft, and look at that crowd of 30,000 people! .....It must be a Yo-Yo competion, I'll fly over and have a look!!!!!

Why oh why is looking out of the aeroplane becoming a dying art!(And GPS isn't a good excuse)!

Spiney

[Aussie Andy]

But Elvington is marked disused - perhaps they weren't local?

[Spiney Norman]

Andy.. Not on sheet CAA 2171AB Northern England & Northern Ireland Edition26 it isn't.... Anyway, I think my point is still valid. Even if you were approaching a disused airfield and saw aircraft on the ground, a crowd, other aircraft in the vicinity perhaps, wouldn't you put two and two together and keep clear I don't think it's rocket science?

Spiney

[Mike Cross]

BS

Have a look here (http://www.telecall.uk.com/ais/More_NOTAM.htm) and look at the Q Line. This is the information that is omitted. It's easy to see that the Q Line contains all of the data that is necessary to sort, select and plot NOTAM. In fact, it is the data that the AIS website itself uses to decide what to include or leave out in a brief.

As it is, NotamPro and NotamPlot have to parse the text portion of the NOTAM, which does not contain all of the data in the Q Line and is not in a predetermined format.

There is currently not a better datasource for NotamPro than the one you are using. I am trying to get a better source made available and am in contact with a number of software writers, including Ian Bennett, the author of NotamPro.

Lack of the Q Line imposes limitations on what the software is capable of. This will always give the CAA/NATS the ability to criticise software working without it.

Apologies for suggesting you were using the backup briefs, evidently you are using the live brief from the AIS site. This brief is generated on demand and is therefore 100% up to date at the time it is taken.

Mike

[bar shaker]

Thanks Mike, very helpful.

It seems daft that the raw data exists but is not made public for third party software use. Shouldn't NATS be doing all it can to improve air safety and reduce the risk of infringements?

[Genghis the Engineer]

I still feel that adding local NOTAM information onto the end of the ATIS would be a good method - receivable by any VHF radio or scanner, or by phoning Volmet from the ground, but let's say we're not allowed to do that.

The obvious other place to put it would be on VORs - you could manage pretty much nationwide coverage that way without a single new frequency, albeit that presumably some black boxes would need adding to the ground hardware.

Of course none of this will stop a complete idiot not bothering to check anything, but I prefer to believe that nobody actually wants to fly dangerously or illegally - but they do tend to if it becomes too much hard work to comply with the rules. I think that at the moment a lot of people simply find the current system too much hard work. I suspect that a broadcast system may well cause a lot of people to not read NOTAMs that aren't close to them, but for safety purposes that should be enough to ensure no repetition of the sort of thing that happened here.

Incidentally, a couple of years ago I went to the "International Rocket Weekend" in Largs. Rockets were being launched up to about FL50 - this was NOTAMED. I counted about half a dozen aircraft per day through our overhead below that height, at-least two of which were Islanders - presumably Logainair and certainly not PPLs.

G


N.B. Wasn't this all the sort of thing everybody worried about when NATS was being privatised?

[PPRuNe Radar]

NATS is contracted to provide AIS by the CAA. I guess the CAA set the requirements for NATS to meet.

I don't think there is any link with privatisation as NATS is just a supplier, not the regulator.

[Aussie Andy]

Spiney: I don't disagree with your general point mate. And you're quite right, its not "disused" as such (was getting confused as I flew there for Project Propeller (http://www.projectpropeller.co.uk/) this year and recall that the field is not in "regular" use, not in Bottlang etc.

Andy

[Eira]

The issue of providing information on ATIS is sadly impractical in so many ways.
ATIS as it says is automated IE most of the information is produced from remote sites and placed on the ATIS. Additional regular information can be added by the pressing of a couple of buttons. When additional information such as wind shear or taxiway closure has to be added it takes manpower to do so and this unfortunately is getting less and less available.
Also who pays for the ATIS , at most airports it is the Airport Authority they will have little or no interest in funding such a service which has no affect on their airfield.
The excuses that many are producing here not to brief are IMHO just excuses . There are many ways to access the information and when people such as Mike Cross spend considerable time trying to improve the situation as well it angers me greatly that there are still so many out there who put so many other peoples lives in danger by failing to brief correctly.
We all know the system is not perfect and much work still has to be done but AIS are themselves working hard to try to make the product more user friendly.
It is also wise to remember that things go wrong in flight and what may seem of insignificance to you before flight can suddenly become of considerable significance during flight due to a diversion etc.

[BEagle]

Although I'm currently locking horns with the BMAA over another regulatory matter, I would just like to add that the implication on this site that microlight flying is in some way inferior or that their pilots are 'gash' is entirely unjustified. The average microlight driver does considerably more flying in a 12 month period than the average spamcan driver (like me) - so please don't suggest that they are of a lower caste.

Oh - and CAA. Let's have live updated graphical NOTAM displays available on the web, please! Years ago when we had a large flight planning staff at the Secret Oxonian Aerodrome, the daily NOTAM brief was drawn on an A4 map of the UK. Then came Computers, reduction in staff levels - and the sort of user-unfriendly rubbish which is on the AIS website.

[Fly Stimulator]

Well said BEagle!

I was worried that it was going to be desperately confusing to bounce up and down the social scale depending on whether I happened to be flying a lawnmower or a 'real' aeroplane at the time!

And would I have been a better person when flying a shiny new expensive machine than when flying a cheap old 152?

Perhaps Bottlang could have included a new 'Snobbery Index' listing the world's flying machines in order of social standing and priority in the circuit. :rolleyes:

[bluskis]

As somebody remarked about Mozart, there are too many notams.

It wouldn't be a big deal to list all notams affecting airspace at the top of the list.

Frequency changes could be listed immediately after airspace.

Then list the rest by airfield identifier.
The only people interested in cranes and blocked runways are those flying to that particular airfield, or chosing it as an alternate.

Each group could be listed N to S as they are purportedly listed at the moment.

If an excercise in o- level geometry is required to make sense of a TRA, then the originators should already have a picture available they should give a link to.

Effective dates could be highlighted within the notams rather better than they are at present.

Perhaps some restriction on what is notamed should be in effect, or is it a problem brought on by insurers and lawyers.

There is no doubt BEagle is right, it needs sorting out.

Nav2000 have announced some new presentation for French notams, which are being issued at the same rate as UK ones, but as yet I have not had the opportunity to look at their solution.

[bar shaker]

FS

You were certainly well down the pecking order when you turned up in that old 38 on Saturday ;)

[Mike Cross]

BS as Pprune Radar says, NATS are clean on this. They did initially raise objections to the release of the data last November but later withdrew them. NATS do not object to release of the data, it is the CAA ADAP1 who are refusing to release it per my earlier post.

Bluskis
There are too many NOTAMs if you don't use the site properly. Cranes within ATZ's (and they are generally only listed if they are within ATZ's) are only included in a Narrow Route brief if they are at your arrival departure or alternate aerodromes.

The whole point of the AIS site tools is to filter the output down to that which is relevant to your intended flight. If you take the trouble to learn how to use the tools you can get good results. If you don't then the system fails safe, i.e. it gives you everything.

There will inevitably be NOTAM which many will feel irrelevant. Most are now properly coded but a few still get through, for example is it essential for aircrew to know about changes in callsigns of medevac helicopters? (that was a recent one)

The FIR VFR briefs are intended for printing out and to go on the noticeboard. They are sorted geographically but unfortunately our group's recommendation was not followed and the sort is also subdivided into type of NOTAM, not something we asked for.

You can find info on applicability of the various briefs here (http://www.telecall.uk.com/ais/how_to_get_a_briefing.htm), togther with alternate sources.

Half an hour on the AIS site with a printout of the FAQ and PIB Help documents should make anyone an expert.

Two things appear to be coming through loud and clear from this discussion:.
1. Many airfields do not display an FIR brief on the noticeboard. :(
2. Too many pilots are aviating unbriefed and infringing.:mad:

Mike

[Aussie Andy]

Having re-skimmed the thread (ok, a cursory glance ;) ), I am surprised to hear that our fellow-aviators in microlight aircraft perceive that they are generally thought of as second class citizens - not sure there is much on the thread to indicate this other than that there were - as a fact - microlights involved in the incursion at Elvington (as were, I believe, some regular GA aircraft and gliders)...

I wasn't previously aware of this shoulder chip! I for one always enjoy seeing microlights around airfields and in the air - it looks like fun! My only concern is that it also looks cold! In fact, from what I have heard in relation to actual flying of microlights, isn't it in some ways more challenging, partciularly in crosswinds, than e.g. PA28 etc. that I fly which - lets face it - you could probably teach your proverbial grandmother to fly..?

Sorry this is a bit off the main thrust of the thread... but just wanted to say microlighters: we love you too, so relax :O

Andy

[bar shaker]

Andy

Its a good topic, but I'll start another thread though leave this one on track.

[Reichman]

People still seem to be making excuses for not getting/reading NOTAMS. There is no excuse.

Sorry microlighters, didn't mean to cause offence about the power(!)plant. Didn't realise you were so sensitive. And before you ask, I have flown one. Didn't have a grass box on it either.

Luv, Reichman ;)

[Genghis the Engineer]

You can't really blame the chaps - there are still quite a lot of airfields that ban microlights still (Thruxton or Biggin to name two) and some very experienced pilots are very-closed minded about them. I must admit, as somebody who flies most things, it irritates me sometimes that I can go somewhere in my (unsilenced) PA28 that I couldn't in my (silenced) flexwing, presumably my airmanship is similar regardless of what I'm flying.

And this is definitely getting off-topic, so I'll belt up.

G

[ianfallon]

OK, I'll bite! :D

I'm hoping to release a new version of NotamPlot shortly.
Again it will be on the basis of an unenforced donation to charity.
Hopefully it will in some way address some of the limitations of the current system.

Keep an eye on the following URL for updates over the next few weeks....

http://www.notamplot.flyer.co.uk

Ian

[Fly Stimulator]

Ian,

Hooray! You are a prince amongst aviators (and coders)!



Andy,

I wasn't previously aware of this shoulder chip!
I should have added a tongue-in-cheek smiley, but there doesn't seem to be one! ;)

If you make the journey to an airfield very close to yours sometime soon I'll take you for a spin in a microlight. If we feel too proletarian after that we'll take the Cirrus round the block too and restore our social standing! :)

Now, off in search of this other thread...

[bluskis]

MC

Tried a narrow route briefing VFR from Switz to UK.

Impressed. VOR on maintenance in Switz, info on Paris region, and nothing to affect in UK.
What is a hls?

Previous remarks withdrawn.

[rotorcraig]

Mike,

I regularly read the NOTAMS, using a combination of NotamPro and manual sifting through a significant amount (albeit much improved through your intervention) of irrelevant detail.

I certainly don't subscribe to the "too difficult, therefore not my problem" school of thought, not least because I want to do everything I can to protect my own safety and/or bank balance when I'm up there!

What I don't understand, despite reading all of these threads over recent months, is...

...it is the CAA who are deliberately blocking its release, despite requests from myself and others.

From what perspective do the CAA stand behind this policy? The Q line used to be available in the old format NOTAMS ... I have not read anything anywhere that explains the CAA perception of a problem that was solved / an improvement that was introduced when the Q line was removed?

RC

[Aussie Andy]

bluskis: HLS = Helicopter Landing Site.

Andy

[Gertrude the Wombat]

Mike Cross said:The whole point of the AIS site tools is to filter the output down to that which is relevant to your intended flight. If you take the trouble to learn how to use the tools you can get good results. If you don't then the system fails safe, i.e. it gives you everything.Well, "This must be some new meaning of the words "[fail] safe" with which I am not familiar" (correction of quotation welcome if anyone can be bothered to look it up).

UI design is not that easy. It seems to turn out in practice that giving you 71 pages of irrelevant garbage is not "fail safe"; it's just "fail". You can't have some random bod just decide what is going to be "fail safe", you need experience of UI design and you probably then ought to test the results in a usability lab before you have much of a serious clue as to what is going to happen in real life.

I'm sorry, but I just cannot believe that the NOTAM UI went through the UI design and usability testing procedures that one might reasonably hope for these days in a safety critical software system.

[GtW is a software engineer; not a professional UI designer but with enough experience to know a failure when he sees one.]

[bluskis]

Thanks Andy

Have to add to satisfy PPrune word limitation, so

HLS not really relevant to my routing, however still impressed.

[Mike Cross]

Gertrude

The system will assume you want NOTAM relevant to VFR and IFR flight. If you are VFR you can change it to VFR only and get less data. If you do not want NAV warnings you can change the setting from General + Misc to General and get less data. You can choose to exclude NOTAM older than x days on the assumption that you have already seen them and get less data. If the defaults were set to return less data then a pilot might not get what he needs. How is this safer?

Agreed about the usability issue. I've always said it's poor, but at least it now works and produces reliable results.
You can't have some random bod just decide what is going to be "fail safe"
Your "random bod" is the combined expertise of the UK AIS office. You are in danger of living up to your handle if you're not careful.:uhoh:

RC
The CAA's explanation is (in paraphrase):-
"We are considering the desirability of regulating third party suppliers of Aeronautical Data. We do not wish to release this data, only to have to withdraw it should the results of this consideration be that it should be witheld."

This was in April I think, no further news since. I have pointed out that this is not supplying data via third parties, it is supply by the UK AIS office direct to Flight Crew. I have also pointed out that the info is disseminated worldwide to other States' AIS's and that it is freely available from official sites such as this one (https://www.notams.jcs.mil/) (Choose RAW as the output format). Regulation would require legislation and would have no effect on suppliers outside the UK. I have suggested a class license licensing the data for use by Flight Crew for the purpose of flight planning their own flights, with all other use (i.e. commercial) requiring a separate license. I have also suggested a voluntary quality scheme, similar to ISO9000 with the right to use a "CAA Recognised" logo on the software.

If you think the CAA should release the data please write to ADAP 1 at the address in my post on this page (http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?s=&postid=973160). A copy of any letter you may write e-mailed to me would be useful ammo.

Bluskis
Glad you got it sorted - spread the word. The incident which started this thread would not have happened if everyone took the trouble to understand how it works and used it

Mike.

PS better mention that I represent AOPA on NOTAM issues, just so you know we are actively working on this.

[witchdoctor]

I access NOTAMS via Avbrief, and haven't yet ever been confused by the information presented. There are adequate filters for me to be able to choose more or less exactly what I'm interested in, especialy (as has already been said) if you filter out all the IFR stuff and the 100nm+ stuff (OK if you want to go to Latvia or Norway).

I'm no genius, but I do wonder how so many bears with little brain, or impatient plonkers, managed to pass exams and flight tests to get a licence who are subsequently defeated by a relatively simple system.:confused:

[Gertrude the Wombat]

Your "random bod" is the combined expertise of the UK AIS office. You are in danger of living up to your handle if you're not careful. I'm sure these people know lots and lots about flight safety, the point is what do they know about UI usability? I'm guessing that from that point of view there might be some randomness. You didn't say whether any professional UI usability lab was involved?If the defaults were set to return less data then a pilot might not get what he needs. How is this safer? Well, if the default is to produce 71 pages of garbage, such that people don't bother, or don't read it, or try to read it but miss something important, then that isn't safe.

If the default were to produce one page of really important stuff plus warnings in big red letters "because you didn't choose the xxx option you might have missed something", or in big red letters "there's only VFR stuff here, if you need IFR stuff as well select the option and re-run the query", or "there some bird-of-prey training around too, click here for details", or whatever, that might end up safer.

[down&out]

G the W,

Get of MC's back, your comments about usability are fair but over the top. MC & other have done a great deal to make the AIS more useable. I myself have gone from being one the first people to say the new site was crap to being a supporter of it.

After 15minutes of reading how to use it & experimenting I can now quickly get all the NOTAMs I need for my flights, and using the narrow route briefing correctly they are now mostly relevant. I particularly like that you can get the briefing the day before and then just updates on the day – this saves a huge amount of time on the day of the flight.

If you want an archaic system try using Minitel in France - it took me 3/4 hour to read the 80 NOTAMs it produced for flight I recently did. (you can only read one NOTAM at a time, and sometimes you have to page down to finish the NOTAM off:bored: )

Sure the UK interface can continue to be improved, I'm also sure MC & others will continue to welcome constructive suggestions to do it - but given the complexity of learning to fly, the exams you have to pass to achieve it - there is now NO excuse for not being able to use the AIS system. Those that don't should not fly.

[Evo]

After 15minutes of reading how to use it & experimenting I can now quickly get all the NOTAMs I need for my flights, and using the narrow route briefing correctly they are now mostly relevant.


Yeah, me too - as I said earlier, it isn't perfect, but it's usable. I haven't had a briefing full of rubbish for a long time. Compared to this time last year it's much much better, so progress is being made.. :ok:

[rustle]

Compared to this time last year it's much much better, so progress is being made..

Which nicely brings us back (almost) to the topic :rolleyes:

Any more news on the (alleged) £2000 fine? ;)

[Evo]

Wow, bringing a thread back on topic? That's a first for me... :) :rolleyes:

[proplover]

Heard on the airwaves that there were no less than 4 infringements ( 2 aircraft, 1 microlight and 1 glider) all between the start time of 13:00hrs and 13:15 when Red 1 gave up and went off with his flock.
Believe 3 have been identified. The Air Show organisers are obviously hoping mad, the Reds have also filed complaints and the CAA are involved, talk of prosecutions and 'throwing the book at them'.
Rumour that one of the culprits when questioned about reading NOTAMS and TSA's claimed he 'was in a hurry' !!!!
Make of that what you will.
Anybody else with info?

[G SXTY]

Unfortunately this doesn’t surprise me at all. Was sat on Southend seafront a few months ago, listening into 128.95 while we waited for the Reds to run in. Finished up shaking my head in disbelief as approach had to explain to a succession of aircraft that no, they couldn’t land just at the moment, as one of the biggest and best publicised airshows in the country was about to start.

The best one was a PA28 from Shoreham who wanted to argue the toss, reckoning he could get across the Thames 1 minute before the TRA came into force. . . :eek:

Silly sods.

[bletchleytugie]

"Any more news on the (alleged) £2000 fine."


Surely all this talk about the amount of the fine is conjecture, the bench (or his/her worship) will decide the amount.

What does interest me, and the legal beagles may care to consider and comment - what would the situation be if the show organiser, and for the case of argument can we assume that any prosecution mounted were succesful, went after one (or more) guilty party (ies) - in an atttempt to recover any costs associated (refunds from disappointed punters) with the cancellation of the display.

I'll bow to me learned collegues expertise - and go and do some more tugging

[IO540]

What does interest me, and the legal beagles may care to consider and comment - what would the situation be if the show organiser, and for the case of argument can we assume that any prosecution mounted were succesful, went after one (or more) guilty party (ies) - in an atttempt to recover any costs associated (refunds from disappointed punters) with the cancellation of the display.

I am not a lawyer but I reckon the organisers could do that, regardless of a successful prosecution. They would have to prove their case to a civil law standard which is a lot less difficult than criminal law (beyond reasonable doubt) which is presumably what the CAA would need to do.

But the pilot's insurance ought to cover negligence like this.

I would guess the organisers might find it hard to show actual loss of profits (which is about all you can recover under English law) due to a particular part of the show not being able to go ahead. Especially as by the time the relevant bit was cancelled, most/all of the visitors had already paid for their tickets!

Also, fortunately, not everyone sues everyone else at the drop of a hat (well not yet anyway, though it's slowly getting that way). I could think of certain cases of a poorly maintained airfield resulting in serious aircraft damage when taxiing; if every such pilot spent the required £10k-£50k and sued, and won, a lot of smaller fields would have to close down.

[Flyin'Dutch']

IO540

I think the insurance has nowt to do with this.

One can not insure oneself for illegal action. And an infringement under the ANO is just that.

Similar to your car insurance not paying for your speeding tickets.

FD

[rustle]

One can not insure oneself for illegal action. And an infringement under the ANO is just that.

Similar to your car insurance not paying for your speeding tickets

Um, no it isn't.

That analogy would work if someone suggested your insurance picked up the tab for a fine or penalty from the CAA - which isn't the point here.

"Loss of profits" compensation isn't a fine or penalty, but I doubt your insurance would cover it anyway. Most policies I have seen specifically exclude "loss of profits" from the cover.

It would be ridiculous to claim "loss of profits" if you have not been forced to refund the punter's entry fees anyway... Or is someone suggesting the organisers very generously did this?!

[Cynical mode] Maybe more people went on the Monday (to see the Red's display they missed on the Sunday) so the organisers made more money than projected...[/cynical mode]

[bar shaker]

G SXTY

I did exactly the same as you at Southend. My favorite was the instructor from Biggin Hill who was letting Southend know that he was en-route to do low level training over St Marys Marshes... which were within the TRA :ooh: :ooh:

Another good one was the aircraft returning from France, expecting to transit Southend, reporting fast jet traffic over the North Kent Marshes. The traffic in question was a Tornado with wings back and burners on, travelling very fast :hmm:

On another note, the other thing about airshows is that fast jet traffic will be approaching and leaving the TRA, often at low level. Its worth giving such areas a very wide berth. A friend, in legal airspace, had the Battle of Britain Memorial Flight pass below him en route to Southend. A sight he will never forget, he says.

[TangoZulu]

The points about loss of profits are probably well made and it is always going to be difficult to quantify exactly how much money would have been lost etc etc.

However I am sure the organisers will have paid for the display by RAFAT and I would be very surprised if this was refundable - especially since the team had effectively already started the display.

Therefore would it not be legitimate to go after the infringers (is that a word?) to recover these direct costs lost as a result of their complete and utter incompetence.

What is the going rate for a Red Arrows display these days - I had it in my mind form sometime in the past that it was around £20 to £25k?

TZ