AIS - your input please
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Croydon (but really from Barnsley)
Age: 64
Posts: 262
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Their website doesn't work with Safari - the standard web browser on Apples.
I've also tried it with Mozilla Firefox on a PC and it doesn't work on that either. Only seems to work on Internet Explorer...
I've also tried it with Mozilla Firefox on a PC and it doesn't work on that either. Only seems to work on Internet Explorer...
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Dublin
Posts: 2,547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No offence taken Bar shaker 
Actually I thought it didn't cover all of the UK FIR's hence my post above. But on checking, I realise it's only the Irish & French ones that it leaves out.
I can't really complain about the AIS, considering you guys are paying for it in your taxes, and I'm only using it because it's more connvient than getting them email to my by ais here! Hence why I didn't mention the Irish ones being left out above.
dp
Actually I thought it didn't cover all of the UK FIR's hence my post above. But on checking, I realise it's only the Irish & French ones that it leaves out.
I can't really complain about the AIS, considering you guys are paying for it in your taxes, and I'm only using it because it's more connvient than getting them email to my by ais here! Hence why I didn't mention the Irish ones being left out above.
dp
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Almost Scotland
Posts: 303
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have no problem with the AIS current method of getting NOTAMs. The improvements made have been welcome, and there is no difficulty with obtaining those data one needs.
If anything, the user interface could be improved: particularly in terms of 'plugging' data from one field to another to 'shortcut' data entry. If, once 'plugged', those fields (e.g. date) could remain eligible for overtyping then prospective queries would still be as easy to obtain as they are today.
Data presentation is fine insofar as it gives everything selected. However, the appearance of the output (pages of Courier font) is not easy on the eye. There is, therefore, a danger that items can be missed when reading the data. It would be good to enable a little highlighting with bold type here and there in each NOTAM to give a more easily identifiable set of NOTAM types.
I certainly endorse the point made above of providing named nearby geographical areas as adjunct references for temporary military restrictions.
If anything, the user interface could be improved: particularly in terms of 'plugging' data from one field to another to 'shortcut' data entry. If, once 'plugged', those fields (e.g. date) could remain eligible for overtyping then prospective queries would still be as easy to obtain as they are today.
Data presentation is fine insofar as it gives everything selected. However, the appearance of the output (pages of Courier font) is not easy on the eye. There is, therefore, a danger that items can be missed when reading the data. It would be good to enable a little highlighting with bold type here and there in each NOTAM to give a more easily identifiable set of NOTAM types.
I certainly endorse the point made above of providing named nearby geographical areas as adjunct references for temporary military restrictions.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Mike,
My biggest grumble by far is that the session time-out is too short and breaks the flow of the planning process. Anybody using the site for planning will be logged on for more than the 10-15mins. It is irritating to to have to log on again after pondering a different route or whatever.
My other grumble, albeit minor, is that I need to use Internet Explorer. My fave - Netscape 7 - seems to be incompatible.
Other than that I find the whole thing to be of sufficient performance, accurate and pretty easy to use, esp the Narrow Route.
Cheers,
HWD.
My biggest grumble by far is that the session time-out is too short and breaks the flow of the planning process. Anybody using the site for planning will be logged on for more than the 10-15mins. It is irritating to to have to log on again after pondering a different route or whatever.
My other grumble, albeit minor, is that I need to use Internet Explorer. My fave - Netscape 7 - seems to be incompatible.
Other than that I find the whole thing to be of sufficient performance, accurate and pretty easy to use, esp the Narrow Route.
Cheers,
HWD.
Hi Mike,
I'm aware of the Oz Airservice thing. If Airnoservices win, then NAIPS will in turn end up supporting the charging for access system. How can that be a negative factor for CAA/AIS if the UK/EADs are hoping to do the same?
Re. supporting alternat browsers via open standards: It's a fallacy that it's more expensive to support multiple browsers provided they use standards compliant code iaw W3 consortium's specifications.
ALL browsers support the specs as a fundamental. It's the use of browser specific code that causes things to break and therefore requires multiple versions for different browsers eg an IE version x.x, y.y and Netscape version z.z. They all still work with standards compliant part of the code. Avoid using the browser specifics and the problem disappears.
There seems to be a clear trend to devices that are NOT bog standard Windows PCs with IE & or Netscape. Witness WAP, smart phones, PDAs of myriad OS & browsers. I don't see this reducing in the near or mid term. If anything I think there will be an expansion of such devices. Where will that leave their restrictive access site then?
Your efforts are much appreciated.
I'm aware of the Oz Airservice thing. If Airnoservices win, then NAIPS will in turn end up supporting the charging for access system. How can that be a negative factor for CAA/AIS if the UK/EADs are hoping to do the same?
Re. supporting alternat browsers via open standards: It's a fallacy that it's more expensive to support multiple browsers provided they use standards compliant code iaw W3 consortium's specifications.
ALL browsers support the specs as a fundamental. It's the use of browser specific code that causes things to break and therefore requires multiple versions for different browsers eg an IE version x.x, y.y and Netscape version z.z. They all still work with standards compliant part of the code. Avoid using the browser specifics and the problem disappears.
There seems to be a clear trend to devices that are NOT bog standard Windows PCs with IE & or Netscape. Witness WAP, smart phones, PDAs of myriad OS & browsers. I don't see this reducing in the near or mid term. If anything I think there will be an expansion of such devices. Where will that leave their restrictive access site then?
Your efforts are much appreciated.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Savannah GA & Portsmouth UK
Posts: 1,784
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm aware of the Oz Airservice thing. If Airnoservices win, then NAIPS will in turn end up supporting the charging for access system. How can that be a negative factor for CAA/AIS if the UK/EADs are hoping to do the same?
AIS info is in my book safety information and I am against availability of safety information being restricted by a requirement for it to be paid for at the point of delivery. It should be freely available and funded centrally, as it is at the moment.
AsA is attempting to copyright the data. Most of it is IMHO not theirs to copyright. Copyright can exist in original work. Facts like the hours of opening of an aerodrome or the length of its runway are not original work and cannot be copyrighted although the means of presentation, such as a chart or the tabulation or indexing of the data or the design of a database holding the information can.
Re the browser compatibility issue I hear what you say, however AIS have bought commercial off-the shelf software. It works that way because the manufacturer designed it that way, not because AIS demanded it. If UK AIS decide they want it re-written so it will work with Mozilla they will have to pay for the rewrite, which despite what you say will entail a price tag that would be difficult to justify merely to satisfy the preferences of those who are anti-Microsoft and anti-Netscape. The cost would also not end there. The support of a UK bespoke delivery system would also cost more than the support of the standard system.
The web briefing software is only a small part of the overall system, whose prime purpose is the management of a worldwide notam database with information being exchanged internationally with about 180 other AIS's and being disseminated to AFTN subscribers such as ATC units, aerodromes, airlines and briefing services as well as the military. Unlike most business databases the information is also very volatile, time-critical and with a short lifespan and most of the data comes from external feeds from third parties rather than from sources within the database manager's control.
Sorry if I sound negative on something that is clearly important to you but in the overall scheme of things I can't help feeling that resources would be better deployed on making the thing do a better job of delivering relevant info in an easily understood format to the pilot via an intuitive and easy to use interface than in rewriting the entire database front end simply to give a wider choice of browser.
It would save a whole lot of hassle if the CAA would release the raw data so that a variety of independent delivery systems could evolve to suit the preferences of users and make use of innovative technologies to do the job. That we would all have a better chance of getting what we want rather than having to work with a one size fits all solution.
"If half the population has big heads and half the population has small heads we'll make all the hats medium because that's the average size and they will therefore fit the most people."
Mike
Hi Mike,
I quite agree with you about the availability of the data being a common resource, obligated by treaty. I was merely pointing out that purchasing the NAIPS system - even though access is currently free for users - isn't likely to interfere with any plans to charge for the use of the data.
I certainly DON't agree that charging for the data is a good thing for the user, let alone moral.
Whilst you see my other point as a browster interface problem for now, writing for specific browsers is still more expensive in the long run. Every time there's a new browser version from what camps are currently supported then a re-write is on the cards to support it. That's hardly a longer term cheap option - hence my point about sticking to open standards.
Ensuring adherence to standards is not really a bespoke cost issue either. The manufacture gains the benefit of a reduced support burden by eliminating many versioning bugs.
I quite agree with you about the availability of the data being a common resource, obligated by treaty. I was merely pointing out that purchasing the NAIPS system - even though access is currently free for users - isn't likely to interfere with any plans to charge for the use of the data.
I certainly DON't agree that charging for the data is a good thing for the user, let alone moral.
Whilst you see my other point as a browster interface problem for now, writing for specific browsers is still more expensive in the long run. Every time there's a new browser version from what camps are currently supported then a re-write is on the cards to support it. That's hardly a longer term cheap option - hence my point about sticking to open standards.
Ensuring adherence to standards is not really a bespoke cost issue either. The manufacture gains the benefit of a reduced support burden by eliminating many versioning bugs.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Savannah GA & Portsmouth UK
Posts: 1,784
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree with you but it's the old Norfolk answer when asking for directions "Well if I wanted to go there I wouldn't be starting from here"
They did start from here so we have to deal with what we have rather than what we would have liked to have had, if you see what I mean.
Anyway I'm off for a week of stupidity sliding down mountains with planks on my feet.
Thank you one and all for your feedback. If you think of anything while I'm away please add it. I know that this thread is being read both by AIS and the CAA so your voices are being heard, even if it may not be apparent to you.
Once I get back I will collate all of the feedback, get it into some sort of order for discussion and come back to you after the meeting has taken place to let you know the result.
Mike
They did start from here so we have to deal with what we have rather than what we would have liked to have had, if you see what I mean.
Anyway I'm off for a week of stupidity sliding down mountains with planks on my feet.
Thank you one and all for your feedback. If you think of anything while I'm away please add it. I know that this thread is being read both by AIS and the CAA so your voices are being heard, even if it may not be apparent to you.
Once I get back I will collate all of the feedback, get it into some sort of order for discussion and come back to you after the meeting has taken place to let you know the result.
Mike
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think the AIS site uses a lot of client-side Java. There is no need for it - its entire function, plus all the reference data it carries (e.g. the UK AIP) could be served in plain ordinary HTML.
It's not as bad as the Eurocontrol website though, which required a Java download of about 20MB last time I tried it. Under NT4 / IE6 it worked just once, with the PC crashing every time after the first time.
It's not as bad as the Eurocontrol website though, which required a Java download of about 20MB last time I tried it. Under NT4 / IE6 it worked just once, with the PC crashing every time after the first time.
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,586
Received 443 Likes
on
235 Posts
A couple of comments.
One gripe regarding the layout of the page, especially in view of the long time it takes to input all the data, is that the "Submit" and "Reset Form" are illogically placed on the page! It's not logical, at least to my simple mind, to have the "Dump your last 5 minutes work button" as the first one at the bottom of the form.
A number of times I've hit the wrong button by mistake and dumped the lot. This is very upsetting for ladies in the office and does nothing for my image as a polite gentleman. OH BO
OCKS! Can't we have them separated and reversed in position?
Also, we often fly a dozen sectors or more per day, IFR and VFR or a combination of both on the same flight (I've done twenty before now) and we zig-zag all over UK. Obtaining and taking note of NOTAMs is a nightmare for folks like us. Last week we got airborne with 43 A4 pages, which took about 10 minutes to print. Many of them were just full of trivia like birds of prey that might be flying to and from kites one day per month - I never did get to read them all.
One gripe regarding the layout of the page, especially in view of the long time it takes to input all the data, is that the "Submit" and "Reset Form" are illogically placed on the page! It's not logical, at least to my simple mind, to have the "Dump your last 5 minutes work button" as the first one at the bottom of the form.
A number of times I've hit the wrong button by mistake and dumped the lot. This is very upsetting for ladies in the office and does nothing for my image as a polite gentleman. OH BO
OCKS! Can't we have them separated and reversed in position? Also, we often fly a dozen sectors or more per day, IFR and VFR or a combination of both on the same flight (I've done twenty before now) and we zig-zag all over UK. Obtaining and taking note of NOTAMs is a nightmare for folks like us. Last week we got airborne with 43 A4 pages, which took about 10 minutes to print. Many of them were just full of trivia like birds of prey that might be flying to and from kites one day per month - I never did get to read them all.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Ready to Depart
Age: 45
Posts: 291
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Other platforms
For those of you that want to browse AIS/ get NOTAMs from your PDAs, mobile phones and other non-IE/Windows platforms, try AltAIS.
If you want an area briefing, or can't use cookies, the AltNotam service grabs the Notam data from the NATS website, changes the ICAO codes to plain text, orders the results geographically, and grabs the latest METAR/TAF data for each airfield where metobs is available.
If your browser supports cookies, then you can get "back door" access to the AIS site, including the AIP and PIBs without javascript. AltAIS will help build your PIB request away from the AIS site, and then push you straight to the relevent results page. For those paying by the byte, this reduces the data transfer required hugely by avoiding the bloated AIS pages for as long as possible. Same goes for people with slow connections (via laptops connected through mobile phone modems etc).
If you want an area briefing, or can't use cookies, the AltNotam service grabs the Notam data from the NATS website, changes the ICAO codes to plain text, orders the results geographically, and grabs the latest METAR/TAF data for each airfield where metobs is available.
If your browser supports cookies, then you can get "back door" access to the AIS site, including the AIP and PIBs without javascript. AltAIS will help build your PIB request away from the AIS site, and then push you straight to the relevent results page. For those paying by the byte, this reduces the data transfer required hugely by avoiding the bloated AIS pages for as long as possible. Same goes for people with slow connections (via laptops connected through mobile phone modems etc).
