NOTAMS and why they need to be checked....
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Fareham
Posts: 194
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No one doubts that the AIS website is much better than it used to be but the usability of the output is still appalling. If the human factors guys ever went to work on it they would condemn it out of hand. The quality control is also appalling.
The one key feature that comes out in my informal questioning of my farm strip friends is the sheer irrelevance of most of it. I am not going to rant, but rather to give a simple example. (Sorry but this is going to be a long post.) This is not hypothetical.
Today I wished to fly from a private strip very close to Southampton Airport to Popham – a distance of about 15 miles. I go to the AIS Notams site and make myself a narrow route briefing VFR up to FL040.
I get 10 Notams for Southampton and five enroute. One of the Southampton ones could just about be marginally useful (though it certainly would not affect the safety of the flight if you did not read it) and there is one temporary class A which is only as important as you consider Prince Charles to be. This is, in my experience entirely typical.
My point is, you almost loose the will to live wading through all the useless junk. Yes, I know about the Chicago Convention, ICAO standards etc. but lets take a long hard look at what we are trying to achieve. Surely it must be possible to separate the essential ones (Reds, RATs and displays) from the procedural.
If you want to look at them I have pasted them below with my comments.
Q) EGTT/QOBAW/IV/M/A/000/999/5105N00113W005
FROM: 08/02/04 13:32 TO: PERM
E) LAND BASED NAVIGATION OBSTACLES AND SOUTHAMPTON AD CHARTS
FOLLOWING SINGLE UNLIT OBSTACLE WITHDRAWN
NAME: HAMPAGE FARM
IDENT: 230C867
TYPE: MAST
LAT: 510432N LONG: 0011319W
AMSL: 757FT AGL: 432FT
ENR 5-4-1-16, AD 2 EGHI-5-1, EGHI-8-1 TO 8-12 REFERS
C0465/08
This one has been in the Notams since February and the fact that the obstacle has been removed serves to show just how useful the Noam ever was…..
Q) EGTT/QFAAH/IV/NBO/A/000/999/5057N00121W005
FROM: 08/03/30 06:30 TO: 08/10/25 22:00
E) SUMMER HRS OF AD OPR
MON-FRI 0530-2130 PPR 2130-2200
SAT 0530-2045 PPR 2045-2200
SUN 0630-2130 PPR 2130-2200
C1009/08
This one has been in the Notams ever since I have been flying (years). It should be in the AIP, not the Notams.
Q) EGTT/QACXX/IV/NBO/A/000/999/5057N00121W005
FROM: 08/03/17 06:30 TO: PERM
E) REF UK AIP AD 2-EGHI 1-11 AD 2.22 FLIGHT PROCEDURES:
ADD NOTE 7 AS FOLLOWS:
PILOTS ARE ADVISED THAT LOWER UPHAM AND ROUGHAY FARM HAVE NOTIFIED
AIRSPACE WITHIN THE SOUTHAMPTON CONTROL ZONE, WITHIN THE ARC OF A
CIRCLE 2NM RAD AT 505615N 0011353W, DAYLIGHT HOURS, SFC-1500FT AMSL.
PILOTS OPR UNDER VFR OR ON A SPECIAL VFR CLEARANCE ARE ADVISED TO
AVOID THIS AREA IF AT ALL POSSIBLE. TRAFFIC INFORMATION WILL NOT BE
PASSED BY ATC
C0856/08
Interesting but…. If you are flying out of the strips concerned you will already know about the contents of the letter of agreement and if not, you will need to call ATC anyway to get and entry clearance. Interesting but ultimately not useful.
Q) EGTT/QMXHW/IV/M/A/000/999/5057N00121W005
FROM: 08/09/01 12:43 TO: 08/12/31 23:59
E) METAL PLATING LOCATED EAST OF HOLDING POINT B1
C3683/08
And the point is? Is this a taxiing hazard? Does it cause a magnetic anomaly? Does it need to be avoided? Can you taxi over it? Useless.
Q) EGTT/QOBCE/IV/M/A/000/999/5057N00121W005
FROM: 08/08/19 11:46 TO: 08/09/19 19:00
E) CRANE OPR 310 DEG (TRUE) 300M FM ARP. MAX WORKING HGT 112FT AMSL.
SCHEDULE: 0530-1900
C3505/08
At 112AMSL(aprox 70AGL) this probably does not even break the safety surface. If you look on the chart and see where the crane is located you will see it is very close to buildings of a similar height. This may be of technical interest for IFR fliers but is of no relevance to VFR
Q) EGTT/QOBCE/IV/M/A/000/999/5057N00121W005
FROM: 08/08/19 07:00 TO: 08/11/28 17:00
E) CRANE OPR 330 DEG TRUE, 3.7KM FM ARP. MAX JIB HGT 279FT AMSL.
C3469/08
At 297AMSL(aprox 190AGL) at 2 miles. Are they having a laugh? Rule 5 and hitting the terrain is all you need to worry about here.
Q) EGTT/QAEXX/IV/NBO/A/000/999/5057N00121W010
FROM: 08/08/28 00:01 TO: PERM
E) REF UK AIP EGHI 5-1 (DATED 28 AUG 08)
AMEND PUBLISHED MSA 2000 TO READ 2300
C3118/08
No relevance to VFR
Q) EGTT/QAEXX/IV/NBO/A/000/999/5057N00121W010
FROM: 08/07/24 10:51 TO: PERM
E) REF UK AIP EGHI 7-1 AND 7-2 (DATED 10 APR 08 AND 28 AUG 08)
AND 8-1 TO 8-12 (DATED 08 MAY 08)
AMEND PUBLISHED MSA NW SECTOR (090-180) TO READ 2300
C3119/08
No relevance to VFR
Q) EGTT/QOBCE/IV/M/A/000/999/5057N00121W005
FROM: 08/07/14 07:00 TO: 08/11/30 17:00
E) CRANE OPR 241 DEG (TRUE) 3200M FM ARP. MAX WORKING HGT 248FT AMSL,
108FT AGL
SCHEDULE: 0700-1700
C2825/08
At 248AMSL at 2 miles. Are they having a laugh? Rule 5 and hitting the terrain is all you need to worry about here.
Q) EGTT/QOBCE/IV/M/A/000/020/5057N00121W005
FROM: 08/07/03 07:45 TO: 08/09/30 19:00
E) CRANE OPR 010 DEG (TRUE), 2900M FM ARP. MAX JIB HGT 186FT AMSL
SCHEDULE: 0730-1900
C2789/08
At 186AMSL at 1.5 miles. Are they having a laugh? Rule 5 and hitting the terrain is all you need to worry about here.
Aerodrome (destination) - EGHP (POPHAM)
NIL
En-Route Information
I am not even going to try and go through these one at a time. With the exception of the temporary Class A not one of these is actually relevant to what I am trying to do. Since when di Doncaster controled airspace and IFR reporting points have any relevance to a VFR flight between Southampton and Popham?
EGTT: LONDON FIR
Q) EGXX/QNATT/IV/NBO/E/000/999/5504N00500W390
FROM: 08/01/01 00:00 TO: 08/12/31 23:59
E) NAVIGATIONAL AID OUTAGES JAN-DEC 2008, AIP SUP S36/2007 REFERS
B2217/07
Q) EGXX/QXXXX/V/BO/E/000/999/5441N00219W483
FROM: 08/07/01 00:00 TO: 08/09/25 23:59
E) ASSIGNMENT OF NEW LOCATION INDICATORS-:
EGEA CULTER HELIPAD
EGMT THURROCK EGTN ENSTONE
EGCR ASHCROFT
EGIA CIVIL AVIATION COMMUNICATION CENTRE (CACC) SCOTLAND AND NI
EGIB CACC WALES
EGIC CACC NW
EGID CACC NE
EGIE CACC MID WEST
EGIF CACC MID EAST
EGIG CACC SW
EGIH CACC SE
B1298/08
Q) EGXX/QAFTT/IV/BO/E/000/999/5441N00219W483
FROM: 08/08/28 00:01 TO: 08/09/11 23:59
E) TRIGGER NOTAM: AIP AMDT AIRAC 9/2008 WEF 28 AUG 2008 PERM
ATS AIRSPACE CLASSIFICATION (CLASS D) DONCASTER SHEFFIELD CONTROL
ZONE/CONTROL AREA INTRODUCED ENR 1-4-5.
LOWER ATS RTE L26 L603 L975 N160 T420 Y70 N160D BASE LVL CHANGES BTN
DIFFERENT SIGNIFICANT POINTS/ INTRODUCTION OF REPORTING POINT ROTNO
ENR 3-1-1-20/27/32/50/90/95
UPPER ATS RTE UL180 UM142 UN34 UN160 UP620 RECLASSIFICATION OF CDR 2
IN SW APPROACHES ENR 3-2-1-24
UPPER ATS RTE UL613 UN12 UN20 UT420 INTRODUCTION OF REPORTING POINTS
TESDO AND ROTNO ENR 3-2-1-24/30/57/60/120 AND ENR 4-4-1
B1405/08
Q) EGTT/QARCA/IV/BO/AE/035/070/5121N00105W009
FROM: 08/09/11 13:05 TO: 08/09/11 14:15
E) TEMPORARY CONTROLLED AIRSPACE CLASS A ESTABLISHED AS FOLLOWS
AIRWAY FM CPT (512950N 0011318W) TO FARNBOROUGH, CONTROLLING
AUTHORITY LONDON ACC. AUS 08-09-0303/AS6.
LOWER: 3500FT AMSL
UPPER: FL070
B1691/08
Nav Warnings
EGTT: LONDON FIR
Q) EGTT/QWELW/IV/BO/W/000/350/5110N00440W198
FROM: 08/09/11 12:00 TO: 08/09/11 17:30
E) MET RESEARCH FLT. CALLSIGN METMAN (1 BAE 146-301) ACFT OPERATING BTN
SFC AND FL350 WI AREA AS FOLLOWS.
AREA ALPHA. DEFINED BY POSITIONS. 5330N 00100W 5000N 00100W-
5000N 00200W 4850N 00800W 5100N 00800W 5220N 00530W 5330N 00530W
ORIGIN. ACTIVITY MAINLY UNDER LATCC (MIL) LJAO ATS.
LIGHT WT SONDES WILL BE DROPPED DURING THIS SORTIE. ALL OPS SUBJECT
TO PRIOR ATC CLEARANCE. (AUS ACN 08-00-0113 DATED 28 MAR 08 REFERS).
ACFT RTE PLAN CAN BE FOUND AT FAAM Home Page. AUS 08-09-0449/AS2.
LOWER: SFC
UPPER: FL350
The one key feature that comes out in my informal questioning of my farm strip friends is the sheer irrelevance of most of it. I am not going to rant, but rather to give a simple example. (Sorry but this is going to be a long post.) This is not hypothetical.
Today I wished to fly from a private strip very close to Southampton Airport to Popham – a distance of about 15 miles. I go to the AIS Notams site and make myself a narrow route briefing VFR up to FL040.
I get 10 Notams for Southampton and five enroute. One of the Southampton ones could just about be marginally useful (though it certainly would not affect the safety of the flight if you did not read it) and there is one temporary class A which is only as important as you consider Prince Charles to be. This is, in my experience entirely typical.
My point is, you almost loose the will to live wading through all the useless junk. Yes, I know about the Chicago Convention, ICAO standards etc. but lets take a long hard look at what we are trying to achieve. Surely it must be possible to separate the essential ones (Reds, RATs and displays) from the procedural.
If you want to look at them I have pasted them below with my comments.
Q) EGTT/QOBAW/IV/M/A/000/999/5105N00113W005
FROM: 08/02/04 13:32 TO: PERM
E) LAND BASED NAVIGATION OBSTACLES AND SOUTHAMPTON AD CHARTS
FOLLOWING SINGLE UNLIT OBSTACLE WITHDRAWN
NAME: HAMPAGE FARM
IDENT: 230C867
TYPE: MAST
LAT: 510432N LONG: 0011319W
AMSL: 757FT AGL: 432FT
ENR 5-4-1-16, AD 2 EGHI-5-1, EGHI-8-1 TO 8-12 REFERS
C0465/08
This one has been in the Notams since February and the fact that the obstacle has been removed serves to show just how useful the Noam ever was…..
Q) EGTT/QFAAH/IV/NBO/A/000/999/5057N00121W005
FROM: 08/03/30 06:30 TO: 08/10/25 22:00
E) SUMMER HRS OF AD OPR
MON-FRI 0530-2130 PPR 2130-2200
SAT 0530-2045 PPR 2045-2200
SUN 0630-2130 PPR 2130-2200
C1009/08
This one has been in the Notams ever since I have been flying (years). It should be in the AIP, not the Notams.
Q) EGTT/QACXX/IV/NBO/A/000/999/5057N00121W005
FROM: 08/03/17 06:30 TO: PERM
E) REF UK AIP AD 2-EGHI 1-11 AD 2.22 FLIGHT PROCEDURES:
ADD NOTE 7 AS FOLLOWS:
PILOTS ARE ADVISED THAT LOWER UPHAM AND ROUGHAY FARM HAVE NOTIFIED
AIRSPACE WITHIN THE SOUTHAMPTON CONTROL ZONE, WITHIN THE ARC OF A
CIRCLE 2NM RAD AT 505615N 0011353W, DAYLIGHT HOURS, SFC-1500FT AMSL.
PILOTS OPR UNDER VFR OR ON A SPECIAL VFR CLEARANCE ARE ADVISED TO
AVOID THIS AREA IF AT ALL POSSIBLE. TRAFFIC INFORMATION WILL NOT BE
PASSED BY ATC
C0856/08
Interesting but…. If you are flying out of the strips concerned you will already know about the contents of the letter of agreement and if not, you will need to call ATC anyway to get and entry clearance. Interesting but ultimately not useful.
Q) EGTT/QMXHW/IV/M/A/000/999/5057N00121W005
FROM: 08/09/01 12:43 TO: 08/12/31 23:59
E) METAL PLATING LOCATED EAST OF HOLDING POINT B1
C3683/08
And the point is? Is this a taxiing hazard? Does it cause a magnetic anomaly? Does it need to be avoided? Can you taxi over it? Useless.
Q) EGTT/QOBCE/IV/M/A/000/999/5057N00121W005
FROM: 08/08/19 11:46 TO: 08/09/19 19:00
E) CRANE OPR 310 DEG (TRUE) 300M FM ARP. MAX WORKING HGT 112FT AMSL.
SCHEDULE: 0530-1900
C3505/08
At 112AMSL(aprox 70AGL) this probably does not even break the safety surface. If you look on the chart and see where the crane is located you will see it is very close to buildings of a similar height. This may be of technical interest for IFR fliers but is of no relevance to VFR
Q) EGTT/QOBCE/IV/M/A/000/999/5057N00121W005
FROM: 08/08/19 07:00 TO: 08/11/28 17:00
E) CRANE OPR 330 DEG TRUE, 3.7KM FM ARP. MAX JIB HGT 279FT AMSL.
C3469/08
At 297AMSL(aprox 190AGL) at 2 miles. Are they having a laugh? Rule 5 and hitting the terrain is all you need to worry about here.
Q) EGTT/QAEXX/IV/NBO/A/000/999/5057N00121W010
FROM: 08/08/28 00:01 TO: PERM
E) REF UK AIP EGHI 5-1 (DATED 28 AUG 08)
AMEND PUBLISHED MSA 2000 TO READ 2300
C3118/08
No relevance to VFR
Q) EGTT/QAEXX/IV/NBO/A/000/999/5057N00121W010
FROM: 08/07/24 10:51 TO: PERM
E) REF UK AIP EGHI 7-1 AND 7-2 (DATED 10 APR 08 AND 28 AUG 08)
AND 8-1 TO 8-12 (DATED 08 MAY 08)
AMEND PUBLISHED MSA NW SECTOR (090-180) TO READ 2300
C3119/08
No relevance to VFR
Q) EGTT/QOBCE/IV/M/A/000/999/5057N00121W005
FROM: 08/07/14 07:00 TO: 08/11/30 17:00
E) CRANE OPR 241 DEG (TRUE) 3200M FM ARP. MAX WORKING HGT 248FT AMSL,
108FT AGL
SCHEDULE: 0700-1700
C2825/08
At 248AMSL at 2 miles. Are they having a laugh? Rule 5 and hitting the terrain is all you need to worry about here.
Q) EGTT/QOBCE/IV/M/A/000/020/5057N00121W005
FROM: 08/07/03 07:45 TO: 08/09/30 19:00
E) CRANE OPR 010 DEG (TRUE), 2900M FM ARP. MAX JIB HGT 186FT AMSL
SCHEDULE: 0730-1900
C2789/08
At 186AMSL at 1.5 miles. Are they having a laugh? Rule 5 and hitting the terrain is all you need to worry about here.
Aerodrome (destination) - EGHP (POPHAM)
NIL
En-Route Information
I am not even going to try and go through these one at a time. With the exception of the temporary Class A not one of these is actually relevant to what I am trying to do. Since when di Doncaster controled airspace and IFR reporting points have any relevance to a VFR flight between Southampton and Popham?
EGTT: LONDON FIR
Q) EGXX/QNATT/IV/NBO/E/000/999/5504N00500W390
FROM: 08/01/01 00:00 TO: 08/12/31 23:59
E) NAVIGATIONAL AID OUTAGES JAN-DEC 2008, AIP SUP S36/2007 REFERS
B2217/07
Q) EGXX/QXXXX/V/BO/E/000/999/5441N00219W483
FROM: 08/07/01 00:00 TO: 08/09/25 23:59
E) ASSIGNMENT OF NEW LOCATION INDICATORS-:
EGEA CULTER HELIPAD
EGMT THURROCK EGTN ENSTONE
EGCR ASHCROFT
EGIA CIVIL AVIATION COMMUNICATION CENTRE (CACC) SCOTLAND AND NI
EGIB CACC WALES
EGIC CACC NW
EGID CACC NE
EGIE CACC MID WEST
EGIF CACC MID EAST
EGIG CACC SW
EGIH CACC SE
B1298/08
Q) EGXX/QAFTT/IV/BO/E/000/999/5441N00219W483
FROM: 08/08/28 00:01 TO: 08/09/11 23:59
E) TRIGGER NOTAM: AIP AMDT AIRAC 9/2008 WEF 28 AUG 2008 PERM
ATS AIRSPACE CLASSIFICATION (CLASS D) DONCASTER SHEFFIELD CONTROL
ZONE/CONTROL AREA INTRODUCED ENR 1-4-5.
LOWER ATS RTE L26 L603 L975 N160 T420 Y70 N160D BASE LVL CHANGES BTN
DIFFERENT SIGNIFICANT POINTS/ INTRODUCTION OF REPORTING POINT ROTNO
ENR 3-1-1-20/27/32/50/90/95
UPPER ATS RTE UL180 UM142 UN34 UN160 UP620 RECLASSIFICATION OF CDR 2
IN SW APPROACHES ENR 3-2-1-24
UPPER ATS RTE UL613 UN12 UN20 UT420 INTRODUCTION OF REPORTING POINTS
TESDO AND ROTNO ENR 3-2-1-24/30/57/60/120 AND ENR 4-4-1
B1405/08
Q) EGTT/QARCA/IV/BO/AE/035/070/5121N00105W009
FROM: 08/09/11 13:05 TO: 08/09/11 14:15
E) TEMPORARY CONTROLLED AIRSPACE CLASS A ESTABLISHED AS FOLLOWS
AIRWAY FM CPT (512950N 0011318W) TO FARNBOROUGH, CONTROLLING
AUTHORITY LONDON ACC. AUS 08-09-0303/AS6.
LOWER: 3500FT AMSL
UPPER: FL070
B1691/08
Nav Warnings
EGTT: LONDON FIR
Q) EGTT/QWELW/IV/BO/W/000/350/5110N00440W198
FROM: 08/09/11 12:00 TO: 08/09/11 17:30
E) MET RESEARCH FLT. CALLSIGN METMAN (1 BAE 146-301) ACFT OPERATING BTN
SFC AND FL350 WI AREA AS FOLLOWS.
AREA ALPHA. DEFINED BY POSITIONS. 5330N 00100W 5000N 00100W-
5000N 00200W 4850N 00800W 5100N 00800W 5220N 00530W 5330N 00530W
ORIGIN. ACTIVITY MAINLY UNDER LATCC (MIL) LJAO ATS.
LIGHT WT SONDES WILL BE DROPPED DURING THIS SORTIE. ALL OPS SUBJECT
TO PRIOR ATC CLEARANCE. (AUS ACN 08-00-0113 DATED 28 MAR 08 REFERS).
ACFT RTE PLAN CAN BE FOUND AT FAAM Home Page. AUS 08-09-0449/AS2.
LOWER: SFC
UPPER: FL350
Last edited by Nipper2; 11th Sep 2008 at 20:57.
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,573
Received 413 Likes
on
218 Posts
Nipper2, the NOTAMS apply to many users and therefore they must include information relevant to everyone.
For example, some aircraft are exempt Rule 5 so obstacles below 500' are important to them, if not the private pilot user. I can give three examples off the top of my head:
Police aircraft.
Military aircraft.
Helicopters taking off or landing, which can occur just about anywhere, such as a garden or hotel.
One personal gripe of mine is where a warning is published for a minor airfield and only the ICAO code is given, the normal airfield name being absent. This means that a code search has to be carried out to find which one they are talking about.
For example, some aircraft are exempt Rule 5 so obstacles below 500' are important to them, if not the private pilot user. I can give three examples off the top of my head:
Police aircraft.
Military aircraft.
Helicopters taking off or landing, which can occur just about anywhere, such as a garden or hotel.
One personal gripe of mine is where a warning is published for a minor airfield and only the ICAO code is given, the normal airfield name being absent. This means that a code search has to be carried out to find which one they are talking about.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Fareham
Posts: 194
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ShyTorque
You are right about low level obstructions.... but look carefully at these. Subtract the AGL heights from the AMSL and the answers are all below 200 feet. Anyone who has a rule 5 exemption down to 200 feet is going to be looking out of the window (probably with NVG at night).
My point is not that the obscure stuff should not be there, but that the operationally critical information for the vast majority of fliers is made prominent and easy to check while the obscure (largely procedural) stuff appears but in a less prominent are more easily filtered way.
How do you defend the Trigger Notam for Doncaster in a VFR brief for Southampton? Or the utterly useless one about the metal plating? Or the airfield opening times?
What am I supposed to do about the met flight? Plot all those points on a chart and keep clear (of most of southern England) for the whole day? Unless people can act on the information, there is no point in publishing it.
It just goes on and on.
You are right about low level obstructions.... but look carefully at these. Subtract the AGL heights from the AMSL and the answers are all below 200 feet. Anyone who has a rule 5 exemption down to 200 feet is going to be looking out of the window (probably with NVG at night).
My point is not that the obscure stuff should not be there, but that the operationally critical information for the vast majority of fliers is made prominent and easy to check while the obscure (largely procedural) stuff appears but in a less prominent are more easily filtered way.
How do you defend the Trigger Notam for Doncaster in a VFR brief for Southampton? Or the utterly useless one about the metal plating? Or the airfield opening times?
What am I supposed to do about the met flight? Plot all those points on a chart and keep clear (of most of southern England) for the whole day? Unless people can act on the information, there is no point in publishing it.
It just goes on and on.
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nipper 2, just becuase you don't feel some of the notams are relevant I think you will find that the aerodrome licence holder has an obligation under CAP 168 for safeguarding of the aerodrome and the airpsace around it. That is why you will find cranes etc notamed because they are infringements of the safeguarded surfaces for IFR arrivals & departures. Deadly serious and mos definitiely not "having a laugh". You might want to get your facts straight before you go slagging peope off!
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,573
Received 413 Likes
on
218 Posts
How do you defend....
Defend? But why should I defend it? I'm not part of the AIS system, only another user of it like yourself, for 35 years now and never had a problem scanning past stuff that obviously doesn't apply to my flight. It might take me a few more seconds to read it but I consider a little personal patience and diligence as a necessary part of the requirements of the job.
If everything was filtered, by whatever means, to suit an individual, how could you/we be sure that something relevant/important wasn't missed off?
Have you voiced your concern to AIS? I did some years ago when I had a query, as per my previous item above, about the inclusion of airfield names, rather than only an ICAO code.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Fareham
Posts: 194
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Liquid and Shy
I'm not slagging anyone off, I'm trying to provide constructive criticism to make the system better (and I do understand why these things need to be published).
By the very nature of the people on this forum, you and I are the kind of guys (and girls) who do read the Notams. I was simply trying to make the point on behalf of those who don't (and who don't come here or even know how to switch on a PC for that matter - there are several of these based on my strip).
The point about the cranes is a good one. It may or may not be the case that these cranes break the safety surface for IFR flights (at 100AGL and two miles it probably doesn't) but thats not the point - they came up on a VFR brief!
Let me try again. The Notams roughly divide into three categories.
1. Those critical to the safety of navigation of all flights. What I loosely call Red, RATs and Airspace (and cranes, nav aids U/S etc. if you are IFR).
2. Procedural stuff. Changes to radio frequencies, opening times, airways routings etc. Important but not life threatening in the short term.
3. Rubbish. Generally due to a wrong Q line (so the dates go on for ever) or just plain useless stuff (that metal plate at Southampton is a good example - it give no detail of what action to take).
My simple view is that putting the Notams in order of importance - Red, RATs and Airspace first and then implementing some decent quality control on the rest would make it all a lot easier to read and absorb.
I repeat again my earlier thought - if the message is not getting through it could just be that the messenger is at fault not the recipient.
I'm not slagging anyone off, I'm trying to provide constructive criticism to make the system better (and I do understand why these things need to be published).
By the very nature of the people on this forum, you and I are the kind of guys (and girls) who do read the Notams. I was simply trying to make the point on behalf of those who don't (and who don't come here or even know how to switch on a PC for that matter - there are several of these based on my strip).
The point about the cranes is a good one. It may or may not be the case that these cranes break the safety surface for IFR flights (at 100AGL and two miles it probably doesn't) but thats not the point - they came up on a VFR brief!
Let me try again. The Notams roughly divide into three categories.
1. Those critical to the safety of navigation of all flights. What I loosely call Red, RATs and Airspace (and cranes, nav aids U/S etc. if you are IFR).
2. Procedural stuff. Changes to radio frequencies, opening times, airways routings etc. Important but not life threatening in the short term.
3. Rubbish. Generally due to a wrong Q line (so the dates go on for ever) or just plain useless stuff (that metal plate at Southampton is a good example - it give no detail of what action to take).
My simple view is that putting the Notams in order of importance - Red, RATs and Airspace first and then implementing some decent quality control on the rest would make it all a lot easier to read and absorb.
I repeat again my earlier thought - if the message is not getting through it could just be that the messenger is at fault not the recipient.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: UK
Age: 46
Posts: 642
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Liquid all well and good. A NOTAM check I recently did for an airfield located on top of a hill in Kent made me laugh. Was a warning about a crane that had maximum elevation above msl of 100 feet lower than the airfield. This will only be in issue if I have an EFATO I chuckled to myself.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Aberdeen
Posts: 1,234
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've had this discussion with Mike Cross. It would seem that AIS do not appear to feel thst they have any resposibility for exerting any quality control over the content of NOTAMS.
I cannot understand why but that appears to be the way they do business.
That and the general 'static' that appears to be the content of much of UK NOTAMS compared with other contries accounts for many pages of the 'rubbish' that a FIR listing accounts for.
Flying back from Macon to Aberdeen (about comparable distances either side of the FIR boundary) it was very noticeable that the listing of French NOTAMS was a tiny fraction of the listing - probably 10%.
Have we forgotten the jobsworth element?
I cannot understand why but that appears to be the way they do business.
That and the general 'static' that appears to be the content of much of UK NOTAMS compared with other contries accounts for many pages of the 'rubbish' that a FIR listing accounts for.
Flying back from Macon to Aberdeen (about comparable distances either side of the FIR boundary) it was very noticeable that the listing of French NOTAMS was a tiny fraction of the listing - probably 10%.
Have we forgotten the jobsworth element?
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: England
Posts: 551
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I do my best to make sure I don't miss anything important in the NOTAM, before a flight, but the screeds of completely irrelevant stuff doesn't help. For example, this is part of a VFR narrow route brief of a flight of 7 miles from Blackpool to Warton:
Nav Warnings
EGTT: LONDON FIR
Q) EGXX/QROXX/IV/NBO/W/000/999/5218N01451W999
B) FROM: 15/09/09 08:11C) TO: 15/12/06 23:59 EST
E) AS A RESULT OF THE UNREST WITHIN THE TERRITORY AND AIRSPACE OF
UKRAINE THERE REMAINS THE POTENTIAL FOR CONFUSION OVER SERVICE
PROVISION IN THE SIMFEROPOL (UKFV) FIR, IN PARTICULAR OVER THE HIGH
SEAS PORTION OF THE AIRSPACE. CAPACITY MAY ALSO BE IMPACTED IN THIS
AREA WHILE ALL REMAINING UKRAINIAN FIRS APPEAR TO BE OPERATING
NORMALLY. 15-01-0341/AS6
SFC
LOWER: SFC
UPPER: UNL
V0050/15
Q) EGXX/QROXX/IV/NBO/W/000/999/5218N01451W999
B) FROM: 15/09/25 14:00C) TO: 15/12/06 23:59 EST
E) HAZARDOUS SITUATION IN YEMEN. POTENTIAL RISK FROM DEDICATED
ANTI-AVIATION WEAPONRY. OPERATORS ARE STRONGLY ADVISED NOT TO ENTER
THE TERRITORY AND AIRSPACE OF YEMEN (SANAA FIR). THIS ADVICE DOES NOT
APPLY TO THOSE ACFT OPR ON AIRWAYS N315, UL425 AND R401. CONTACT UK
DEPARTMENT FOR TRANSPORT (+44) (0)20 7944 3260 OR (+44) (0)207 944
5999 OUT OF HOURS. 15-03-0473/AS6
LOWER: SFC
UPPER: UNL
V0051/15
Q) EGXX/QROXX/IV/NBO/W/000/999/5218N01451W999
B) FROM: 15/09/09 08:09C) TO: 15/12/06 23:59 EST
E) HAZARDOUS SITUATION WITHIN OR OVER THE TERRITORY AND AIRSPACE OF
SOUTH SUDAN. POTENTIAL RISK TO AVIATION OVERFLYING THIS AREA AT LESS
THAN 25,000FT ABOVE GROUND LEVEL (AGL) FROM DEDICATED ANTI-AVIATION
WEAPONRY. OPERATORS ARE STRONGLY ADVISED TO TAKE THIS POTENTIAL RISK
INTO ACCOUNT IN THEIR RISK ASSESSMENTS AND ROUTEING DECISIONS.
CONTACT UK DEPARTMENT FOR TRANSPORT (+44) (0)20 7944 3260 OR (+44)
(0)207 944 5999 OUT OF HOURS. 15-01-0253/AS6.
LOWER: SFC
UPPER: UNL
V0049/15
Q) EGXX/QROXX/IV/NBO/W/000/999/5218N01451W999
B) FROM: 15/09/08 08:53C) TO: 15/12/06 23:59 EST
E) HAZARDOUS SITUATION IN SYRIA. POTENTIAL RISK FROM DEDICATED
ANTI-AVIATION WEAPONRY. OPERATORS ARE STRONGLY ADVISED NOT TO ENTER
THE TERRITORY AND AIRSPACE OF SYRIA (INCLUDING THE DAMASCUS FIR).
CONTACT UK DEPARTMENT FOR TRANSPORT (+44) (0)20 7944 3260 OR (+44)
(0)207 944 5999 OUT OF HOURS. 15-03-0474/AS6
LOWER: SFC
UPPER: UNL
V0046/15
Q) EGXX/QROXX/IV/NBO/W/000/999/5218N01451W999
B) FROM: 15/09/08 08:52C) TO: 15/12/06 23:59 EST
E) HAZARDOUS SITUATION IN IRAQ. POTENTIAL RISK FROM DEDICATED
ANTI-AVIATION WEAPONRY. OPERATORS ARE STRONGLY ADVISED NOT TO ENTER
THE TERRITORY AND AIRSPACE OF IRAQ (INCLUDING THE BAGHDAD FIR).
CONTACT UK DEPARTMENT FOR TRANSPORT (+44) (0)20 7944 3260 OR (+44)
(0)207 944 5999 OUT OF HOURS. 15-03-0472/AS6
LOWER: SFC
UPPER: UNL
V0044/15
Q) EGXX/QROXX/IV/NBO/W/000/999/5218N01451W999
B) FROM: 15/09/08 08:50C) TO: 15/12/06 23:59 EST
E) HAZARDOUS SITUATION IN UKRAINE. POTENTIAL RISK TO AVIATION
OVERFLYING EASTERN UKRAINE THE DNIPROPETROVSK (UKDV) FIR - AND THE
CRIMEA REGION THE SIMFEROPOL (UKFV) FIR - FROM DEDICATED
ANTI-AVIATION WEAPONRY. THE EASTERN PART OF UKRAINE - DNIPROPETROVSK
(UKDV) FIR REMAINS CLOSED AS INDICATED BY THE LOCAL NOTAM. OPERATORS
ARE STRONGLY ADVISED NOT TO ENTER THE DNIPROPETROVSK (UKDV) AND
SIMFEROPOL (UKFV) FIRS. CONTACT UK DEPARTMENT FOR TRANSPORT (+44)
(0)20 7944 3260 OR (+44) (0)207 944 5999 OUT OF HOURS.
2015-01-0341/AS6
LOWER: SFC
UPPER: UNL
V0043/15
Q) EGXX/QROXX/IV/NBO/W/000/999/5218N01451W999
B) FROM: 15/09/08 08:50C) TO: 15/12/06 23:59 EST
E) HAZARDOUS SITUATION IN EGYPTIAN AIRSPACE IN NORTHERN SINAI
GOVERNATE WITHIN THE AREA BOUNDED BY 311400N 322200E - 294000N
324000E - 293000N 345400E - 312000N 341200E - 311400N 322200E (CAIRO
FIR, SINAI PENINSULA). POTENTIAL RISK TO AVIATION OVERFLYING THIS
AREA AT LESS THAN 25,000FT AGL FROM DEDICATED ANTI-AVIATION WEAPONRY.
OPERATORS ARE STRONGLY ADVISED TO TAKE THIS POTENTIAL RISK INTO
ACCOUNT IN THEIR RISK ASSESSMENTS AND ROUTEING DECISIONS. CONTACT UK
DEPARTMENT FOR TRANSPORT (DFT) (+44) (0)20 7944 3260 OR (+44) (0)207
944 5999 OUT OF HOURS 14-12-0274/AS6.
LOWER: SFC
UPPER: UNL
V0042/15
Q) EGXX/QROXX/IV/NBO/W/000/999/5218N01451W999
B) FROM: 15/09/08 08:49C) TO: 15/12/06 23:59 EST
E) HAZARDOUS SITUATION IN LIBYA. POTENTIAL RISK TO AVIATION
OVERFLYING FROM DEDICATED ANTI-AVIATION WEAPONRY. IN ACCORDANCE WITH
DIRECTION UNDER THE AVIATION SECURITY ACT 1982 UK REGISTERED
OPERATORS SO SERVED SHALL NOT ENTER THE TERRITORY AND AIRSPACE
(INCLUDING TRIPOLI FIR) OF THE STATE OF LIBYA. UK OPERATORS NOT
CURRENTLY SUBJECT TO DIRECTION UNDER THE AVIATION SECURITY ACT
SHOULD CONTACT UK DEPARTMENT FOR TRANSPORT (DFT) BEFORE OPERATING IN
THIS AREA. CONTACT UK DFT (+44) (0)20 7944 3260 OR (+44) (0)207 944
5999 OUT OF HOURS.
14-12-0160/AS6
LOWER: SFC
UPPER: UNL
There's no excuse for that!
Nav Warnings
EGTT: LONDON FIR
Q) EGXX/QROXX/IV/NBO/W/000/999/5218N01451W999
B) FROM: 15/09/09 08:11C) TO: 15/12/06 23:59 EST
E) AS A RESULT OF THE UNREST WITHIN THE TERRITORY AND AIRSPACE OF
UKRAINE THERE REMAINS THE POTENTIAL FOR CONFUSION OVER SERVICE
PROVISION IN THE SIMFEROPOL (UKFV) FIR, IN PARTICULAR OVER THE HIGH
SEAS PORTION OF THE AIRSPACE. CAPACITY MAY ALSO BE IMPACTED IN THIS
AREA WHILE ALL REMAINING UKRAINIAN FIRS APPEAR TO BE OPERATING
NORMALLY. 15-01-0341/AS6
SFC
LOWER: SFC
UPPER: UNL
V0050/15
Q) EGXX/QROXX/IV/NBO/W/000/999/5218N01451W999
B) FROM: 15/09/25 14:00C) TO: 15/12/06 23:59 EST
E) HAZARDOUS SITUATION IN YEMEN. POTENTIAL RISK FROM DEDICATED
ANTI-AVIATION WEAPONRY. OPERATORS ARE STRONGLY ADVISED NOT TO ENTER
THE TERRITORY AND AIRSPACE OF YEMEN (SANAA FIR). THIS ADVICE DOES NOT
APPLY TO THOSE ACFT OPR ON AIRWAYS N315, UL425 AND R401. CONTACT UK
DEPARTMENT FOR TRANSPORT (+44) (0)20 7944 3260 OR (+44) (0)207 944
5999 OUT OF HOURS. 15-03-0473/AS6
LOWER: SFC
UPPER: UNL
V0051/15
Q) EGXX/QROXX/IV/NBO/W/000/999/5218N01451W999
B) FROM: 15/09/09 08:09C) TO: 15/12/06 23:59 EST
E) HAZARDOUS SITUATION WITHIN OR OVER THE TERRITORY AND AIRSPACE OF
SOUTH SUDAN. POTENTIAL RISK TO AVIATION OVERFLYING THIS AREA AT LESS
THAN 25,000FT ABOVE GROUND LEVEL (AGL) FROM DEDICATED ANTI-AVIATION
WEAPONRY. OPERATORS ARE STRONGLY ADVISED TO TAKE THIS POTENTIAL RISK
INTO ACCOUNT IN THEIR RISK ASSESSMENTS AND ROUTEING DECISIONS.
CONTACT UK DEPARTMENT FOR TRANSPORT (+44) (0)20 7944 3260 OR (+44)
(0)207 944 5999 OUT OF HOURS. 15-01-0253/AS6.
LOWER: SFC
UPPER: UNL
V0049/15
Q) EGXX/QROXX/IV/NBO/W/000/999/5218N01451W999
B) FROM: 15/09/08 08:53C) TO: 15/12/06 23:59 EST
E) HAZARDOUS SITUATION IN SYRIA. POTENTIAL RISK FROM DEDICATED
ANTI-AVIATION WEAPONRY. OPERATORS ARE STRONGLY ADVISED NOT TO ENTER
THE TERRITORY AND AIRSPACE OF SYRIA (INCLUDING THE DAMASCUS FIR).
CONTACT UK DEPARTMENT FOR TRANSPORT (+44) (0)20 7944 3260 OR (+44)
(0)207 944 5999 OUT OF HOURS. 15-03-0474/AS6
LOWER: SFC
UPPER: UNL
V0046/15
Q) EGXX/QROXX/IV/NBO/W/000/999/5218N01451W999
B) FROM: 15/09/08 08:52C) TO: 15/12/06 23:59 EST
E) HAZARDOUS SITUATION IN IRAQ. POTENTIAL RISK FROM DEDICATED
ANTI-AVIATION WEAPONRY. OPERATORS ARE STRONGLY ADVISED NOT TO ENTER
THE TERRITORY AND AIRSPACE OF IRAQ (INCLUDING THE BAGHDAD FIR).
CONTACT UK DEPARTMENT FOR TRANSPORT (+44) (0)20 7944 3260 OR (+44)
(0)207 944 5999 OUT OF HOURS. 15-03-0472/AS6
LOWER: SFC
UPPER: UNL
V0044/15
Q) EGXX/QROXX/IV/NBO/W/000/999/5218N01451W999
B) FROM: 15/09/08 08:50C) TO: 15/12/06 23:59 EST
E) HAZARDOUS SITUATION IN UKRAINE. POTENTIAL RISK TO AVIATION
OVERFLYING EASTERN UKRAINE THE DNIPROPETROVSK (UKDV) FIR - AND THE
CRIMEA REGION THE SIMFEROPOL (UKFV) FIR - FROM DEDICATED
ANTI-AVIATION WEAPONRY. THE EASTERN PART OF UKRAINE - DNIPROPETROVSK
(UKDV) FIR REMAINS CLOSED AS INDICATED BY THE LOCAL NOTAM. OPERATORS
ARE STRONGLY ADVISED NOT TO ENTER THE DNIPROPETROVSK (UKDV) AND
SIMFEROPOL (UKFV) FIRS. CONTACT UK DEPARTMENT FOR TRANSPORT (+44)
(0)20 7944 3260 OR (+44) (0)207 944 5999 OUT OF HOURS.
2015-01-0341/AS6
LOWER: SFC
UPPER: UNL
V0043/15
Q) EGXX/QROXX/IV/NBO/W/000/999/5218N01451W999
B) FROM: 15/09/08 08:50C) TO: 15/12/06 23:59 EST
E) HAZARDOUS SITUATION IN EGYPTIAN AIRSPACE IN NORTHERN SINAI
GOVERNATE WITHIN THE AREA BOUNDED BY 311400N 322200E - 294000N
324000E - 293000N 345400E - 312000N 341200E - 311400N 322200E (CAIRO
FIR, SINAI PENINSULA). POTENTIAL RISK TO AVIATION OVERFLYING THIS
AREA AT LESS THAN 25,000FT AGL FROM DEDICATED ANTI-AVIATION WEAPONRY.
OPERATORS ARE STRONGLY ADVISED TO TAKE THIS POTENTIAL RISK INTO
ACCOUNT IN THEIR RISK ASSESSMENTS AND ROUTEING DECISIONS. CONTACT UK
DEPARTMENT FOR TRANSPORT (DFT) (+44) (0)20 7944 3260 OR (+44) (0)207
944 5999 OUT OF HOURS 14-12-0274/AS6.
LOWER: SFC
UPPER: UNL
V0042/15
Q) EGXX/QROXX/IV/NBO/W/000/999/5218N01451W999
B) FROM: 15/09/08 08:49C) TO: 15/12/06 23:59 EST
E) HAZARDOUS SITUATION IN LIBYA. POTENTIAL RISK TO AVIATION
OVERFLYING FROM DEDICATED ANTI-AVIATION WEAPONRY. IN ACCORDANCE WITH
DIRECTION UNDER THE AVIATION SECURITY ACT 1982 UK REGISTERED
OPERATORS SO SERVED SHALL NOT ENTER THE TERRITORY AND AIRSPACE
(INCLUDING TRIPOLI FIR) OF THE STATE OF LIBYA. UK OPERATORS NOT
CURRENTLY SUBJECT TO DIRECTION UNDER THE AVIATION SECURITY ACT
SHOULD CONTACT UK DEPARTMENT FOR TRANSPORT (DFT) BEFORE OPERATING IN
THIS AREA. CONTACT UK DFT (+44) (0)20 7944 3260 OR (+44) (0)207 944
5999 OUT OF HOURS.
14-12-0160/AS6
LOWER: SFC
UPPER: UNL
There's no excuse for that!
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: where should i be today????
Age: 57
Posts: 342
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Soay
As AS6 in those NOTAM I feel able to answer your question. I know that these V series NOTAM are irrelevant to many operators in the UK (particularly GA) but the information has to be available to UK operators who may fly into/over/close to those areas. Unfortunately, the NATS AIS system does not enable pilots to filter out certain NOTAM series (in this case the V series which is also used for Volcanic Ash warnings). We are working on alternative methods of retaining the long-term warnings in the appropriate, but alternative, domain.
In the meantime when using the NATS AIS site for your narrow route brief just skim past the NOTAM that are annotated Vn the right hand column. I hope to bring news of developments in the near future as we progress.
rej
As AS6 in those NOTAM I feel able to answer your question. I know that these V series NOTAM are irrelevant to many operators in the UK (particularly GA) but the information has to be available to UK operators who may fly into/over/close to those areas. Unfortunately, the NATS AIS system does not enable pilots to filter out certain NOTAM series (in this case the V series which is also used for Volcanic Ash warnings). We are working on alternative methods of retaining the long-term warnings in the appropriate, but alternative, domain.
In the meantime when using the NATS AIS site for your narrow route brief just skim past the NOTAM that are annotated Vn the right hand column. I hope to bring news of developments in the near future as we progress.
rej
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Northampton UK
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's fantastic to get a response on this subject from the horse's mouth!
The problem is, as I'm sure rej is aware, that these notams actually reduce safety by increasing the clutter content to the point where other, more relevant, notams can be overlooked. This is especially true if one attempts to print a narrow route briefing for use in the cockpit, where one two pages become six or more!
Something that's puzzling is why these Notams don't have a radius of action based on their actual location, as others do. This would entirely avoid the problem, even if the radius was 1000 miles!
Anyway it's good to hear it's being taken seriously as a problem. Let's hope we don't get too many infringements as a result of Notam clutter in the meantime!
The problem is, as I'm sure rej is aware, that these notams actually reduce safety by increasing the clutter content to the point where other, more relevant, notams can be overlooked. This is especially true if one attempts to print a narrow route briefing for use in the cockpit, where one two pages become six or more!
Something that's puzzling is why these Notams don't have a radius of action based on their actual location, as others do. This would entirely avoid the problem, even if the radius was 1000 miles!
Anyway it's good to hear it's being taken seriously as a problem. Let's hope we don't get too many infringements as a result of Notam clutter in the meantime!
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: where should i be today????
Age: 57
Posts: 342
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As promised I am now able to give you an update on the V series NOTAMs that refer to warnings and the globe. After much work with various key stakeholders progress has been made. With effect from the AIRAC 01/2016 the existing V series NOTAMs will be removed and the information will be included in the UK AIP. Any new or revised warnings will need to be initially promulgated by V series NOTAM (lasting no more than 60 days) but the details will only remain in NOTAM format until the next available AIRAC cycle when it/they too will be incorporated into the UK AIP.
I know that many people would like to see them disappear immediately but I hope that you understand that we are bound by AIRAC submission dates and the next one is 16 October for AIRAC 01/2016 .... effective date is 7 January 2016.
I know that many people would like to see them disappear immediately but I hope that you understand that we are bound by AIRAC submission dates and the next one is 16 October for AIRAC 01/2016 .... effective date is 7 January 2016.
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Rochdale
Age: 48
Posts: 95
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Skydemon Light
I use the free online version of SKYDEMON to check notams. It plots them on the chart for you and will even show you the route the red arrows are flying graphically. I also check the ais website as well, just in case, but that's down to my OCD.
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Sherborne, UK
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have kept my eye on this thread, since (in my role as "SkyDemon Guy") we got a lot of complaints from our users at a recent flying event about such NOTAMs...
Some have been questioning whether our narrow route briefing algorithms were faulty (NO!) but a great many pilots were reporting that due to these NOTAMs clogging up the feed, they were overshadowing other NOTAMs which do actually have value, and that is something that we want to nip in the bud.
I have been chatting with various individuals within decision making organisations to suggest a simple solution to this, and while I don't agree with the reasoning behind my solution not being implemented, it is important to note that these decision makers are actually engaging with the problem.
Interestingly it sounds like once this type of NOTAM gets pushed to the AIP, there will be a couple of other types that will start to pop up... Hopefully these can be wrestled out of our NOTAM feeds in a similar way...
Some have been questioning whether our narrow route briefing algorithms were faulty (NO!) but a great many pilots were reporting that due to these NOTAMs clogging up the feed, they were overshadowing other NOTAMs which do actually have value, and that is something that we want to nip in the bud.
I have been chatting with various individuals within decision making organisations to suggest a simple solution to this, and while I don't agree with the reasoning behind my solution not being implemented, it is important to note that these decision makers are actually engaging with the problem.
Interestingly it sounds like once this type of NOTAM gets pushed to the AIP, there will be a couple of other types that will start to pop up... Hopefully these can be wrestled out of our NOTAM feeds in a similar way...
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Dublin
Posts: 2,547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
rej,
It's good to see something being done about these. Your solution will obviously work in this case, and reduce permanent notams to just 60 days. So well done on that.
But I wonder why the NOTAMs were ever coded as they were? Would it not have made more sence to put the centre of the NOTAM in the country affected, and a radius sufficient to cover the whole of that country. Then people would only see the NOTAM if their route took them through the airspace affected? Just like other NOTAMs.
dp
It's good to see something being done about these. Your solution will obviously work in this case, and reduce permanent notams to just 60 days. So well done on that.
But I wonder why the NOTAMs were ever coded as they were? Would it not have made more sence to put the centre of the NOTAM in the country affected, and a radius sufficient to cover the whole of that country. Then people would only see the NOTAM if their route took them through the airspace affected? Just like other NOTAMs.
dp
