PDA

View Full Version : Alternate Notams


Pedro
1st Apr 2010, 10:20
I would like to resolve an issue concerning the legal requirement for Notams and AIS information to be obtained at the planning stage for the declared alternate on the ATC flight plan.

Is it a requirement to have Notams for the declared alternate in the ATC flight plan or is it sufficient to have notams to cover the alternate chosen by the commander at the preflight stage; given that the alternate chosen is suitable and weather and sufficient diversion fuel has been obtained?

Many company computer flight plans list a number of alternates and my view is that any one can be chosen in the preflight stage (or during flight of course) and this is perfectly satisfactory if fuel,weather and notams are in order.

I was recently told by an official that Notams for the alternate in the filed ATC flight plan had to be produced by dispatch and if they were not then another flight plan had to be filed for an airport where notams were available notwithstanding that other suitable alternates with notams were available at the same time.

EUR OPS 1 state very simply that "appropriate notam/AIS information should be available" and leave it at that as far as I can tell.

Clarification on this rather fine point would be welcome.

Nubboy
1st Apr 2010, 12:22
On a dark and stormy night with a high chasnce of not getting in to your destination, are you really going to launch off not knowing the status of your diversion airfield? Never mind the rules sand finer points of law, it's you sitting in that tin tube. Hopefully it's not me or my family behind you if youy're prepared to go without that info. Sorry if I'm being perjorative, but sometimes we need to think and behave like grown ups and use old fashioned airmanship.

A37575
1st Apr 2010, 12:34
Sorry if I'm being perjorative, but sometimes we need to think and behave like grown ups and use old fashioned airmanship.

That is a mean and unnecessary reply to a perfectly reasonable and polite question. Manners, please...

bfisk
1st Apr 2010, 12:56
A37575, while I can agree with you that manners are a good thing, I have to say I'm kind of with Nubboy on this one. Or perhaps I don't really understand the question?

The designated alternate should be the same on the operative documentation as on the ATC flight plan, and you should have (checked) NOTAMS for your diversionary airfield. If the commander wishes to change the alternate, it should be done so on the ATC flight plan too. If you simply want "more outs" for comfort, then fine; don't put it in the flight plan, but I see checking notams just as essential as checking weather and comparing it to your approach plates to have a plan.

:confused:

Dan Winterland
1st Apr 2010, 13:16
NOTAMS - for pooftahs!

http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb73/dbchippy/c1301-1.gif

The crew of this C130 missed the NOTAM about the WIP on the runway and landed on it at night using NVGs.

Oops!

Pedro
1st Apr 2010, 20:01
Nubboy's off the cuff emotional reply is the kind of response that could put people off asking questions on this forum - I was hoping for some informed comments. Please read the post before answering in such a manner! Was my post entitled "Why read notams?" - no of course not. Go to the back of the class! And thank you Dan for the photograph - very dramatic and seen often in CRM courses but on this occasion, not relevant.

I'll phrase the query in another way: If notams are not available for some reason for alternate A (the declared ATC flight plan alternate), then is there an issue with nominating alternate B, (WITH Notams , met and sufficient flight plan fuel) before departure; without having to re-file a ATC flight plan.
This is a bit like the enroute alternate procedure.

As I commented in my initial post EUROPS1 appear to have a common-sense position when they talk about "appropriate Notams and AIS must be available and the question I ask is (and this is the point of my post) :is there a legal requirement to have Notams available for the declared alternate on the ATC flight plan OR can another alternate (WITH AVAILABLE NOTAMS, and checked of course,) satisfy the regulations.

mustafagander
2nd Apr 2010, 06:06
I would find it difficult to consider an airport "suitable" without any notams, very difficult indeed.

Imagine yourself in front of a group of bewigged ladies and gentlemen...."now Captain would you tell the court in your own words why....".

rudderrudderrat
2nd Apr 2010, 09:39
Hi,

If notams are not available for some reason for alternate A (the declared ATC flight plan alternate), then is there an issue with nominating alternate B, (WITH Notams , met and sufficient flight plan fuel) before departure; without having to re-file a ATC flight plan.

There is no problem with your procedure. It saves all the trouble of refiling the same flight plan details again for the sake of one change. If you did have to divert, then you'd tell ATC on the radio of your intention.

If you chose to divert & subsequently had a radio failure before telling ATC of your revised alternate, then it would cause them some confusion. So it might be prudent to tell ATC of your preferred Alternate, before your radio failure, if you think you may have to divert. It's like "Take these tablets 5 mins before your head ache comes on."

Pedro
2nd Apr 2010, 09:50
Mustafagander Read the post please before making disparaging comments

"is there a legal requirement to have Notams available for the declared alternate on the ATS flight plan OR can another alternate (WITH AVAILABLE NOTAMS, and checked of course,) satisfy the regulations."


If you read your Notams the way you read this post I would be worried!

bfisk
2nd Apr 2010, 14:12
Pedro: please bear in mind that this is an internet forum and answers will be opinionated. To find the answer you are searching for it is often better to be encouraging those replies you wish to see and remain silent about those that are not to your liking. If you find content to be directly offensive, using the report button may be appropriate.

Clandestino
2nd Apr 2010, 16:31
Bear in mind that following applies to air carrier operations. If you were wondering about having altn NOTAMS when going cross-country in your KitFox, disregard it.

As far as I know there's no explicit legal requirement to have NOTAMs for FPLed alternate available at dispatch phase. However, one believing that provision of any-OPS: "appropriate NOTAM/AIS information should be available" doesn't cover this case shouldn't be let anywhere near aeroplane without proper boarding pass.

Airport that you can't get NOTAMs for is useless to you, either as destination or alternate. Period.

If you think that filing a flight plan is just a bureaucratic formality that has no major effect on your everyday flying, there is something very wrong about the way you were taught the Air law.

Trouble with refiling a flight-plan? Dude, I'd rather have all the trouble of the world in the planing phase than single trouble in flight.

King Muppet
2nd Apr 2010, 16:46
A flight plan allows the submission of up to two alternates (item 16). I would suggest that if, for whatever reason, at the planning stage you don't intend to make use of the one or two that have been named it would be prudent to submit a modified plan - if only for the com failure plus diversion scenario mentioned above. I believe that a supplementary flight plan (SPL) message can be used for this, so not a re-file as such.

mustafagander
3rd Apr 2010, 10:13
Pedro my friend, I only offered my take on this situation.

I would not use an alternate without the relevant notams. What you choose to do or what your rules require are not questioned by me.

In my mob we only plan an alternate when we need it, so I simply will not sign off on the flight plan without the relevant notams.

frontlefthamster
3rd Apr 2010, 22:13
Well, this thread neatly illustrates what's wrong...


The OP wraps himself up in minutae without having regard to the fundamental safety of his aircraft and contents
an old salt rightly takes offence and is fairly forthright in doing so
some idiot whose username begins with A steps in to demand fair play when he's posted replies elsewhere which demonstrate that he's behind the drag curve on common sense
someone else posts a lovely pic illustrating why airmanship is important
and then we have the pissing contestTHAT is why this forum is beyond hope...

justintime5
4th Apr 2010, 16:12
This is a question done because of the VERY frequent confusion about Planning and operational phase of flights. Some parts of regulations refer to one and some others to the second. In the Planning phase you need to prove that you have chosen a valid alternate acording to the regulations and all that is needed to prove this MUST be enclosed with the flight dispatch. If you can't have acces to this then you are not sure if there is an NOTAM saying AIRFIELD CLOSED. The dispatcher should provide you of at least on option to divert (unless you use an airfield with 2 independent runways...etc EU OPS) The CFP calculations just demostrats the fuel and time capabilities but that is only part or the story.

On the other hand you have the operational phase and if you have a problem or something changes or your passengers booked the wrong airfield (like it happened to me a few weeks ago) then the captain with all availabel meens must re dispatch the flight to the airfield that he considers apropriate and complies with all legal and aircraft limitations. Some people think that if you divert you must divert to the planned airfield and that is simply :yuk: and many more think that if you reach mimimum diversion fuel you must divert another :yuk: . Just take the safest and most logical decision is a good advise.

frontlefthamster
5th Apr 2010, 20:53
Justin,

When you plan, you are planning the operation, not the gathering of paperwork to satisfy the regulator. There is no disconnect between the two in reality.

You're right, many are confused about how to operate legitimately, but I cannot stress enough how much easier life is when you step away from seeing achieving regulatory compliance as a separate task from operating.

If you operate well, compliance is child's play.

Others fly for operators who cannot work out where their passengers want to go, or spell 'available', or 'means', but that's another story...

justintime5
18th Apr 2010, 13:35
I agree, but its fact that the planning stage is one thing and the operational phase is another. EU-OPS and most world regulations rules different things for each phase. There are different requierements for each phase. The planning is based on all available info to get the closest estimate to what the operation is going to be like and have your safety limits properly set. In the operation phase we need to be considering many more factors many of them that can't be even imagined in the planning phase.