NOTAMS and why they need to be checked....
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
......I thought that there was an obligation on all training schools to provide access to NOTAM's ? I can't think of any briefing rooms that I've visited that hasn't had them pinned up on the noticeboard (ok, I haven't visited many flying schools!).
Is it really the case that most pilots never go anywhere, and get into trouble notam-wise when they do? I am sure most regular posters on here would disagree with that, in most cases violently
Even if it were true 
I think a part of the "notam problem" is that most of the UK GA scene is quite "old" in terms of pilot age, and doesn't have IT skills.
...
And anybody who trained before c. 2002 will not have seen any notam website at all. In 2003 the ais.org.uk site was crap, missing off vital French power station TRAs which nearly got me busted by the frogs.
And most "older" pilots do not know how to use a PC, never mind the internet.
...
And anybody who trained before c. 2002 will not have seen any notam website at all. In 2003 the ais.org.uk site was crap, missing off vital French power station TRAs which nearly got me busted by the frogs.
And most "older" pilots do not know how to use a PC, never mind the internet.
Yes NOTAMS are a pain. I ALWAYS check them the night before I expect to go flying (NotamPlot usually) - even when I don't expect to leave the circuit - and I also check the freefone before flight.
One off the concerns I have is that they are stuffed full of non-standard abbreviations. I did a survey of a single day and found well over 60 abbreviations used that were not in the published list of standard abbreviations. This I raised in writing with AIS who promised to raise this point with those responsible for accepting UK NOTAMs and doing the data entry.
Regarding payment - I believe in the principle the polluter pays - so if there is a charge it should be paid by the body requesting the NOTAM - not the pilot obliged to read it - even if it has no relevence to his flight.
Software utilities like Notam Plot (and others) mean there really is no excuse for this kind of sloppiness. Why can't people act with a care to others and exercise more responsibility I ask?
As someone who does check NOTAMs and plan accordingly, I've been rather frustrated in the past by the number of NOTAMed events thaat have clearly been canceled, some at a relatively early stage, and yet no one has bothered to cancel or amend the NOTAM. On a recent flight, a call from my colleague to a well known gliding site whose activity was NOTAMed go a response along the lines of "of course we're not gliding today, the weather's awful".
Responsibility goes both ways.
Moderator
Join Date: Jul 1997
Location: Europe
Posts: 3,228
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As someone who does check NOTAMs and plan accordingly, I've been rather frustrated in the past by the number of NOTAMed events thaat have clearly been canceled, some at a relatively early stage, and yet no one has bothered to cancel or amend the NOTAM.
Maybe AIS need to get other NOTAM filers to adopt the same principles.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Daventry
Posts: 349
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NOTAM woes
I recently spotted a NOTAM for a military PJE that was directly in my planned path
No drop times published and duration about a week IIRC.Contacted the organiser who called me back but had no specific info.Contacted the mil base that the jump plane was to operate from,no info available.
Went on flight,contacted the controlling mil base nice and early,still no info so made a detour
.
What more could I have done as a humble GA pilot?
MM
No drop times published and duration about a week IIRC.Contacted the organiser who called me back but had no specific info.Contacted the mil base that the jump plane was to operate from,no info available.
Went on flight,contacted the controlling mil base nice and early,still no info so made a detour
.What more could I have done as a humble GA pilot?
MM
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Savannah GA & Portsmouth UK
Posts: 1,784
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On the subject of cancelled events:-
Bids are put in to the Airspace Utilisation Section of the Directorate of Airspace Policy at the Civil Aviation Authority (now you know why we use acronyms!) whose job it is to deconflict activity. If for example the RAF want to mark Betty's birthday with a flypast that involves assembling lots of heavy metal and routing it through someone else's aerobatic competition AUS will do the necessary to deconflict it and come up with a workable plan. They will then issue the NOTAM which will go over to AIS who'll load it into the European AIS database. The people who do this work normal office hours and while AIS do have staff on duty H24 it's not really practical to get a NOTAM cancelled if on the day the organisers take the decision to cancel due Wx (RIAT this year for example). This is becasue there's no-one on duty in AUS to issue the instruction to AIS.
WRT to bandits infringing notammed airspace. In the majority of cases the activity is the subject of a Nav Warning rather than a RA(T), conferring no rights on the organisers over the airspace concerned. It is therefore incumbent on the event organisers to make suitable safety arrangements. For example to have ground observers or a radar service watching for potential intruders and warning the participants of the threat.
Even in the case of a RA(T) the fact that you have rights over the airspace will not make you any less dead in the event of a collision so it's a good idea not to rely on the eyeballs of the display pilot alone. (IMHO)
Mike
Bids are put in to the Airspace Utilisation Section of the Directorate of Airspace Policy at the Civil Aviation Authority (now you know why we use acronyms!) whose job it is to deconflict activity. If for example the RAF want to mark Betty's birthday with a flypast that involves assembling lots of heavy metal and routing it through someone else's aerobatic competition AUS will do the necessary to deconflict it and come up with a workable plan. They will then issue the NOTAM which will go over to AIS who'll load it into the European AIS database. The people who do this work normal office hours and while AIS do have staff on duty H24 it's not really practical to get a NOTAM cancelled if on the day the organisers take the decision to cancel due Wx (RIAT this year for example). This is becasue there's no-one on duty in AUS to issue the instruction to AIS.
WRT to bandits infringing notammed airspace. In the majority of cases the activity is the subject of a Nav Warning rather than a RA(T), conferring no rights on the organisers over the airspace concerned. It is therefore incumbent on the event organisers to make suitable safety arrangements. For example to have ground observers or a radar service watching for potential intruders and warning the participants of the threat.
Even in the case of a RA(T) the fact that you have rights over the airspace will not make you any less dead in the event of a collision so it's a good idea not to rely on the eyeballs of the display pilot alone. (IMHO)
Mike
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jim59
Like some others you did not read the whole of what I wrote. FWIW my first exposure to computers was c. 1971 when I was repairing the first ever electronic calculators, and I programmed microprocessors (in assembler) in their earliest days, from the 8080 onwards. And I am well aware that the best quality software is not written by youngsters with spikey hair and ear-rings (and never was; I've employed plenty of programmers).
I stand by my suggestion that the bulk of the pilot population is behind the wave in the required technological expertise.
Obviously nobody here will agree on the basis of personal experience because you cannot be reading pprune.org unless you know how to access the internet
The only solution is to do something on the 2 yearly checkride. An FAA-style oral perhaps?
Like some others you did not read the whole of what I wrote. FWIW my first exposure to computers was c. 1971 when I was repairing the first ever electronic calculators, and I programmed microprocessors (in assembler) in their earliest days, from the 8080 onwards. And I am well aware that the best quality software is not written by youngsters with spikey hair and ear-rings (and never was; I've employed plenty of programmers).
I stand by my suggestion that the bulk of the pilot population is behind the wave in the required technological expertise.
Obviously nobody here will agree on the basis of personal experience because you cannot be reading pprune.org unless you know how to access the internet
The only solution is to do something on the 2 yearly checkride. An FAA-style oral perhaps?
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 433
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"That gives you the local area which is OK for a local bimble but doesn't address the case of a pilot actually going somewhere"
.....If by somewhere you mean outside of the UK then I accept your point. The NOTAMs that I've seen pinned up are normally for the entire UK (hense someone else's observation that there's just so many).
I don wonder if pilots are taught how to go through NOTAMs (of the printed variety) in order to identify what may affect them. Maybe, with all this talk of automation and improved information formats, someone should design an automated download which feeds into a device that then connects to the aircraft's autopilot and prevents them from busting airspace/NOTAMs/etc. I am actually joking about this concept but it does seem in line with the abrogation of responsiblity that technology can so often enable.
.....If by somewhere you mean outside of the UK then I accept your point. The NOTAMs that I've seen pinned up are normally for the entire UK (hense someone else's observation that there's just so many).
I don wonder if pilots are taught how to go through NOTAMs (of the printed variety) in order to identify what may affect them. Maybe, with all this talk of automation and improved information formats, someone should design an automated download which feeds into a device that then connects to the aircraft's autopilot and prevents them from busting airspace/NOTAMs/etc. I am actually joking about this concept but it does seem in line with the abrogation of responsiblity that technology can so often enable.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
but it does seem in line with the abrogation of responsiblity that technology can so often enable
As I commented earlier if a computer could plot every NOTAM accuratley for me that would be great, better still if the same data could be displayed on my MDF.
I am happy for anyone who can use a sextant (and FWIW I am one of them) but I prefer to use a GPS most of the time. More often than not I plan the flight not because I enjoy doing so but because needs must, its the flying I enjoy.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If by somewhere you mean outside of the UK then I accept your point. The NOTAMs that I've seen pinned up are normally for the entire UK (hense someone else's observation that there's just so many).
Now, there is a school of thought that notams of non-prohibited stuff are not worth reading for VFR flight, and they would not be far off.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Fareham
Posts: 194
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It seems to me that there are several interrelated issues being discussed here.
One. Notams are (practically) only available on the Internet and access to the Internet is at best sketchy. The non-internet savvy (a very high proportion of the population especially amongst the PPL demographic) have no idea what is going on and quite a few of the rest are unable or unwilling to log on for various reasons. Hard though it may be for people on here to accept, there is a huge population out there who have no computer, no access to a computer and no intention of getting access to a computer.
In so far as I am aware the vast majority of the strictly VFR, 'never more than 50 miles from home' guys I fly with NEVER look at the NOTAMS and when I ask them why, they usually just shrug and say its not relevant to them.
Two. The AIS site is not a complete victory of user-friendliness. Many of those who can and do (did) access it have given up as it is 'too hard' and too full of (in their eyes) irrelevant junk. True, the new site is much better than the previous one and there is now some marginal quality control but there is still a lot of meaningless junk in it for the VRF bimbler.
Three. The way the Notam system works is stuck in the age of the telex and teleprinter and with the best will in the world does not run smoothly on the modern graphics-based internet.
Four. There is little or no education or re-education on the workings of the system and there appears to be no requirement to show competency either at initial licence issue or at any subsequent competency check (what ever you want to call it).
The sooner an honest acknowledgement of all the issues is made by all parties, the sooner we can do something about fixing it. Progress will be slow but without the will to change, nothing will happen until a guy in a 152 runs into one of the Reds and we all end up on the ground for a month or two.
So what do I suggest?
How about a regional equivalent of Volmet for Notams, perhaps by phone with a daily run through of the really critical NOTAMs? The ones where someone is potentially going to die instantly if they don't know what is going on. Reds, RATs and displays. Not much more. No need for the endless changes to airfield hours, NDBs U/S or cranes barely above the level of the surrounding buildings four miles from the nearest airfield. Put the same information on a simple web page. Yes, I know it will cost, but much as with the LARs service, the cost of not doing it is ultimately going to be much higher.
At the same time put some kind of decent quality control onto the flow of Notams and make a big effort to get rid of the spurious stuff. For example, the aerodrome hours of my local commercial airport have been in the NOTAMs every day for the last ten years. They should be in the AIP. If you really don't know when they shut (and it matters) ring them up and ask. The same airport (which incidentally almost always has the most notams of any UK airport - often more than Heathrow and Gatwick combined) is obsessed with cranes. Most of those Notamed are barely higher than the surrounding buildings, almost always below the 200-foot limit at which they have to be lighted and so far below the safety surface its ridiculous.
As part of the quality control drive, add in the name of airfields and cities in plain text where the originator uses ICAO code identifiers. Who can honestly say that they remember where all the four-letter airfields in the UK are? And, for VFR Notams, do not allow the use of IFR reporting points (it has got much better lately.)
Work like crazy on XNotam and drag the system into the 21st Century. CAA, EASA and the AIS need to remember that most of the people who cause them trouble (the infringers) don’t all have flight planning departments and ops-room staff to go through all the data for them.
We have a rule where I work that if you have conveyed information to someone three times and they have not acted upon it, then you need to think about the message and the messenger, not just the recipient. The powers that be would do well to do likewise. If the message isn’t getting through, maybe it’s time to change the message.?
Once the system is a bit friendlier then it will be appropriate to check that people know how to use the system. Make a check of the NOTAMs an integral part of an flight test (new or repeat). If you can’t show the examiner/instructor that you have sought out the relevant information, you can’t fly.
No one solution alone is going to solve the problem. But everyone working together just might.
With thanks in advance to Mike C, IO540 and others who are already doing sterling work on this.
One. Notams are (practically) only available on the Internet and access to the Internet is at best sketchy. The non-internet savvy (a very high proportion of the population especially amongst the PPL demographic) have no idea what is going on and quite a few of the rest are unable or unwilling to log on for various reasons. Hard though it may be for people on here to accept, there is a huge population out there who have no computer, no access to a computer and no intention of getting access to a computer.
In so far as I am aware the vast majority of the strictly VFR, 'never more than 50 miles from home' guys I fly with NEVER look at the NOTAMS and when I ask them why, they usually just shrug and say its not relevant to them.
Two. The AIS site is not a complete victory of user-friendliness. Many of those who can and do (did) access it have given up as it is 'too hard' and too full of (in their eyes) irrelevant junk. True, the new site is much better than the previous one and there is now some marginal quality control but there is still a lot of meaningless junk in it for the VRF bimbler.
Three. The way the Notam system works is stuck in the age of the telex and teleprinter and with the best will in the world does not run smoothly on the modern graphics-based internet.
Four. There is little or no education or re-education on the workings of the system and there appears to be no requirement to show competency either at initial licence issue or at any subsequent competency check (what ever you want to call it).
The sooner an honest acknowledgement of all the issues is made by all parties, the sooner we can do something about fixing it. Progress will be slow but without the will to change, nothing will happen until a guy in a 152 runs into one of the Reds and we all end up on the ground for a month or two.
So what do I suggest?
How about a regional equivalent of Volmet for Notams, perhaps by phone with a daily run through of the really critical NOTAMs? The ones where someone is potentially going to die instantly if they don't know what is going on. Reds, RATs and displays. Not much more. No need for the endless changes to airfield hours, NDBs U/S or cranes barely above the level of the surrounding buildings four miles from the nearest airfield. Put the same information on a simple web page. Yes, I know it will cost, but much as with the LARs service, the cost of not doing it is ultimately going to be much higher.
At the same time put some kind of decent quality control onto the flow of Notams and make a big effort to get rid of the spurious stuff. For example, the aerodrome hours of my local commercial airport have been in the NOTAMs every day for the last ten years. They should be in the AIP. If you really don't know when they shut (and it matters) ring them up and ask. The same airport (which incidentally almost always has the most notams of any UK airport - often more than Heathrow and Gatwick combined) is obsessed with cranes. Most of those Notamed are barely higher than the surrounding buildings, almost always below the 200-foot limit at which they have to be lighted and so far below the safety surface its ridiculous.
As part of the quality control drive, add in the name of airfields and cities in plain text where the originator uses ICAO code identifiers. Who can honestly say that they remember where all the four-letter airfields in the UK are? And, for VFR Notams, do not allow the use of IFR reporting points (it has got much better lately.)
Work like crazy on XNotam and drag the system into the 21st Century. CAA, EASA and the AIS need to remember that most of the people who cause them trouble (the infringers) don’t all have flight planning departments and ops-room staff to go through all the data for them.
We have a rule where I work that if you have conveyed information to someone three times and they have not acted upon it, then you need to think about the message and the messenger, not just the recipient. The powers that be would do well to do likewise. If the message isn’t getting through, maybe it’s time to change the message.?
Once the system is a bit friendlier then it will be appropriate to check that people know how to use the system. Make a check of the NOTAMs an integral part of an flight test (new or repeat). If you can’t show the examiner/instructor that you have sought out the relevant information, you can’t fly.
No one solution alone is going to solve the problem. But everyone working together just might.
With thanks in advance to Mike C, IO540 and others who are already doing sterling work on this.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Savannah GA & Portsmouth UK
Posts: 1,784
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Now Flymap can give me the above, why not AIS/NATS
POWERED PARACHUTE EVENT WILL TAKE PLACE AT WITHIN 15NM RADIUS OF ONE OF THE FOLLOWING LOCATIONS. LOCATION WILL BE CHOSEN ACCORDING TO WEATHER CONDITIONS ON THE DAY.
This is one I actually saw, there were 5 geographic locations defined by co-ordinates and the Q Line carried the geographic centre and radius of a circle that would enclose all of the 5x15nm radius circles drawn round the 5 locations.
There's a big problem with graphical deisplay of NOTAM that overlap. For example the chart you show has part of a bit red circle at top left. How for example would it deal with an air display including the Reds somewhere wholly inside that big red circle? There would be at least two NOTAM centred on the a/d. One would be for a RA(T) for the Reds, typically to 8,500 ft and for a half hour period to cover the display. Another would be for the air display for a much longer period and maybe a different radius. You might also get one for a PJE with a different set of parameters if a parachute display was included.
The reason why AIS don't provide it is that the UK is required under the Chicago Convention to provide PIB that comply with the specification set out in Annex 15, which that display does not. Ergo a graphical display would be in addition to and not instead of what is currently provided.
Bear in mind that it is the duty of the State within who's FIR the flight originates to provide the briefing so this isn't used just by UK PPL's it'll also be used for foreign airline and bizjet pilots for their flights outbound from UK. They need something that's in a standardised format they can understand, same applies to TAF & METAR.
DfT funds CAA to meet the Convention obligations and no more. CAA employs NATS to deliver the goods via UK AIS. The official view is that if you want something different to what's available from AIS you're welcome to use any alternative briefing service. Unsurprisingly the commercial briefing services will only provide stuff if it's commercially viable. Flymap is of course a commercial business.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: England
Posts: 380
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting thread.
The current AIS narrow route brief is mentioned several times and it really is an effective tool to use which filters out the "irrelevant" data and presents a manageable set of warnings for the area and height parameters entered.
Which is what the average "sport" pilot needs as say below FL40
True it has odditiies like not accepting ICAO airfield codes as waypoints - I find VOR radials/ditances a quick and easy method.
One irritation is the fact that you don't seem to be able to save a "route" (ie Shoreham-Needles -Thruxton -Shoreham) with a name, just a long string of numbers.
Anyone know of a trick to overcome this?
Finally don't EVER EVER go flying without calling the 0500 number - NO EXCUSES!
The current AIS narrow route brief is mentioned several times and it really is an effective tool to use which filters out the "irrelevant" data and presents a manageable set of warnings for the area and height parameters entered.
Which is what the average "sport" pilot needs as say below FL40
True it has odditiies like not accepting ICAO airfield codes as waypoints - I find VOR radials/ditances a quick and easy method.
One irritation is the fact that you don't seem to be able to save a "route" (ie Shoreham-Needles -Thruxton -Shoreham) with a name, just a long string of numbers.
Anyone know of a trick to overcome this?
Finally don't EVER EVER go flying without calling the 0500 number - NO EXCUSES!
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: England
Posts: 380
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Agreed, but can you elaborate on your FL 040 sentence? Surely the narrow route brief goes higher?
It does work well for VFR flying with some room still for improvement!
I also like the FREE UKGA graphical tool - interesting to cross refer with AIS.
Dancing with the devil, going with the flow... it's all a game to me.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: England
Posts: 1,688
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Finally don't EVER EVER go flying without calling the 0500 number - NO EXCUSES!
The two-faced hypocrisy from equally guilty pilots amazes and saddens me.
Something needs to be done regarding the ease of access and usability of the AIS website. We should not need to rely on other easier formats when a body is tasked and paid handsomely with that very job. Who funds it?
VFE.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: kent
Posts: 211
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One irritation is the fact that you don't seem to be able to save a "route" (ie Shoreham-Needles -Thruxton -Shoreham) with a name, just a long string of numbers.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Burton upon Trent
Age: 65
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote:
"True it has odditiies like not accepting ICAO airfield codes as waypoints - I find VOR radials/ditances a quick and easy method"
Yes, that is a bit odd, isn't it? If you want a route that goes o/h an ICAO airfield you can't do it (unless it's somewhere like Gamston which has got a VOR). Or use the VOR-bearing-distance method as you say.
If out for a bimble and not setting down anywhere you can decribe a route which may use some of the airways route waypoints as well to create a ficticious 'route' on a 10 or 20 mile corridor which overlaps enough to ensure you can get anywhere within the route 'polygon' formed, as the mood takes you, and be sure you've got all the NOTAMS.
"True it has odditiies like not accepting ICAO airfield codes as waypoints - I find VOR radials/ditances a quick and easy method"
Yes, that is a bit odd, isn't it? If you want a route that goes o/h an ICAO airfield you can't do it (unless it's somewhere like Gamston which has got a VOR). Or use the VOR-bearing-distance method as you say.
If out for a bimble and not setting down anywhere you can decribe a route which may use some of the airways route waypoints as well to create a ficticious 'route' on a 10 or 20 mile corridor which overlaps enough to ensure you can get anywhere within the route 'polygon' formed, as the mood takes you, and be sure you've got all the NOTAMS.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Burton upon Trent
Age: 65
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If I bring up the 'briefing handbook' and look at the list of previous briefing ID no.s I can 'highlight' any of the ID no.s but I can't seem to edit them.
What am I doing wrong?
What am I doing wrong?
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 647
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BdP, did you highlight, then click on "use", NOT "update"?
"Use" allows edit for another day/time/change anything else..
"Update" is to re-check for a day you have already done, e.g. done last night and want a quick check to see if anything has changed on the morning you are going.
HTH. Chris N.
"Use" allows edit for another day/time/change anything else..
"Update" is to re-check for a day you have already done, e.g. done last night and want a quick check to see if anything has changed on the morning you are going.
HTH. Chris N.