NOTAMS and why they need to be checked....

[glush]

We recently held an aerobatic competition at the airfield, which was NOTAM'd from the surface up to 4000' AGL with a radius of 4NM.

I was astonished by the number of aircraft which called up on frequency (for joining info) without the faintest clue, and others who's commanders clearly hadn't bothered to check the NOTAMs wanting to fly through the o/head at 2000', or close enough to be a hazard to those participating in the aerobatics event.

Even worse, was the number of student pilots (some on solo navex's) from local airfields who called up 'inbound', again blissfully unaware of the competition. As an instructor myself, I make it my business to check that my students have read AND understood the NOTAM's and also check them myself. After all, we are supposed to be 'supervising' the student.

Lastly, we also had the potentially disatrous situation of aircraft flying through 'the box' whilst aeros were in progress that hadn't even bothered to call up on the airfield frequency...:eek:

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?

[Fuji Abound]

Bit""&ng on here is probably preaching to the converted.

It is worth trying to be pro-active.

Even worse, was the number of student pilots (some on solo navex's)

So, this was an opportunity to establish which school they were with and which instructor. I would make a call to their CFI. Both the student and the school might "learn" a very worth while lesson. Isnt that the object of airfields "mentoring" students.

Train the student properly and you will end up with a better pilot.

[BackPacker]

We had the Dutch Open last weekend and as far as I knew nobody flew through the NOTAMed SRZ (which included the holding and box, obviously)

It helped that this SRZ was located into another, permanent SRZ which is almost completely contained in class A starting at 1500' and up (so no en-route traffic possible, only traffic climbing up from underneath), and that Lelystad Radio always mentioned "aerobatics active" to everyone who asked for airfield information. Also Lelystad has no overhead joins but a specific, mandatory joining procedure located on the opposite side from where we did the competition.

There were a few banner towing aircraft who used "our" frequency (which was in the NOTAM as well) to coordinate their towing and general chitchat. Fortunately they found another frequency after a polite request.

So great weekend, great weather, no incidents (and I came in 1st in the Beginners class:ok:).

(Oh, and before anyone starts to make smart remarks about aerobatics on an IFR flightplan: The permanent SRZ is carved out of class A airspace which effectively becomes class G airspace in favourable weather conditions. It is there to allow aerobatics, stall practice and a few other things for which you need more than 1500' in altitude, roughly above the busiest GA airfield in the Netherlands.)

[scooter boy]

At least the other pilots bothered to put a radio call in and check.
I hope they were spoken to politely.
As far as I am concerned interpreting NOTAMs in their current impenetrable state is tedious and prone to error - the problem is with the system - I cannot help but sympathise with people caught out by events such as yours.

I check them on long flights but locally rely on radio contact, a knowledge of where the red arrows are going to be and ATC to steer me clear. When I file IFR I glance at them but they are definitely not user friendly enough.

We need legible graphical relevant NOTAM presentation - the current presentation is not acceptable in any of the available formats,

SB

[jonkil]

As far as I am concerned interpreting NOTAMs in their current impenetrable state is tedious and prone to error - the problem is with the system - I cannot help but sympathise with people caught out by events such as yours.
Quite right, whenever they sort out their crap system things will improve.

[PompeyPaul]

I would never go flying without checking NOTAMs, if nothing else on the 0500354802 number.

However that number is not exactly all encompassing and I was caught out by something that was NOTAMd but not mentioned on the AIS phone in number. Now I manually check that through the website.

Have to agree though the ais website is a bit impenetrable and will even though I've mostly worked out how to give it a source and destination it will still flood you with hundreds of NOTAMs (especially if you put in region EGTT) that have no relationship to your flight.

I always check NOTAMs religiously before flying, yet still get caught out because I miss something about Epsom, wedged into between NOTAMs refering to Solent \ Bournemouth or somewhere else I'm not going to.

With a small amount of software development though, the NOTAMs could be made MUCH easier to use. Having the NOTAMs NOT arrive as one big block of black ASCII on a white background would be a starting point. Why not have them arrive with a colour key ? So that the location is red and so stands out against the rest ? That way you can scan them more easily for NOTAMs that are relevant.

This being PPRUNE, I don't doubt "the special ones" are going to come back with "If you can't be bothered to read through all 50 pages of NOTAMs before every flight then you are a danger to yourself and everybody else around you" :ouch: but the simple fact is, not matter how tenaciously you read them, they are sufficiently poorly delivered it's WAY to easy to miss something important.

[dublinpilot]

This being PPRUNE, I don't doubt "the special ones" are going to come back with "If you can't be bothered to read through all 50 pages of NOTAMs before every flight then you are a danger to yourself and everybody else around you"

Nope, but I would say that if you're getting 50 pages of NOTAMs that you're doing something wrong. There has been various guides on how to get the most out of the NOTAM system, in particular how to use the Narrow Route Briefing. Anything else is going to produce far too many notams.

The only reason I would put EGTT into the notam system, is the unlikely event that I was passing through EGTT FIR, but didn't have waypoints located in that FIR....very unlikely for me.

[Bravo73]

If you are struggling with the UK CAA version, the French version (in English!) is slightly more user friendly:

http://www.sia.aviation-civile.gouv.fr/default_uk.htm

Click on NOTAM, Narrow Route on the lhs. It takes it's feed from the same database so you are effectively receiving the same info.


HTH

[VFE]

Glush,

With the greatest respect and sympathy I feel it rather unfair for you to jump to the conclusion (like so many instructors are want to do) that a solo x-country student was not properly briefed. As a fellow instructor I have known a capable student pilot make the silliest of errors, or perhaps forget a detail from a NOTAM check, thus making what might appear from an outsiders point of view to be a rather alarming mistake. Brief all you like but the student will still make a mistake - it's part and parcel of learning.

PPR is required at Conington (I assume this is the airfield to which you refer) therefore I find it hard to believe that a supervising instructor would not only forget to check their student had obtained the relevant NOTAMS but also forget to call the airfield if that was the destination?!

VFE.

[Arfur Feck-Sake]

VFE

You'd be amazed by how many QXC students turn up at airfields with very little input from their Instructors. No NOTAMs? I've seen no lines on a chart, no fuel, no PPR, no idea that sunset is imminent, etc. It's apparent that some students are "briefed" days/weeks in advance and told "next time the weather's good, just turn up and go".

[VFE]

Care to name and shame the flying schools concerned?

Have you ever reported it via the usual anonymous channels?

VFE.

[BigEndBob]

Why can't the way the notams are displayed be changed.
Say a map, a bit like google earth, with flags of the current days notams.
Much easier to find out if a particular notam effects your flight and its position.

Some of these obscure kite flying and balloons take some finding.

If flagged, click on, then opens up to give more details.

Also the free phone number, why can't it first give all the event locations first briefly, then the detail, so that i don't have to listen to a load of info that doesn't effect me.

[Shunter]

Ain't you lot ever heard of NotamPlot? It makes checking UK notams the work of seconds, and it's free. fly.dsc and ukga have similar facilities, which are also free.

I appreciate that the current notam system is the way it is in order to ensure a uniform interface worldwide, but that doesn't stop it sucking to high heaven! It's what we in the IT sector would describe as a "legacy system". A load of old crap which doesn't improve because the relevant stakeholders can't/won't sit round a table long enough to do something about it.

[PompeyPaul]

I would say that if you're getting 50 pages of NOTAMs that you're doing something wrong
And right on cue...

[Mike Cross]

Well PP, if you put a post like that up you shouldn't be surprised.

The system may be cumbersome but that's the way of ICAO and until xnotam (http://www.aixm.aero/public/standard_page/digital_notam_eurocontrol.html) is adopted by ICAO we are stuck with it. About 3 pages is the norm. If you go for a Route Brief rather than a Narrow Route Brief and stick in a FIR you will get NOTAM for the whole of that FIR.

The freephone number gives you what it says on the tin. RA(T) and airspace upgrades, i.e. the mandatory stuff. It won't give you nav warnings or tell you that the taxiway at Little Snoring is out of service.

In the context of the original post here it will almost certainly have been a Nav Warning, which infers no prohibition on entry other than that which would apply to the ATZ under Rule 45.

glush's astonishment at the breaches of Art 52 of the ANO by the commander is however quite understandable.

[magpienja]

I do wonder about this subject myself I know a few pilots that just never bother to check notams and don't bad an eyelid in saying so, I have only had my pilots licence 3 years but and feel privileged to have it, but I do wonder if stds are dropping like most things seem to be in modern day life,

Or are the schools dumbing down????

NJA.

[PompeyPaul]

Well PP, if you put a post like that up you shouldn't be surprised.
And precisely WHICH part of that post are you referring to sunshine ?!?

1. The AIS site being a bit impenetrable ?
2. With a small amount of software development the whole site could be much easier to use ?
3. Not having NOTAMs arrive as black text on white background, but with some sort of colour key would help ?
4. The "golden ones" immediately coming out to criticise ?
5. Or the bit I was being facetious and mentioned 50 pages of NOTAMs ?!

Look I'll even look facetious up for you, it's here (http://www.dict.org/bin/Dict?Form=Dict2&Database=*&Query=facetious). I guess that's my fault though, I'm never ceased to be amazed by the high population of people on here who've undergone an extremely successful "sense of humour" bypass operation.

May I respectfully suggest that you actually read posts before commenting on them ? Oh yeah, thanks for proving point 4 for me.

Kindest Regards
PompeyPaul

[Fuji Abound]

Mike

I know we have been here before but I think these threads reflect peoples frustration with a system that goes back to the dawn of tele printers.

Yeah, sure the system works, and it may well be the best we have within ICAO standards, but that doesnt mean its the best system we could have.

People wish for something better, more user friendly, and given the advances in the way we can use and manipulate data, that does not seem unreasonable.

The EASA intiative you mention looks to be a good one. Its a shame that once we were world leaders in so many fields, today we seem happier to let others do the innovation.

[Jodelman]

but that doesn't mean its the best system we could have.

No, it's not but would people be willing to PAY for a better system?

I know that I would not. The present system works well enough if you are willing to take a little amount of time to understand how to get the best from it.

[Fuji Abound]

No, it's not but would people be willing to PAY for a better system?

For a change I dont think cost is a significant factor.

The issues stem from the problems assiciated with interpolating the existing data. The format we have was developed I suspect long before there was any possibility of automatically plotting the information graphically which results in the known issues with plotting the data graphically.

I think what most people want is a reliable way of displaying NOTAMS on a map which they can print and take with them. If that process took all of 5 minutes and they could super impose their PLOG on their map I suspect many more would include this as part of their pre-flight.

Here is a thought - with the growth in glass - how about being able to download NOTAMS to a usb, plug this into your G1000 or Avidyne and have an instant graphical display of the days NOTAMs. :)

[Jodelman]

I dont think cost is a significant factor

I do!

plug this into your G1000 or Avidyne

I don't have either.


If you are going to change the system we have, it will cost money and I really do not want to pay for something I get for free at the moment. The present system works plenty well enough.

[Fuji Abound]

Jodelman

Given NATS have an obligation to provide NOTAMS free of charge at the moment how do you think you currently pay?

If EASA / ICAO mandates the promulgation of NOTAMS in a format more adaptable to "modern" communications why do you think you will be expected to pay for those changes any more / less than you do at the moment.

I am just wondering whether we are at cross purposes.

Up loading to glass was not linked to the first part of my reply other than as a musing that it would be a nice option if Garmin or Avidyne were to include this facility.

[Mike Cross]

PP

1. The AIS site being a bit impenetrable ?

Agreed. I've been sent a draft of the new user guide and have provided my comments back to AIS.

2. With a small amount of software development the whole site could be much easier to use ?

I suspect you are confusing the data with the software that is used to present it. The content and format of the data is laid down in Annex 15 of the Chicago convention. UK AIS cannot change it. The format is not designed for anything other than a textual presentation. It would in any case be courting disaster to provide anything other than the originator's text (i.e. to change wot he wrote). If you have a good idea please share it with us. I'll be happy to put you in touch with the right people and, with my AOPA hat on to support you if you have something workable.

3. Not having NOTAMs arrive as black text on white background, but with some sort of colour key would help ?

Colour key is a possibility. How would you envisage it working? It's when you get to the nitty gritty that it gets tricky, particularly when you try to cater for briefings stuck on the wall having been printed on a mono laser. The market is of course entirely open to commercial providers to deliver alternative presentations if they want to. The fact that there is no stampede to do so perhaps indicates something.

4. The "golden ones" immediately coming out to criticise ?

You flatter me.

5. Or the bit I was being facetious and mentioned 50 pages of NOTAMs ?!

If you're going to be facetious I do wish you'd warn me. I'm a bear of very little brain. As I said 3 pages is about the norm. Anyone wading through 50 pages has done something badly wrong.


Calling me sunshine doesn't help. I think we had all of 10 seconds of it in Pompey this afternoon.

Mike

[JOE-FBS]

I'm still only a student just starting XC work but have already learnt to use NOTAM Check it's not free like some of the others mentioned above (it is very cheap) but it certainly works. All you do is paste the AIS NOTAM list into a window in NOTAM Check and it plots them onto a map for you. Then if you see any where you want to go, you click on them and it shows you the text. Easy.

One of my instructors also demonstrated the need to also call the AIS number. We did a XC route one evening. I had checked the NOTAMS and all was clear but the AIS line told him about a BBMF Hurricane doing fly-pasts close to our route which was not in the NOTAM brief.

[PompeyPaul]

No, it's not but would people be willing to PAY for a better system?
If the SQL database that is used to pomulgate NOTAM data (I'm presuming it is a SQL database) was made publicly readable then they could "open source" the software.

I'd be more than happy to provide a web interface to it, so that you could click nav points and it would query the database providing appropriate data. Maybe it's already publicly readable ? If so, I'd love to know the details...

You could simply provide the web interface as a "not for operational purposes" and give the disclaimer that the archaic ais web site is used. As the open souce alternative progresses you will almost certainly see it overtake the official outlet. Making NOTAMs easier for everyone.

Although the current AIS system is alright once you know how to navigate it I don't think anybody would deny making it intuitive would help everyone. You could point almost anybody at http://news.bbc.co.uk and they would be able to find the current lead story in asia, without any training. I don't think that almost anybody could be pointed @ ais.org.uk and told to find any NOTAMs for Farnborough and succceed ?

[Mike Cross]

If the SQL database that is used to pomulgate NOTAM data (I'm presuming it is a SQL database) was made publicly readable then they could "open source" the software.

Not quite so simple.

http://www.eurocontrol.int/ead/public/standard_page/ead_ino_notam_index.html

[PompeyPaul]

Not quite so simple.

http://www.eurocontrol.int/ead/publi...tam_index.html (http://www.eurocontrol.int/ead/public/standard_page/ead_ino_notam_index.html)
Hmm, interesting. Reading \ writing XML to receive NOTAM information is not outrageous, but if it were possible to pull the whole thing down, say every morning from ais, and cache in a database then the easier, gui becomes more of a reality.

Is that website for international NOTAMs only ? Does the CAA \ AIS provide UK only Notams in database format ?

[Mike Cross]

Is that website for international NOTAMs only ? Does the CAA \ AIS provide UK only Notams in database format ?

1) Yes 2)No

The European AIS Database evolved out of recognition that it was a tad daft for every Eurocontrol State to maintain its own NOTAM database. The EAD covers not only dynamic data (NOTAM) but also static data (IAIP, SRD, AIC).

Now instead of each State subscribing to AFTN feeds of all other States' NOTAM it's all done at Eurocontrol. The UK no longer has its own NOTAM database. The EAD is populated with UK NOTAM by UK AIS staff at Heathrow House on the Bath Road using EAD terminals.

AFIK there has never been a database containing solely UK NOTAM, it's always been worldwide.

WRT pulling it down each day that's not hugely clever as you'd always be working with out of date data. When you run a brief on the AIS site it's a live query on the EAD. Basically you're applying filters on the data and if something went into the database 5 minutes before you clicked the submit button you'll get it included in the result if it meets the filter criteria.

drauk I believe was pulling down data every 15 mins or every half hour. If you're interested in finding out more then Annex 15 (http://dcaa.slv.dk:8000/icaodocs/Annex%20XV%20-%20Aeronautical%20Information%) to the Chicago Convention contains the data format.

ICAO Doc 8126 contains the encode/decode for the Q codes used in the Q line but I don't know of an online source for that document.

The filtering and display options currently available are limited by the data format, which is what xnotam is designed to address.

Mike

[ALEXA]

The original post complained (quite rightly in my view) about pilots, including students, seeking to land at/overfly Conington during a notamed aerobatic competition when they had apparently no knowledge of the event.

So how hard was it on the two or three days of the competition to find this notam?

My own experience was that a narrow route search on the AIS site for an intended flight to Conington on 29 August showed the Notam as the SECOND ITEM on the search results - the Destination aerodrome info.

How hard is that to spot?

Admittedly, anyone seeking to transit or overfly the ATZ would have had to look a bit further down the search results, because their destination would not have been Conington, but for goodness' sake, a narrow route search would have shown a nav warning with the name "Peterborough Connington" in it, not just a series of lats and longs! That should have rung a bell for anyone who had bothered to plot their route on a chart!

However difficult some notams may be to decipher, and however irrelevant some may be (all those transponder code changes spring to mind) the point here is that a narrow route search of the AIS site (which takes a minute or so to input) would have yielded the information in readable form for anyone who took the trouble to read it.

So you can moan all you like about the inadequacies of the notam system in general (and I'd agree to a considerable extent) but it doesn't invalidate what the first poster was saying. People should not have turned up at Conington ignorant of the Notam. And sending students out on solo NAVEXs without apparently having checked Notams just doesn't bear thinking about. Sure, nobody fell out of the sky, but a student who is put into an unfamiliar situation suddenly has a lot more workload to cope with and can make errors as a result of inexperience. Usually good for the soul if nothing serious happens, but on occasion ....

[Mariner9]

Its taken me about 20 seconds to find the relevant notam from AIS:

EGTT/QWBLW/IV/M/AW/000/045/5228N00015W002
FROM: 08/08/28 11:00 TO: 08/08/30 19:30
E) AIR DISPLAY/AEROBATICS CONTEST WI 2NM RADIUS 5228N 00015W
(PETERBOROUGH/CONINGTON AD, CAMBS). AUS 08-08-0020/AS2LOWER: SFC
UPPER: 4100FT AMSL
SCHEDULE: 28 AUG 1100-1930, 29 30 AUG 0800-1930

Not rocket science at all :ok:

[Fuji Abound]

During my training the most I would have been asked was 'have you checked the notams?' personally I see it as the students responsibility it seems blaming instructors as some have is a bit like blaming PPLs as their 'training' was poor. If pilots (student or PPL) haven't got any clue about these things they should look to themselves nobody else, it was obvious to me throughout my training that one doesn't launch off on a route without checking the notams, it was something that I knew I had to be on the ball about, so why not others?

Fact is it is the instructors responsibility to satisfy himself you have properly briefed for the flight - guess whose neck it is when the stude passes through the Red Arrow display.

.. .. .. imho rightly so, you are a student through out the PPL course, it does no harm when sent out on your very first x-country(s) to be reminded of the planning components - if you have them all covered good on you, if you havent its another lesson learnt. If you fly through NOTAM'ed airspace shame on you, but more shame on your instuctor - unless you told him you had checked, but hadnt really!! :)

[Fuji Abound]

Emma - yep, I agree, the instructor should also be concerned if the student gets to the x-country and hasnt correctly prepared. Of course the instructor sending the student off on the x-country is usually one and the same that has done the training to date. I have heard at some clubs they get another instructor to supervise the x-country which isnt such a bad idea. It can give the student a different perspective on some of planning elements.

[IO540]

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.

Somewhere around 90% of new PPLs chuck it in for good within a year or two, which leaves only a slow trickle of pilots who will hang in there entering the PPL scene each year. All the rest are much older "residents" who trained, I guess, on average, maybe 20 years ago.

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.

I do not wish to sound disrespectful to older pilots (I fly with many of them) but what we have here is a WW1/WW2 training scene which in its backwardness stops just short of handing out leather helmets and goggles on your first solo, while the powers to be have brought in a super duper modern bang up to date system for notams, whose ignorance is more or less guaranteed by the majority of currently active pilots because it requires bang up to date IT skills (called the "internet") to use.

To me, this is fair enough, and I have mobile internet so I can check notams anywhere, with a PDA, with a laptop, could even do it in Mongolia using a satellite phone, could even do it when airborne, but currently most UK airfields do not even have public internet access!

When I got my PPL in 2001 I had never been shown how to check notams. The Chief Flying Instructor (note the capital letters - I am showing due respect by writing it as the CAA due in their letters) would pin some local notam printout to the wall each morning, together with tafs/metars, and each instructor would give it a quick glance, and that was it. And I am a relatively recent recruit to flying...

The best thing the CAA could do it mandate a free internet connected PC at every airfield.

[Lister Noble]

And most "older" pilots do not know how to use a PC, never mind the internet.

Where did that load of arrogant misinformed rubbish come from,I started using PC's in the early 80's,that's 1980 not my age.:(

A lot of people of my age are PC and internet savvy,so don't be o bl@@dy ageist.:ugh:

[gpn01]

Isn't being shown how to access and read NOTAM's part of PPL training ? If it isn't then it certainly should be.

[Fuji Abound]

Over all the years including FAA BFR, MEP, SEP and instrument renewals (my goodness do we have to do so many renewals!) I cant recall being asked once if I had checked the NOTAMS.

[IO540]

Isn't being shown how to access and read NOTAM's part of PPL training ? If it isn't then it certainly should be.

I don't think any use of the internet is on the PPL syllabus, though clearly it should be given that notams are accessible (practically) only via the internet, and so is weather info. But if the CAA made it thus, they would have to mandate its universal provision on the training scene, which they have no power to do. It's a bit like the idea of mandating GPS for the PPL syllabus - they would then have to mandate its installation in the training fleet, which they could do but they would have a war on their hands from the flight training industry.

My guess is that most schools do have internet access and most of them will allow a curious student to look stuff up, but that applies to people being currently trained. The vast majority of the ~ 20,000 numbered UK pilot population gets nowhere near this.

And it's pretty evident that the 2-yearly check flights do not test this.

[gpn01]

"I don't think any use of the internet is on the PPL syllabus, though clearly it should be given that notams are accessible (practically) only via the internet, and so is weather info. But if the CAA made it thus, they would have to mandate its universal provision on the training scene, which they have no power to do."

......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!).

" It's a bit like the idea of mandating GPS for the PPL syllabus - they would then have to mandate its installation in the training fleet".

.......No, the CAA would have to mandate that pilots read NOTAMs before flying. I thought that they had and am quite concerned that some pilots don't check that there aren't any NOTAMs that could affect them.

"My guess is that most schools do have internet access and most of them will allow a curious student to look stuff up, but that applies to people being currently trained. The vast majority of the ~ 20,000 numbered UK pilot population gets nowhere near this.
And it's pretty evident that the 2-yearly check flights do not test this."

........Seems a pretty good reason to me as to why they should be included then.

I overheard a pilot recently who was visiting a club/school to do a check flight and NavEx. He didn't have the appropriate map, hadn't checked the NOTAMs, hadn't checked the Met (obviously unflyable because it was raining and the Met Office had issued a weather advisory for the area). Makes me wonder what's going through their minds!

[stiknruda]

A few years ago, I came face to face with a large retractable helicopter in the competition box at the UK Nationals. I was so close that I can still recall the number of pens that the chap in the RHS had in his breast pocket. Yet, he still hadn't seen me. I've had gliders run through the box (Fenland) and I've seen a gaggle of microlights landing non-radio whilst the comp was in progress in the overhead.

People make mistakes, we all know that they should not - accept it.

Narrow Route Brief, and a couple of phone calls for PPR have kept me out of trouble over the last 15 years.

Notams are a little clunky but they are the best that we have today. Live with it until something better comes along or you decide to create something better. Frankly they work ok for me.

Stik

[BackPacker]

......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!).

Well, yes, it's indeed pinned to the wall or somehow there. But since that printout has to include every airfield and FIR where a member might conceivably fly to that day, this is indeed the proverbial 50-page document full of PJEs and stuff. Not fun to read through. Even worse if your geographical knowledge isn't fully up to scratch (if you're a foreigner, say) and you have no idea where Nowhereshire is - you need to plot all lat/long coordinates on a map to see if there's anything that's relevant.

As others have said, there are websites that allow a narrow route briefing which greatly reduces the amount of NOTAMs. But if no instructor points this out to the students, how are they going to learn?

BTW am I the only one who thinks the Eurocontrol PIB interface is crap? You have a choice of the basic view, which is plain HTML and doesn't allow any filtering at all, or you have the advanced view which downloads a seriously big Java applet to do your filtering. It has a number of logical errors as well (it doesn't accept a "local" flight for instance, where DEP = DEST, and if you're not interested in either the snowtam or the ashtam it throws an error.) This in addition to opening at least three or so different browser windows/tabs and hiding the most obvious buttons somewhere in the text.

[IO540]

......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!).

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.

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 ;)

[Jim59]

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.



Grow-up. Who do you think created and developed all the technology that you take for granted? It was not today's youngsters. My first exposure to computers was an Elliot 803 in the mid 1960s and I worked with various computers full time from 1968 until April this year when I retired - including being trained by IBM on the original PC pre-launch.

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.

[bookworm]

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?

Let me turn it around for a moment.

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.

[PPRuNe Radar]

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.

The military are generally very good at this, releasing airspace back to civil use where an activity finishes early or is cancelled.

Maybe AIS need to get other NOTAM filers to adopt the same principles.

[modelman]

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?:confused:

MM

[Mike Cross]

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

[IO540]

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 :ugh:

The only solution is to do something on the 2 yearly checkride. An FAA-style oral perhaps? ;)

[gpn01]

"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.

[Fuji Abound]

but it does seem in line with the abrogation of responsiblity that technology can so often enable

Kid you may, but we have all heard the one about the dog in the cockpit .. .. .. there is a point, when it comes to data the fact is computers consistantly handle data better than us.

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.

[IO540]

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).

Today, a list of notams for the whole of the UK would be unmanagable. Even a narrow route briefing can generate several pages. The old "few sheets pinned on a wall" system is long dead for serious UK cross-country flying, unless it shows only airspace that is prohibited to enter.

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.

[Nipper2]

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.

[Mike Cross]

Now Flymap can give me the above, why not AIS/NATS

Works fine for something with a small radius but how does it cope with something like:-

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.

[Fake Sealion]

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!:=

[ALEXA]

Agreed, but can you elaborate on your FL 040 sentence? Surely the narrow route brief goes higher?

[Fake Sealion]

Agreed, but can you elaborate on your FL 040 sentence? Surely the narrow route brief goes higher?

Yes sure it does, I was just making the point that for an average (!) GA triangle trip, say to a waypoint then landing at another airfield then back home you can define a (say) 10nm route up to FL40 max with precision. ALL other non-relevant stuff is filtered out.

It does work well for VFR flying with some room still for improvement!:bored:

I also like the FREE UKGA graphical tool - interesting to cross refer with AIS.

[VFE]

Finally don't EVER EVER go flying without calling the 0500 number - NO EXCUSES!

Both The Red Arrows and The BBMF have both shown in the past that they do not check their NOTAMS sufficiently. Other pilots who should know better have made the same omission from their pre-flight planning. Commercial pilots occasionally overlook their NOTAMS. GA pilots too make the same mistakes and are all shamefully made aware!

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.

[Jodelman]

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.


Just replace the long string of numbers with a name, say, Thruxton. Job done and the name will then show in your briefing handbook.

[Ballon de Plomb]

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.

[Ballon de Plomb]

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?

[chrisN]

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.

[Nipper2]

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 (http://WWW.FAAM.AC.UK). AUS 08-09-0449/AS2.

LOWER: SFC
UPPER: FL350

[ShyTorque]

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.

[Nipper2]

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.

[liquid sunshine]

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!:=

[ShyTorque]

How do you defend.... :confused:

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. :)

[Nipper2]

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.

[timzsta]

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.

[gasax]

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?

[ops_oz]

all you may know the maximum period of a NOTAM is 3 months.
question:
does a NOTAM issue in advance (i.e. before effecting date)?

[AerocatS2A]

Yes they do.

[soay]

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!

[rej]

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

[Victorian]

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!

[rej]

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.

[Cenus_]

Good work.

[chillindan]

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.

[dagowly]

http://notaminfo.com/ukmap

Works well for me.

[Flyingmac]

I was wondering when SkyDemon would pop its head up. It's what I use, and I'm one of those ancient pilots unfamiliar with computers.:O

[Bobby Hart]

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...

[dublinpilot]

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

[alex90]

Bobby,

As a software developer, if the V series notams port little interest to the majority of your users - wouldn't you just put all those V series notams under a separate tab called "V Series Notams"? (perhaps placed at the bottom of the current notam field? as a "See V Series Notams" revealing the irrelevant data to most users?)

Just pointing out a very simple and perhaps crude solution to an important problem. This way the information is still available to users who are interested, and hidden from view for users who couldn't care less about these...

It'd take me a whole 8-10 lines of code to do if I was feeling particularly verbose!

Food for thought...? ;-)

[Bobby Hart]

Alex90,

That, and several other possibilities were considered but ultimately found lacking. The idea of adding just a few lines of code to solve a problem is compelling, but we have to deal with lots of possible manifestations of the problem whilst avoiding the system becoming bloated with checks and filters. The optimum solution is for the actual publication of these NOTAMs to be such that existing filter tags naturally direct them to their target audience.

I posited that if these NOTAMs are intended for commercial operators that might fly near these areas, then it would probably be optimal to simply publish them as IFR only NOTAMs (there is a section in the Q line that defines this)... but it was pointed out to me that a) it is perfectly legal for a flight to be planned and started VFR in the UK, and later become IFR, and b) that such an operator might not tick the "include IFR NOTAMs" in whatever software they use, because for the entire duration of their flight within the UK FIR, they are technically VFR. Also, c) if you don't warn everyone about absolutely everything then anyone can sue you for absolutely anything!

This might seem a bit silly, but these decisions are made assuming that all operators use the official UK briefing service which is naturally UK focused... It makes sense when you squint at it from that perspective.