SAM NOTAM Brisbane

[noclue]

Question re SAM NOTAM at Brisbane.

NOTAM C944/19 alters the SAM to 950’/5km if “any runway not available”

NOTAM C1156/19 says “01L/19R not available under construction”

Does this mean (if all else is above board) that the SAM for Brisbane is 950’/5km until the NPR is open next year?

[morno]

Ohh stop reading it so literally

You can't even land on 19R/01L, let alone even conduct an approach to it.

What do you think the logical answer is?

[noclue]

I know the logical answer.

However, with smoke making vis 2.5-4km for most of this morning I didn’t have an alternate nominated. legally, did I need to?

[Angle of Attack]

Well if either 14/32 or 19L/01R is unavailable or there is a displaced threshold in effect, you would need an alternate if the forecast had viz under 5000m. I know where your coming from but technically the new runway hasn’t opened yet so it doesn’t apply.

[De_flieger]

Originally Posted by morno

Ohh stop reading it so literally

I would've thought (hoped?) that notams would be one of the few things that should be able to be read literally.

Hypothetically, if the notam had said "RWY 14/32 not available due to tarmac damage from spilt oil", but I was unable to land on 14/32 anyway due to my aircraft type, there would be a legal requirement to carry that alternate under those conditions. From a practical perspective the unavailability of a bit of tarmac that I cant use anyway shouldn't realistically affect the alternate minima for my planning into Brisbane, although legally it would according to that notam, which doesn't seem particularly logical.

[Horatio Leafblower]

There I was, worried about Surface to Air Missiles....

[wishiwasupthere]

Same NOTAM at Sydney. So with 07/25 available with 40 mins notice, if they’re using 16/34 do you need to carry 40 mins fuel to use the SAM??

[Mr Proach]

Originally Posted by wishiwasupthere

Same NOTAM at Sydney. So with 07/25 available with 40 mins notice, if they’re using 16/34 do you need to carry 40 mins fuel to use the SAM??

Not that I have analysed it in detail however, it reminds me of the phraseology "behind the landing ..... line up behind". Perhaps the NOTAM could include "any RWY not under construction is NOT AVBL". Expanding on the topic of NOTAMS, given that the teletext machine is yesterday's technology and the electronic medium has been around for some time could NOTAMs be generated in plain English (supplemented with diagrams where appropriate)?
I would assess that to be an improvement to the AIS NOTAM. Perhaps there is something about bits and bytes that I don't understand however, this aspect of the AIS appears to be behind in utilising the capabilities of today's technology to provide a more effective presentation of NOTAMs.
Wouldn't it be easier to read and digest NOTAMs in full text plain english free of abbreviations and acronyms with the really significant ones in RED (e.g. runway closed due disabled aircraft etc)?
Comments invited and welcomed from the regulator & service providers. What are the issues?

[Lead Balloon]

https://ops.group/blog/the-problem-of-bull****-notams/

https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-n...notams-garbage

[Capn Bloggs]

Originally Posted by Leafblower

There I was, worried about Surface to Air Missiles....

Me too.

I've always thought of the subject as SPAM.

[Pinky the pilot]

There I was, worried about Surface to Air Missiles....

Likewise. My initial thought upon reading the thread title was along the lines of ' ..someone loose with a SAM 7 (or latest version) in Oz??'

[noclue]

Looks like they’ve spelled it out now