Do QF pilots read NOTAMS?
 

In recent days, QF pilots have been questioning ATC regarding faulty or non-response radio frequencies.

EG:

NOTAM YPAD

Adelaide Clearance 126.1 not available due to Tower Maintenance, contact Ground on 121.7 for clearance.

QF crew “Ground no joy on 126.1”


I know, small and trivial, but given the chance VB or REX crew would be hammered for doing such things.

Answer;

Those QF pilots obviously did not but, as a species I'm sure QF pilots read notams.

What a stupid topic:bored:

Get a life!

Saw a RAAF King Air get airborne for VOR approaches at MDG this week with the VOR NOTAMed as US.

Are QF shorthaul Pilots unprofessional??

More importantly, is a DJ a "musician" ?

I think the incident that prop refers to is particularly poignant because it was also on the ATIS that 126.1 wasnt available. Not a good day for reading notams or listening to the ATIS! Everybody's human - they're just lucky their mistake was very minor.

Who the fark has enough time to read (and fully understand) all the NOTAMS on YSSY ?!?

Is there any way they could be simplified ??

Topper so you're one of the many from QF who've been asking about the 34L glide path in recent days?

RTFN

but I do sympathise - 5 pages of NOTAMs seems excessive.

Let he without sin cast the first stone.

No company / operation is immune from missing a NOTAM.

The most memorable for me was when CS RWY was NOTAM n/a from midnight local to 0400 due lighting replacement.

A certain large domestic carrier - no longer with us - launched out of ML nonetheless. For some reason, the controller in CS noticed the Dep just out of ML and relayed down the line the status of the RWY.

Undeterred the 737 continued on.

Coy Ops in ML were rung and advised that the RWY was closed - not subject to recall. Acknowledged by Ops.

737 continues on.

Port Authority notified that traffic was inbound and about 90 minutes out. But we are closed - wires everywhere - no lights, and doing some resealing.

Message passed to aircraft - response: "Require Runway 15"!

Advised to divert to TL or BN. TL 'not suitable' (no ground handling), and insufficnent fuel for BN (WX).

Much scrambling of wires, contractors and earthmoving equipment.

Runway was operational 3 minutes before this idiot crossed the threshold.

After landing rang to complain about how he was handled - and.... requested track shortening on his departure to make up for lost time. Departure???

Response given was you can expect track shortening on request when you get airborne - after 0430.

Unbelieveable? I would have thought so - except the next evening...... same flight departed ex-ML again.

Port Authority delayed further works until a frank discussion with said company.

I'll have to fess up here, I haven't read a NOTAM since about mid March!! :E Not through lack of desire to do so though! :(

Prop's ???? = son of Scumfish.

Gosh uncommon sense in my day that woulda got ya a whole pot of tea and a packet of biscuits.....for two!:}


Over 1000 posts and I obviously don't want a Personal Title which I could get just by clicking here.

oh..oh tin got no money.

Safety Compromised
 

Interesting topic.

Notams these days seem to be raised to cover failures to comply with legislation and procedures. Arse covering everywhere.

No wonder pilots don't bother to read them, or rather miss the one's that actually should be raised.

If aerodromes were anywhere near serviceable, you wouldn't need so may notams.

I've often pondered this as well.
My conclusion is that they should simply publish a list of things that work.
It'll be less than five items, so the list will be several thousand items shorter.

Why can't they publish NOTAM's in some sort of logical sense.

E.G With the five pages or so on Sydney, why don't they put the new ones first rather than hidden at some random position within the novel that we are presented with everyday ??

Are the new ones not at the bottom?

With the ones older than 7 days reduced to 1 line?

Or do they do notams differently in Sydney to anywhere else in the country?

Cheers, HH.

:ok:

18 Wheeler.

So true especially with regards to AYPY where virtually nothing is working at the best of times.

Flew through Moresby's airspace a few months back and no contact with anyone at all.
A quick call to YBBN confirmed that their entire communications had went down and that we had to make TIBA broadcasts until in contact with San Francisco and provide our own traffic separation.
I believe AYPY Tower was about the only frequency working.

Perhaps they ought to at least prioritise the YSSY Notams so that important ones arent lost in the pile.

Uncommon Sense.

Never a truer word spoken than your quote:

I too have been guilty of the very same crime that these other aviators have been accused of.

Fortunately no, it was not serious but it really got me thinking and determined that it wouldn't happen again.
Sure it happened on a short(er) sector and what I did learn was that although I always go through all the NOTAMS on a longer sector, I would more thoroughly peruse all of the NOTAMS personally on shorter sectors pre flight.

To make matters worse I was performing training on a command candidate and missed the NOTAM entirely myself.
I was to personally blame and set a poor example for my trainee who didnt have to buy a meal or drink for the remainder of the trip.

Time pressures, monotonous reams of never-ending NOTAMS, distractions and it can happen to anyone.
It called Human Error and none of us are immune.

Silly me thanks for putting it into logical order. :O

There Has to be a Better System!
 

Pilots are definitely either not bothering to obtain Notams at the pre-flight stage or, if they do, they are not reading them.

Recently, I have been conducting a "private" survey of IFR pilots and IFR training institutions re the approved DA for the Rwy 26 ILS at YMEN. Invariably all the pilots, AND IFR INSTRUCTORS, are still operating to a DA of 490 feet/1.5km.

They are obviously unaware of this NOTAM which has now been out for about 3 months (at least since April):

C199/05 REVIEW C137/05
AIP DAP EAST AMD AS FLW:
1. SID ESSENDON ONE DEP (RADAR) - ALL RWY DATED 25 NOV 2004
AMD RWY 17 CLIMB GRADIENT 3.6 PERCENT TO 1600FT THEN 3.3 PERCENT
2. RWY 26 ILS DATED 9 JUN 2005 AMD S-I ILS DA TO 640 (401) 2.2 FROM 06 200324 TO PERM

Why the DAP plate for YMEN, dated 9 June 2005, wasn't amended accordingly defies logic