NOTAM - Please Help

[Mike Cross]

May I ask for your assistance please?

We are very close to being able to close off the NOTAM issues but we need feedback from you. In particular on the new VFR briefs, the backup arrangements, and the Fax download.

Four new VFR briefs are now available from www.ais.org.uk you will find them listed on the NOTAM drop-down menu. They are intended to replace the old A1/A8 bulletins for display at aerodromes.

Two issues have been raised with us:-
1. The FIR briefs are not sorted in the manner we requested. We asked for a South-North sort of localised NOTAM (as per the old A8 bulletin), with FIR-wide NOTAM in another section. What we have been given is a sort of the localised NOTAM, first by type (there are 5 types) and THEN geographically, North-South rather than South-North.
2. Glider pilots have indicated that the period of validity of the brief is too short. I checked this morning and got a validity period of six and a half hours. Some glider flights last longer than this, and equally a pilot operating away from base may find this too short.

Are you happy with these or should we ask for modifications? My personal preference would be for the sort to be geographic (South-North) and then by type and for the validity period to be 12 hours. You may have a better idea.

Secondly, we now have VFR/IFR briefs available at http://www.nats.co.uk/operational/pibs/index.shtml as backup in the event of the AIS server being inaccessible. Any comments on these?

Thirdly fax download is available on the following numbers:-
VFR BRIEF ON LONDON FIR DIAL 020 8557 0064
VFR BRIEF ON SCOTTISH FIR DIAL 020 8557 0065
VFR BRIEF ON LONDON AERODROMES DIAL 020 8557 0051
VFR BRIEF ON SCOTTISH AERODROMES DIAL 020 8557 0052

The procedure is to use the polling facility on your fax machine or else to dial manually and press the START button on your fax machine when answered. I have had problems using a Panafax UF315 but am not aware of anyone else having any problem. Feedback would be appreciated if you could try it out. Currently the system can only handle one call at a time on each of the numbers so you may get engaged tone if it is already in use.

Work continues on improving usability and browser compatibility.

Please give us your feedback. Recent reports of a failure to read NOTAM costing a pilot UKL 600 in fines and costs for infringing TRA highlight the need to get it right.

Thanks in advance for your response

Mike Cross

[BRL]

Hi Mike. I have stuck this for you for a week or so. :)
P.E.

[Aussie Andy]

Hi mrcross, I just tested the polling using a Panafax UF-770 to dial 020 8557 0064 (London FIR VFR brief) and it worked OK, albeit giving a very lengthy report - 14 pages - which took nearly 7 minutes to receive. My only complaint besides the one you have already mentioned (i.e. it would be better to have the thing sorted first by LAT/LONG then by type) is that the list is further sorted into two sections, the first "Specific FIR" (radius of influence 30NM or less) and "General FIR" (radius of influence greater than 30NM) - this is an arbitrary distinction and doesn't help and together with the above means the entire list has to be sifted through to be sure not to miss anything pertinent to one's planned route.

I think the one-click PIBs on the AIS website and the backup briefs on the NATS site are good.

Excellent work to all concerned!

Andy

[Mike Cross]

Thanks Andy

the list is further sorted into two sections, the first "Specific FIR" (radius of influence 30NM or less) and "General FIR" (radius of influence greater than 30NM) - this is an arbitrary distinction and doesn't help and together with the above means the entire list has to be sifted through to be sure not to miss anything pertinent to one's planned route

The reasoning behind this is:-

All NOTAM have a geographic centre and a radius of influence. The geographic centre of something affecting the whole of EGTT would be somewhere in the Midlands, with a radius big enough to cover the entire FIR. If it affects both FIR's it's geographic centre is even further north.

On Friday I flew Popham to Sandown and would have ignored something in the Midlands as being irrelevant to my intended flight, however it would have been relevant if it affected the whole FIR.

The cut-off of 30nm was chosen so that you should only need to search from 30nm north of your intended area of operation to 30nm south in order to find anything that might affect you.

You then need to check the second section to find anything affecting a wider area.

Hope this makes sense

Mike

The

[Aussie Andy]

Thanks Mike,

Understood: makes sense,


Andy

[FlyingForFun]

Mike's explaination makes perfect sense. I wonder how easy it would be to re-train the entire pilot population to know that they have to search for everything within 30 miles of their track in the first half, and the whole of the second half? Especially instructors, who will need to pass this on to the next generation...

I have had an opportunity to use the new format, and it's a huge improvement. Even with the sorting by type first (what are the 5 types, anyway? Some of them are obvious, some less so) it only took a few minutes to check the Notams, compared to around 1/2 hour previously.

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

[Mike Cross]

FFF - Here they are:-

AGA - Aerodromes, Air Routes & Ground Aids
COM - Communications
RAC - Roles of the Air and Air Traffic Services
NAVW - Navigation Warnings
OTH - Other

Useful page for understanding the acronyms and abbreviations is http://www.ais.org.uk/aes/pubs/aip/pdf/gen/10202.PDF Takes a short time to download so don't give up.

The education issue is one that we, AIS, and the CAA recognise. You should see more information being put out through various media in the coming months. In the meantime if your airfield is one that doesn't put the FIR brief up, please ask them to. Today's EGTT brief runs 14 pages at the default settings on Internet Explorer, reduces to 12 if you use View/Text Size to reduce the font and will go even smaller if you reduce the margins.

Mike

[Keef]

Looks fine to me. I think I agree with Mike on sorting sequence. Happy.

I just pulled up a narrow route briefing for EGMC to EGKB (IFR), max alt 4500 feet. I got what I assume is all the relevant stuff, but also a load that is very irrelevant, for example about upper airways routings - including Amsterdam to Shannon FIR limits.

I reckon the following are not relevant:
B0554/03
B0347/03
B0544/03
U2628/02
B0084/03
B0077/03 (not even sure what this is telling me)
L0817/03
B0591/03

Leaving those off would have reduced six pages to about two.

Still a heck of a lot better than before the "gang of three" began their efforts, though.

[Barney_Gumble]

Just one point concerning......

validity period to be 12 hours

I tend to plan my flights the evening before say at 8pm. I check NOTAMS and then leave final wx check + winds aloft until the next morning. It would be nice to have a bulletin that would cover the whole of the next day i.e. 24 hours as the 12 hours would only take me to 8am.

I notice the NATS operational covers 48 hours, the one I looked at this evening did at any rate.

Lastly, I agree that geographic then type filtering is the best way.

Cheers

Barney

P.S. I assume that I should not have to check the NOTAMS again directly before stepping in the cockpit if my flight is and was covered by the period of the NOTAM I initially looked at?

[Mike Cross]

BG

Thanks for the input

How far in advance you make the check is something for which there is no hard & fast rule. These days as soon as disaster strikes an Emergency TRA is slapped on to keep the press helicopters at bay.

If there was say a rail crash at 23:00 with a TRA being imposed at 23:59 and you bimbled into it at 15:00 the next day "they" might wave the big stick. On the other hand a check the previous evening for a flight starting at 09:00 might well be considered reasonable.

One hopes that something of that ilk would in any case be broadcast on the FIS and by nearby ATC units at regular intervals.

NavAids do go out of service. There was a fatal accident where the AAIB found the pilot was relying on a VOR that was notammed as out of service and flew into high ground.

So I suppose the answer, as with the weather, is to work from the most up to date info that you can reasonably obtain.

Microsoft Word has a useful tool under Tools/Track Changes/Compare Documents which would allow you to quickly compare the brief you downloaded and checked last night with this morning's one and highlight the differences.

Mike

[Barney_Gumble]

Cheers Mike,

I am going to change my practice to check NOTAMS with wx immediately prior to flight.

Therefore 12 hours validity seems sensible.

Andy

[Tinstaafl]

I'd like a 24hr version as well.

I have a problem with the +/- 4000' setting for notam applicability on the route briefings.

My flights involve up to F100 down to S.L. Can't find a mechanism that lets me set a min & max. height band for notam selection/sorting.

I'd like a 24hr version as well.

I have a problem with the +/- 4000' setting for notam applicability on the route briefings.

My flights involve up to F100 down to S.L. Can't find a mechanism that lets me set a min & max. height band for notam selection/sorting.

Still find problems using Opera or other standards compliant browsers... :*

[Mike Cross]

Thanks for that Tinstaafl

You can find out how the 4000 ft filtering works here (http://www.ais.org.uk/aes/en/image/faq.pdf)

Basically on a Narrow Route brief from departure a/d to first waypoint and from last waypoint to arrival a/d you get everything from surface to FL120. For the remainder of the route you get +/- 4000 ft from the entered FL.

If you can't get what you want by manipulating the waypoints you will need to use the Route Briefing, which enables you to set upper and lower FL's but will give you the entire FIR.

As mere pilots we are not allowed to see the raw data from which the briefings are derived. However if you go to the US Department of Defense NOTAM site (https://www.notams.jcs.mil/) and select Text Type "Raw" and put EGTT in as the ICAO identifier you will get the raw data, for example:-

B0172/03 NOTAMN
Q) EGTT/QAZCD/IV/NBO/E/000/020/5113N00136W005
A) EGTT
B) 0304190800
C) 0304271600
D) APR 19 20 AND 27 0800-1600
E) THRUXTON ATZ CLOSED DUE AD UNLICENCED

In the line starting Q) (the famous "Q Line") 000/020 is the effective height band as FL (sfc to 2000 ft)

Also locked in there is all sorts of information that would allow programs like NotamPlot and NotamPro to be really effective. You can find a Q Line decode here (http://www.telecall.uk.com/ais/More_NOTAM.htm)

We're still lobbying to get this info released. NATS/AIS have no objection it's the CAA who are delaying a decision.

Browser compatibility is a priority. As you will appreciate this is commercial third party software. Some of the site functionality is dependent on features that are supported by IE5 and Communicator 4.7 or later with JavaScript and Cookies but not by other browsers. It's therefore not possible to cut out the offending code without crippling the site. An independent survey of browser usage can be found here (http://www.upsdell.com/BrowserNews/stat_trends.htm) the figures indicate that around 95.5% of page accesses are made using browsers supported by the AIS site. AIS are exploring methods of improving this percentage.

24 Hrs seems to be the consensus for validity

Mike

[FlyingForFun]

The figures indicate that around 95.5% of page accesses are made using browsers supported by the AIS siteLies, damn lies and statistics.

Having tried a non-compatible browser once or twice, I think it's logical to assume that a user would not try it again. On the other hand, having tried a compatible browser once, a user is far more likely to return many times, thus pushing this number up.

Far more useful would be the percentage of IP addresses which have only ever attempted to access the site using a compatible browser.

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

[flyingwysiwyg]

Far more useful would be the percentage of IP addresses which have only ever attempted to access the site using a compatible browser.

FFF,

With my limited knowledge, I don't think that would work. Your average member of Joe Public (e.g. me) gets assigned a different IP address everytime they log onto the internet. I could log on one day and use IE5 or 6.0 and log on the next day with Netscape Navigator or something else. I would be the same user with a different IP address in each session.

FWyg.

(edited for a few tarrible spilling mistooks)

[Aussie Andy]

The stats mentioned are internet-wide, not site specific... now can we all come down from our soap boxes, and stop shooting the piano players please!?

[Tinstaafl]

"...come down of our soapboxes...."? Why should we? It's only because people like mrcross, rustle et al. were vociferous that these problems were addressed at all at AIS.

Remember: WE pay an arm & a leg for their notam etc 'service'.

The point is that this is an operational necessesity. There shouldn't be built in restrictions of access caused by proprietary coding.

Opera - and many other browsers - is quite capable of using Java, Javascript etc etc. The argument about the site won't work doesn't wash - had it been written with open useability in mind ie standards compliant.

As we move to a greater & greater reliance on electronic access to data they will have no choice but to adhere to standards. Devices for accessing information are becoming more prevalent AND more varied. They're NOT all PCs with IE/NS.

Bear in mind that as the customer it's US that ultimately pay for this. AIS are there for US. Further down the line, AIS as the customer of Thales are the ones who get to call the tune with THEM.

Further, the govermental policy is towards online access of data. Even their current Microsoft-centric move to online data is now being criticised & reviewed due to the difficulty of ensuring full access to everyone. (Forget where I read that. BBC? Business review? It Something like that. It's been in several places anyway...)

I'm certainly not having a go at mrcross. His efforts have been exemplary. I'm very much grateful for what he & the others have done. I shudder to think of the mess we'd be in were it not for you gentlemen.

Rather, it's the sheer incompetence of the AIS implementation that gets my goat.

I've come to think that it would be money well spent for AIS to reneg on the Thales contract, using whatever get-out clauses might be available, and buy Australia's system in-toto. The Oz one isn't perfect either, but certainly shines all over Thales' offering.

Back to the useability...

1. I can now get the site to mostly work with Opera 7. The drop down menus now work ie now allow selection from them however remain in the foreground when a menu option is not selected. The menu doesn't disappear unless a menu item is selected.

Interestingly, using Opera 6.04 I can get to the notams page but only by cutting & pasting the URL derived from another source. You can't tell me that a working drop down list is a site critical difficult problem, a change to which will require recoding the whole shebang.

Maybe Thales programmers need to re-open their books about HTML/Java/Javascript/PHP or which ever mechanism they chose to implement the lists.

2. Instead of an arbitrary +/- 4000' buffer why isn't it able to be specified? Perhaps defaulting to +/- <something> but a different buffer able to be selected eg +/-5000'? Alternatively, limiting altitudes in the full brief page can be chosen so how about cutting & pasting that bit of code?

Most pilots on a route aren't too interested in the whole of the country/FIR so using the full brief isn't appropriate. Just the route + alternates, at the levels they'll fly. BTW, who decided on 4000' & based on what criteria? If a single buffer had to be chosen I'd have gone for +/- 5000': That allows notam access for the entire airspace that most unpressurised/non-O2 equipped a/c can use. Still prefer the ability to choose the buffer amount though...

3. There needs to be an ability to update a previous briefing. That is obtain only the changes since the full breif was obtained. The system requires us to input a briefing ID and, now sensibly add date/time data to the output. A mechanism that can combine/filter/compare this information would be very useful.

4. The various icons don't seem to have some form of 'tooltip' description that is meaningful. The sort of thing that pops up as a tooltip is

Address http://www.ais.co.uk/aes/controlbriefing?briefing?HF_ACTION=helpback&HF_HELPFIELD=altaerodm&HF_PAGETYPE=briefing_route&VF_ITEMID=EDLW|2003-04-17 00:00:00.0|V

Similarly, there needs to be a handler routine that explains what's wrong when the form won't submit due to something not filled out correctly. The case I just had turned out that it didn't like the number '1' as my chosen briefing ID. Damned if I know why.

The form wouldn't accept a mouse click on the 'submit' button, but I could get a Javascript window pop up by right clicking & selecting 'open page'. If I mouse-over'ed the button & pressed enter it dropped me back into the form without any explanation of what's wrong.

[Aussie Andy]

On the whole, I agree that they should make their system more standards compatible and not reliant on proprietary MS desktop components. But we are where we are for now... and with the stats cited above there just isn't enough pressure to make this change quickly with what we might regard as relatively "unenlightened" software vendors!

You seem to have gone to a lot of trouble to get Opera to work... is this because you don't want to download MS IE6 (http://www.microsoft.com/windows/ie/downloads/critical/ie6sp1/default.asp) or because you are running or Linux or some other desktop? In which case, have you tried to use Mozilla (http://www.mozilla.org/releases/)? I'd assume it would have similar problems.

For sure MS are starting to lose their iron-clad grip on the desktop, recently citing Linux as their greatest threat (and not only on the desktop!) and so eventually the world will catch up with the more open and standards based approach. But the popularity of MS existing products means that there isn't enough pressure on vendors as yet to always support the more open alternatives.

I understand what has been said that a re-write of the web-UI to be totally cross-browser and standards compliant would be a major task: a suggestion would be to put up an a simple "text only" style web-UI with static rather than popup links to the key menu items. Would be pretty quick to add, surely: we're talking about what, twenty odd links and a small maintenance overhead?

Hope this helps!

Andy

[Tinstaafl]

Hi Andy

I run Win95, 98, XP & Linux, with Linux being my preferred OS.

Opera is great because of its much more enhanced security features and cross platform availability compared to IE.

I'm certainly with you about the 'widget-ness' of the current site. A text only version is a great idea!

I'd prefer that as a near-as-dammit guaranteed access by everyone. That would ensure the maximum access to all. Especially using static links to the relevent page.

Maybe next time they'll sort out the fundamentals before jumping on the 'gee whiz' wagon.... :rolleyes:

[PPRuNe Towers]

A quick boffin note to ask you not to rely on stats regarding the browser type. As someone involved in running a fairly substantial site;) ;) we know all too well the problems of platform compatibility.

We absolutely support the calls for testing and functionality across all browsers. We do that constantly here at the Towers. Discerning users avoid the mainstream offerings just as soon as they try a decent browser.

It may also help you to challenge the propeller heads coding for you whether the browser they use actually reports what it really is:ok: :ok:

For many years browsers have had the ability to 'appear' as altogether different ones in such records. Thus treat all such data with a very large pinch of salt and look after the customers instead. Directly challenge the software suppliers with this information and enjoy the resultant shoe shuffling........

They majority of you enjoy the fruits of PC equipment compatibility and resulting low price versus performance. Make the sods continue the process to its only logical conclusion - code to enable similar choice in the browser they use. On a PC, Mac, set top TV, phone or PDA.

Code for choice across all platforms and not the commercial interests of corporate giants.

Regards from the Towers
Rob Lloyd

[Mike Cross]

Thanks Rob, all good useful stuff which will be fed back up the line.

Just discovered http://mysite.freeserve.com/ais2plot/index.html which re-formats the AIS backup briefings on the NATS website for use in NotamPlot (http://www.notamplot.flyer.co.uk/)

Which brings me back to our ongoing battle for release of the Q Line referred to in my last post on this thread.

I have previously warned the CAA that, whether they like it or not, people will produce tools to manipulate the data. That prediction is now true.

Given that, it is best that they work from good information in a database format rather than attempting to work by parsing a text file that was never designed for the task.

We asked for this in October last year. CAA are still sitting on the fence.

We now see Ais2Plot (http://mysite.freeserve.com/ais2plot/index.html ) NotamPlot (http://www.notamplot.flyer.co.uk) NotamPro (http://www.notampro.com/) and AltAIS (http://www.altais.org.uk/) all parsing text files because the CAA still refuses to sanction the release of the Q Line.

The Q Line was designed by ICAO to facilitate the filtering of NOTAM by electronic data processing specifically for the purpose of producing Pre-Flight Information Bulletins.

Comments anyone?

Mike

[BRL]

Unstuck and back to the top....... :)

[Aussie Andy]

Well, we know all about the problems with the AIS website discussed here - many of which have been, or are starting to be, addressed - but I just thought it was about time to make mention here of the improvements that the system has brought, and for which I believe we should be thankful. If we don't pass on positive feedback to AIS, then the individuals who work there may come to believe they have a thankless task, and give up! We wouldn't want that...

I have just been doing the planning for a trip over the coming weekend (wx permitting!) which will entail flying through 6 FIRs, and will involve 7 destination airfields, and as many alternate airfields.

Compared to last year on a comparable foreign trip, the task of gathering NOTAM information for a number of FIR and airfields is far simpler, because you can get it all in one place in and one format. And because you can re-run the same query several times, you can do most of the work in advance, then check for late changes before departure relatively easily.

So here's my vote of thanks for what is an improved service. Thanks!

Andy :O

[Mike Cross]

Your comments have been passed back to the guys at AIS Andy, Im sure they will be much appreciated.

Why not come and visit them on 12 June at Heathrow (http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=88705)?

Mike

[Aussie Andy]

Why not come and visit them on 12 June at Heathrow? Would love to but have to work... Anyway, have had a nice note of thanks from the NATs guys :)

[Checkboard]

hmmm .. actually wish I had read/seen this thread earlier!

I have been playing with the AIS site for some time, and usually with Win XP/IE, but running webwasher to remove ads, speed up net access and filter cookies. Getting the cookie filters right was OK, but I couldn't get menu access until I also allowed the javascript access to the cookies on my machine. It took a while to work this out, cutting and pasting urls from the source code an so fourth to decide on what was wrong.

Perhaps their logon page - the first one you see - should advise that access isn't possible without IE or Netscape, with cookies for the site allowed, and java filters off?

Once you get it working, it's not bad. Similar to Tinny, I didn't get an error message when I also used a 1 in the briefing ID field - which was frustrating - but today I did get a popup error message when I used my name? I guess that is a fix. Well done that man!

A briefing update page would be a good thing - log on, enter your ID number/whatever and get just the updated Notams.

Why the CAA consider the Q field as some sort of secret, I will never know - always has been available in Oz. What do they think they are protecting???

Linked weather from the site along with the Notams seems an obvious "wish list" item. It's pretty poor when you get better service for free from other countries' sites (no logon required, full text, linked weather etc etc) than you can from the "home" site.

P.S. Why does it take three pages to get to the UK AIP, when all of the interviening pages are simply the same link repeated?

[Mike Cross]

Thanks Checkboard

To be fair it does say in the FAQ's that JavaScript & Cookies must be enabled.

Briefing update is available. Go to the Briefing Handbook, select the briefing and choose "Update".

BTW anyone wanting a last minute update can call the Duty Officer (H24). If they quote the PIB ID No which is printed on the brief they obtained, the Duty Officer will check for any new NOTAM not included in the original brief.

Most of the problems now are to do with usability, i.e. making it intuitive in operation. "Handbook" to me is an Instruction Book, have suggested they change it to "Saved Briefings" or similar.

Your problems indicate that it is still not intuitive or easy enough to navigate. However it is infinitely better than it was last August.

If you think this one is fun try https://www.homebriefing.com/aes/login.jsp
You can register and get some free credits to try it out (yes you do have to pay for NOTAM!)

You might also find some interesting stuff here (http://www.telecall.uk.com/ais/)

Mike

[HelenD]

I used the NOTAM service last weekend to get info for a cross channel trip. My only comment is that when I tried to use the route section it complained when I put the French designator in with a message saying all codes must start with eg

I would have loved to come on the visit since I still dont really understand NOTAM's but as somone has already said I have to work:{

[Mike Cross]

Possibly you are registered for UK only?

If so, as there is no mechanism for updating your registration you will have to re-register, choosing a different username and password.

Sorry you can't make the visit.

Mike

[CitationJet]

To see how some of the rest of the world does it, look at

http://www.airservices.gov.au/brief/areabrf.htm

All you do is click on the numbered area, or areas in which you want to fly to get a comprehensive briefing. This includes, in order;

Area forecast
All aerodrome forecasts (TAF/METAR/TTF) for the area
All FIR NOTAMS
All location specific NOTAMS for places within the area
All Head office NOTAMS if selected
A list of all locations in the area which do not have current NOTAMS

Could not be simpler.



This

If you want headoffice NOTAMS tick the HeadOffice Notam box.

[Aussie Andy]

CitationJet has a good point in that the Australian system is very easy to use. I used it when out there earlier thius year and it was great. Its also possible to access the same info through phone, fax or web in a consistent way, and to get specific NOTAM for a route instead of the entire area listings.

One thought though is that these big long listsings may not work as well in Europe as the density of airfields, FIR, Navaids, etc. in a given area is much higher here than in Australia where things are much more spread out geographically.

Andy