RA(T) Essex

[UV]

There was a TR(A) today (5th May) Notamed from 1230- 1325Z centered on Brentwood (Essex). As I understand it Practice Interceptions with Grob Tutors and Helos.
Waypoints were given as Lat and Longs. No map attached. No names(other than Brentwood) On reading the Notam one would expect it to be in the vacinity of Brentwood but...

When plotted it was actually 500 yes 500 square miles based on waypoints from West of Southend, to Near Stapleford, North Weald, Chelmsford, Maldon and back to West of Southend. Who of us seeing the name "Brentwood" would have actually plotted all of this? Yes we should should have. Lots didnt and got caught out...

Why on earth did the Notam only mention Brentwood, when in fact it was so large an area?

Now if you (CAA) cant publish a map with the Notams how do you expect the avereage pilot to easily recognise such a vast area??

Why didnt it at least give the extemities of the area in known language? i.e from 10 miles West of Southend/Damyns Hall/2 miles East of North Weald/Dundow/Maldon... or something similar?

CAA ...You will have to do better than this for the Olympics...

Pilots ..there is another one tomorrow, Sunday 6 May different shape.. you better PLOT IT!

[UV]

There was a RA(T) Restricted Area (Temporary) today (5th May) Notamed from 1230- 1325Z centered on Brentwood (Essex). As I understand it Practice Interceptions with Grob Tutors and Helos.

Waypoints were given as Lat and Longs. No map attached. No names(other than Brentwood) On reading the Notam one would expect it to be in the vacinity of Brentwood but...

When plotted it was actually 500 yes 500 square miles based on waypoints from West of Southend, to Near Stapleford, North Weald, Chelmsford, Maldon and back to West of Southend. Who of us seeing the name "Brentwood" would have actually plotted all of this? Yes we should should have. Lots didnt and got caught out...

Why on earth did the Notam only mention Brentwood, when in fact it was so large an area?

Now if you (CAA) cant publish a map with the Notams how do you expect the avereage pilot to easily recognise such a vast area??

Why didnt it at least give the extemities of the area in known language? i.e from 10 miles West of Southend/Damyns Hall/2 miles East of North Weald/Dundow/Maldon... or something similar?

CAA ...You will have to do better than this for the Olympics...

Pilots ..there may be another one tomorrow, Sunday 6 May different shape.. you better PLOT IT!

[BEagle]

ICAO FPL convention is that lat/long uses the following format:

Degrees and minutes (11 characters):
4 figures describing latitude in degrees, tens and units of minutes followed by ‘N’ or ‘S’, followed by 5 figures describing longitude in degrees, tens and units of minutes, followed by ‘E’ or ‘W’. Make up the correct number of figures, where necessary, by insertion of zeros, eg 4620N07805W.

However, NOTAMs are often written thus:
NO ACFT IS TO FLY BELOW THE NOTIFIED BASE LEVEL OF CONTROLLED AIRSPACE WI THE AREA BOUNDED BY STRAIGHT LINES JOINING SUCCESSIVELY THE FOLLOWING POINTS: 513540N 0002816E - 513424N 0001906E - 514508N 0001309E - 515828N 0003314E - 515924N 0004119E - 515450N 0004712E - 514408N 0003049E - 513540N 0002816E


By inspection, it seems that these are DD:MM:SS values rather than DD:MM.

The UK AIP uses a mix of DD:MM:SS and DD:MM.m values.

Surely it is time to standardise on one system? Quite why a NOTAM needs to include values to the nearest second is beyond me - if DD:MM is good enough for FPLs, then why not for NOTAMs?

At least one military friendly fire incident was probably caused by DD:MM:SS being entered as DD:MM.mm; although nothing quite so problematic is likely from similar misplotting of a UK NOTAM, the lack of clear identification of units does not help.

[Miken100]

Agree about the terminology... a better description of the area would have been helpful and would contribute better to conflict avoidance.

I was on an instrument detail yesterday via LAM into Southend, nearly 'dismissed' the "Brentwood" description on the Notam but was helped by Skydemon as this within seconds outlined the Notamed area, and made us realise we would be flying right through it on our way back up to Liverpool. A quick reroute in the Southend Cafe enabled us to steer clear and avoid the "Phone ATC when you land" message!!

UV - yes - the Grobs were waiting on the deck at Southend (pilots looking rather bored!) to go off and presumably be 'attacked'...

[goldeneaglepilot]

It looks like more is planned for today...


Q) EGTT/QRTCA/IV/BO/W/000/045/5147N00030E015
B) FROM: 12/05/06 15:30C) TO: 12/05/06 16:20
E) RESTRICTED AREA (TEMPORARY) AT CHELMSFORD. RESTRICTION OF FLYING REGULATIONS MADE UNDER ARTICLE 161 OF THE ANO 2009 NO ACFT IS TO FLY BELOW THE NOTIFIED BASE LEVEL OF CONTROLLED AIRSPACE WI THE AREA BOUNDED BY STRAIGHT LINES JOINING SUCCESSIVELY THE FOLLOWING POINTS: 513540N 0002816E - 513424N 0001906E - 514508N 0001309E - 515828N 0003314E - 515924N 0004119E - 515450N 0004712E - 514408N 0003049E - 513540N 0002816E EXCEPT ACFT FLYING IN THE SERVICE OF THE ESSEX POLICE FLYING IN THE SERVICE OF THE HELICOPTER EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICE FLYING IN ACCORDANCE WITH AN AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL CLEARANCE ISSUED BY LONDON AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL CENTRE (MILITARY) PROVIDED THE COMMANDER OF THE AIRCRAFT COMPLIES WITH ANY CONDITIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS ISSUED BY THAT UNITOR FLYING IN ACCORDANCE WITH ACLEARANCE ISSUED BY THE MINISTRY OF DEFENCES UNITED KINGDOM AIRSURVEILLANCE AND CONTROL SYSTEM UNIT AT RAF BOULMER PROVIDED THE COMMANDER OF THE AIRCRAFT COMPLIES WITH ANY CONDITIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS ISSUED BY THAT UNIT. 12-05-0102/ AS 6LOWER: SFC
UPPER: 4500FT AMSL

[fulham fan]

CAA do normally produce a chart and press release for something of that size (see one for Queen's Jubilee Flypast) as there is not one for this weekend's RA(T)s then it's probably due to them not being given enough time to prepare one by the NOTAM applicant

[goldeneaglepilot]

On another note - its worth considering the potential that your GPS is not going to work...


Q) EGTT/QWELW/IV/BO/W/000/400/5112N00158W065
B) FROM: 12/05/07 07:00C) TO: 12/05/11 20:00
E) GPS JAMMING EXER. JAMMER BASED WI 8NM RADIUS OF 5112N 00158W(SALISBURY PLAIN, WILTSHIRE). COVERAGE WI 15NM RADIUS AND ARC 355AND 050 DEG TRUE UP TO MAX RANGE 65NM AND 40000FT AMSL. AIC P046/2012REFERS. OPS CTC 01980674xxx OR 07776482xxx. 12-05-0067/AS 2.LOWER: SFC
UPPER: 40000FT AMSL
SCHEDULE: 0700-2000

DO NOT ASSUME that Sky Demon is going to be able to warn you of the RA(T) areas with reliability

[Miken100]

GEP.... yes agree that assumptions make an ASS out of U & ME = possible dead pilots and broken aircraft....

Just to be clear... We used the Notam from the "official" site, SkyDemon simply gave us more information than "Brentwood" and a list of lat/long numbers - still had charts, plogs, Wx, Notams, everything else to provide as much data as possible pre-flight...

Interesting thought re the GPS... didn't use one yesterday tho' so didn't affect our navigation but it's a consideration for the future - thanks...

[goldeneaglepilot]

I strongly suspect that as the build up continues for the Olympics then more use will be made of GPS Jamming techniques. The area warned of in the Notam for tomorrow covers very busy airfields such as Oxford, Sywell and Wellesbourne.

I know that we are supposed to do our planning properly, however time and time again pilots fail. A good example of that would be the RA(T) issues at Silverstone last year that caused the Red Arrows to cancel mid way through the display.

A lot of pilots have become increasingly reliant upon GPS for navigation and have developed a warm and fuzzy feeling for its accuracy and reliability. Skydemon is a great tool for assistance - but does not replace good old fashioned planning. It can fail...

[Miroku]

This is rather worrying. I wonder if you took 100 pilots and asked them to plot the 'Brentwood' notam how many would get it right?

I'm afraid that I tend to rely on Skydemon for restrictions but having read the note above maybe I should check the NATS site as well.

As already mentioned, it really would make life easier if a map was made available, if nothing else for safety reasons.

[goldeneaglepilot]

My personal thoughts are that if the pilot had recently qualified for a licence then most would get the plot right, but the longer the period that had elapsed since they did their written exams then the greater the percentage who would get it wrong (through lack of practice plotting in this fashion).

Someone else said that the reason the area is not plotted on a map and presented is simply because of the lateness of publishing the Notam. It seems a poor excuse.

[cct]

What is wrong with using the planning side of Skydemon to plot the NOTAM. I use that for planning in the comfort of my own home, and it doesnt rely on GPS.

It is ridiculous in this day and age to have to plot the outage manually.

Then if it affects you, draw on the map as appropriate

[390cruise]

This with many other notams would be so much better if just a map was produced showing location.

Notam thinking has not moved on from the days of Telex!!!

390

[cladosporangium]

I must agree. Someone, somewhere must have plotted the references on a map in order to obtain the Lat/Long in the first place..... just print the map! (like they do on Skydemon. Excellent planning tool.)

While we are on the subject, what's going on at Wittering?
If you read the notam for the airfield it isn't clear if it is active or not.
And there are 2 frequencies to call if gliding is taking place. Can't they just agree on one, in the interest of flight safety? Can't be difficult.:rolleyes:

[Miroku]

DO NOT ASSUME that Sky Demon is going to be able to warn you of the RA(T)
areas with reliability


I took this to mean that the SD planning page cannot be relied upon for all Notams. Is this correct or have I misunderstood?

[VictorGolf]

SkyDemon Light also invents Notams as it had the whole of the Olympic Restricted area as active on Sunday. I couldn't find this on the AIS site and I gather the full SD site didn't have it.

[Morris542]

SkyDemon Light also invents Notams as it had the whole of the Olympic
Restricted area as active on Sunday


I believe that was for people wishing to take part in 'file a flight plan day' on the Sunday.

[BEagle]

By inspection, it seems that these NOTAM positions are DD:MM:SS values rather than DD:MM.

The UK AIP uses a mix of DD:MM:SS and DD:MM.m values.

Surely it is time to standardise on one system? Quite why a NOTAM needs to include values to the nearest second is beyond me - if DD:MM is good enough for FPLs, then why not for NOTAMs?


I e-mailed the CAA's Dawn Lindsay about this issue and have already had a helpful response. It seems that the problem has already been raised by others and is now being considered by the Head of Aeronautical Information Management.

Out of interest, do people prefer DD:MM:SS or DD:MM.m? In other words, do you prefer to enter waypoints as 503030N 0010042W or as 5030.5N 00100.7W?

[tmmorris]

Most GPSs appear to default to decimals...

Tim

[soaringhigh650]

Lots didnt and got caught out...

Where major errors arise:

1) Pilots don't bother to read the NOTAMs.

2) NOTAMs ain't published graphically on a chart for all to understand. Just publishing a complex set of co-ordinates in text form is no good.