18G
Not sure whether there is any particular sequence to the order the en-route NOTAM appear in a Narrow Route Brief. It's unusual for me to get more than a page or two and it's easy to skip through those that are irrelevant.
The old briefs were replaced by the VFR FIR briefs, where things do arrive in a particular order. As it says at the head of the brief:-
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.
Then at the start of the first section it says
THE FOLLOWING SECTION CONTAINS NOTAM WITH A RADIUS OF INFLUENCE OF 30 NM OR LESS, SORTED BY TYPE: AGA, COM, RAC, NAVW AND OTHER AND WITHIN EACH TYPE SORTED GEOGRAPHICALLY FROM NORTH TO SOUTH.
At the start of the second it says
THE FOLLOWING SECTION CONTAINS NOTAM WITH A RADIUS OF INFLUENCE GREATER THAN 30 NM, SORTED BY TYPE: AGA, COM, RAC, NAVW AND OTHER AND WITHIN EACH TYPE SORTED GEOGRAPHICALLY FROM NORTH TO SOUTH.
This is not unforunately what the GA pilot representatives asked for. We suggested a sort from south to north (which was the way the old briefs were sorted) and we did not ask it to be sectioned by type. What we ended up with was decided by John Gentleman of CAA DAP and Rod Dean of the CAA's GA Department (both no longer in post). The reason for sorting into two sections based on radius of influence is as follows:-
Imagine I am flying from Plymouth to Bournemouth. I check the section of the brief covering the latitudes within which my flight lies. However there are some NOTAM that affect the entire UK and which therefore have a geographic centre up in the Midlands. Because I have not checked this part of the brief I don't see them. Putting the large-area stuff in a separate section which is read in its entirety deals with the risk of not seeing it.
The problem with changing the sort is that it costs money. NATS have to pay Thales Information Systems to re-write the software. Having already done so and produced what the CAA asked for they won't be amenable to paying again and would probably require CAA to fund it, who, as is natural, will not want to, particularly if it implies an admission that they got it wrong in the first place.
ST
I agree it would be helpful for the a/d name to be included. While NATS staff are not permitted to identify themselves on web forums they do monitor them and some do post under pseudonyms. However the best way to get changes made is to send an email directly to
[email protected] A number of users making the same request will have more effect than simply feeding it through me. I have already mentioned it to them on your behalf.