NOTAM site 'upgrade' [Archive]

down&out

22nd Aug 2002, 17:59

I have noticed today they have snuck into the FAQ a descripition on how to use the new site. I have read it and at least it answers some of the questions and does help to explain what to do- altough I agree with the problem of rapid turn off of the old delivery mechanism espically as on the Flyer forum someone is suggesting there are flaws in the delivery of the data.

Given that, how can they put this up?
Liability The information on this site is collated from a number of varied sources and is considered to be as reliable as possible at the time of publication. National Air Traffic Services Ltd and the UK Civil Aviation Authority, while exercising great care in the compilation of this information, will not be responsible for the accuracy of the contents of AIS publications, omissions therein, the adequacy or the receipt of this information.

If they are not responsible for the accuracy of their publications then who is????

Rod1

22nd Aug 2002, 19:43

I asked about compatability with NOTAMplot;

Got

"I cannot comment on third party products"

From

[email protected].

This is a major step backwards. There are some European and American sites which had the old style, anyone know of a good one? It may be posible to get NOTAMplot to work with them and kick Nats out!

Rod1

rustle

22nd Aug 2002, 20:19

Rod1

Try:

http://ippc.nais.luftfartsverket.no/ippc/AisAerodrome1.html

I can't take credit for this pointer, someone on FlyerList posted it today... (If they're here they'll know who they are) ;)

Wrong Stuff

22nd Aug 2002, 20:24

That disclaimer's not just an idle threat either - they really do miss stuff out you need :(

Last Saturday did a Le Touquet run from Elstree and logged into the new site to try it out. Put in all the details and printed out the 18 pages. Undaunted, I waded through it all and couldn't find much to affect me, but as there was so much there I decided to just have a quick check using NotamPlot just in case I'd missed something important. I was horrified to see that just off my track I'd missed a PJE (Gillingham AB 5123 - H3862/02 in case anyone's interested!). I was really disconcerted - I was sure I'd checked reasonably carefully so I went back through it again to see how I could have missed it. Fairly simple explanation - it just wasn't there :eek:.

How can that be??? It was scheduled for exactly the time I was returning and if I'd been one mile off track to the east I'd have passed straight through it.

I wouldn't like to jump to conclusions from just one example, but it really seems to me that this change is measurably dangerous and has a significant chance of causing a serious accident.

Quite apart from the missing NOTAMs, producing 18 pages of warnings, almost all of which are irrelevant, can only hinder pilots from carrying out a proper check. There's already been a thread on the OnTrack website about people not bothering to check for TRAs before setting out. Now it's been made even more difficult to check, this problem can only get worse. And if the service also omits NOTAMs (and even admits it might in the disclaimer) such pilots are starting to have a valid excuse for not bothering to look first.

This "improvement" really has been poorly carried out.

skua

22nd Aug 2002, 20:40

What a load of c***p NATS hjave concocted! It bears all the hallmarks of being created by a committee - moreover a committee of GCSE rejects. The help pages are useless, there are no FAQ's that I could find, it is the most un-user-friendly site I have come accross. This from the b*****dy organisation that is about to come cap in hand to the taxpayer. Let the Swedes do it for us!

Such a shame, when a smooth and helpful bit of kit like Notamplot had just come along. W8888888rs !

Bluebeard

22nd Aug 2002, 21:41

Just been taking a look at the Notams for a NAVEX tomorrow courtesy of the new 'improved' AIS site...ugh!:mad: what a dogs dinner the've made of the site.

It clearly smacks of a some bright spark cooking up a bunch of good ideas and slapping them together in a completely rubbish implementation. I did manage to figure out how it worked - I think - but if its not intuitive its surely a hindrance to flight safety. I can't say with confidence whether the correct/complete information is presented, which is worrying.

Oh yes, and someone seems to have forgotten to do any kind of performance testing on the damned thing :confused: when I eventually got into the site it crawled along.

Keef

22nd Aug 2002, 22:45

The idea is right; what they're trying to do is right.

Only ... by the time they got round to it, Ian had produced NotamPlot and we were all blissfully happy. Now, they've improved the Notam site (they have!) but killed NotamPlot in the process.

There's a lot of work to be done before the AIS site is useable. I put in a route for tomorrow, telling it my route, VFR, not above 5000 feet. I got Upper Airways NOTAMS in the screed, for heavens sakes!

The NOTAM list started with a list of the 50-odd NOTAMS that are relevant but NOT included in the briefing. Really inspires confidence, that does.

I waded through the first four or five pages, and didn't see anything that looked relevant. After that, it was all a blur.

Give them time. Meanwhile, pray there aren't any important bits of information on page 13 of 25, or any important things they didn't get round to NOTAMming.

Circuit Basher

23rd Aug 2002, 07:16

I sent the attached to NATS yesterday

As a PPL who flies from a smaller airfield, where the pre-flight briefing facilities are moderately basic, I have relied on self-briefing using a utility called NOTAM Plot, which downloads live data from the AIS Web Site into a readily viewable graphic display. This enables rapid assimilation of which NOTAMs are relevant to my proposed trip and permits me to concentrate on detailed review of relevant NOTAMs.

With the launch of the new NOTAM Web site, this facility has now been removed as the NOTAM Text files are no longer available. I have not yet registered with your new site, but I have been advised by others who have that that obtaining a list of NOTAMs applicable to the proposed route is complex and that the end product is, at best, of limited usefulness.

May I request that the plain text facility be permitted to remain in place at least until all the teething problems with the new site are resolved and users have gained some basic level of familiarity with the new system.The bulletins that used to be provided under the old web-site are no longer
available.

The following response has been received:

Please find attached a document to help you with your briefings.

A temporary Account:

Username: AISTEMP
Password: password

has been made available until the 20th September while people register themselves.

People are now getting a 'Full' briefing. While that might be a shock to the system, I'm sorry, that is what is going on and is relevant to the flying community.

People are doing so many differing forms of flying it would be dangerous if we were to continue to assume that we know what to restrict and what not to restrict. The web-site does allow you to use the tools available to filter the NOTAM to the type of flying activity you undertake.

Out of interest, a friend saw a good one on Wednesday afternoon (21 Aug 02): during a display at Weymouth seafront, which was scheduled to include the Sparra's, a Cessna of some variety pootled straight across Weymouth Bay whilst a Harrier was in the middle of a display routine. The visual estimates of miss distances were around 2-300m. The reg of the Cessna was noted and I have looked it up - it was registered to a Bournemouth Club. Someone obviously didn't do a very good job of reading *his* NOTAMS!
;) :)

Courtman

23rd Aug 2002, 08:11

Here is a transcript of what I have just experienced, and duly reported to the "AIS Supervisor".

Having just used your new briefing website I have a few comments I would like to make on the service offered.

We are planning to fly a navigational exercise tonight Luton - Stansted - Clacton - Thetford - Cambridge - Luton. I tried both a normal route briefing and a "narrow route briefing". I restricted the flight level to FL050 maximum along the route. Of the 6 pages of NOTAMs that printed out, 2 affected me. No en-route aerodromes were included unless I expressed them in the box (surely if the system knows the route and will be picking NOTAMs from a 10nm radius it could include them). I got NOTAMs regarding UP620 and UT7 Brest Control, and Plymouth Military Radar unavailable, 8.33KHz spacing (in effect since 99 anyway), and use of STS/ indicators in IFR plans when I specified VFR only. All in all, this is not good. I have found no NOTAMs about PJE or kite launching or rocket launching, when I know the route will be routing near them.

Until you switched the old website off I was able to use a fantastic bit of freeware called NotamPlot. This took the A1 and A8 bulletins and drew them on a map so you could visually see where the restrictions were. Notam Plot (http://www.notamplot.flyer.co.uk) is the website for this. Now A1 and A8 bulletins are not available this software does not work, and I feel that the current service offered by NATS is a severe degradation in terms of quality and potential flight safety.

This is not what I'd expect. I've only recently realised just how many little NOTAMs there are out there to be checked, and this website seems to take all that away again...

(Edited coz I got the URL wrong....!)

:) :D :p :D :)

Flap40

23rd Aug 2002, 08:18

This is the most successful attept at degrading flight safety that I have ever seen!!!!!!!!!!!

Just to test it I put in a VFR route from EGPT where I fly to EGPH. I got no info for Perth (not unusual) and two notams for Edinburgh both of which were relevent. I then got a whole load of utter drivel about 8.33 radios, Kinloss LARS (73 miles in the opposite direction for god sake!) and to cap it all, some info on QNH's around oilrigs in the north sea.

No doubt you have been told before, and I'm sure you will be told again, "Notamplot" was excellent very quick and easy. You have designed a site that is difficult to use and far too slow to use. I and I suspect many others will just not bother to use your site in its current form. Is that what you want?

Give us back the A1 and A8 bulletins and let us use Notamplot until you get this site user friendly. (A1 & A8 are still available on MARS so it must be possible).

Evo7

23rd Aug 2002, 08:37

:confused:

Checking 10nm either side of a track from EGHR to EGHH it gives me information about Goodwood and Bournemouth, but then goes on about the Welshpool NDB, Lydd VOR and UP620 and UT7 Brest Control before several important NOTAMs about Cowes on the IoW. :rolleyes:

Scrolling down further it is even giving me information about Carlisle, Campbeltown and a Red Arrows TRA in Clacton!!! :confused: :confused:

Apart from that, I agree with Keef. Good idea, bad implementation and so s...l...o...w...

pulse1

23rd Aug 2002, 09:25

I am planning to fly to EGTU on Sunday and, so far, I have not been able to get a single NOTAM. I enter all the requested fields and then the screen goes to >INPUT and then does nothing for about two minutes.

Am I being too impatient? Should I wait longer?

FAQ seems only to link to a site for unlicensed airfields. I have always been diligent about checking NOTAMS before flying and I am beginning to feel very insecure now.

I am not particularly computer wise and find the HELP fairly unhelpful - under Brief Id, all it says it must not exceed 3 7. What does that mean?

I agree that this is a singularly effective contribution to a reduction in air safety.

long final

23rd Aug 2002, 10:11

Lydd and Breast the on the first page for a trip from Blackpool to Humberside :rolleyes:

email on the way ......

LF :mad:

pulse1

23rd Aug 2002, 11:23

For those who, like me, have been struggling with this new website I have discovered that it doesn't like places like EGTU. If you enter this as your destination it just sulks without telling you why.

Entered EGTE instead and it worked. I had previously spoken with a very nice man at NATS and he couldn't tell me why it wouldn't work. I explained exactly what I was doing and he couldn't get it to work either. I am waiting for him to fax me with the answer.

He did agree that this was not the best bit of software ever written. Hopefully they will sort it out quickly.

Don D Cake

23rd Aug 2002, 11:25

I can't even register. Got told I would receive an e-mail when my account was set up. Still nothing after 2 hours.

rustle

23rd Aug 2002, 11:28

DDC, that's nothing...

I applied for my account > 24 hours ago :(

Did you apply for just UK or multiple FIRs? Dunno if that makes a difference.

Evo7

23rd Aug 2002, 11:30

I just 'borrowed' Circuit Basher's temporary login. Currently composing a 'disgusted of Chichester' e-mail to let them know what I think of their efforts....

BlueRobin

23rd Aug 2002, 11:49

The change has been on the cards for months now. One would have hoped for a better replacement system than the text file.

I have also struggled with the form, finding that a lot of background knowledge is recquired in order to fill it in. Particulary narked with the free text box called "route". What goes there?

I have seen similiar systems in operation in towers so I guess this is where the "model" comes from. However, we are not ATC bods who have been trained in such systems and in depth terminology, we are pilots.

I doubt that the relationship between NATS and programmer is an understanding one, so that the comprehension of the problem did not deliver a usable, full-featured solution for the end-user, i.e. the pilot. This smacks of a slightly botched, proprietory system to me. It all boils down to giving what the user wants, which needs to be identified first by talking to them. I fear here we have the age old problem of the programmers interpretation of what NATS stipulated.

Surely we should be living in the age of open, transparent systems now?

Having met Ian Fallon, a GA pilot, and author of NotamPlot, he should be given a consultancy job on this. Even if Ian isn't available, I'm sure NATS could have sourced a developer who is both into flying and IT. It appears that there are a lot of us about :D

I doubt that a return to the text NOTAM file will happen. I gather that was hand-written and humans always favour automation in order to save time. So, I hope to see a fast improvement in the service now that NATS know the problems. (hopefully, they'll listen and act on our comments). Finally, I think they have released this too early and shoudl have contacted a small group of pilots to BETA test in order to iron out problems like logins and user issues, rather than having a large amount of disgruntled people emailing them.

Don D Cake

23rd Aug 2002, 12:03

Rustle

I only applied for the UK FIR.

rustle

23rd Aug 2002, 12:10

DDC said:

I only applied for the UK FIR
Not that then :p

Still, we should keep this in perspective:

It cannot have gone hundreds of millions over budget
It cannot have been delivered 6 years late

So they are getting better at this IT lark ;)

pulse1

23rd Aug 2002, 12:46

No fax from NATS yet. But I've just remembered that I will be drinking with a software engineer tonight. And guess who he works for? Yes! NATS!!!. Boy, the drinks and the jokes are going to be on him.:D

BBDO

23rd Aug 2002, 17:13

Would it be worth sending NATS the link to this particular pprune topic so they can see first hand our disgruntled comments?

And I agree with Bluerobin that the author of NOTAM plot should certainly have been given a consulting role on this project, and an MBE for services to aviation whilst we're at it................

As a GA pilot with little money / time I tend not to fly for more than an hour and a half at a time. Notam plot made it easy for me to have a quick look at the local area to check that there was nothing to conflict. My initial exploration of the new site would suggest that I'm now going to have to dedicate significantly more time to my flight planning with little confidence that the results are accurate.

rustle

23rd Aug 2002, 17:31

Would it be worth sending NATS the link to this particular pprune topic so they can see first hand our disgruntled comments?
BBDO, that assumes they have browsers which is altogether not apparent :rolleyes:

Rod1

23rd Aug 2002, 18:23

Sent them the link at midday today. No response yet. Similar comments on all the other BB’s

I find it hard to believe they could do this so badly.

Rod1

rustle

24th Aug 2002, 08:13

May I suggest that all disgruntled AIS/NATS website users register their dismay at:

http://www.flyontrack.co.uk/

They have a thread about this too...

RW05

25th Aug 2002, 10:21

I didn't realise the Notam site had changed (haven't done a lot of flying recently) and tried to access it yesterday morning for a flight yesterday afternoon. 24 hours on I'm still waiting for my registration, so it gets a big thumbs down from me. I was glad to read about the site's reaction to EGTU. That would really have stumped me. Guess that's another big thumbs down then. Wonder how many other airfields are ignored. So if the text is no longer available, which explains why it's no longer on the notice board at the club, what do those people who don't have computers/internet access do? If not enough people bothered with Notams before fewer will now. Is this supposed to be an improvement?

Ripline

25th Aug 2002, 11:59

Oh dear. I wish that I could say something nice about the new scheme, because obviously a lot of time and effort has gone into it. It does seem to have demonstrated all of the mistakes
that the rest of the IT world knows about and tries to avoid, like:

INADEQUATE warning of change

INSUFFICIENT beta testing

ABSENCE of parallel running during the transition

LACK of consultation with the end users.

OK, so I'm not the typical GA user. I fly balloons for pleasure and my typical flight planning is necessarily biased towards the met and planned track. But I always checked the NOTAMS because it made for good airmanship.

An example: A few weeks ago the text version threw up the fact that the Red Arrows were doing a display at Halton which is close enough to my area for a "heads up" from me! If I'm not flying a predicted track from ICAO airfield to airfield there doesn't seem much in it for me and hence not a lot of point in even looking. As others have said, it doesn't do a lot for my perception of air safety. I'll just have to rely on being highly visible to others....

Carlito

25th Aug 2002, 17:47

I did a search on the www.nats.co.uk site for "NOTAMS" and got "no matches were found for notams"!
Does that help explain something?
Carlito

PPRuNe Radar

25th Aug 2002, 18:06

Yeah, it means you're looking at the corporate site instead of the AIS one :p

NATS AIS Site (http://195.217.206.162/aes/login.jsp)

rustle

26th Aug 2002, 09:39

It just got better ;)

I have been trying since 10:15L (0915Z) but the site is completely unreachable now...

Well done :mad:

Flyontrack

26th Aug 2002, 12:34

We've a similar set of comments coming into our website at www.flyontrack.co.uk and you're very welcome to join in.

We've also had direct e-mail from the NATS supervisor answering some comments; he's clearly busy but give him your honest feedback - this is obviously a prototype which will need upgrading.

We're gathering ideas to help reduce infringements and the availability and readability of NOTAMS (and AICs etc etc) is an active area for improvement.

There's several threads going on our open forum page on this subject - keep sending your comments in by whatever means and you will make a difference!!

By the way, if you have any thoughts on NOTAM layout and readability now's the time to get them in while NOTAMS are under scrutiny.

Remember you're the customer - register your opinion & suggest improvements.

DE

rustle

26th Aug 2002, 13:15

Flyontrack:
We've also had direct e-mail from the NATS supervisor answering some comments

Can you post those comments here or on your website?

Wot No Engines

26th Aug 2002, 20:15

:mad: Spent a total of 8 hours trying to get NOTAMs this weekend. The new site continuously crashed. When I was finally able to do anything, I found the information totally useless for gliding. This system is totally unable to cope with weekend demand.

When setting a cross country task, it is normal to plot those NOTAMs in the planned task area on the map and then set a task avoiding them - notamplot was great for this.

According to the very hastled person I spoke to, our best option is to request a series of overlapping "narrow" routes running north/south giving a 99 mile corridor. Then try to locate the information that is required, plot this manually (again) and then set a task.

The new system was meant to provide the required information for all involved in aviation - it certainly fails miserably for gliding - which has been recognised, and by the comments here and elsewhere, it seems to be failing for many other forms of aviation. The other reason I was given was that it was very costly to produce the A1/A8 and they are trying to cut costs - Sadly, this was resulted in a masive reduction in safety for all.

Flyontrack

27th Aug 2002, 10:41

Rustle:

Can you post those comments here or on your website?

I've posted the NATS reply to one pilot on our website

http://www.flyontrack.co.uk/comm.asp

Look under "New AIS Service" to see it

AC-DC

27th Aug 2002, 11:29

I have heard that someone filed an MOR. What do you think, many more might help?

BBDO

27th Aug 2002, 13:47

The other NOTAM thread currently running refers to the ability to get UK Notams from the FAA:
https://www.notams.faa.gov/
You then enter EGTT for London FIR.

Is this list exhaustive?

Is it possible that Notamplot could be reconfigured to this source?

Does this provide the ability to bypass the new AIS system?

Thank you!

bertiethebadger

27th Aug 2002, 14:59

Wot No Engines

27th Aug 2002, 16:09

All Notam Plot needs is the data in a text format. Surely this must still exist for flying clubs etc who are not online.

Sadly not - some time ago, our club paid subscription to receive NOTAMs by post was terminated by NATS and we were told we had to use the online version (for free)

tacpot

27th Aug 2002, 16:25

All Notam Plot needs is the data in a text format. Surely this must still exist for flying clubs etc who are not online.

All NATS have to do is have a page with the docs in the old format somewhere accessable on thier web site. It is very easy to repoint Notam Plot to another web page.

Saying this, if anybody knows of a web site that has the info in text format. Can you please mention it. Problem solved

The FAA web site has the info in text format, but not the same format as AIS used to present their bulletins in, so NOTAMPlot will not work. I've tried pasting the FAA report and raw formatted data into a text file and having NOTAMPlot process the tet file, with no success.

It should be possible for Ian to change NOTAMPlot to work from the FAA RAW format relatively easily, as the RAW format is very well structured. Let's hope he does so.

rustle

27th Aug 2002, 16:38

I'm going to ruin someone's chips again :p

The LAT/LONG info that NotamPlot requires used to be input by hand.

To cut costs, NATS no longer do this where there is an ICAO code or name of area (danger areas activated by NOTAM etc.)

Obviously the web-redesign was free ;)

Because the state of origin -- UK (NATS) in this case -- provide the NOTAM info to other AIS agencies it won't be there either.

Draw your own conclusions.

editied because I forgot to mention the ICAO and DA bit.

Flap40

27th Aug 2002, 19:07

The A1 and A8 are still available on the "MARS" system so there is no reason why they can't be made available on the web.

rustle

27th Aug 2002, 20:07

Flap40,

Pardon my ignorance, but what is this "MARS" system, and who has access to it?

Flap40

27th Aug 2002, 20:21

It is the NATS supplied weather and notam (old text based mono screen probably running DOS) system that crews/ handling agents use at most(all?) BAA airports plus a few others eg Jersey.
So if they can supply the A1/A8 to this system then why can't they put them on the web???????

rustle

27th Aug 2002, 20:26

F40,

Thanks...

And you're sure those users are still getting this post 19/08/2002??

Got any contacts I can get recently dated copies of A1/A8 from?

Puts the cost/benefit thing in a whole new perspective if so (as well as underlining the BS we've heard so far from NATS)

Flap40

27th Aug 2002, 21:02

Yes. I checked last Sunday and I'll check again in the morning.

rustle

27th Aug 2002, 21:06

Thanks very much :)

Rod1

28th Aug 2002, 12:12

It is surprising we have not had a response from NATS on this forum. Any NATS people out there?

Come on guys, if my organisation was taking this much flack I would want to put my side and explain to the users, what I was going to do to get out of the mess.

Rod1

Evo7

28th Aug 2002, 15:30

I received a reply to my E-mail: "Thanks for your comments, they have been taken into consideration". Short and sweet, but at least the mail is being read and hopefully the message is getting through. Iit would be nice if someone would comment.

Ah, reading www.flyontrack.co.uk, there's this:

I did put forward many of your observations, and they are working to keep up with the steady flow of complaints and enquiries coming in. They had 1400 e-mails to work through as we were speaking.

Austeralian

28th Aug 2002, 15:37

:) Hi all, finally got around to subscribing to PPRUNE as well as the Flyer list.

Firstly thanks for all the positive messages about NotamPlot - I'm glad you all found it useful.

I'm currently investigating several avenues I could take with NP in order to regain a graphical plot of NOTAMs at least similar to what we had previously.

Will keep you posted ...

Ian :D

rustle

28th Aug 2002, 15:44

Hi Ian

Thanks for NotamPlot, hope it doesn't turn out to be "Thanks for the memory" ;)

Flyontrack

28th Aug 2002, 15:58

Evo 7 must have been poised as I posted the AIS reply on our website at www.flyontrack.co.uk where there's more comment on this and other ideas to reduce airspace infringements. By the time I looked here he'd lifted it!!

Here's the rest of it:

I've just spoken to the manager of the new AIS website by phone and have invited him to have a look here and at Pprune for feedback, and hopefully for a response.

I did put forward many of your observations, and they are working to keep up with the steady flow of complaints and enquiries coming in. They had 1400 e-mails to work through as we were speaking.

Apparently the new programme is a commercial product (in use elsewhere) which was upgraded at 0900 this morning when they took it offline for 4 minutes to incorporate some fixes in reponse to user feedback.

I trust in due course that we will receive a direct response from AIS. In the meantime, please keep your comments coming as they are taking note! (Endquote)

So there you have it !

rustle

28th Aug 2002, 16:07

Flyontrack, (or NATS if you're there ;) )

Any truth in the rumour that this commercial product you mentioned is from Thales? Part of the same organisation who bring us Aerad?

Flyontrack

28th Aug 2002, 17:31

Not sure Rustle - we didn't get into that detail.

I was more interested in getting them to look at the comments on flyontrack.co.uk and here to see what was being said and hopefully reply to it.

In the absence of anything else so far I thought it might help to share the reply I got !

We'll keep trying!!

Bof

28th Aug 2002, 17:45

Well, Ive seen it all! This post makes 60 on the subject of new NOTAM procedures. I only hope to God someone at NATS takes note of what THE CUSTOMERS are saying. Blue Robin made the point on the 23rd - Any PILOTS involved in this bag of of bones?
Also Rotor on the On Track website. Keef, you are too kind - It might be a good idea but hardly well thought out!

Whoever said it was almost certainly a result of having to cut costs, hit the nail on the head. I bet some Herbert at West Drayton or Heathrow or wherever, is really looking forward to his promotion on having saved NATS a couple of thousand quid.

I am not going to plow the same furrow - you've all made the point very eloquently, Not enough Beta testing, no parallel issue for a few weeks to get it right. I personally found the long reply from NATS mentioned here, and reproduced by one of the On Track guys extremely cavalier and insulting to our intelligence. It really was a case of "This is what you are getting - all the info is there if you look for it and filter out what you don't need. Take it or leave it."

So what do we do about it. Bravo AC-DC! Whack in MORs if you really think it's dangerous. Write those letters and e-mails.
Don't let it be yet another case of "apathy rules" . Believe me if you shout loud enough - they'll hear. Get on the On Track website, perhaps a little bit out of their remit, but I understand they do have the collective ears of some of the CAA bods in General Aviation.

Having got all that off my chest, I'm going to have a beer! Mutter, Mutter, Mutter.

Flyontrack

28th Aug 2002, 18:53

Thanks BOF.

I know of one pilot who has already filed a Mandatory Occurrence Report (MOR) to the CAA to say that Safety Standards have been reduced by the new NOTAM system, and I can only agree that this will gain immediate attention.

Apart from that, letting rip here and at www.flyontrack.co.uk reaches a surprisingly large audience!!

Whatever method you choose, just keep at it and the system will improve. The final version - once you've all had your desires met -should be worth striving for and be safer for everyone.

rustle

28th Aug 2002, 21:14

Remember the A1/A8 we used to get from AIS which enabled NotamPlot to work?

Then we learned they were not available anymore, "to save costs"?

Then Flap40 said they were available.

Quite correct.

They are, and I have today's. Produced by AIS! Complete with all LAT/LONG data.

So we now have a situation where NATS is deliberately not supplying us, the users, with data to enable us to flight plan safely, whilst continuing to peddle us their useless replacement.

I ask again:

Is AIS-site MOR-able?

FlyOnTrack, I will cross-post this to your site ;)

Flyontrack

29th Aug 2002, 09:34

Rustle.

The pilot I spoke to said he was going to draw attention to his view of reduced safety standard through submitting a normal MOR to the CAA.

I'm not a CAA employee but I'm aware that MORs can be used by anyone concerned with aviation to highlight reduced safety or to put forward any safety related suggestion, and they are keen to hear any ideas from the cockpit.

The rather formal "Mandatory Occurrence Report" title tends to put people off using MOR unless they are forced to - but it shouldn't. (Most airlines use ASR "Air Safety Reports" equivalent to encourage free reporting)

If you want a reply to your MOR make sure you ask for one!

rustle

30th Aug 2002, 08:25

The following image is one page of the A8 Bulletin from Wednesday 28/8/2002.

Apparently they haven't been available since the 19/8/2002.

Hmmm. Any comments NATS? :confused:

http://www.artifaxsoftware.com/files/a8.jpg

Who has control?

30th Aug 2002, 08:29

As a matter of interest, how long does it take to register at the new site? I've been waiting for 3 days now for response.

rustle

30th Aug 2002, 14:21

WHC, you may not get a response ever.

Suggest you try your login again - mine suddenly started working, but I was never advised it had been activated.

ShyTorque

2nd Sep 2002, 13:10

I too am very concerned about this. I am actually concerned about conflicting with a NOTAM that I have missed because of the difficulties with this 'upgraded' site. As a professional pilot I would subsequently get my backside kicked by the CAA even though they have a disclaimer on the site pages to cover themselves.

There is a similar thread on 'Rotorheads'.

Everyone with a complaint - PLEASE email NATS and tell them about it.

If we don't all do this, it will become too late and we'll be stuck with it.

The contact link is on the NATS site. :(

Evo7

2nd Sep 2002, 17:14

Had my PPL skills test today, and trying to read NOTAMs during pre-flight was 'interesting'. Fortunately my examiner couldn't get the bastard system from hell to work either, so we agreed that we had done the best we could.... :rolleyes:

Rod1

3rd Sep 2002, 07:48

Evo7

So let me get this strait. You took your skill test, with an examiner, and neither of you could access any NOTAMS, so you said “we did our best” and went anyway!! I think the vast majority of PPL’s have probably given up as well.

The frustrating thing is that NATS are going to get away with it by simply ignoring us. Our only hope of getting the system changed is the aviation press, and that is a long shot.

Hope you passed by the way.

Rod

Evo7

3rd Sep 2002, 08:48

Sorry - I wasn't very clear. We could access them, but couldn't get any sort of route filtering to work and in the end we had to wade through 36 pages of randomly-ordered London-FIR NOTAMs in the pre-flight and just hope we didn't miss anything. I spent most of my flight-planning hour fighting that damn thing.. :mad: ... but I passed :)

I beat the examiner 2-1 on useful NOTAMs - we both spotted one about Portsmouth, but I also managed to find out that Farnborough was SSR-only yesterday (hidden on page 7 of a EGHR -> EGTB route after all sorts of crap about Welsh NDBs and North Sea oilrigs).

I wouldn't mind this damn system so much if it could at least put the useful ones first. If we must have a complete area briefing, why can they not do something like putting the NOTAMs in order of distance from a named aerodrome? Too simple, I guess....

rustle

3rd Sep 2002, 09:09

Evo7,

They are sorted by "type", then alphabetically by ICAO :(
(Useful isn't it)

Old system:

Know Lat/Long area you are going to fly in, get relevant NOTAMs by Lat/Long (they were grouped by Lat/Long), modify route as necessary, fly.

New system:

Know area you want to fly in, wade through pages of irrelevant cr@p - missing things buried in the noise, hope and pray that the relevant stuff is actually included (often it isn't), fly.

NB: This assumes you can actually log-in, it doesn't crash 3 times, and your printer has a ready supply of rainforest.

One of the other undesirable side effects of this garbage is the additional "tension" when flying -- no longer do you have all the command information you require.

All-in-all a complete fiasco, and still nothing from NATS by way of apology for the "service", comments on when it's likely to get better, nothing.

Evo7

3rd Sep 2002, 09:21

They are sorted by "type", then alphabetically by ICAO

And there was me thinking it was random... :)

There was a suggestion that Goodwood should hold a sweepstake to guess the number of people busting the NOTAMed TRA during the revival weekend :(

BBDO

3rd Sep 2002, 09:40

Has anyone had a satisfactory response as to why the old A1/A8 notams are still available on the MARS system but not available to us?
And why NATS claimed that A1/A8 didn't exist anymore?

rustle

3rd Sep 2002, 10:27

Evo7,

The contents may be random, the sorting is by ICAO ;)

BBDO,

Negative on both counts.

I have asked and I know others have asked.

I think they are on auto-pilot and have gone to sleep :p

In a competitive environment someone would have had to say something by now.

Have a read of the comments on www.flyontrack.co.uk if you haven't done so already.

Rod1

4th Sep 2002, 13:10

Having spoken to an Editor or two, the aviation press is on the case. Should see some results in the next few weeks.

There are some people even NATS cannot ignore.

It will be interesting to see the "spin" they use.

Rod

BRL

4th Sep 2002, 13:20

Very interesting. I emailed them yesterday at about 0930. Got a reply about 2 hours later. I simply asked them to read the link, register here and reply on this forum to sort of settle us all down a bit. Looks like an automated reply that i got back.........
Thankyou for your feedback. AIS has acknowledged receipt of the feedback.It
maybe the case that some have been missed and others duplicated. I attach a
user guide which has already gone out to some individuals.

Regards

AIS

Attached was a user guide(!) in Adobe format........ :rolleyes:

I shouldn't say this but i will... the words chocolate fireguard come to mind......

rustle

4th Sep 2002, 13:27

BRL,

There's a NATS Forum but I can't post in there to send the link to this thread...

Can you? Maybe someone reading in there can shed some light on this appalling mess.

BRL

4th Sep 2002, 14:06

Rustle, I can sort that out. :)

It would be a bit better if they had the bottle to come on-line and admit they got it wrong and its going to be sorted out soon but they havn't even got the decency to do that :mad:

rustle

4th Sep 2002, 15:29

BRL, nice one.

You may want to point them at www.flyontrack.co.uk as well -- there's some fairly interesting comments appearing there :(

LPL

4th Sep 2002, 21:29

This NATS AIC, AIS website is driving me me up the F*^*^*G wall,

Have they stopped you viewing/printing the IAP, STAR, SIDs etc because I cannot, for the life of me find them.

Also, why is it so bloody sloooooow.

ANGRY:mad: :mad: :mad:

28thJuly2001

4th Sep 2002, 22:52

Let me get this straight..
Your not happy with the new improved, easy to use, need a computer degree to get the NOTAMS website are you?
Tsk Tsk some people dont like change
Walt,,:D

PhilD

4th Sep 2002, 23:16

The SIDs, STARs etc are under Publications, UK AIP Supplements, UK AIP, Aerodrome Data, Aerodromes Specific.

Only takes about 5 mins to get there zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

PS What's the problem with accessing the site from outside the UK? Will it automatically cancel my JAA licence if I try?

Genghis the Engineer

5th Sep 2002, 06:12

That'll be the site I couldn't manage to get to work last week, thus nearly (bar the vigilance of a reasonably switched on air trafficer) had me flying into the middle of a military airshow. That one?

G

LPL

5th Sep 2002, 07:59

Phild

Don't know what I was doing wrong last night, I was asked for a specific airfield I wanted info on, when I entered which one , all I got was a list of all the SIDs etc and not the actual plate.

Havn't tried the Notam function yet, so I will keep the noose slack :(

LPL

rustle

5th Sep 2002, 08:11

Guys, quick request

Can we keep all the AIS Site stuff in the Notam Site 'Upgrade' thread, because we're pointing quite a few people directly at it now and wouldn't want them to miss anything ;)

Just a thought :)

BRL

5th Sep 2002, 09:11

Cheers Rus.... going to copy this/merge it with the other thread. :)

Coke611

5th Sep 2002, 09:51

Finally got into AIS site today- after registering 4 times, recieving no confirmation email !
Just looking over the forms at the moment, see how many 'irrelevant' notams it gives me!

DamienB

5th Sep 2002, 17:10

Spotted this on a newsgroup, Ben Chapman has put together a simpler and faster interface to the AIS site:

http://www.benchapman.co.uk/preflight/altais/

Opens another window for the AIS site on login, then go back to Ben's window and carry out your query there, swap back to the AIS window for the results.

HighWing

5th Sep 2002, 22:35

Tried to fly last Wednesday. Couldn't get a password to access the site, no one at my club was able to access the system or aparently aware of the change! Rang the tower who directed me to the briefing room in the main terminal.

Couldn't find the NOTAMs in the briefing room - asked someone who very kindly went and found them for me somewhere in the office. I found them completely unrecognisable (In my innocence I was expecting them to be ordered by lon/lat!).

After pondering over them for some time I decided to cancel the flight. I could not guarentee that I wouldn't wander across a TRA and at best end up in court or at worst be shot down. My friend who had traveled some distance was most p**sed off - but perhaps not as p**sed off as I would have been if I had inadvertantly endangered myself, my friend, other flyers or folks on the ground.

I wonder how many flyers have said "****** it - I'll fly anyway"?

Aussie Andy

6th Sep 2002, 15:19

The AIS website is, as I type this, offline. Test using this traceroute server (http://visualroute.visualware.co.uk/) indicate that ... "IP packets are being lost past network "Nats (Services) Ltd" at hop 21 ... Connections to HTTP port 80 are being refused". Seems they have taken it offline for the afternoon for some reason.....

FlyingForFun

6th Sep 2002, 15:24

Is it asking too much to hope that the reason it's down is so that they can put the old system back again???

FFF
--------------

pulse1

6th Sep 2002, 15:30

I tried to use it yesterday for a trip to the MIdlands today. I couldn't get it to work so I rang NATS and they were extremely helpful. They answered the phone immediately and spent some time trying to get it to work. Eventually they rang me back and then helped me to get it to work. (60% of resultant NOTAMS were irrelevant for my flight as others have found).

The only justification he could offer for this poor system was that it was free:confused: :confused:

Does this mean that they will charge for it when it works better?

rustle

6th Sep 2002, 15:41

FFF,

According to NATS that isn't possible - see AOPA news story.

But then NATS said the temp user-ID and password would work until 20 September as well ;)

Pulse1,

Did they mean free to them, or free to the users?

Aussie Andy

6th Sep 2002, 16:34

... and now its back up again... but seems the same functionaly, yet possbly slower..?

Tee

6th Sep 2002, 21:08

What a total shambles..............and on top of everything else, the format of dates has been altered - beware - if it says 02/09/03, it means 3rd September 2002 and not 2nd September 2003.

rustle

8th Sep 2002, 17:24

Here's the URL for the AOPA news item:

http://www.aopa.co.uk/cgi-bin/viewnews.cgi?newsid1031140546,4618,

It's titled "AIS: New Web Service has GA Pilots Seeing Red"

The confusing bit is this quote:

"AIS will not be going back to the old way of providing NOTAM information via the web because it was too labour intensive..."

So which bit is the labour intensive bit?

Where the LAT/LONG is added as in the A1/A8s? (Which are still produced, just not available to GA pilots!)

Or maybe it's labour intensive to point a URL at the A1/A8 data, which is obviously still in electronic form.

Any thoughts anyone?

Fly Stimulator

8th Sep 2002, 22:23

Useless.

The AOPA guard dog, having emitted a half-hearted yap, has been fed a biscuit and has slunk away.

It's all very well for AOPA to be "re-assured to know that AIS is taking all constructive comments seriously."

Are they satisfied that anything at all will be done to improve things? This is an issue with profound safety implications for us all. How long is an acceptable period for NOTAMS to be this hard to get at? Another week? A month? Six months?

I hope that some of the flying magazines can do a better job of defending our interests than AOPA.

Aussie Andy

9th Sep 2002, 08:53

... again this morning.

Whipping Boy's SATCO

9th Sep 2002, 10:42

That's alright then, I wasn't planning on flying today!!:confused: :confused:

Aussie Andy

9th Sep 2002, 11:24

... and now its back up again..!

BillieBob

9th Sep 2002, 13:30

Let's face it - NATS is going to take zero notice of e-mails from concerned citizens and even less notice of posts on Pprune and On Track (No offence Danny). It is now a profit-making organisation and doesn't give a toss what you or I think of the service it provides. After all, it doesn't make any money from us, does it?

However, it is regulated by the CAA which, in turn, runs a very good scheme to allow people to report safety related shortcomings in the system - MORs. If the CAA receives an equivalent number of MORs, it must react. Those MORs will show up in the annual stats, as would a lack of action on the part of SRG and those stats are, by law, in the public domain.

A copy of the MOR form (CA1673) is included in CAP 382, which is available in .pdf format from the SRG website HERE (http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP382.pdf). You will need to print out pages 24 and 25 of the full document to obtain the complete form.

If SRG is deluged in MOR reports (which anyone can submit) they will have to take some action. I have already submitted one, what about the rest of you?

rustle

9th Sep 2002, 13:40

BB,

Excellent advice.

I have as well (26/8/02).

Don't forget when you FAX it to them on 01293 573 972 to mark the address as Attention: SDD (Safety Data Department)

Also, you do not need the form, a letter will do :)

Whipping Boy's SATCO

9th Sep 2002, 17:36

Its down again:(

Aussie Andy

9th Sep 2002, 17:54

So it is... up and down like a "wh*re's draws" as they say...

QDMQDMQDM

9th Sep 2002, 19:24

AOPA accepts that change can be very difficult but we are re-assured to know that AIS is taking all constructive comments seriously. In time we hope the system will once again become user friendly.

If you have any constructive comments or suggestion to make on the new AIS Service please email them to [email protected] We will ask AIS to consider all reasonable suggestions when we talk to them next.

AOPA is watching the development of this issue with interest and will apply more pressure in future if changes to the system are not forthcoming.

This is from the AOPA news story. What a pathetic bunch of dishrags. No wonder their organisation can't attract membership.

QDM

PhilD

9th Sep 2002, 22:12

I completely agree. Compare the attitude of AOPA UK and the CAA (who so far seem to have been silent on this issue) with these quotes from the AOPA US website about TRAs (Temporary Restricted Areas) and US NOTAMS:

------------

Aug. 28 — The FAA has acknowledged what many pilots already know; flight service station briefers don't always tell them about temporary flight restriction areas (TFRs). Now the agency vows it will fix the problem.

In a letter to AOPA President Phil Boyer, Acting FAA Administrator Monte Belger said the FAA is implementing a "TFR Action Plan" to improve the flow of TFR information to general aviation pilots.

FAA is responding to AOPA's demand for action to improve the notam system to provide pilots with timely, accurate, and understandable information, particularly concerning TFRs.

"AOPA is encouraged by this strong response from Mr. Belger," said Andy Cebula, AOPA senior vice president of Government and Technical Affairs. "Ongoing security-related airspace restrictions and inadvertent incursions are some of the most pressing problems facing general aviation. It is critical that FSS personnel and pilots have the most current information."

......

FAA has also committed to implementing graphical notams as soon as possible. It is currently testing a Jeppesen product that would plot TFRs on aeronautical charts. In mid-July, the FAA published several security TFR maps on its Web site. FAA also installed a "hot-link" capability from DUAT to the FAA Web site.

According to Belger, the FAA has also sent a notice to FSSs, holding them accountable for providing the information while conducting pilot weather briefings. FAA will place special emphasis on TFR dissemination in all future evaluations of the system.

-------------

'TFR Action Plan', 'Graphical NOTAMs', 'AOPAs demand(!)' ..... it's a different world. I wonder if the UK powers-that-be ever look at this stuff....they certainly don't seem to speak this language

I'm particularly struck by the talk in the last para about 'accountability', especially when compared with the pathetic disclaimer on the NATS website. It seems no-one in the UK wants to stand up and take responsibility for this mess. I'm sure if there is an accident the CAA and NATS will be queuing up to blame the pilot....

lancer1

10th Sep 2002, 06:12

I am concerned about a GA pilot's liability as a result of these continuing problems with obtaining NOTAMs. The AIS login page carries the warning that:

"The information on this site is collated from a number of varied sources and is considered to be as reliable as possible at the time of publication. National Air Traffic Services Ltd and the UK Civil Aviation Authority, while exercising great care in the compilation of this information, will not be responsible for the accuracy of the contents of AIS publications, omissions therein, the adequacy or the receipt of this information"

So even if we can access NOTAM information (and it was unavailable for much of yesterday), we are officially unable to trust it. So from whom do we get accurate NOTAMs, if not from NATS - and where does legal responsibility lie in the case of an infringement occurring because of a NATS error?

Air safety!

Aussie Andy

10th Sep 2002, 09:00

... and its down again this morning!!!

Whipping Boy's SATCO

10th Sep 2002, 11:47

Quick, its working!!!

However, my 'narrow route' flight from EGWU to EGNT came up with the attached.

COM : FROM 02/08/29 00:01 TO 02/10/31 23:59 L1584/02
E)THE MODE 3/A SSR CODE 7010 WILL BE USED FOR THE AIRBORNE TRIALS OF
A PROTOTYPE LIGHT AVIATION SSR TRANSPONDER. THE TRAILS WILL BE
CONDUCTED FROM MOD BOSCOMBE DOWN. ACTIVITY WILL TAKE PLACE IN A BLOCK
OF AIRSPACE TO A MAX OF 50NM WEST AND SOUTHWEST OF MOD BOSCOMBE DOWN
BTN 1500FT AGL AND FL50. THE CODE WILL REMAIN UNVALIDATED AND
UNVERIFIED BUT THE ACFT WILL BE UNDER THE CONTROL OF MOD BOSCOMBE
DOWN ATC

Relevance?:confused: :confused:

QDMQDMQDM

10th Sep 2002, 20:19

I'm sure if there is an accident the CAA and NATS will be queuing up to blame the pilot....

Yes, exactly. I think that given this NOTAM debacle and the CAA's extremely punitive attitude to airspace infringements with hefty fines, the only answer is to avoid talking to ATC services wherever and whenever possible. That way, if something does go wrong and you do infringe airspace no-one has your reg.

These people -- NATS and the CAA -- must be morons to have allowed such an absurd situation to develop.

QDM

Whipping Boy's SATCO

11th Sep 2002, 05:58

QQQ. Whilst I do not support NATS' position in this matter I find your coments to be rather flippant. A couple of points:

a. The CAA does not necessarily have an "extremely punitive attitude to airspace infringements", it looks at every single case (including the pilot's response) in isolation.

b. ATC is there for the good of all. To adopt a "lets not talk to them attitude" smacks of poor airmanship.

QDMQDMQDM

11th Sep 2002, 11:10

a. The CAA does not necessarily have an "extremely punitive attitude to airspace infringements", it looks at every single case (including the pilot's response) in isolation.

In your dreams.

To adopt a "lets not talk to them attitude" smacks of poor airmanship.

One has to ask what the benefit is and then weigh that against the risks. In this case, the benefits do not seem to outweigh the risks. Given all this palaver, where possible I shall simply fly along squawking 7000 mode charlie, keep a listening watch and let others avoid me.

If these bureaucrats actually cared about flight safety and had an ounce of sense, they would do their best to include people like me, not give me plenty of reasons to exclude myself.

QDM

Whipping Boy's SATCO

11th Sep 2002, 11:32

QQQ, in the last 2 years I have personally been involved in 17 formal investigations regarding significant unauthorised/inadvertant penetration of Class A CAS. This has involved lengthy radio tape transcripts, impounding of radar tapes, statements from all concerned and thorough investigation. Only once was an individual subject to "punitive" treatment (£2000 fine) as, despite all this evidence, he swore blind that he had not penetrated CAS. In every other circumstance, the Authority and the individuals concerned agreed about the cause of the error and identified apprpriate lessons.

Believe me - I have not been dreaming.

QDMQDMQDM

11th Sep 2002, 11:37

Believe me - I have not been dreaming.

Point taken.

But look, this absurdity with the NOTAMs is extremely annoying and there is no way I am going to put myself at risk if the information I am given is incomplete, inaccurate and difficult to access.

QDM

Keef

11th Sep 2002, 11:43

QQQ/WBS

I've not been involved with that many cases (only two in the last ten years, neither of them because I was the bad boy, I'm happy to say).

In both cases, the "offender" was given a stern ticking off, and that was it. In one case, it must have cost the CAA quite a bit, cos one of their inspectors came to my office to interview me about what I'd seen (a chap doing aerobatics inside controlled airspace, without talking to ATC).

General

So I check the NOTAM site, find nothing about Red Barrows or PJE on my route, and fly. I get an MOR filed against me for infringing one, or both.

I go to court, show that I'd consulted the NOTAM site (with my printout to prove it) and argue that I took all reasonable care - what else could I have done?

Although the NATS site has the weasel-words, what OTHER source of information could I have used to avoid infringing?

I think "reasonable care and due diligence" would stand me in reasonable stead with a reasonable judge.

What else COULD the CAA argue we should do, other than not fly at all - and we have licences and a legal right to do that, don't we?

Or don't we have a "right" to fly?

Aussie Andy

11th Sep 2002, 12:00

I think Keef has it right (God bless you, Father!) regarding the legal risks that we should calculate, and that aspect won't stop me flying (there's not miuch that would, other than bad wx!).

However, what I am concerned about is that we may unwittingly run safety risks, as opposed to legal risks due to, say, lack of availability of NOTAM info when the site is down, and/or omission of some information in the NOTAM briefing for whatever reason, such as blundering into an Air Display or PJE that might have been avoided.

Rod1

11th Sep 2002, 12:29

If someone has to die to get NATS to listen it is a very sad state of affairs. They are obviously not going to respond to us. Keep putting in the complaints to the CAA and the press and hope we get to them before the inevitable happens to some poor sod that did his best but was denied vital safety info by the body required to provide it.

Rod

Whipping Boy's SATCO

11th Sep 2002, 15:16

Now we're talking. I fully agree that the new NOTAM site, as it stands, is a potential flight safety hazard. However, as a GA pilot, I feel we must ensure that we are seen to have made best effort to fully acquaint ourselves with extant regulations and NOTAMs. Subsequently, any failing can then attributed to where the blame actually lies. In an earlier post, I stated that I feared the complexity of the site may well encourage a tendancy to ignore good practice. Lets be professional and show NATS that they are not dealing with a two-bit, disorganised rabble.

PS. QQQ - I hope I did not offend.

rustle

11th Sep 2002, 20:31

Okay, now I am REALLY p'd off with this.

Read this: http://www.ais.org.uk/aes/en/image/NATS_Statement_11-09-2002.pdf

What a bunch of arrogant so'n'so's they are...

MOR AIS, fax CAA, ring your MP, fax the newspapers/TV/Radio anyone who will listen and understand the problem!

How are the GA community supposed to take these jokers seriously??

Ridiculous

Whipping Boy's SATCO

11th Sep 2002, 21:23

NATS AIS remains commited to a high quality of service provision

Well that makes me feel really warm.

28thJuly2001

11th Sep 2002, 21:34

I'm sticking to circuits. much safer.
Walt,,

P.S. What if there is a NOTAM for my home airport? DOH!:p

Aussie Andy

11th Sep 2002, 22:27

The NATS statement is signed "MANAGER" - why not give their names, like any other commercial organistion does?

I think that the outages are unforgiveable, and the way in which the transition from the old system has been handled was, at best, amateurish from the end user perspective.

Having said all that though, I think I am coming to grips with the system. I've been able to obtain relevant NOTAMs for planned my flight to Blackpool this Saturday using the "narrow route" function, and while there was some extraneous stuff in the resulant print-out (as before), I have been able to find the relevant stuff including a PJE, a couple of Air Displays and some Kite Flying on or near to my track, as well as several relevant navaid outages etc.

But have I got all the NOTAMs? Before we could tell for sure as by reading A1 and A8 you knew you had all of them... This is a weakness in the new system, so I've saved a copy of the output into a text file for safety sake - in case I blunder into something that was not mentioned in the report generated and need to defend myself.

Anyway, I am now starting to think that we will get used to the new system - even though its not as useful or as good from our perspective as the previous system, and requires that we become accustomed to its weaknesses. But I suppose that we will learn how to make it work for us - we're smart people after all :).

This is not to excuse the failings I've mentioned above, nor my ongoing concerns over the system outages we've been seeing over recent days, but what's done is done...

skua

12th Sep 2002, 14:11

I have just received a printout of 34 pages of Notams, for a flight that crosses 3 FIR's. Then I happened upon a part of the NATS site that gives responsibilities in that "organisation" - possibly a misue of the word.

The manager of AIS is one Phil Bate (presumably know to his friends and servants as Master !).

His e-mail address is [email protected].

I guess he might just be receiving an abnormally high load of e-mails from now on!

Skua

Mike Cross

13th Sep 2002, 06:32

Can I ask you please to take a look at the post on this subject at http://www.flyontrack.co.uk/comm.asp
dated 12/9/2002 at 12:46

This post is signed by the three pilots running the OnTrack project on behalf of the CAA and proposes action that we can take in order to force improvements.

Mike

Flyontrack

13th Sep 2002, 10:23

Thanks Mike - I was just logging on to make the invitation to any of you who want to use the system properly to make your voice heard.

NATS must listen to you, their Customers and incorporate the improvements being demanded on Safety grounds alone, and we give practical advice on how this can be achieved.

It's at: http://www.flyontrack.co.uk/comm.asp

While you're visiting the site, please take time to look around the home page and let us have any ideas or suggestions you may have on reducing airspace infringements........... That's our real aim, but we have provided a useful forum for highlighting the AIS problems, which is fine by us - we hope it all helps.

Evo

15th Sep 2002, 16:55

After a couple of hours trying to submit my wife's tax return on the inland revenue's website the AIS Notam pages suddenly don't seem so bad... :rolleyes: :)

rustle

15th Sep 2002, 17:33

Evo,

Even in today's economy I don't think the death penalty applies if you cannot file IR (Inland Revenue) stuff online...

Still comparable?

Keef

15th Sep 2002, 17:35

Evo

The best advice I had was "Don't even bother trying with the Inland Revenue online submission."

I did try, nevertheless, and it proved to be a waste of a half an hour or more of good core lifetime.

Do the paper one, and post it - you've got to get it all together on paper anyway, to be sure you're happy with all the details.

Anyway, as soon as you need any of the "extra forms", you find they don't have them yet so it's back to the paper form.

Meanwhile - I've been able to get into the AIS site every time I've tried this past two days!

rustle

16th Sep 2002, 12:55

Keef said:Meanwhile - I've been able to get into the AIS site every time I've tried this past two days!
I think they may have replaced the "Commodore 64" back end with a 386DX...

Either that or it can cope when there's only you online ;)

bcfc

18th Sep 2002, 12:42

Sadly, nothing to add. Just wanted to keep this thread up the top as its too important to let it disappear

Lawyerboy

18th Sep 2002, 13:09

Going against the grain somewhat, can I just say that I've had no problems at all with the site, nor with getting NOTAMS sorted out for whenever I've wanted to go flying, but I did have to spend an hour jotting down the ICAO codes for every one of the airfields I was going anywhere near 'cos just putting in the name would be far too easy, wouldn't it....

rustle

21st Sep 2002, 14:49

Continuing the positive theme...

Having spent a large part of yesterday (Friday 20/9) with AIS I think things are going to get better, and quite soon.

I'm just putting together some "words" around our discussions yesterday, and when I have done so will post them here...

rustle

22nd Sep 2002, 15:48

Have now written some "words" about my visit with AIS on Friday.

I have posted them on PPL/IR website.

http://www.pplir.org

BBDO

22nd Sep 2002, 16:41

Thanks for your efforts Rustle.
Was anything mentioned with regard to Notamplot or a similar capability to plot Notams on a map for easy visual reference?

QDMQDMQDM

22nd Sep 2002, 18:38

Yes, rustle, thanks for your efforts, but as far as I am concerned the new system has effectively disabled the only truly useable means of accessing NOTAM info -- Notamplot. What are they doing to either:

a) Provide an interface as good.

b) Restore the information feed so Notamplot functions once more.

QDM

bcfc

23rd Sep 2002, 11:34

Rustle

Can only echo QDM and also gratitude for your efforts. I am persevering with the new site and experience is helping illicit the information I need but I know of people flying without checking the notams first. Crazy I know, but a fact of life post-Notamplot.

-bcfc

rustle

23rd Sep 2002, 13:24

Re NotamPlot:

I think we realistically couldn't expect AIS to comment favourably or otherwise about NotamPlot: if they said it was good it becomes an endorsement, and if they said anything negative that becomes a problem too - so saying nothing seems sensible...

Some perspective:

The A1/A8 data via Internet became available Q1/1998.

NotamPlot became available Q1/2002.

It's probably fair to say that enhancements and "value-add" will happen much quicker now, post NotamPlot, than the 4 years it took prior to NotamPlot because there is so obviously a market for such enhancements.

Whether or not these are from AIS or others I wouldn't like to guess.

I know Ian (of NotamPlot fame not fortune) is looking into this even as I write.

To my mind there are two "action lists":

Phase I - must have:

Sorting by Lat/Long, better communication about changes, perhaps a structured "transition" period, better "POH" for the site etc.

then,

Phase II - nice to have:

Graphical representation of NOTAM data, WAP availability etc.

There are a myriad extras that could be done, but my thinking would be make sure Phase I is correct prior to embarking on Phase II.

QDM, to answer your question more directly, I think if a transition period was to occur that would enable you to use the tool you are comfortable with whilst enabling them (or a.another) to develop new tools you would be comfortable with.

Sort of a win-win.

I have asked :)

rustle

25th Sep 2002, 13:37

There have been some good changes made to the site.

More information available from the front (login) page.

Worth another look :)

Aussie Andy

25th Sep 2002, 14:00

G'day rustle, looks pretty much the same..? What am I missing? Are you referring to the new FAQ's? Still a bit slow...

But on the positive side, I reiterate my previous comments and confirm that having used it a few times in anger I now feel I am able to get what I need from it using the Narrow route briefing... its probably not as bad as it seemed at first!

HighWing

25th Sep 2002, 22:12

Hello Rustle,

In your excellent article about your visit to AIS, you said that NATS were concerned that if they listed them lat/long then pilots would only look at the lat/long that they were flying in.

Errr - at great risk of sounding foolish - isn't that the whole point of listing them lat/long?

I suppose that means that graphical representations are equally bad as you are only likely to look where you are flying.

I must be missing something here...

(Not having a pop at you - just would like to understand this better)

Rod1

26th Sep 2002, 13:14

I think what most of us would like is a "feed" of the information to be made available to others. This would allow people to get Notampro and other similar programs working.

The basic operation of the "new" AIS site is text based. It is very similar to the sort of stuff supplied with the early IBM PC's back in 1982/83. NATS are not programmers, and boy does it show. If they concentrated on getting the info out and left others to make it understandable all our problems would go away in a mater of weeks. Nats would then not have the CAA hitting them over the head, and would not have to invest hundreds of thousands of pounds on trying to catch up on the last 20 years of Graphical User Interfaces and colour maps indicating exactly what we need to know in next to no time.

The frustrating thing is it was all available, virtually free of charge. With a tiny amount of planning they could have arranged for the feed to coincide with the new site and we could have carried on using our favourite programs as if nothing had happened. Such a feed, by the way, could be entirely automatic, and would cost next to nothing to set up.

Rod1

Mike Cross

27th Sep 2002, 13:04

Having stuck my head above the parapet once too often I have now been invited like Russell to visit AIS at Heathrow on 3 Oct.

I have been corresponding with Russell to co-ordinate our approach.

I am a 200+ Hr PPL flying a Luscombe out of Popham, the avionics of which consist of a single COM. Just the sort of person who might wander where he shouldn't and at whom NOTAM are aimed.

I have a certain amount of knowledge of databases, web design and quality systems and am preparing a list of discussion points which currently include:-

The need for a printable area bulletin that can be put up on a notice board and used by a pilot at an airfield. It needs to be organised in such a way that you don't need a computer to extract the information.

The desirability of making the raw data available in a form that allow third party developers to produce products like NotamPlot. At the moment what you get from the AIS site is not NOTAM, it is an edited form of the raw NOTAM data arranged into a pre-flight information bulletin (PIB)

Improvements to the layout and data provided in a PIB.

Improvements to the website, including speed, usability and availability

If you have particular points to do with the above that you want raised, or if you have additional issues please raise them here or email me at [email protected]

I will report back after the meeting.

Mike

Tinstaafl

27th Sep 2002, 17:02

A change to the cumbersome selection of aerodrome/waypoints etc

The current to-ing & fro-ing between different pages is a pain in the @rse! Why not a drop down list based on the characters present? Micro$oft manage it quite well with their help menu.

Also, why only ICAO codes? Why not IATA or full name? Travel websites manage to cope with it.

Damned if I know every bloody ICAO code used in the UK, consdering the less than intuitive assigments. Give me Oz or (better) USA...

FlyingForFun

27th Sep 2002, 17:16

Personally, I'd be quite happy with a list of NOTAMs organised by latitude.

(Hmm, now where have we seen that before???)

I quite often go for short local flights, trying to keep away from airfields. Or I'll be going to another airfield via a dog-leg to avoid London, or a danger area, or similar. The only two ways I can think of getting the information I need for that kind of flight easily is either graphically, or sorted geographically. Currently, it takes over an hour - compared to about 5 minutes with the old system (and that was without using NotamPlot).

FFF
-----------

Aussie Andy

27th Sep 2002, 21:00

Godd on ya mrcross. Here's a bug for you then: In "handbook" (why is it called that!?) I am unable to "update" a plan... when I try I get the following error message:

Error received from server Anais

Oops! Your request cannot be completed. The server ANAIS got the following error.
Please return to the previous page using the back button on your browser and ensure that the following fields are properly entered and re-submit the form.

(E0733) DURATION FILTER: FORBIDDEN ERROR : LINE 1 COL 16

But all the fields are properly filled in, and it works fine in "use" mode...

Mike Cross

28th Sep 2002, 16:53

Thanks Andy, I've verified it and added it to the list.

I've also suggested to them that most people regard a Handbook as a User Guide and suggested that they call it "My Briefings" or "Saved Briefings". They need to sort out the drop-down control on the page which obscures the dropdowns from the NavBar, they also need to stop it from saving everything. Currently if you re-use a briefing it will update the date and save it as a new briefing. They also need to give you the option of deleting a briefing you no longer need.
It's not one of their better efforts at page design.

Thanks also FlyingForFun
When I said you needed to be able to extract the information without the need for a computer your point was exactly what I had in mind. We need at least two sections in the briefing, one by geographical location, probably in the old south-north order and another to cover those items which have a wider effect, e.g. the fact that a particular FIS frequency might be unavailable.

All on the list for Thursday

Mike

Hi Tinstaafl

Agreed, the lookup is very poor.
Bear in mind that there's a list of the codes for all licensed airfields on the 500,000 ICAO chart. It's in brackets after the airfield name in the frequency list. Probably quicker to look up.

For anyone having difficulty with decoding the abbreviations they are listed in GEN2-2 of the UK AIP and can be found at http://www.ais.org.uk/aes/pubs/aip/pdf/gen/10202.PDF (you'll need Adobe Acrobat Reader)

Mike

Mike Cross

29th Sep 2002, 11:51

Hi Tinstaafl

Agreed, the lookup is very poor.
Bear in mind that there's a list of the codes for all licensed airfields on the 500,000 ICAO chart. It's in brackets after the airfield name in the frequency list. Probably quicker to look up.

For anyone having difficulty with decoding the abbreviations they are listed in GEN2-2 of the UK AIP and can be found at http://www.ais.org.uk/aes/pubs/aip/pdf/gen/10202.PDF (you'll need Adobe Acrobat Reader)

Mike

QDMQDMQDM

29th Sep 2002, 19:42

rustle,

I'm a very average private pilot and I find lat / long very confusing and difficult to visualise. Frankly, I tend to switch off when having to figure out which lat / long are relevant to me. It just ends up in a big splurge of unmanageable numbers in my mind.

That's why Notamplot was so brilliant. In this context, therefore, I don't think a graphical representation of data is a 'Nice to have', it's an absolute essential. Many people can cope with sifting through a lengthy list of lat / long. Many, many more can't.

If they're serious about flight safety they will deliver the info to the user in the most easily interpretable fashion, a fashion which even an idiot could interpret, because, let's face it, many pilots are idiots.

So, yes, either concoct a GUI themselves or let notamplot fuction once more. This, I think, is urgent.

QDM

P.S. Look at this useful bit of advice mrcross has just given us to help interpret the ais site: For anyone having difficulty with decoding the abbreviations they are listed in GEN2-2 of the UK AIP and can be found at http://www.ais.org.uk/aes/pubs/aip/pdf/gen/10202.PDF (you'll need Adobe Acrobat Reader)
Helpful though this advice is to the technologically abled few, this proves conclusively that you need to be an obsessive geek to be able to use the site. It's a hopeless mess.

rustle

29th Sep 2002, 20:12

QDM,

Did you see this bit of my post:
QDM, to answer your question more directly, I think if a transition period was to occur that would enable you to use the tool you are comfortable with whilst enabling them (or a.another) to develop new tools you would be comfortable with.
What I meant was what you want:

A1/A8 so you can use NotamPlot today, whilst they or someone else develops a similar thing for "tomorrow"... :)

QDMQDMQDM

29th Sep 2002, 20:37

A1/A8 so you can use NotamPlot today, whilst they or someone else develops a similar thing for "tomorrow"...

Yes, thanks, rustle. All the reports so far though are that this is highly unlikely to occur, is it not?

QDM

chrisN

29th Sep 2002, 22:11

I second QDM's "find lat / long very confusing and difficult to visualise".

In the old system, it was OK because I could look at a day's list and see where to limit the region of interest by relation to other places I know. (My gliding club needs nothing south of Croxley Green which always features, and there was usually something further north I could recognise to limit the range. Ditto for east and west limitations.).

Today I got the NOTAms for us, found buried in the rest a rocket event up to 15000 feet at Heckingham - just west of the meridian and south of the 53rd parallel, so I thought it might be in range of gliders from Essex. Turned out it is in Lincolnshire and of no interest to us today.

(They often don't put something more helpful, like a county, in the descriptions. Of course, they do mention "Wales" which is apparently within 50 miles of the "narrow route" I have to use to find East Anglian data, as I pick up NOTAMs in that region of a mil - oops, nearly said what they told me I must not use, copy or pass on. They do give counties where kite flying goes on. If NOTAM originators don't give such data, it's a pity AIS can't fill the gap to help the rest of us - but I suppose it's cost again.)

Aussie Andy

3rd Oct 2002, 21:48

Hi there,

Just got a narrow (10NM) route briefing for EGUB -> EGMH for this coming Sunday, with route DCT LAM DCT DVR DCT. Output notams included:

NAVW: FROM 02/10/06 10:25 TO 02/10/06 11:05 H4891/02
E) AUS(MIL REF)02-10-0181/3103/DG
MIL FAST JET (1X TORN F3 ACFT)AEROBATIC DISPLAY
WI 5NMS RAD PSN 5231N 00044W (ROCKINGHAM RACE CIRCUIT, NR CORBY,
NORTHANTS).
F)SFC G)6000FT AGL
Which is approx. 50NM north of track, and so oughtn't to have been included.

Hope this helps,

Whipping Boy's SATCO

4th Oct 2002, 08:29

AA, maybe the system is REALLY clever and recognises your navigation skills.;)

Mike Cross

4th Oct 2002, 09:41

Yesterday I spent 5 hours at AIS Heathrow, meeting with the following:-

Steve Harben, Head of Data Management
Phil Bate, Manager UK AIS
Alan Burrill, Manager IS/IT

It is going to take me a little time to write up a full account so please bear with me.

I am certain that the meeting will produce positive results, though as always with these things, not in the timescale that we might like to see.

Mike

Mike Cross

4th Oct 2002, 13:10

Just spoken with Phil Bate, Manager UK AIS

They are experiencing problems with the web servers. They have not yet been able to determine the cause. One possibility is that it is caused by high utilisation because the new AIRAC cycle has just been published and a lot of people may be trying large downloads of the AIP.

Mike

Aussie Andy

4th Oct 2002, 16:12

I found out this afternoon, by accident, that you don't get some categories of aerodrome NOTAM unless you select IFR / VFR. In this case, its of interest also to the VFR pilot...

I plan to fly to Manston (EGMH). I anticipate using the Manston LARS service enroute. When I get my briefing using only "VFR" setting, there is no mention of any problems with Manston's radar service, but when I select IFR/VFR I see:
AERODROME (DESTINATION) - EGMH (MANSTON):
COM : FROM 02/10/04 09:23 TO 02/10/06 19:00 E1513/0
E)RADAR U/SSo I now anticipate no LARS service. Granted, its not cirtical information for VFR flight, but I would suggest that this would be of interest to most VFR users.

Havva great weekend everybody!

Mike Cross

8th Oct 2002, 17:27

Andy - re the Radar at Manston - it will be because the NOTAM was incorrectly coded in the first place. ICAO Annexe 15 lays down a series of Q Codes for the NOTAM which will determine which type of briefing it appears in. Unfortunately we don't see the Q Codes so we can't see when the originator goofed by putting the wroing ones in.

Following my visit to AIS at Heathrow last Thursday I have been speaking to Russell and also to AIS as well.

Russell and I have set up a website at http://www.telecall.uk.com/ais (sorry about the URL but I nicked some space on our own server) Also apologies for the appearance but it has been knocked up in a hurry.

This will give you a good background to what is going on, together with a list of what the various briefings SHOULD do (as we see it) and known problems. If you come up with problems that we have not identified there are links which will allow you to mail us.

As well as our contacts within AIS I have also made contact with the software vendors in France.

Both AIS and Thales Information Systems are receptive to dealing with the issues. Russel and I will try to collate everything and give them the information that they need in a structured way which helps them to resolve the issues.

I spoke yesterday with Phil Bate, the Manager of UK AIS and we are going to arrange a re-visit to look at the mechanics of producing what we all want. To this end I would be grateful if anyone interested could look at the website and respond with feedback that is structured and relevant.

It won't happen overnight but it seems to be going in the right direction.

Mike

QDMQDMQDM

8th Oct 2002, 18:59

Mike and Russell,

Firstly, thank-you to you two for some unbelievable work. AIS and NATS are fortunate indeed to have you two working as unpaid consultants to sort out their complete and utter screw-up of the design and implementation of this system.

Secondly, at the risk of sounding like a mono-maniac, I think a graphical representation, a la Notamplot, is essential if the bog standard pilot is going to consult Notams. Any news on that front? Do they understand how important this is?

Thanks again, anyway.

QDM

Mike Cross

8th Oct 2002, 21:41

Thanks QDM

My own view is that independent developers will get there first, hoever to do the job they need access to the whole of the NOTAM message, including the Q Line, which does not appear in the bulletins that were available in the past, or the current bulletins.

Included in the Q Line are the geographic location and the radius of influence which IMHO are essential to anyone producing a graphical presentation. For example there may be a TRA centred on an airfield, greatly increasing its CTZ for an airshow. You look at the map presentation. See a highlight on the airfield, but you're routing clear of their zone so you don't see it as relevant and blunder straight into the TRA.

I am trying to get us to a position where we have a daily download of an FIR aerodrome briefing and another download of an FIR en-route briefing, with geographic sorting so every airfield can have a standard briefing like the old A1/A8.

I would also like us to have a daily FIR download of the entire NOTAM, including the Q Line. This would enable you to load the information into a third-party software package to produce the presentation you want a la NotamPlot.

There would also be a market for an online service such as AvBrief where they would have live up to the minute data using a leased line into AIS.

Getting AIS/Thales to come up with a graphical presentation is a great idea but as the database is worldwide it's more of a job and likely to require significant development time and cost so I don't think we'll see it in the immediate future. They do read these posts so maybe they'll surprise us!

Mike

Warped Factor

8th Oct 2002, 22:15

mrcross,

One of the links to AIS on your new web page is slightly wrong and it brings up the Institute of Alcohol Studies.

Or maybe that was what you meant :p

WF.

Mike Cross

8th Oct 2002, 23:08

Apologies - my typing fingers think that DNA is an acronym for the National Dyslexia Association, and they are agnostic as well so they're not sure whether Dog really exists either.

Aussie Andy

9th Oct 2002, 09:13

mrcross, rustle - fabulous guys - very impressed, and they are lucky you guys have the time for this! I am willing to help in anyway, but think best I can do is report bugs here as I see them...

Cheers,

Rod1

11th Oct 2002, 18:53

From Flyer Website;

----------------------------------------------------------------------

AIS website offline

11 - 10 - 2002

If you are having trouble accessing the AIS website today (Friday) that's because it has crashed.

We are told that BAA cut the power to the tower at Heathrow last night and since then the AIS website servers keep falling over every time they are fired up. Engineers from Thales are apparently investigating the problem. In the meantime, anyone requiring Notam or wishing to plan a flight can ring 020 8745 3464.

FLYER Comment
Enough is enough. This farce has got to stop - now.

Flyer Ed Nick Wall

-------------------------------------------------------

Good on you Nick.

Rod

Aussie Andy

12th Oct 2002, 08:47

Why on earth have they not provisioned an offsite installation of mirrored servers in an external managed hosting environment (and those associated with the industry will know this is relatively cheap these days!) to provide for high-availability and disaster recovery scenarios? This is normal for essential services... and NATS, as a business built largely on information systems, should understand this.........

Fly Stimulator

12th Oct 2002, 19:30

AA,

My guess is because they:

a) Don't know what they're bleedin' well doing

and

b) Haven't got the sense to employ an outfit who does

and

c) Can't resist fiddling with something that was working to the satisfaction of its users before they messed about with it

Do I win a prize for the right answer?

aidanruff

14th Oct 2002, 08:28

The avbrief site does have the NOTAMs as well and it seems that they are testing out a graphical version as well - the data isn't up to date, but presumably it will be at some point.

However, you *can* still get access to the text version - even though it places the north of England in Scotland...

Mike Cross

14th Oct 2002, 09:20

Phil Bate, Manager UK AIS sent me the following email on Friday evening (11 Oct). Unfortunately it was to my office email so I didn't get to see it until this morning.

Mike

Mike/Russell,

You will no doubt be aware that the web has been off-line today. This began
last night (Thurs) when the BAA had a programmed power interruption to the
Control Tower. This of course should not have caused any difficulties as
absolutely everything here is protected by back-up generators and UPS.
Although we have a suspicion that an individual UPS may have allowed a 'grey
spike' to encroach, we do not as yet know the exact problem but suffice to
say that there was a difficulty with the 'Replica Server' which as you may
recall lies between the ADIMS database and the web servers, protected by a
firewall on both sides. Having struggled locally for some time to get
things going, the supplier was informed and asked to provide support under
the warranty agreement. They have done this remotely for most of the day
with no success (partly due to the efficiency of the firewalls) and decided
a few minutes ago to call it a day. They are flying a team over early
tomorrow morning and we are also going to be in attendance. NATS has made
it very clear that we cannot run a 24/7 service with this level of
instability and that we must at all costs achieve a stable environment from
now on (which in software term we thought we had done up to last night).

Please can I ask you to post something on the various sites explaining that
we really are trying 110% to sort this out and we apologise for the
interruption of service but we are now in the hands of our supplier (who to
be fair is also showing the fullest commitment). We will be staffed to
provide support to those requiring a briefing on the usual number (020 8745
3464 - If busy try 3450 or Fax. 3453) and ask that pilots also try their
'local' international airport flight briefing unit, who should be able to
supply information from the bulletins (A1/A8 etc. - I've heard of them
before!). We will also be faxing and e-mailing pre-prepared briefs to
clubs/aerodromes requesting them.

I can't tell you just how devastating a blow this is to my staff who were
just beginning to look forward to some stability, a reduction in pressure
and the next phase of development. Instead they are now having to bear some
serious individual abuse, which of course is terribly unfair but I guess
understandable. They will endeavour to maintain their cool and will as
always give the fullest support to our customers. We do record the
telephone lines and will use this if we need to in extreme cases of abuse.
I believe that I have the highest quality staff and I have unfortunately
just recently had to accept a resignation and I don't need more of that as
they are almost impossible to replace.

We will be sending an advisory notice via AFTN and FAX.

On other topics, when I get a minute I will talk to you both about the way
forward as I think that I have identified a route which might interest you
and others, also with the support of our Regulator and SRG.

Update to above, sent on Friday at 21:17

Mike

Mike/Russell,

I have just been informed that our engineers here have found the problem and
fixed it. The Web is stable, updating and operating successfully and we
have put the French team on hold. You might still want to place something
on the forums for me though. I am very grateful to the NATS staff involved
in this, who have demonstrated exceptional commitment and ability. We WILL
get there in the end despite some very testing times and our promise to
provide the best possible service is not a hollow one.

Thanks for your help in this.

Regards,

Phil

rustle

16th Oct 2002, 12:46

This just in from AIS -

============================

There will be an interruption of service both today and tomorrow for changes and upgrades.

Today is system changes and upgrades and tomorrow is the fortnightly AIRAC.

In the future we anticipate that there will be only the two planned outages per month for AIRAC and we will combine the engineering/upgrade elements at that time.

============================

You have been warned :)

ianfallon

17th Oct 2002, 10:49

Hi all,

Have been away from the forum for a while. Glad to see that progress is being made in talking to NATs re. the website.

Have spoken to Russell and hopefully if we can get a nice straightforward, web-published feed of NOTAM information that will allow me to easily rework NotamPlot into a v2 that will return us to the land of graphical NOTAM viewing!

Ian:)

Aussie Andy

17th Oct 2002, 11:23

Best news today :)

rustle

17th Oct 2002, 11:50

Nice one Ian.

Have spoken to Russell... Blown my anonymity right out the window ;)

bpilatus

17th Oct 2002, 15:11

ianfallon said Have spoken to Russell and hopefully if we can get a nice straightforward, web-published feed of NOTAM information that will allow me to easily rework NotamPlot into a v2 that will return us to the land of graphical NOTAM viewing If you can get notamplot working again that would be very good

when can we get more news about this ?

Aussie Andy

17th Oct 2002, 15:42

I guess we've all got better at plotting LAT/LONG on our maps since we've had to do without Notamplot eh!? But if you want to save a bit of time, and/or double-check your manual plotting, then here's a way to cheat...

The excellent www.streetmap.co.uk site will accept LAT/LONG input - so you can just go there, select Lat/Long, and then enter the coordinates in the appropriate format.

For example, a current NOTAM is:OTH : FROM 02/10/12 00:01 TO PERM A1823/02
E)(MIL REF) AUS 02-10-DAPLC10/3101/BJ
FOLLOWING HANG GLIDING/PARASCENDING WINCH LAUNCHING SITE INTRODUCED
PARKFARM DOWN, BERKSHIRE
POSITION 513138N 0013429W
OPERATING HEIGHT 1500FT AGL
HOURS HJ
SITE ELEVATION 540FT AMSL.
(MIL REF U2243)

You would have to enter this position into Streetmap as 51:31:38,-1:34:29. Note the use of negative number for West longitude. East longitude would be a positive number.

You then get a small scale map back from Streetmap, highlighting the position entered. Zoom out a couple of steps to a more practical scale, and you will get a results like
this (http://www.streetmap.co.uk/newmap.srf?x=429599&y=181008&z=5&sv=429599,181008&st=4&tl=Grid+Location+429599,181008&mapp=newmap.srf&searchp=newsearch.srf), which is then easy to plot on your ICAO chart with a chinagraph pencil.

So there you go! Still... I'd rather have Notamplot!!!

Mike Cross

17th Oct 2002, 17:23

bpilatus

I suspect that any delay is going to result from the time it takes to get the information made available for download by AIS. Ian is almost certainly going to be able to move a lot faster than they are.

Phil Bate, the manager of UK AIS is aware of Ian's post.

Russell and I recognise that the download is needed and the requirement is in a document that we left them on Tuesday.

If you have a look at http://www.telecall.uk.com/ais/More_NOTAM.htm
you will understand why the download is so important.

AIS have suggested a meeting with us and DAP because Phil does not want to move without DAP being behind the proposal. It's possible that other interested parties within CAA may get involved too.

Due to absence overseas by key people in AIS and DAP the earliest time that the meeting can take place is w/c Monday 4 November. Which gives Russell and I some time to polish up the proposal.

I can tell you that neither AIS nor DAP have raised any objections in principle to what we are suggesting. Getting it implemented is another matter because it is not a feature of the product that AIS have bought so it means going back to the vendor for development.

One of the best things that anyone reading this post can do is write to DAP and AIS/NATS stressing the importance you attach to the raw data download.

DAP is the regulator and AIS is part of NATS so the more united the voice that they hear, the more likely we are to get what we want.

DAP http://www.caa.co.uk/dap/default.asp

NATS contact points at http://www.nats.co.uk/operational/Operations%20Contact%20Guide%20April%2020021.pdf
(AIS are in section D6)

and keep an eye on www.telecall.uk.com/ais - I will be working to update it over the next few days.

Mike

QDMQDMQDM

17th Oct 2002, 17:25

Have spoken to Russell and hopefully if we can get a nice straightforward, web-published feed of NOTAM information that will allow me to easily rework NotamPlot into a v2 that will return us to the land of graphical NOTAM viewing!

You da man.

Respect!

QDM

rustle

17th Oct 2002, 17:28

bpilatus,

you can get more info about what's happening at:

click here (http://www.telecall.uk.com/ais)

(BRL, that ain't an advert :) )

Edited to say:

Aye Carumba, in the 2 nanoseconds it took to write the above mrcross and QDM have posted, so now this post looks silly.

DOH!

Mike Cross

17th Oct 2002, 17:36

As from about 18:30 the site is down. Called the briefing staff and they weren't aware.

They checked with engineers who are "looking into it!"

NATS IT department are responsible for keeping it up.

Mike

At the height of the "Dirty Tricks" war between BA and Virgin, BA were trying to lift the London Eye into position and were having problems.

Virgin hired the Goodyear blimp to fly over the site displaying on its side the message:-

"BA can't keep it up!"

The same appears to apply to NATS IT department.

They got it up again (so to speak) a short while later and it was back in service at 18:50

Aussie Andy

17th Oct 2002, 17:47

17:47 GMT: seems OK to me..?

Whipping Boy's SATCO

17th Oct 2002, 17:54

Working fine (well, as advertised) at 1754Z

Mike Cross

18th Oct 2002, 16:02

Please go to http://www.telecall.uk.com/ais/news!.htm
to see the proposals for sorting out the problems at the AIS web site.

These are being distributed widely to interested parties for comment prior to a meeting to be held in mid-November with the AIS regulator at the Directorate of Airspace Policy, CAA.

There is an email address at the end of the document which you can use to inform DAP of your views.

Mike

BTW the outage last night lasted about 20 mins and AIS have confirmed that they think it was due to loading the AIRAC update again (same thing happened last time)

Aussie Andy

18th Oct 2002, 16:07

URL got a bit distorted try this (http://www.telecall.uk.com/ais/news!.htm)

rustle

22nd Oct 2002, 16:39

Wanted this back on page one :)

More news being posted to www.telecall.uk.com/ais (as soon as I get off PPRuNe ;) )

Keep your comments coming - we have amassed a huge amount of feedback, but the more the better...

Cheers

Aussie Andy

22nd Oct 2002, 16:56

rustle, mrcross - very impressed with the paper you guys wrote. Nothing to add or change. Keep at it!

Mike Cross

23rd Oct 2002, 10:48

Hi Folks

Another update - things are moving.

A meeting has been provisionally arranged for 15 November. The attendees are likely to include AIS, their regulator from the CAA, other interested parties from the CAA, a representative from the BGA and Russell and myself.

The regulator is John Gentlemean, Manager, Aeronautical Charts and Data at the CAA Directorate of Airspace Policy.

He has agreeed that the email address [email protected] can be used for you to make representations and has already received a number of mails as a result of our putting the address on our proposals, which can be found at
http://www.telecall.uk.com/ais/proposals_for_the_future.htm

SORRY! This forum doesn't like long URL's, try http://www.telecall.uk.com/ais instead. Mike

Please make your voice heard by sending an email. Don't get upset if you don't get a response, there are likely to be too many to reply to individually but they will all be taken into account.

If you support our proposal please say so but it is equally important for you to raise your voice if you disagree with what we are suggesting.

AIS and the CAA have come forward and demonstrated that they are ready and willing to listen to your views and deserve credit for doing so. Please give them a constructive response.

Mike

Aussie Andy

23rd Oct 2002, 11:21

Well done guys - I have sent an email to the regulator in support of your proposal, and urge others to do so as well - it took me about 2 minutes.

Best,

chrisN

23rd Oct 2002, 12:34

I have posted the message on gliding forums, as well as sent an email to John Gentleman. Pleased to see "a BGA representative" will be at the meeting (not me).

ModernDinosaur

26th Oct 2002, 18:41

Sadly I was one of the unlucky pilots who suffered the "missing NOTAM" problem during the early days, and as a result I very nearly bimbled through the middle of an airshow, save for an alert ATController. That event, exacerbated by my very low level of experience, resulted in my not flying at all for nearly two months, and even now I get a case of the jitters when I plan a flight away from my home airfield. I'm hoping that will pass given time, and I plan to get at IMC rating early next year to rebuild my confidence somewhat.

My case may be an extreme one, but since the removal of the old A1/A8 bulletins and the consequent effect on tools such as NOTAMPlot and NotamPro, I have noticed that the number of pilots I know who check NOTAMs regularly has fallen alarmingly. Most now complain that it is too hard, too slow or just too awkward, and very few bother to try. It is no longer possible for the flying club I am a member of to print out a concise list of NOTAMs for the noticeboard, nor is it quick and easy to get a chart showing "areas of interest" in the local flying area. Even some of the most experienced and cautious pilots I know have been known not to bother any more, with the obvious attendant risks.

Most pilots previously regarded NOTAMs as a necessary evil, now, sadly, they are regarded by many as just evil and no longer necessary. It will take some time to reverse this, and in the meantime there is an increased risk of airspace infringements and other incidents which could have been avoided. Technology will continue to progress, but hopefully future progress will be tempered by the lessons learnt in the last few months, and the changes will be managed with a more sympathetic eye for those who use the service(s) being "upgraded".

I must offer a huge "thank-you" to all of the people who have been trying to improve the current situation, especially Mike Cross, Russell Howton, Ian Fallon and the all of the people behind the scenes in NATS, the CAA, FlyOnTrack, Flyer, ... the list goes on and on. I hope that all your efforts will quickly provide all pilots with a system which NATS can be proud of. To that end I have added my support to Mike and Russell's list of suggestions through the [email protected] email address - have you?

Cheers,

MD

fireflybob

27th Oct 2002, 00:16

It's not foolproof but I have reverted to the Calendar section of Pilot magazine to find out where the airshows are when I am planning to fly.

The NOTAM situation is a fiasco and heads should roll for this situation.

david viewing

29th Oct 2002, 14:10

Mr John Gentleman

Sir

I am one of the GA pilots adversley affected by the Notam fiasco. I was also the author of the Times letter.

I note that you are quoted as being a PPL who has found the current narrow route briefing "usable". Whilst I agree that some of the more outrageous defects have been removed from the site, I cannot agree with your quoted judgement in this case. In my opinion, the site in it's present form creates a sufficient obstacle in the path of pilots wishing to obtain Notams before flight that many flights are in practice conducted without briefing.

As the owner of a software company, I also believe that there are significant issues about whether an interactive web site can EVER provide the reliability, performance, accuracy and usability that is essential in this application. Nats appear to have bought in to a 'consumer quality' product, but even if they matched the IT investment of say, Avis car rental, I doubt that their IT provider would be willing to financially underwrite the safety of flight exposures created as a result.

The idea behind the interactive web site is entirely laudable. However, the reality is what those who employ programmers sometimes refer to as the 90/10 rule: 10% of the effort yields 90% of the result, but to get the last 10% - well, you can guess. If the project is unsuccessful, well, no problem. But if users actually come on line, then is that last 10% that matters.

The real problem with web sites is success - the more users, the bigger the problems and the more unfamiliar the territory. Solve one set of problems and you just get more users. It's a virtuous circle that burns you alive! Worse, I don't belive the current site has even reached the 90% mark yet, while in a safety critical application like this we need better integrity than most commercial applications.

I fully endorse the initiative being persued by Michael Cross and Russell Howton.

However, I suggest that in order to properly address this issue the following steps are needed:

1) Re-instate the manual A1/A8 bulletins temporarily, but immediately - re-hire the personnel if needed.
2) Suspend development of the web site until it is established that it is actually possible to provide a satisfactory service using this technology. Classify the existing site as 'evaluation only - not for use in flight planning' and refer users to the manual A1/A8.
3) Put every effort into providing the information feed specified by Mike and Russell. I predict that there will be a furious competition amongst programmer/pilots to develop the must usuable interpretive software.

Please make no mistake - lives are being put at risk every day. A computer literate friend, unable to obtain Notam, flew to xxxx only to find the into wind runway closed. Vectored to the servicable runway, he conducted a cross wind landing well into his, and the aircraft's, limitations. If he had crashed, it would have been his fault. But if he had had the Notam, he would have gone somewhere else.

Working together, we are in sight of a useful objective - provision of Notam information that can be used by every pilot without excuse for the first time in UK aviation history. For this, graphical rendition and local filtering are essential. The pilot community is offering this escape route to Nats, and to CAA, 'on a plate'. In return, we must have immediate restoration of the manual A1/A8 bulletins without prevarication, so that no more flights are conducted without briefing when one is available.

Yours faithfully

David Viewing

(Copies of this letter posted to relevant forums)

bpilatus

29th Oct 2002, 14:53

nice letter David but didn't someone say that the A1 and A8 stuff was not available any more?

I hope the meeting in November isn't a waste of time because what do we do then:confused:

does this regluator have any teeth or is this just CAA trying too sound clever before EASA makes them all redundant

what about the software company - are they going to bother sending someone to this meeting or are they going to do a NATS and not bother with GA :(

rustle

30th Oct 2002, 10:41

david,

Just to clarify (if I may) one thing:

1) Re-instate the manual A1/A8 bulletins temporarily, but immediately - re-hire the personnel if needed

These are still produced -- they are not published as a download from the web though.

I asked for these to be reinstated during my first meeting on September 20th.

Hope that answers your first point as well, bpilatus -- as for the other issues you have mentioned:

We obviously trust that the meeting on November 15th is not a "waste of time" as well!

It's probably worth mentioning that the guys at AIS have bent over backwards to assist and answer questions, but the real problems with NOTAM dissemination today is more to do with the technology...

Web sites falling over repeatedly is nothing to do with the team that put together PIBs or collate NOTAMs - it is totally the responsibility of NATS IS/IT and/or Thales. Let us hope they have someone at the meeting to address this issue.

Writing queries against a database is nowt to do with the team that put together PIBs or collate NOTAMs - it is totally the responsibility of NATS IS/IT and/or Thales. Let us hope they have someone at the meeting to address this issue.

Appallingly slow (web) response times have nothing to do with the team that put together PIBs or collate NOTAMs - it is totally the responsibility of NATS IS/IT and/or Thales. Let us hope they have someone at the meeting to address this issue.

Inability to delete old route briefings, change/update passwords or UK/Europe registration details (etc) have nothing to do with the team that put together PIBs or collate NOTAMs - it is totally the responsibility of NATS IS/IT and/or Thales. Let us hope they have someone at the meeting to address this issue.

Publication of raw data-downloads (including Q-Line info) and other information that would enable NotamPlot/Pro and their ilk to function have nothing to do with the team that put together PIBs or collate NOTAMs - it is totally the responsibility of NATS IS/IT and/or Thales. Let us hope they have someone at the meeting to address this issue.

I sense a pattern forming ;)

Cannot comment about the regulator's role - guess we'll know after 15th November.

We have emailed Thales. They have (quite rightly) said that their relationship is with NATS not us (as users) so anything they need to do must come from an instruction from NATS.

Mike Cross

30th Oct 2002, 17:20

For anyone wanting to see more discussion on this subject I have updated

http://www.telecall.uk.com/ais/forums.htm

to include links to all the forums I could find. If you know any more please use the link on that page to let me know where they are.

Mike

david viewing

31st Oct 2002, 12:07

Mike / Russell

I sense that the direction of your discussions with AIS is increasingly pointing to IT issues.

Can I ask what contact you have had with AIS's IT provider, who the provider actually is, and what response you have had so far?

Keep up the good work!

David

Mike Cross

31st Oct 2002, 16:20

David:-

My understanding is:-

The software was supplied by Thales Information Systems.

Day to day processing of NOTAM is carried out by AIS at Heathrow. AIS know all about NOTAM but do not have the knowledge or ability to deal with technical issues such as managing the delivery systems or maintaining the hardware. For this they are reliant on NATS.

Most of my contacts have been with Phil Bate, Manager UK AIS, and his staff. They have been very open, helpful and informative, but cannot speak at a technical level with regard to the delivery system.

As Russell has said, we have passed on our proposals to Thales IS and I know that they are monitoring the feedback in the forums. However they decline to enter into discussion with us because it would breach the confidentiality of their contract with NATS. I fully respect that position.

The person introduced to Russell as the Project Manager for the IT side is Alan Burrill of NATS Airport Services. Unfortunately Alan will not communicate with us on a technical level either. I understand that Alan does not have the AIS website as his primary responsibility.

To be fair to AIS, Phil Bate has been away from his office since our suggestions were delivered and has therefore not been in a position to respond. He should be back in the next day or so.

The lack of engagement on a technical level does worry me and I have passed my concerns on to John Gentleman, Manager Aeronautical Charts and Data at DAP and also to Phil Roberts, Assistant Director Airspace Policy 1 also at DAP. Contact details for both of these gentlemen are published by the CAA in CAP 723 (Directory Guide) which can be found at http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP723.pdf

I have also passed my concerns on to Roger Budgen, Head ATO Customer & External Relations at NATS. He is listed, together with his contact details in the NATS Operations Contact Guide for Customers which can be found at http://www.nats.co.uk/operational/Operations%20Contact%20Guide%20April%2020021.pdf

The worry is that we have had no technical feedback at all from NATS. No questions have been asked about our suggestions and no-one has said whether they might be technically flawed, easy, or difficult. All of which leaves us wondering whether the meeting on the 15th will result in any action or merely a thank you and an assurance that our proposals will be borne in mind for the future development of the site.

We do have a couple of weeks left before the meeting and now that Phil is back I hope we will see some signs of movement towards an action plan. It will be a very poor result indeed if three months after the site went live we are still left in limbo.

Hope this answers your question.

Mike

bpilatus

31st Oct 2002, 18:35

well it could have answered Davids question but it raised more questions for me.

Why won't the IT people tell you if the proposals can be applied?

If they cannot be applied, where does that leave the users?

are these the same IT gurus who set up swanick?

Why if Thales see this forum has nothing been done. If my company got such bad publicity I would want it fixed now not in three months time.

I reckon this is just stalling. When you have your meeting NATS will tell you that it cannot be done or they cannot afford it or some other garbage and they could have told us already.

and my other question from before. what happens if nothing happens after your meeting? What next?

they have had too much time to think of excuses we should have kept pressure on instead of them seeing no comments here since you guys started your meetings.

Mike Cross

1st Nov 2002, 11:59

Hi Bpilatus

>>Why won't the IT people tell you if the proposals can be applied?

Assuming that's not a rhetorical question :-) .....

I didn't say they wouldn't tell us, just that they hadn't commented on our proposals. The information on feasibility and costs would have to come from Thales IS, which would mean AIS have to ask Thales IS in order to get the answer. I don't know whether AIS have done so yet but hope that they will have the information in time to provide an informed response at the meeting on 15 Nov.

>>If they cannot be applied, where does that leave the users?

I think it unlikely that the proposals CANNOT be applied. Their application might be seen as too expensive to implement or undesirable on policy grounds, in which case we would be back where we started.

>>are these the same IT gurus who set up swanick?

As far as I am aware Thales IS were not involved with Swanwick. I believe the main software contractor was Lockheed Martin. I have no way of knowing whether any of the individuals working within NATS were involved with Swanwick. However I suspect it would be fair to say that NATS was the customer in both projects.

>>Why if Thales see this forum has nothing been done. If my company got such bad publicity I would want it fixed now not in three months time.

So would I!
[email protected] would probably be a good place to address this query, quoting the product name ANAIS and naming the UK AIS website. If enough of us asked we might get a statement.

I suspect also that NATS expected the implementation to be a lot easier than it has been and it may be that the resources they allocated are overstretched as a result.

>>I reckon this is just stalling. When you have your meeting NATS will tell you that it cannot be done or they cannot afford it or some other garbage and they could have told us already.

I've now had the opportunity to speak to Phil Bate, who has assured me that there will be positive proposals at the meeting and that we can expect attendance from NATS senior management.

>>and my other question from before. what happens if nothing happens after your meeting? What next?

I suspect an all-out blitz on the media and MP's with attendant bad publicity for NATS, the CAA and Thales IS. Let's hope it doesn't come to that.

>>they have had too much time to think of excuses we should have kept pressure on instead of them seeing no comments here since you guys started your meetings.

We have been trying to keep the pressure on, hence my postings asking people to make their views heard by the relevant people.
I know a lot of people have already e-mailed [email protected] with their views - please keep it up.
Keeping the debate alive on the forums is very important too, the more people who post the better.

Many thanks for your input

Mike

drauk

4th Nov 2002, 16:41

I disagree with David's comments about a web based application being too unreliable to deliver NOTAM information.

Think of the web based systems which, for example, transact billions of dollars worth of securities on a daily basis for the world's investment banks - do you think they'd do this if it couldn't be made reliable enough (for reasonable cost)?

Having said all that, the AIS web site has some way to go. I've been monitoring it (automatically) for 48 hours now and in that time it has been available only 67% of the time. In particular it was completely unavailable for over 7 hours starting at 22:51 last night.

bpilatus

4th Nov 2002, 17:57

mrcross I have read all you have said but I think the all out blitz on the media should have started before now. it is three months gone and nothing is any better for the users.

The CAA, NATS, the regulator, Thales should all hang there head in shame at this joke of a system

and still no comment from anyone except you guys which makes me mad. why don't people understand that users want information about when it will be better NOW?

I have sent email to vfrcharts but got only a standard answer which must be automatic?

I think CAA don't bother anymore with GA as I said before because they will not be around much soon when EASA is here in the UK.

I will make a post about what to do and see if its only me thinking that NATS should be worried about users and not money for once.

drauk how do you measure this availability? do you ping the web or what do you do? I want some better information to give to my politician and maybe something might happen sooner?

drauk

4th Nov 2002, 18:30

The system monitors it by making an HTTP request (i.e requesting a web page) - as such it checks that web server process is serving requests rather than simple checking that the server is up. The check is done from a variety of servers, with connectivity to each being provided by different providers.

Mike Cross

4th Nov 2002, 22:07

The FAA have just issued an advisory circular with regard to the provision of NOTAM via the Internet, you can find it at

http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsitems/2002/ac00-62.pdf

It includes, with reference to becoming a Qualified Internet Communications Provider (QICP) the following requirement:-

2. GENERAL. A person or organization that accomplishes and maintains the following as they pertain to the provider's facility (i.e., all hardware, software and Internet connectivity under the applicant’s direct control) may become an approved QICP:
a. Reliability means users are able to retrieve requested data from the provider with no outage lasting longer than 10 minutes, and no more than 30 minutes of total outages (including outages due to maintenance) in any continuous 3-month period.
b. Accessibility means turnaround time within the provider's facility. The provider should be capable of initiating transmission of requested data during transactions with 100% of its users within 2 minutes.

Nearly three months down the line Thales IS and NATS are nowhere near achieving this standard.

Mike

DamienB

5th Nov 2002, 09:18

drauk -

Think of the web based systems which, for example, transact billions of dollars worth of securities on a daily basis for the world's investment banks - do you think they'd do this if it couldn't be made reliable enough (for reasonable cost)?

Could you point me towards any info on such systems, as I wasn't aware any bank was dumb enough to entrust that sort of thing to a web server?

Financial systems aren't on the WWW as a rule, and if your bank's one is... change banks! They are closed systems kept well away from the wilds of the internet, and cost huge amounts of money.

NATS certainly aren't going to invest in anything similar for a mere NOTAMS site. Seems to me the only reason they won't bring back the old A8 etc. is that they would lose face in doing so - modern British businesses seem far more interested in face-saving than getting the job done.

Mike Cross

5th Nov 2002, 09:48

DamienB

Try
https://ibank.barclays.co.uk/
http://www.natwest.com/frontpage/dhtml/index.htm
http://www.hsbc.co.uk/ebank/default.htm
http://www.lloydstsb.com/services/internet/0,1011,general,00.html

for starters

Mike

FlyingForFun

5th Nov 2002, 10:00

I used to work for a company which claimed to have the largest website in the world, in terms of dollars transacted per day.

The number of hits on the website was pretty low, though. Ok, so we may have traded several million dollars in a single transaction, but it only took a few of those transaction to start racking up the turnover figures. And reliability was obviously important, but not mission-critical, because our counterparties could phone us if the website went down. (Our disaster recovery procedures in the London office included disabling all of the UK-based products on the (US-based) website, and asking our counterparties to pick up the phone while we resolved some technical difficulties.)

If you want examples of high-reliability high-traffic websites, I suggest you look at sites such as Yahoo. Can't remember the last time I couldn't access Yahoo. It's traffic levels are far higher than the AIS pages, and it has a much larger database.

FFF
--------------

QDMQDMQDM

5th Nov 2002, 10:18

If you want examples of high-reliability high-traffic websites, I suggest you look at sites such as Yahoo.

Exactly. When was the last time Amazon went down? The number of page views the AIS website gets is pitiful comared with any commercial web organisation, or even the Met Office, which I have never found unavailable.

As for the idea that confidential information shouldn't be available to view over the web, e.g. financial info, that is a notion from history. Wake up, as they say, and smell the coffee.

QDM

Evo

5th Nov 2002, 10:34

High reliability is routine these days, as are e-banking and share dealing websites etc. - www.schwab.com is a good example of one that routinely processes tens of millions of shares a day without problems. Nothing wrong with that, but it costs. A lot. For Amazon, Yahoo and any e-Banking/e-Trading business these costs are essential - no website, no business - but I suspect AIS would choke if you told them the cost of the hardware, software and people to do it. The problem is that we are now getting used to what a good eCommerce website can do, so we expect it all the time.

We had an interesting project going with FFF's former employer to feed their traders information in real-time, anyplace, anywhere and to process their response. Reliability was critical, as they it would cost them millions if a link went down and a trader was left holding options he didn't want, and the cost was well into 8 figures (USD, not Lira :) ). That's the sort of money Amazon et al. spend too....

rustle

5th Nov 2002, 10:35

At the risk of ruining your chips guys, please remember that the banks and Amazon(s) of this world have extremely reliable websites because of two very important reasons:

1. If they fall over you WILL go elsewhere

2. They transact through them, thereby making money (strongly linked to 1 above)

The Yahoo(s) and other "service" sites make money from advertising.

So, are NATS/AIS to sell us the NOTAMs to pay for the site?

Or are pop-up ads de-rigueur?

No.

Neither thanks.

Just SORT IT OUT!

Or roll back to known good.

Edited to add this:

(I appreciate that NATS is no longer "Government", per se)

BRL if this breaches copyright, please edit it out...

From Ananova:

GOVERNMENT WEBSITES UNDER FIRE

Ministers are being urged to suspend their £5 billion e-government programme amid claims that hundreds of official websites were experiencing "serious problems".

An independent survey of 20 "flagship" Government websites found that three-quarters needed "immediate attention" - with the Prime Minister's own site one of the worst offenders.

It warned that the Government's target of fully on-line government by 2005 was "not realistically achievable" and urged ministers to halt the web aspects of the programme while existing faults were rectified.

The 200-page review was commissioned by the Interactive Bureau - a website strategy and design agency - and the research carried out by Porter Research which also publishes an annual review of the FTSE-100 web sites.

It said that its findings were a "strong indication" that hundreds of Government and quasi-Government websites were in need of attention in one area or another.

The 10 Downing Street site was said to be "a mess - in need of a thorough overhaul from top to bottom".

"What is the point of the Prime Minister - the prime mover in bringing the Government to the people via the web - having a site which announces the opportunity for foreign journalists to ask him questions, yet gives no opportunity for members of the British Public to do so ?" the report complained.

It gave the website a score of just 40.75% - marginally higher than the Driver Vehicle and Licensing Agency which was rated the worst of the lot.

The Number 10 site scored so badly "because its navigation is inept, because of a lack of attention to detail, because it is poorly maintained, because the coding of it is of a low standard, because whole sections of it are inappropriately named, because of its slow speed of loading, because it does not work properly with some browsers - and because it allows no provision for members of the public to contact either the Prime Minister or his office".

In contrast, the best of the 20 sites surveyed - the Department for Education and Skills - scored 78.5%.

(c) Copyright Ananova Ltd 2002, all rights reserved.

DamienB

5th Nov 2002, 11:11

The online banking sites mentioned here do not transact 'billions of dollars of securities on a daily basis'. They also fall over with regularity and occasionally have massive - and occasionally well publicised - security leaks. Hardly a good example. You have to realise there's a difference between stuff aimed at consumers and the behind-the-scenes systems that do the really big stuff between banks etc.

As mentioned the sort of server setups that people like Yahoo and Amazon have are way, way beyond anything that NATS could afford - or would want to provide. And even they fall over and get things wrong.

For a safety critical system like this the old text file download was great because there were so few points at which the information could end up with bits missing. NATS have put all the load on their own site, chopped up and hidden the data and put a hideous front end on it - when leaving the processing to the user of the data would make more sense - if only financially.

A few different servers offering the old text file download would have been an acceptable solution to reliability problems - the load on a small text file from a few thousand pilots every day is hardly going to stretch a single server let alone a cluster of them. But add your hideous front end with all of the processing required just to serve that, and the processing to muck about with the data... and deal with authenticating users... stick it all on a single box and watch it fall over. Madness really when the existing system worked so well.

QDMQDMQDM

5th Nov 2002, 11:15

rustle,

re Points 1 and 2, this is exactly the problem. A government monopoly leads to blind indifference to the needs of consumers and they've now made the problem worse by not publishing the A1 / A8 data anymore. If they opened up the field to competition with commercial providers, people would quite rightly go elsewhere, but as it is AIS just sits and delivers a crap, unacceptable service three months after launch. In the commercial world they would be out of business.

If they publish the data, I am sure that after all this furore someone would take the challenge and deliver us a commercial service. If the alternative is no NOTAMs or the rubbish AIS service, I would be prepared to pay a few quid a year, as would most members of this forum I suspect.

QDM

FlyingForFun

5th Nov 2002, 11:33

Russel,

Re point 1 comparing commercial sites to the AIS site, you said of commercial sites:

If they fall over you WILL go elsewhere
And if the AIS site falls over? It puts our safety at risk. I'd say this is at least as important.

The cost of running a site such as Yahoo or Amazon is not related to availability. It is related to the fact that these sites hold a massivate amount of data. Lots of data requiers lots of storage space to store the data on, which is expensive. They are also global sites, requiring the data to be replicated to vast number of servers around the world. In the case of Amazon, customer orders must be taken in real-time, and backed up in real-time - again, this is expensive.

All that is required to maintain availability of the AIS website is two independant servers. This is not expensive - I don't know the details of the hardware they're running, but we may be talking 5-figure sums, certainly not 8 figures like Evo was talking about. (I'm not familiar with that project, Evo, but I'd guess the cost was due to the need for real time replication.) Real time replication is not required for this application - the NOTAMs can be manually copied from the main site to the backup site after they are periodically updated. And the procedures for handling a failure of the main site would then be to contact the ISP and ask them to re-direct the domain name to the backup site.

There is no technical reason why the AIS site can't be made reliable for a very small cost. Lots of people on this thread are comparing apples with oranges. (I probably shouldn't have mentioned Yahoo - it's a good comparison in terms of reliability, but not in terms of cost, for the reasons I've mentioned.)

Of course, making the information useful is an entirely different prospect to making it available.

FFF
----------------

Evo

5th Nov 2002, 11:44

Rule of thumb is that cost scales as the square of the number of nines in the percentage uptime. If 90% uptime is OK, 99% costs 4 times as much, 99.9% costs 9 times as much etc. Reliability isn't all that cheap, but we aren't asking for the sort of five-9's reliability that Amazon look for. 99.9% is only down an hour a year after all :)

(edit: I seem to be making more posts about computers than flying at the moment. Bl**dy weather... :) )

drauk

5th Nov 2002, 11:56

The sites mentioned (like personal online banking) by others probably don't transact billions of dollars a day. But at least the examples provided show that web sites can provide a fairly reliable service. They do go wrong sometimes, just as your fax machine might, but by and large they are online well over 99% of the time.

There are plenty of examples which do transact very large $ amounts over the Internet. They do have to pay to get this reliability, but I was responding to a comment which suggested that web applications couldn't be reliable enough for NOTAMS. And I personally know of finance sites that transact very large $ amounts who pay 5 figure sums per year.

Lastly, there are plenty of e-commerce sites around whose hosting bill is a few thousand pounds per year that enjoy > 99% uptime.

It is true that the AIS site is not commercial - you won't go elsewhere in disgust. And it is safety critical. But, as others have said, simple text based NOTAMS could be made available from a number of servers for a tiny cost per year.

The US standards mentioned earlier are well above 99% uptime, but if the AIS site was available and responsive (leaving aside for now the question of actually being able to get the data you need, just for the sake of this discussion of hosting) 99 times out of 100 and you had to use a simplified alternative for those other times, you'd probably be reasonably happy.

For those that care, AIS is now at 91% for the last 4 days. The big hit was a 7+ hour outage, which makes me think that they don't monitor it or can't resolve problems remotely.

rustle

5th Nov 2002, 12:16

Calm down, calm down (in my best LPL accent :) )

I think it's obvious where myself and Mike have been coming from throughout this period of "NOTAM uncertainty" :p

I actually agree with everything you guys said about reliability, I was merely pointing out the differing financial clout between a cash-strapped QUANGO and a megaprofit bank/online seller.

Since day one (August 2002) I've been banging on (and on) about rolling back to the "A" series PIBs, parallel developing the new super-site and getting some real user testing/feedback (I refer the honourable gents to my post on www.pplir.org)

My point 1 previously was to illustrate the problem - we have zero choice at present with regards NOTAM info. Sure, you can get a half briefing from the US MIL sites, even European sites running the same software, but you cannot get your local NOTAM except from AIS-UK.

AvBrief were supposed to have their unadulterated feed from AIS by September - don't know why they haven't - I'll ask.

They will be well pleased to know that they'll have a raft of new subscribers! (QDM)

Will these be the same forum members who, of a total of > 100 views only 7 bothered to vote on the "is 3 months long enough" poll?

=================================

Copy of email to AvBrief - sent October:

Paul,

I have no issues with you using any ideas we've collected to enhance AvBrief.

My mission (and I chose to accept it) is to make NATS/AIS do the right thing and provide useable base information.

Value-add and enhancements they cannot do, and nor should they - over to you guys and the Ian Fallons of the world.

Rod1

5th Nov 2002, 13:02

rustle

Spoke to Paul a few days ago and he is expecting to be up and running for test purposes within 7 days.

Rod

Mike Cross

6th Nov 2002, 13:43

AIS did a software upgrade today. No change in functionality but whatever they did has lit the afterburners - speed increase is dramatic.

Mike

QDMQDMQDM

6th Nov 2002, 17:03

They will be well pleased to know that they'll have a raft of new subscribers!

Well, the value-added service is the one that provides a graphical representation. Notamplot step forward.

QDM

alphaalpha

6th Nov 2002, 19:54

I have just tried my local 'narrow route' VFR notam print from AIS. It was much faster (but it was 20:50Z, so not many flight planners accessing the site?). Also the number of 'VRF' notam error and duplications seem to have shrunk.

Looks like a big step forward. well done AIS, Russell and Mike etc.

rotorcraig

7th Nov 2002, 20:42

Given the recent performance improvement, the system at least now seems to be consistently available, but...

Why if I specify Narrow Route width 30nm routing EGBK DCT EGBK am I not informed of military exercise PHOTON EAGLE which passes within 10nm of the airfield tomorrow morning, consisting of 18 helis operating below 1000ft QFE??!!:eek:

Conversely if I specify Narrow Route width 10nm routing EGBK DCT DTY DCT EGBK, which is actually a smaller radius, the exercise is listed (albeit embedded within 2 pages of junk).

The guidance in the FAQ suggests that in order to search a 50nm "local area" around a home airfield, it's necessary to specify both a search radius of 50nm and also invent a "DCT x DCT y DCT" route specifying NavAids 50nm North and 50nm South of the field.

That's some whacky programming??!!

Aussie Andy

8th Nov 2002, 08:42

rotorcraig - thats shocking..! http://www.stopstart.freeserve.co.uk/smilie/unhap.gif

Until now I'd been thinking the system was beginning to settle down and had become confident that, although its not is not user friendly and the user interface sucks, I could get what information I needed from it.

But your tale indicates that we can't trust the system not to exclude information it should give us... I am going to maintain habit of keeping print-outs in case needed to defend myself!

rustle

9th Nov 2002, 11:44

rotorcraig,

Any chance you have copies of these briefs (paper or electronic) that you could email/fax to me?

Don't forget our meeting is this coming Friday - let us have your thoughts, both good (speed increases) and bad (you name it)

rotorcraig

10th Nov 2002, 09:48

Rustle,

Have recreated what I can from retrospective searches and the specific NOTAM that I held onto.

On it's way to you by EMail, hope it's of use...

RC

Mike Cross

11th Nov 2002, 10:56

I have had a look into this and it appears that the site will allow you to set the Departure and Arrival aerodromes the same on a Narrow Route Brief. However if you do so it will NOT return any en-route info.

If however you put a second location in, either in the route as RotorCraig did or by specifying different AD's then the en-route info does appear.

An easy way to reproduce this is to set a narrow route EGHN (Sandown) to EGHJ (Bembridge) which is all of 3 miles. You will find you get the en-route. If however you set EGHN to EGHN DCT you get no en-route.

Clearly this has the potential for a serious incident and I have flagged the problem up to Phil Bate at AIS.

Mike

ModernDinosaur

11th Nov 2002, 18:48

I don't know whether to laugh or cry. It seems that Mike Cross has (after three months of head-scratching) managed to solve my personal "missing NOTAM" problems, the results of which are quite widely known from my other posts.

When I first started using the new service, I'm was advised (by a member of NATS) that rather than entering three different flights for a triangular route, I could enter a single route starting and ending at the same place, with the other two airfields listed as alternates and appropriate turning points. It now transpires that this can eliminate the "en-route" information about, for example, airshows....

I wonder if this is the reason behind many of the other "missing NOTAM" reports??? Even if it is not the cause of all the reports, given that an awful lot of PPL flying is "local area and return to base" it could easily account for a reasonably large number of the reports.

I have to agree with Mike's recommendation that this is a very serious bug and must be addressed with some urgency. Thanks to Mike for spotting this and alerting users.

Yours slightly relieved,

MD.

Aussie Andy

11th Nov 2002, 21:42

But this just highlights the failings of the systems design - the User Interface should not be so poor and ambiguous as to allow this confusion!

Talk about a ***** unprofessional design... I reckon they've been oversold on what the system actually does, versus what they'd like it to do, and have failed to do a good enough job of analysis to ascertain the degree to which functionality provided matches with the needs of the systems GA users. Just plain lazy - and s h i t e !

Mike Cross

12th Nov 2002, 14:02

I turned up an interesting bit of info today in the Thales website, it's a Press Release:-

@IS E-Services, a new solution from Thales Information Systems in partnership with Austro Control

Paris, 29/01/02
@IS E-Services (@ES), a new ANAIS module, is available allowing Civil Aviation Authorities (CAA) to offer briefing-services through Internet and Intranet based solution.

The @ES has been developed with the latest Internet technologies (Java Application Server, Web browser Client, Identification Systems...) and provides Self-Briefing and Home-Briefing features for private pilots and small aircraft operators. This new solution which includes a rich and powerful interface, suits non-specialist AIS (Aeronautical Information Services) users. It is also scalable and available on different platform allowing any aviation authority to provide such services.

Based on @ES, Austro Control will offer new Self-Briefing and Home-Briefing services starting in April 2002 to their customers.

This new solution is also being installed in Germany, South Africa, and United Kingdom, proving the strong position of THALES IS in the aeronautical environment.

If you look towards the end of Austro Control's bulletin at http://www.austrocontrol.at/ais/english/bulletin.html
you will find the following:-

AUSTRO CONTROL IS PRESENTLY TESTING A SELFBRIEFING-SYSTEM WHICH ALLOWS TO FILE ATC-FLIGHTPLANS AND TO OBTAIN A COMBINED AIS AND MET-BRIEFING FROM SELFBRIEFING STATIONS AT THE AUSTRIAN AIRPORTS. SOON THIS SERVICE WILL ALSO BE AVAILABLE VIA INTERNET. PILOTS ARE INVITED TO TESTRUN THE SYSTEM AND GIVE US THEIR FEEDBACK. FOR DETAILS CONTACT AIS/ARO.

mmmmm...... wonder why it's 7 months late?

Mike

rustle

12th Nov 2002, 18:47

I wonder if [email protected] have seen this thread?

rustle

18th Nov 2002, 15:14

Answering my own question, but I believe they have seen this thread.

Hello Austria :)

Mike Cross

18th Nov 2002, 16:38

For an update on the meeting that took place at AIS Heathrow on Friday please go to:-
http://www.telecall.uk.com/ais/news!.htm

Then get back here and start posting!

Mike

QDMQDMQDM

18th Nov 2002, 22:09

Russell,

You and Mike need some kind of award for all that you're doing. If I wasn't an insufferably tight git I'd be putting my hand in my pocket right now. ;)

It's a shame to see AIS so woefully unprepared and complacent for the meeting:

"Phil Bate accepted the criticism and explained that a workshop was being arranged between AIS and Thales AIS to address issues. They did not yet have a date fixed but he expected it to take place before Christmas.

AIS were pressed to give a timeframe for the work to be carried out but said that they were unable at present to do so.

It was pointed out to them that they had been in possession of the proposals for some time and they should have been able to come to the meeting with some idea of timescale.

Mike Cross asked Phil Bate what discussions had taken place between AIS and Thales IS with regard to the proposals. Phil Bate said that that was a matter for the Project Manager but he was not aware of any formal requests to Thales IS to carry out any investigation of the proposals.

Mike Cross pointed out that a copy of the proposals had been passed by him to Thales IS well in advance of the meeting."

And it doesn't sound like the raw data will be made available and the consulting with the CAA legal dept is just a fob off. Amazing, really, that this fellow Bate can talk about his worries with regard to liability issues if the raw data is made available. One wonders where he'd stand himself with relation to corporate manslaughter charges if somebody comes a cropper as a result of this shambles.

The complacency is breathtaking, but well done you chaps.

QDM

Fly Stimulator

18th Nov 2002, 22:31

QDM,

Exactly. The minutes paint a picture of bureaucratic obfuscation and complacency which would do credit to the writers of 'Yes, Minister'.

Depressing that our safety is reliant on the likes of Mr Bates. Thank goodness for rustle and mrcross, but perhaps they need to take some sharp implements along to the next meeting.

Aussie Andy

19th Nov 2002, 06:51

Well done Mike & Russel, your efforts are appreciated.

I am not shocked by the minutes though... it will take time. I think we all know plenty of organisations (even some well funded IT groups within some large investment banks I could name!) where projects go wrong, take a lot of time to set right, and yes people come to meetings not fully prepared!

As irksome as it may seem, rather than pour scorn onto this particular hapless / incompetent (strike out which ever emotive word you prefer to - it makes no difference) lot, the more productive way forward in my view is to recognise that it will have been difficult for them to have come forward to admit their mistakes and/or weaknesses; and that it is a very good sign that they have engaged at all with us as outsiders (ok, customers!)... it would have been easier for them to refuse the meeting and just issue statements that they were dealing with it!

So I say lets not scare them away from the table, lets be thankful that M&R are energetic enough to engage on our behalf, and thankful that the regulator too hasn't hesitated to get involved. Who knows what pressures these poor b*ggers at the coalface may be under in terms of lack of budget, lack of training, lack of expertise, or whatever.

I know the need for blame is strong - I feel it too as this fiasco has exposed safety issues and could have been avoided with better planing and better software than that which oozed from somewhere in the bowels of Thales [yuk!] To see how it could/should be done for contrast, take a look at the facilities provided in Airservices Australia Brieifing Service (http://www.airservices.gov.au/brief/) which includes a full area listing combining both wx and NOTAMS (this example is for the southern half of NSW): http://www.airservices.gov.au/brief/html.asp?/cgi-bin/avreq?area=21 - an easy "one-stop-shop" for all the briefing info needed for a flight within that region (vast - at least as big as the UK!).

But my main point is that even though what has delivered to us been is sub-standard and frustrating in the exteme, I believe that we have to take a positive attitude at this stage in order to have people do what we want them to do. Its M & R's positive and constructive engagement that seems to have made progress thus far - lets not take the easy route of just pointing out the obvious which I fear may be counter-productive.

And no, I don't work for NATS ;)

Mike Cross

19th Nov 2002, 17:24

It's a very frustrating situation for all of us. Having been closely involved I hope this will shed some light.

AIS bought the software as an "off the shelf" solution from Thales IS. I understand that Phil Bate was not the manager of UK AIS at the time that decision was made.

We know that the bulk of the problems are to do with availability (outages) and the results that are obtained from the software.

Thales IS should be roundly condemned for having provided software that is still not working properly three months AFTER it went live. (Any bugs should have been sorted out BEFORE going live)

Anyone know a good way of exerting pressure on Thales IS?

Because the Project Manager declines to discuss anything with me and Thales IS, for resons of client confidentiality, cannot; I can only give you a fairly sketchy view but to me it looks like this.

AIS are not computer experts and certainly can't set all this up on their own. Thales IS are the software vendors and they and NATS IT department are responsible between them for providing and maintaining the hardware and software platform which AIS use to deliver the goods. That hardware and software platform has performed in a manner that is unsatisfactory to a significant proportion of users for over three months. That failure has to be the fault of NATS IT or Thales IS, or both of them.

AIS have overall responsibility for the project but don't have the in-house expertise themselves to fight their own corner. Their Project Manager actually works for one of their suppliers, which is not a situation that you would expect to see in normal business.

AIS certainly have overall responsibility but we won't see a significant breakthrough until NATS IT and Thales IS start delivering.

Mike

Rod1

19th Nov 2002, 20:11

QDM

>>And it doesn't sound like the raw data will be made available and the >>consulting with the CAA legal dept is just a fob off.

I agree that Nats are probably expecting the legal angle to delay things. However do not give up on this. The regulator, John Gentleman, was well fired up to get this done ASAP. His own words were “I will get this started first thing Monday”.

Remember 95% of the raw data is already available via a number of other sources, including the US military. We have supplied John Gentleman with sample s/w for him to play with so he can get a feel for what is possible with a modern user interface.

The number one request we received from pilots was to get NotamPlot/Pro working again. We need the raw data to do this and we will keep pushing to get it. Fortunately there does no appear to be any technical problem with the provision of the raw data, so our unhelpful friends at Nats IT and THALES IS should not be too much of an obstacle.

Help us keep up the pressure!

Rod

QDMQDMQDM

19th Nov 2002, 22:01

Help us keep up the pressure!

What's the best way for us to do that at this point, Rod?

QDM

Rod1

20th Nov 2002, 12:27

QDM

Any or all of the following;

http://www.nats.co.uk/operational/Operations%20Contact%20Guide%20April%2020021.pdf gives peoples names addresses and e-mails within NATS

Lodge a formal complaint with NATS, details at http://www.nats.co.uk/operational/ComplaintProc-%20Ed2-Aug-02.pdf

Write to the Secretary of State for Transport, Alistair Darling or to your local MP http://www.parliament.uk/directories/directories.cfm also further details available from http://politics.guardian.co.uk/person/browse/mps/az/0,9379,,00.html

Write to Anne McIntosh, Shadow Minister in the Department of Transport http://politics.guardian.co.uk/person/0,9290,-3830,00.html to give her ammunition. She has already asked a parliamentary question of the Department of Transport and written to the Chairman of the CAA. Her husband is a Director of Delta Airlines.

File an MOR if you think that the system is causing safety issues http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP382.pdf

Post comments or carry out any activity that is critical of NATS and/or Thales Information Systems for failing to have the system working properly three months after it went live.

And last but not least, my number one suggestion, right now. A politely worded letter, on paper, to John Gentleman, in support of the raw data download and NotamPro/Plot style presentation.

Details for John (the Regulator) are at; http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP723.pdf

Rod

QDMQDMQDM

20th Nov 2002, 14:00

Thanks, Rod. I'll get onto the last one right away and urge others to do the same.

QDM

Dusty_B

20th Nov 2002, 14:15

AltAIS (Logon Page) (http://www.benchapman.co.uk/preflight/altais/)

Some of you may be aware of 'AltAIS', a simple web site I set up in September to help people get into the AIS more quickly, and even access the Area Briefings without JavaScript enabled (though you do still need cookies).

Well, over the last couple of days I've written another page that parses a given Notam to insert the latitude and longitude of each ICAO airfield code that it recognises.

A few Notams still slip the net, namely those about danger areas (I haven't found a source that gives their coordinates), En-Route Nav Aids (it is harder to decode these, as the idents could easily be confused with plain text), and the very few about other locations where no lat and long is given.

AltAIS NOTAM Parser (http://www.benchapman.co.uk/preflight/altais/parser.asp)

Once you have your Notam on screen from the AIS site, copy and paste the content into my 'Parser' page. Hit the 'PROCESS' button. Wait a couple of seconds for it to do its magic. Finally, copy the parsed Notam text from my page into NotamPro. Heypresto. Look at all those red blobs!!!

I have never used NotamPlot, so don't know if it works the same way. Le me know if a simple change will make the difference.

rustle

20th Nov 2002, 14:25

Before you all put pen to paper (or finger to keyboard) you may want to have a browse through some of this lot:

http://www.eurocontrol.int/ais/symposium/index_symposium.htm

http://www.eurocontrol.int/ais/symposium/press%20release%20dgs.pdf

Extract from press release:

With the objective to achieve ever higher levels of safety, speakers from Europe and around the world confirmed that Aeronautical Information Services (AIS) users now needed high quality aeronautical information to be processed and delivered more quickly to the customer using electronic media. Other speakers outlined emerging technologies that are paving the way to new and innovative ways to originate, process, publish, integrate and use aeronautical information.

Dusty_B
The danger area, navaid &tc. co-ords and radius of influence are in the Q-Line as well.

Mike Cross

20th Nov 2002, 15:10

Dusty B

Danger Area co-ordinates
http://www.ais.org.uk/aes/pubs/aip/pdf/enr/2050103.PDF

Mike

Dusty_B

21st Nov 2002, 08:08

Thanks Mr C.

I spent about 2 hours writting them in by hand last night... locating each one using the PDF, and estimating where the center of each mass is by reference to the chart.

...Two hours, and I only managed to get through 50N and 51N. Still, as it happens, that is half way through the document (page 9 of 18 :eek: )

...Two hours, and I forgot to upload it last night!!
Now I've got 8 hours at work without anything to distract me :(

Oooh. Top of page. I'll post the URL again:
www.benchapman.co.uk/preflight/altais/parser.asp (http://www.benchapman.co.uk/preflight/altais/parser.asp)

rustle

21st Nov 2002, 10:26

Ben, fantastic.

But to my mind there's something illogical about this process.

I'll walk through it, see if you can see what I mean...!

(1)
Data at AIS has Q-Line, wherein amongst other things are the latitude, longitude and the radius of influence of the NOTAM data.

(2)
For no good reason, other than software unsuitability, this useful information is not presented to the (web) users of the data

(3)
A.Another, using data provided by NATS/AIS, creates a lookup table to recreate the latitude and longitude of the NOTAM data by parsing the ICAO code information provided :rolleyes:

IS IT JUST ME :confused:

Dusty_B

21st Nov 2002, 11:02

Illogical is said A.N.Other having to resort to copying BY HAND all the information published by NATS because Copy has been disabled in all their PDF files. :mad:

As MrCross said in a private message, it is a slap in the face to NATS for refusing to give out the Q-Line... :(

If I get the chance to be more adventurous, I'll try to do more with it, such as bringing 'un-plotted' notices to the top of the page, or highlighting them in some other way.

Mike Cross

21st Nov 2002, 12:42

Dusty B said

"Illogical is said A.N.Other having to resort to copying BY HAND all the information published by NATS because Copy has been disabled in all their PDF files. "

On 3 October I attended a meeting at AIS Heathrow which was attended by the Project Manager, Alan Burrill of NATS IS/IT. Prior to the meeting I had prepared and submitted a paper which included:-

"UK AIP
.pdf files for the UKAIP do not permit text selection, preventing “cut and paste” which is a useful feature for anyone writing documentation or software that refers to AIP or uses the data contained within it. For example, someone wanting to write a decode program for the AIS abbreviations in GEN 2-2 would need re-type around 1,400 abbreviations and their meanings!"

In our suggestions for improving the site (http://www.telecall.uk.com/ais/documents/AIS%20Proposal%20(web).htm) we included:-

"We suggest that the .pdf files making up the AIP might be modified to allow text selection. This would allow users to "cut and paste" parts of the AIP into other documents, allowing for example a pilot to print his own ICAO encodes/decodes for his kneeboard."

This was published on 18 October.

On 16 October AIS added a new abbreviations page to the site in PDF format. It had text selection enabled and I wrote to Alan Burrill the Project Manager the following day saying:-

"Thanks for the site updates, I have updated our site to clear off those issues that have now been dealt with. I did notice that we now have text selection capability on the abbreviations extract from the AIP you put up - thanks for that as well."

I did not have a reply, but guess what - the ability to select text was removed.

NATS have a Code of Practice for Customer Consultation (http://www.nats.co.uk/operational/ComplaintProc-%20Ed2-Aug-02.pdf) which states:-

Commitment to our customers
National Air Traffic Services Limited’s aim is to be the world leader in the
provision of en-route and airport air traffic management services. To this end,
we are always looking for ways to improve by actively listening to our
customers' needs and acting upon them. We do this a number of ways
including holding regular formal and ad hoc customer consultation group
meetings on a wide range of subjects. Building on this, NATS is also keen to
develop one-to-one relationships with customers in order to enhance its
understanding of your organisation’s needs.

Gives one a nice warm feeling doesn't it.

Mike

rustle

21st Nov 2002, 13:46

Dusty_B -- check your PMs

This any use?

EG D001 Trevose Head
ALT 1000 Activity: Helicopter Exercises including winching (Air Force Dept).
501918N 0053042W - 502400N 0053900W - SFC Hours: Mon-Thu 0800-2359, Fri 0800-1800 Winter (Summer 1hr earlier).
503200N 0053400W - 503930N 0052400W - Service: DACS: St. Mawgan APP on 126.500 MHz when open. Other
504300N 0051230W - 503830N 0050430W - times DAAIS: London Information on 124.750 MHz.
501918N 0053042W. Remarks: Nil.
‡ EG D003 Plymouth
Up to Activity: Ship Exercises / Target Towing / Firing / Pilotless Target Aircraft
501001N 0034740W - 500339N 0033430W - ALT 55000 (Navy Dept).
494105N 0034912W - 493719N 0040938W - SFC Hours: Mon-Thu 0800-2359, Fri 0800-1600 Winter (Summer 1hr earlier);
501001N 0034740W. Subject to and as notified.
co-ordination Service: DACS: Plymouth Military on 121.250 MHz when open; other
procedures times London Mil via London Information on 124.750 MHz.
above Remarks: Pre-flight information may be obtained from Plymouth
ALT 22000 Operations, Tel: 01752-557550.
‡ EG D004 Plymouth
Up to Activity: Ship Exercises / Target Towing / Firing / Pilotless Target Aircraft
500339N 0033430W - 500103N 0032910W - ALT 55000 (Navy Dept).
494653N 0031655W - 494105N 0034912W - SFC Hours: Mon-Thu 0800-2359, Fri 0800-1600 Winter (Summer 1hr earlier);
500339N 0033430W. Subject to and as notified.
co-ordination Service: DACS: Plymouth Military on 121.250 MHz when open; other
procedures times London Mil via London Information on 124.750 MHz.
above Remarks: Pre-flight information may be obtained from Plymouth
ALT 22000 Operations, Tel: 01752-557550.