Do QF pilots read NOTAMS?

[Prop's ????]

In recent days, QF pilots have been questioning ATC regarding faulty or non-response radio frequencies.

EG:

NOTAM YPAD

Adelaide Clearance 126.1 not available due to Tower Maintenance, contact Ground on 121.7 for clearance.

QF crew “Ground no joy on 126.1”


I know, small and trivial, but given the chance VB or REX crew would be hammered for doing such things.

[The Messiah]

Answer;

Those QF pilots obviously did not but, as a species I'm sure QF pilots read notams.

What a stupid topic:bored:

Get a life!

[tobzalp]

Saw a RAAF King Air get airborne for VOR approaches at MDG this week with the VOR NOTAMed as US.

[chimbu]

Are QF shorthaul Pilots unprofessional??

[Capt Stabbin]

More importantly, is a DJ a "musician" ?

[Pretzal]

I think the incident that prop refers to is particularly poignant because it was also on the ATIS that 126.1 wasnt available. Not a good day for reading notams or listening to the ATIS! Everybody's human - they're just lucky their mistake was very minor.

[TopperHarley]

Who the fark has enough time to read (and fully understand) all the NOTAMS on YSSY ?!?

Is there any way they could be simplified ??

[Duff Man]

Topper so you're one of the many from QF who've been asking about the 34L glide path in recent days?

AD C1325/05
GP RWY 34L NOT AVBL
FROM 07 040001 TO 08 100600


RTFN

but I do sympathise - 5 pages of NOTAMs seems excessive.

[Uncommon Sense]

Let he without sin cast the first stone.

No company / operation is immune from missing a NOTAM.

The most memorable for me was when CS RWY was NOTAM n/a from midnight local to 0400 due lighting replacement.

A certain large domestic carrier - no longer with us - launched out of ML nonetheless. For some reason, the controller in CS noticed the Dep just out of ML and relayed down the line the status of the RWY.

Undeterred the 737 continued on.

Coy Ops in ML were rung and advised that the RWY was closed - not subject to recall. Acknowledged by Ops.

737 continues on.

Port Authority notified that traffic was inbound and about 90 minutes out. But we are closed - wires everywhere - no lights, and doing some resealing.

Message passed to aircraft - response: "Require Runway 15"!

Advised to divert to TL or BN. TL 'not suitable' (no ground handling), and insufficnent fuel for BN (WX).

Much scrambling of wires, contractors and earthmoving equipment.

Runway was operational 3 minutes before this idiot crossed the threshold.

After landing rang to complain about how he was handled - and.... requested track shortening on his departure to make up for lost time. Departure???

Response given was you can expect track shortening on request when you get airborne - after 0430.

Unbelieveable? I would have thought so - except the next evening...... same flight departed ex-ML again.

Port Authority delayed further works until a frank discussion with said company.

[Keg]

I'll have to fess up here, I haven't read a NOTAM since about mid March!! :E Not through lack of desire to do so though! :(

[Enema Bandit's Dad]

Prop's ???? = son of Scumfish.

[tinpis]

Gosh uncommon sense in my day that woulda got ya a whole pot of tea and a packet of biscuits.....for two!:}


Over 1000 posts and I obviously don't want a Personal Title which I could get just by clicking here.

oh..oh tin got no money.

[mjskinne]

Interesting topic.

Notams these days seem to be raised to cover failures to comply with legislation and procedures. Arse covering everywhere.

No wonder pilots don't bother to read them, or rather miss the one's that actually should be raised.

If aerodromes were anywhere near serviceable, you wouldn't need so may notams.

[18-Wheeler]

Who the fark has enough time to read (and fully understand) all the NOTAMS on YSSY ?!?

Is there any way they could be simplified ??


I've often pondered this as well.
My conclusion is that they should simply publish a list of things that work.
It'll be less than five items, so the list will be several thousand items shorter.

[Bill Smith]

Why can't they publish NOTAM's in some sort of logical sense.

E.G With the five pages or so on Sydney, why don't they put the new ones first rather than hidden at some random position within the novel that we are presented with everyday ??

[Howard Hughes]

Are the new ones not at the bottom?

With the ones older than 7 days reduced to 1 line?

Or do they do notams differently in Sydney to anywhere else in the country?

Cheers, HH.

:ok:

[TIMMEEEE]

18 Wheeler.

So true especially with regards to AYPY where virtually nothing is working at the best of times.

Flew through Moresby's airspace a few months back and no contact with anyone at all.
A quick call to YBBN confirmed that their entire communications had went down and that we had to make TIBA broadcasts until in contact with San Francisco and provide our own traffic separation.
I believe AYPY Tower was about the only frequency working.

Perhaps they ought to at least prioritise the YSSY Notams so that important ones arent lost in the pile.

[1013]

Uncommon Sense.

Never a truer word spoken than your quote:

Let he without sin cast the first stone

I too have been guilty of the very same crime that these other aviators have been accused of.

Fortunately no, it was not serious but it really got me thinking and determined that it wouldn't happen again.
Sure it happened on a short(er) sector and what I did learn was that although I always go through all the NOTAMS on a longer sector, I would more thoroughly peruse all of the NOTAMS personally on shorter sectors pre flight.

To make matters worse I was performing training on a command candidate and missed the NOTAM entirely myself.
I was to personally blame and set a poor example for my trainee who didnt have to buy a meal or drink for the remainder of the trip.

Time pressures, monotonous reams of never-ending NOTAMS, distractions and it can happen to anyone.
It called Human Error and none of us are immune.

[Bill Smith]

Silly me thanks for putting it into logical order. :O

[QSK?]

Pilots are definitely either not bothering to obtain Notams at the pre-flight stage or, if they do, they are not reading them.

Recently, I have been conducting a "private" survey of IFR pilots and IFR training institutions re the approved DA for the Rwy 26 ILS at YMEN. Invariably all the pilots, AND IFR INSTRUCTORS, are still operating to a DA of 490 feet/1.5km.

They are obviously unaware of this NOTAM which has now been out for about 3 months (at least since April):

C199/05 REVIEW C137/05
AIP DAP EAST AMD AS FLW:
1. SID ESSENDON ONE DEP (RADAR) - ALL RWY DATED 25 NOV 2004
AMD RWY 17 CLIMB GRADIENT 3.6 PERCENT TO 1600FT THEN 3.3 PERCENT
2. RWY 26 ILS DATED 9 JUN 2005 AMD S-I ILS DA TO 640 (401) 2.2 FROM 06 200324 TO PERM

Why the DAP plate for YMEN, dated 9 June 2005, wasn't amended accordingly defies logic

[chief wiggum]

More to the point, when was the last time most of you chaps, QF or otherwise, read the AIP, or Jepps with respect to STANDARD CALLS ?

I cringe every time i hear on tower freq" XXX Tower, ABC is established on Localiser approach for RWY zz "

ANd you chaps that constantly chat on 121.5!!! I think enuff has been said here before regarding that. It always amazes me though, just how quick someone always is to pipe up with "On Guard" when some poor B@stard has a finger fault.

[Three Bars]

I think that a lot of the problems are because valid and important stuff can be lost in amongst absolute waffle that has no useful application whatsoever.

Here's one of my favourites from Cairns.

AMD AIP ENROUTE SUPPLEMENT AUSTRALIA RWY DISTANCES SUPPLEMENT EFFECTIVE 09 JUNE 2005 PAGE RDS C-1
DELETE SECOND REF TO RWY 15 APPROACH GRADIENT
INSERT RWY 33 1. APPROACH GRAD RWY 33 IS BASED ON 180M INNER EDGE AND 3.7 CLEAR GRAD TO THR.
CRITICAL OBST TKOF RWY 33 IS BUILDING 11FT 100M FM END OF CWY 100M E OF RCL
FROM 06 250639 TO PERM

Now, this stuff is all very nice, but at the preflight stage where every second can count (particularly after Xray scan, depart terminal via airbridge, don green jacket and orange ear protection, walk to flight planning) I really couldn't give a rats!!!
Multiply this by (sometimes) 30-odd pages and your eyes start to glaze over.

No excuses for missing an important NOTAM, but I can certainly understand the circumstances behind it.

[Ron & Edna Johns]

Maybe the Rat Flight Ops should employ a Communications manager/expert. This person could be responsible for improving the flow of important information to/from crews. NOTAM presentation and streamlining the bookcase-load of manuals would be just a start (the second-most commonly heard phrase on a Rat flight-deck would have to be: "where is that written?"). Such a person would have expertise in communication theory and how to cut out the noise that interferes with getting info through.

Oh, hang on, we've already got such a person... editing a glossy mag and trying to work out why we're not engaged! Nothing against the individual concerned, but surely the person's talents could be better used by management for the good of the operation??

And they wonder why our ASK cost is what it is......

:suspect:

[Kaptin M]

It seems to me, that Dicko is missing a big opportunity here to do what today's modern airline management enjoy most - creating another department, with more "managers" (those highly paid employees who help contribute to reducing the number of revenue producing staff).

In JAL, I'm certain there is an entire department dedicated to dealing with NOTAMS.
Allow me to explain a recent event that convinced me of this.
Many airports in Japan have their own "unique" weather factors - sea fogs, depending on the wind direction; windshear - also dependant upon which quadrant the wind is blowing from; 180 degree wind direction swings below 1,000 (with wind strength going from say a 25 kt tailwind, to a 25 kt headwind).
Sendai - north of Tokyo is one such airport that offers us ALL of the above, frequently.

A couple of months ago, I was on approach into Sendai (SDJ), and naturally looked for the windsock.
There was none - it was gone.
After arrival, I went to the company briefing office and asked them about the windsock, "Where is it?"
"It's gone - out of service for 1 month."
I re-checked the NOTAMS, thinking that I must have missed it - however, SDJ was listed as "nil NOTAMS".
Nor was it on the ATI.

A Captain's Report was made to the company, advising them of this obvious oversight - information that I felt pilots should be aware of.
To my amazement, I received a reply from the company advising me that a NOTAM had been issued, but that the company didn't feel it was important enough for pilots to be given!
Apparently all NOTAMS are "vetted" by the company (undoubtedly by a non-pilot - and more than likely by some little girl who has been employed for no more than 6 months), and then graded into 6 levels - only the first 2 are thought worthy enough of passing on to the pilots! (And you were wondering HOW a JAL aircraft could land on a closed runway in Tokyo, weren't you?! The "vetter of NOTAMS" probably thought THAT NOTAM was also unworthy of the crew's attention!).

Recently, JAL introduced a system whereby NOTAMS (the ones they let us see) newer than 1 month are highlighted.
Prior to that, they had categorised them by usage of asterisks,
* within the last 6 months
** within the past 3 months
*** within the past month

[ovum]

A DJ is about as much of a musician as a tomato is a vegetable.

[Merlins Magic]

When will the powers that be sit up and listen to us Pilots. After all, we are the ones that have to read and translate the pages of information given to us.

I am yet to fly with anyone who thinks that the current format is the best it can be.

During my flight this morning the comment was made regarding a Mod to Sev turbulence sigmet that the grid references that are provided are not appropriate as they need to be plotted on the chart to see if our track will inflict this zone. Once again, something that takes a good deal of time during the pre-flight. Would it not be more user friendly if the sigmet read area bounded by towns A B C D and E.

I think it is fair to say that there is no single solution that will please everyone, but I do believe that if the system doesn't please anyone, then it needs to be altered.

[bushy]

Merlin
You're right. The areas should be defined by identifiable points.
Not by fictitious names that do not appear on any maps.

[OperationsNormal]

WHAT A LOAD OF BOLLOCKS


NOTAM INFORMATION
-----------------

SYDNEY (YSSY)
C721/04 REVIEW C716/04
RTZL RWY 16R NOT AVBL
FROM 05 280214 TO PERM

C852/05 REVIEW C91/05
SW SECTOR APRON WORKS
DETAILS SUP H5/05, AVBL FM AVFAX CODE 81522 AND AIRSERVICES WEBSITE
WWW.AIRSERVICESAUSTRALIA.COM/PUBLICATIONS/AIP.ASP
FROM 04 140100 TO 07 140100 EST

C872/05
OBST INFRINGING RWY16R APCH SFC / RWY34L TKOF SFC AND TRANSITIONAL
SFC
RWY16R APCH SFC INFRINGED BY 3.11M (10.2FT) LOCATED BTN 778M TO 849M
FM THR16R AND BTN 171M TO 248M W OF RWY 16R/34L RCL.

RWY34L TKOF SFC INFRINGED BY 6.1M(20FT) LOCATED BTN 699M TO 813M FM
RWY34L END AND BTN 76M TO 160M W OF RWY 16R/34L RCL.

TRANSITIONAL SFC INFRINGED BY 2M (6.56FT) LOCATED BTN 669M TO 765M FM
RWY34L END AND BTN 259M TO 277M W OF RWY 16R/34L RCL.
FROM 04 180526 TO 07 142300

C1129/05 REVIEW C1083/05
TWY RESTR DUE LEADOUT LIGHTING FAILURE
RWY 16R EXIT TWY BRAVO-4 NOT AVBL
RWY 16R EXIT TWY BRAVO-3 NOT AVBL
RWY 16R EXIT TWY FOXTROT WEST NOT AVBL
RWY 16R EXIT TWY KILO EAST NOT AVBL
FROM 05 291723 TO 07 310700 EST
HN

C1150/05 REVIEW C781/05
TEMPO OBST TREES INFRINGING
RWY 25 APCH SFC INFRINGED 7.3M (24FT) BY TREE
LOC 516M FM RWY 25 THR 210M NORTH OF CL 74FT AMSL
RWY 16L APCH SFC INFRINGED 4.2M (13.8FT) BY TREE
LOC 520M FM RWY 16L THR 206M EAST OF CL 60FT AMSL

FROM 05 310458 TO 08 010600 EST

C1174/05
RWY 07/25 LGT AND RECABLING
WORKS BEGIN JUL 2005.
DETAILS SUP H33/05
AVBL FM AVFAX CODE 81551 AND
AIRSERVICES WEBSITE:
WWW.AIRSERVICESAUSTRALIA.COM/PUBLICATIONS/AIP.ASP
FROM 06 020041 TO 10 260100

C1228/05
AMD AIP ENROUTE SUPPLEMENT AUSTRALIA
FAC S-25 DATED 9 JUNE 2005
DELETE NOTE 12.4.2 AND REPLACE WITH
'ACCESS TO CORPORATE AVIATION APRON AS APPROVED BY AD OPR,
RESTRICTED TO WHEELED HEL AND BLW 14.7M ROTOR DIAMETER.
GROUND TAXIING VIA THE 30M MAX WING SPAN TWY GA-1'
FROM 06 080717 TO PERM

C1229/05
AMD AIP ENROUTE SUPPLEMENT AUSTRALIA FAC S-26
DATED 9 JUNE 2005
DELETE NOTE 12.4.4 AND REPLACE WITH
'NO HELICOPTER OPS PERMITTED NEAR INTL AND DOM TERMINALS
OR ON INTL AND DOM APRONS'.
FROM 06 080724 TO PERM

C1200/05 REVIEW C1182/05
AMD AIP DAP EAST STAR 'AUDLY ONE ARRIVAL' AND 'MANFA ONE ARRIVAL'
DATED 9 JUN 2005
AMD WAYPOINT BOREE LAT TO S33 14.2
FROM 06 081600 TO PERM

C1154/05
AMD AIP DAP EAST SID RWYS 16R & 34L SOUTH DEPARTURES (NON-JET) DATED
25 NOV 04.
RWY 16R CLIFF TWO DEPARTURE, SHELLYS TRANSITION AMD TRANSITION NAME
TO CORDO.
INSTRUCTION:
AT CLIFF (19 SY) TURN RIGHT TRK 227 DEG TO CORDO THENCE AS CLEARED.

RWY 34L GLENFIELD FOUR DEPARTURE, SHELLYS TRANSITION AMD TRANSITION
NAME TO CORDO.

INSTRUCTION:
AT GLF NDB TURN LEFT TRK 170 DEG. INTERCEPT AND TRK SY RADIAL 208 DEG
TO CORDO (30 SY) THENCE AS CLEARED.
FROM 06 081600 TO PERM

C1239/05 REVIEW C612/05
AMD AIP ERSA FAC S-22 DATED 9 JUNE 2005
TAXIWAY RESTRICTIONS
DELETE NOTE 10B.
FROM 06 090638 TO PERM

C1240/05 REVIEW C620/05
AMD AIP ENROUTE SUP AUSTRALIA (ERSA) DATED 9 JUNE 2005
PAGE FAC S - 23 FLIGHT PROCEDURES
DELETE IN TOTO NOTE 5 AND REPLACE WITH:
INT DEP RWY 16L FM TWY T1 NOT AVBL HN
FROM 06 090639 TO PERM

C1255/05 REVIEW C1252/05
MANDATORY MOV AREA GUIDANCE SIGN INDICATING THE HOLDING POINT RWY
07/25 AT TWY HOTEL NOT AVBL
FROM 06 131938 TO 07 310900 EST
HN

C1256/05 REVIEW C1253/05
MANDATORY MOV AREA GUIDANCE SIGN SOUTH EAST CORNER OF INTERSECTION OF
RWY 07/25 AND RWY 16R/34L NOT AVBL
FROM 06 131940 TO 07 310900 EST
HN

C1257/05 REVIEW C1254/05
MANDATORY MOV AREA GUIDANCE SIGN NORTH WEST CORNER OF INTERSECTION OF
RWY 07/25 AND RWY 16R/34L NOT AVBL
FROM 06 131941 TO 07 310900 EST
HN

C1265/05 REVIEW C892/05
TWY K INT DECLARED DIST MOV AREA GUIDANCE SIGNS WITH TORA NOT AVBL
FROM 06 140539 TO 09 140200 EST

C1279/05 REVIEW C1277/05
AMD AIP
ENROUTE SUPPLEMENT AUSTRALIA FAC S - 22 DATED 9 JUN 2005 LOCAL
TRAFFIC REGULATIONS TWY RESTRICTION DELETE NOTE 10(F) AND REPLACE
WITH TWY
C BTN TWY F AND TWY G, TWY B4 BTN TWY B AND DOM2 RESTRICTED TO 60.4M
MAX WINGSPAN.
FROM 06 150048 TO PERM

C1314/05
TWY ALPHA BTN TWY GOLF AND TWY FOXTROT NOT AVBL
DUE WIP
REF MOWP 04-011
FROM 06 211300 TO 07 291900
DAILY 1300/1900
EXC SAT

C1321/05 REVIEW C1318/05
CL LGT TWY ALPHA INTERMITTENT DUE WIP
SUPPLEMENTED BY TEMPO BLUE EDGE LGT
FROM 06 212240 TO 07 280200 EST
HN

C1336/05 REVIEW C1260/05
TWY ALPHA BTN RWY 07/25 AND TWY ALPHA-6 NOT AVBL
DUE WIP REFER MOWP 04-011
FROM 06 230242 TO 07 312000
DAILY 1300/2000

C1373/05 REVIEW C1181/05
MANDATORY MOVEMENT AREA GUIDANCE SIGN S SIDE OF RWY 25 AT HELIPORT
NOT AVBL
USE PAVEMENT MARKINGS AND HOLDING POINT LGT
FROM 06 300250 TO 07 120200 EST

C1375/05 REVIEW C1211/05
MANDATORY MOV AREA GUIDANCE SIGN INDICATING THE HOLDING POINT RWY
16R/34L AT TWY BRAVO -2 NOT AVBL
FROM 06 300338 TO 07 120200 EST
HN

C1376/05 REVIEW C1272/05
MADATORY MOV AREA GUIDANCE SIGN INDICATING HLDG POINT RWY 16R/34L AT
TWY ALPHA 3 ON S SIDE NOT AVBL
DUE LGT FAILURE
FROM 06 300433 TO 07 150500 EST

C1378/05 REVIEW C1273/05
MANDATORY MAG SIGN TWY GOLF-4 WITH RWY 07/25 NOT AVBL
DUE LGT U/S
FROM 06 300448 TO 07 300500 EST
HN

C1379/05 REVIEW C1271/05
MANDATORY MOVEMENT AREA GUIDANCE SIGN
TWY LIMA TO HOLD SHORT OF TWY CHARLIE NOT AVBL DUE LGT FAILURE
FROM 06 300450 TO 07 140500 EST

C1380/05 REVIEW C1153/05
MANDATORY MOV AREA GUIDANCE SIGN N SIDE OF TWY ALPHA 4 NOT AVBL
DUE LGT FAILURE
FROM 06 300619 TO 07 140600 EST
HN

C1381/05 REVIEW C1377/05
TEMPO OBST MARKED CRANES ERECTED AT FLW LOCATIONS
237FT AMSL BRG 090 MAG 1.51NM FM VOR
201FT AMSL BRG 355 MAG 1.18NM FM VOR
350FT AMSL BRG 022 MAG 2.66NM FM VOR
178FT AMSL BRG 095 MAG 2.05NM FM VOR
200FT AMSL BRG 298 MAG 1.50NM FM VOR
230FT AMSL BRG 035 MAG 2.85NM FM VOR
291FT AMSL BRG 126 MAG 2.11NM FM VOR
291FT AMSL BRG 114 MAG 2.38NM FM VOR
FROM 06 300827 TO 07 310800

C1386/05
RWY 07/25 NOT AVBL
DUE WIP
FROM 07 031300 TO 07 221900
DAILY 1300/1900
EXC SAT

C1325/05
GP RWY 34L NOT AVBL
FROM 07 040001 TO 08 100600

C1394/05
OM RWY34L NOT AVBL
FROM 07 040001 TO 08 100600

C1406/05 REVIEW C1403/05
TEMPO OBST CRANE ASSOCIATED WITH RWY WORKS OPR ON RWY 16R
APRX 200M S OF INT RWY 16R AND TWY KILO
SFC TO 24FT AGL
FROM 07 041400 TO 07 281800
DAILY 1400/1800

C1404/05
TEMPO OBST CRANE ERECTED
ASSOCIATED WITH TWY WORKS OPR APRX 200M S OF TWY ALPHA
AND TWY KILO INTERSECTION ON TWY ALPHA
SFC TO 24FT AGL
FROM 07 041400 TO 07 281800
DAILY 1400/1800

C1411/05 REVIEW C1374/05
RCL LGTS RWY 16R/34L NOT AVBL
FROM 07 050210 TO 07 190200 EST

C1418/05
TWY OPR RESTR
MANDATORY MOVEMENT AREA GUIDANCE SIGNAGE TWY ALPHA-3 S SIDE NOT AVBL
FROM 07 060113 TO 07 300900 EST

C1432/05 REVIEW C856/05
AIRPORT CURFEW OPS DURING WORKS
DETAILS AIC H9/05 AVBL FM AVFAX CODE 81543 AND AIRSERVICES WEBSITE
WWW.AIRSERVICESAUSTRALIA.COM/PUBLICATIONS/AIP.ASP
FROM 07 070532 TO 11 250100 EST

C1433/05 REVIEW C1223/05
RWY THR IDENT LGT (RTIL) RWY 07 NOT AVBL
FROM 07 080551 TO 07 290600 EST

C1448/05
CHANGED DEPARTURE PROC DUE 'WOL' NDB NOT AVBL
ACFT EQUIPPED WITH RNAV EXP SID
OTHER ACFT EXP SYDNEY ONE DEPARTURE.
FROM 07 102217 TO 07 220800 EST

C1447/05 REVIEW C1440/05
AMD TFC HLDG ADVISORY
FOR ALL TFC ARRIVING
BTN 0100 AND 2100 - 20 MIN
BTN 2100 AND 0100 - 15 MIN

EXC SKED ACFT ARR FM AFRICA OR W COT OF NORTH AMERICA - 10 MIN

THIS SUPERCEDES TFC HLDG AS SPECIFIED IN AIP ENROUTE SUP AUSTRALIA
(ERSA)
FROM 07 110100 TO 07 300600 EST

C1449/05 REVIEW C1398/05
RWY STRIP RWY 16R/34L WID REDUCED TO 150M
DUE WIP
FROM 07 110315 TO 08 110300 EST

C1414/05
ILS RWY 34R 'IKN' RADIATING INTERMITTENTLY ON TEST
NOT TO BE USED FOR NAV EXC ON 45 MIN NOTICE
FROM 07 111300 TO 07 111700

[Uncommon Sense]

Merlins etc.

Agreed - see here (http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=180153)

[BankAngle50]

My favorite SYD NOTAM TEMPO OBST TREES INFRINGING

MERLIN the BOM also publish a map plot of SIGMETs so you
don’t have to join the LAT/LONG’s.

I would like to see some degree of priority to the way the NOTAMS are listed.
IT would be helpful if they could put all the OBST at the end for eg; and group
other thing together, such as lights. Perhaps this would make sorting through
20 pages of NOTAMS in the 5 mins left before the walkaround.

[Capn Bloggs]

BA50,
MERLIN the BOM also publish a map plot of SIGMETs so you
Where would that be?

[Capt Basil Brush]

Bloggs,

I think its still a Trial Graphical Sigmet presentation on our flight planning web page. Its very good, shows the boundarys and you just print it off. Contact BOM if you cant find it.

BB

[Capn Bloggs]

BB,

Thanks. I'll check it out.

Cheers, CB

[What-ho Squiffy!]

SIGWX Prognosis shows all the nasties on a map...

[cobber74]

havent read a NOTAM in years....

[QSK?]

cobber74:havent read a NOTAM in years....And you say you're a B767 pilot with QF? Can you please let me know when you're flying next so that I can make sure I'm not a pax on one of your flights!

[Keg]

QSK, given cobber's comments in other threads, I think the following most aptly describes what he or she is.

As these are anonymous forums the origins of the contributions may be opposite to what may be apparent. In fact the press may use it, or the unscrupulous, to elicit certain reactions.,

[UnderneathTheRadar]

Also keep in mind that Cobber74 and Sputnik_1 appear to be the same person or have the same IQ levels.

[cobber74]

of course i read them guys lighten up.. and sputnik and i same person??? righteo.????

[turbolager]

I didn't know they had NOTAMs in flightsim2005, must be an extra expansion pack. Tell us more about the 747s that will be operating out of Bankstown cobber74!

[cobber74]

this flightsim sh#t is getting real old, thats everybody s line..? what do u fly ??? u wanna read bout bk 747, go to the post stupid.

[QSK?]

Woomera:

Many of cobber 74's posts are aggressive in tone and contain no real information or substance. In short, they are designed to agitate other thread respondants who are using these fora for good intentions.

There are some serious doubts amongst many of us re cobber 74's self-claimed credentials as being a B767 pilot with Qantas.

On the BK thread, he has been given an opportunity to prove his credentials by correctly answering a number of technical questions, presented by other thread respondants, relating to B747 ops . My understanding is that, to date, he has failed to answer them.

I would propose that, until he answers them and satisfies us that he is indeed a bona-fide B767 driver, then any further posts by cobber 74 should be banned.

[cobber74]

yes i should be banned, please. i am really i 152 driver from NZ..please .ha.