AIS - your input please
Thread Starter
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 1,784
Likes: 0
From: Savannah GA & Portsmouth UK
AIS - your input please
A meeting is being set up between AIS and representatives from the GA community on 20 April and an agenda is being prepared.
I shall be representing AOPA and will be happy to raise issues on your behalf and report back.
AIS are responsible for publishing the AIP, NOTAM and AIC's. AIS is part of NATS and publishes the information on behalf of CAA Directorate of Airspace Policy, who are also reponsible for the VFR charts.
Mods - sticky for a few days?
Mike
I shall be representing AOPA and will be happy to raise issues on your behalf and report back.
AIS are responsible for publishing the AIP, NOTAM and AIC's. AIS is part of NATS and publishes the information on behalf of CAA Directorate of Airspace Policy, who are also reponsible for the VFR charts.
Mods - sticky for a few days?
Mike
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 198
Likes: 0
From: London
I'm not sure what range or detail of comments you are after so I am just going to stick to a couple of minor bugbears on the NOTAM website.
First, it would be useful if you could use airfields as turning points for the narrow route briefing.
Second, I wish the military would put area names next to the co-ordinates when NOTAMing chunks of airspace as being active in military exercises.
Third, could royal flights not be NOTAMed rather than having to phone that telephone number?
Finally, it would be worth repeating the need for a graphic site with notams plotted on a map.
Other than that, it seems to work pretty well now and the NOTAM for Fort William that I got for a narrow route for a Norfolk flight on Sunday was a the first howler I'd seen for a while!
First, it would be useful if you could use airfields as turning points for the narrow route briefing.
Second, I wish the military would put area names next to the co-ordinates when NOTAMing chunks of airspace as being active in military exercises.
Third, could royal flights not be NOTAMed rather than having to phone that telephone number?
Finally, it would be worth repeating the need for a graphic site with notams plotted on a map.
Other than that, it seems to work pretty well now and the NOTAM for Fort William that I got for a narrow route for a Norfolk flight on Sunday was a the first howler I'd seen for a while!
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,856
Likes: 75
From: uk
For what it's worth, some comments from an infrequent user (once a month?)
I have not flown much during the Winter so haven't used it much. I needed to use it last weekend and, for my sort of flying, I still find it unnecessarily cumbersome and difficult to use.
E.g. Why do I have to enter the full date and time at least three times each time I want a different briefing for the same day? For much of my flying I do not decide where to go until I see what the weather is like so I might want several route briefings and some aerodrome briefings. I imagine that it is a satisfactory service for those whose flying is more planned and less weather dependent but, for those of us who have to plan around weather on the day, it is infuriating.
To me, such a safety critical facility should be very easy and intuitive to use, just like it used to be. The new system does not give me anything that the old system didn't give me, it is much harder to use, and is therefore LESS SAFE.
I know a few PPL's who have struggled with it and who therefore fly without checking NOTAMs.
I have not flown much during the Winter so haven't used it much. I needed to use it last weekend and, for my sort of flying, I still find it unnecessarily cumbersome and difficult to use.
E.g. Why do I have to enter the full date and time at least three times each time I want a different briefing for the same day? For much of my flying I do not decide where to go until I see what the weather is like so I might want several route briefings and some aerodrome briefings. I imagine that it is a satisfactory service for those whose flying is more planned and less weather dependent but, for those of us who have to plan around weather on the day, it is infuriating.
To me, such a safety critical facility should be very easy and intuitive to use, just like it used to be. The new system does not give me anything that the old system didn't give me, it is much harder to use, and is therefore LESS SAFE.
I know a few PPL's who have struggled with it and who therefore fly without checking NOTAMs.
Thread Starter
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 1,784
Likes: 0
From: Savannah GA & Portsmouth UK
Thanks for the input so far
You can't input a/d's as turning points because the route format follows the ICAO Flight Plan format. You can't put a/d's into a FP so you can't do it here. Frustrating but logical.
Re the dates thing. You don't necessarily need to put in the validity period. If you leave it blank you will get all NOTAM for 48 hours from when you click the SUBMIT button. Also if you use the Briefing Handbook you can re-use a brief or choose UPDATE to only get anything that has changed since you took the brief.
Keep 'em coming!
Mike
You can't input a/d's as turning points because the route format follows the ICAO Flight Plan format. You can't put a/d's into a FP so you can't do it here. Frustrating but logical.
Re the dates thing. You don't necessarily need to put in the validity period. If you leave it blank you will get all NOTAM for 48 hours from when you click the SUBMIT button. Also if you use the Briefing Handbook you can re-use a brief or choose UPDATE to only get anything that has changed since you took the brief.
Keep 'em coming!
Mike
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 198
Likes: 0
From: London
You can't input a/d's as turning points because the route format follows the ICAO Flight Plan format. You can't put a/d's into a FP so you can't do it here. Frustrating but logical
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 616
Likes: 0
From: Essex, UK
Mike
The whole thing has come so far since those dark days of 2002. Some of this is software and some is NATS. Either way, perhaps you could just express my thanks to everyone involved as I now find it simple and effect... which results in me using it, rather than ignoring it. AvBrief also deserve a round of applause, while your at it.
Aim Far, you simply MUST get yourself a copy of NotamPlot v2.0 (free) and an AvBrief registration (also free). You get a perfect graphic representation and a route that can be overlaid, plotted as airfield to airfield waypoints. So simple, even I can use it.
The whole thing has come so far since those dark days of 2002. Some of this is software and some is NATS. Either way, perhaps you could just express my thanks to everyone involved as I now find it simple and effect... which results in me using it, rather than ignoring it. AvBrief also deserve a round of applause, while your at it.
Finally, it would be worth repeating the need for a graphic site with notams plotted on a map.
Moderator
Joined: Feb 2000
Aviation Qualifications: CPL
Posts: 14,480
Likes: 178
From: UK
- Ability to enter names of FIRs rather than just EG** would be enhancing since I wouldn't have to keep looking them up.
- Agree, multiple input of dates is a pain. Could a couple of "today / tomorrow" tickboxes be added to do this automatically? Works well on Railtrack's train timetable webpage !
- Agree, graphical presentation and place-names for military exercises would be most helpful.
- When clicking on the help arrows (say, looking up an airfield identifier) it would be easiest if that help screen came up as a separate window automatically. For that matter, could it accept a name and offer an ICAO identifier automatically - frankly that and a flightplan are the only times that I ever use them and I suspect that's true of a great many people.
- Any chance of a tie-up with the met-office to give en-route TAFs at the same time?
- Still not awfully good at omitting the occasional NOTAM at the other end of the country.
- Yes please - purples and reds would be a worthwhile inclusion.
Are you going to the CAA safety evening at Popham this week Mike?
G
- Agree, multiple input of dates is a pain. Could a couple of "today / tomorrow" tickboxes be added to do this automatically? Works well on Railtrack's train timetable webpage !
- Agree, graphical presentation and place-names for military exercises would be most helpful.
- When clicking on the help arrows (say, looking up an airfield identifier) it would be easiest if that help screen came up as a separate window automatically. For that matter, could it accept a name and offer an ICAO identifier automatically - frankly that and a flightplan are the only times that I ever use them and I suspect that's true of a great many people.
- Any chance of a tie-up with the met-office to give en-route TAFs at the same time?
- Still not awfully good at omitting the occasional NOTAM at the other end of the country.
- Yes please - purples and reds would be a worthwhile inclusion.
Are you going to the CAA safety evening at Popham this week Mike?
G
Joined: Dec 1998
Posts: 4,282
Likes: 6
From: Escapee from Ultima Thule
I find the 'normal' briefing input pages so cumbersome I don't use them.
Why should I have to keep entering a briefing ID (a required field)?
Or a mandatory dept. & arr. aerodrome? I operate out of places that don't exist on their database.
There only seems to be a facility to search the database of locations/FIRs/navaids, and not browse. Bad luck if you have no idea of the exact code or place name (as held in the database). Even M$ Outlook Express lets you browse AND it will skip based on one or two entered characters.
No help to explain why it won't accept an entry or even a note to say what is acceptable in the form field.
Doesn't work with Opera - a fully standards compliant browser. How do I access the site from a PDA or smartphone that doesn't use M$? If they wrote the bloody site so it was standards compliant they'd improve accessability without increasing their workload. It would also future proof it somewhat. They've incompetently locked themselves into a corner.
As a result the route briefing 'feature' is unuseable to me. At least I can get the FIR briefs. Except they're only VFR...
Access to the Q line so 3rd party, properly written & more useable software can work.
No graphical selection. In the 21st century....
Why don't you suggest they buy Australia's system? It works a damn sight better.
Why should I have to keep entering a briefing ID (a required field)?
Or a mandatory dept. & arr. aerodrome? I operate out of places that don't exist on their database.
There only seems to be a facility to search the database of locations/FIRs/navaids, and not browse. Bad luck if you have no idea of the exact code or place name (as held in the database). Even M$ Outlook Express lets you browse AND it will skip based on one or two entered characters.
No help to explain why it won't accept an entry or even a note to say what is acceptable in the form field.
Doesn't work with Opera - a fully standards compliant browser. How do I access the site from a PDA or smartphone that doesn't use M$? If they wrote the bloody site so it was standards compliant they'd improve accessability without increasing their workload. It would also future proof it somewhat. They've incompetently locked themselves into a corner.
As a result the route briefing 'feature' is unuseable to me. At least I can get the FIR briefs. Except they're only VFR...
Access to the Q line so 3rd party, properly written & more useable software can work.
No graphical selection. In the 21st century....
Why don't you suggest they buy Australia's system? It works a damn sight better.
Thread Starter
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 1,784
Likes: 0
From: Savannah GA & Portsmouth UK
Genghis
Yes I've got my name down for the Safety Evening. Big 15 stone 6 ft tall grey-haired git is me. I'll pm my mobile so we can meet up.
Bar Shaker
It's not that AIS doesn't cover them it's that AvBrief only provide the download for the UK FIR's which Dublin Pilot is not flying in.
Tinstaafl said
Good point except that there is a court case pending in Oz where AirServices Australia are trying to assert copyright over NOTAM and AIP info. Why might they do that? Why else but to be able to charge for it! Jeppesen are opposing them.More info here.
If you fly from sites without an ICAO indicator you will find that AIS have created dummy ICAO indicators which may cover your site. Details Here You need to register for UK & Foreign to use them because they don't start EG. If you need to change from UK to UK and Foreign just email [email protected] with your username and password and they'll change it for you. When I did it they turned it round in under an hour.
Keep 'em coming
Mike
Yes I've got my name down for the Safety Evening. Big 15 stone 6 ft tall grey-haired git is me. I'll pm my mobile so we can meet up.
Bar Shaker
It's not that AIS doesn't cover them it's that AvBrief only provide the download for the UK FIR's which Dublin Pilot is not flying in.
Tinstaafl said
Why don't you suggest they buy Australia's system? It works a damn sight better.
If you fly from sites without an ICAO indicator you will find that AIS have created dummy ICAO indicators which may cover your site. Details Here You need to register for UK & Foreign to use them because they don't start EG. If you need to change from UK to UK and Foreign just email [email protected] with your username and password and they'll change it for you. When I did it they turned it round in under an hour.
Keep 'em coming
Mike
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 616
Likes: 0
From: Essex, UK
Handy ICAO look up
That's what I thought Mike. Just a case of Johnny Foreigner moaning again
(3 winks so DP desn't take offence)
That's what I thought Mike. Just a case of Johnny Foreigner moaning again
(3 winks so DP desn't take offence)
Why do it if it's not fun?
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 4,782
Likes: 12
From: Bournemouth
Mike,
I think every single one of us appreciates the work which you+Russel have put in to turn this disaster into a usable system, and the fact that you are continuing to work so closely with the guys at AIS to improve it even further.
With that in mind, I hope you won't take the following personally, or be offended by it.... but please take a step back and stop trying to defend the system! For example:
I'm sure that's all true. But the fact is that Aim Far wants to use airfields as turning points. He doesn't care about the reasons that he can't do so.... all he wants to hear is that you've taken his point on board and that you'll argue his case for him. You're also giving advice on how to work around issues (e.g. registering as an international user to get some of the non-ICAO designators), which is great... but surely the ultimate aim must be to make the system intuitive enough that we can figure these things out without needing your help? Again, what we'd like to hear from you would be: "Well, you can work around that by doing XYZ... but I see that this isn't intuitive, so I'll raise that at the meeting and see if we can fix it."
As I said, please don't take my constructive criticism to heart... we really do appreciate everything you've done. In fact, I've found myself guilty of exactly the same thing I'm accusing you of (i.e. defending an IT system's flaws, instead of listening to the users and working out how to address the issues) in my day-job many times, so I know it's very easy to do!
As for what I want: basically as Pulse1 says - the ability to get NOTAMs not just for a pre-planned route, but also for a local bimble wherever I happen to want to fly. I appreciate that there are now third-party graphical tools out there, and I really must get them installed on my PC and have a look at them, because I suspect that at least one of them would do what I want. Anyone know a way of adding a day or two to the week, because the current week isn't long enough!
FFF
--------------
I think every single one of us appreciates the work which you+Russel have put in to turn this disaster into a usable system, and the fact that you are continuing to work so closely with the guys at AIS to improve it even further.
With that in mind, I hope you won't take the following personally, or be offended by it.... but please take a step back and stop trying to defend the system! For example:
You can't input a/d's as turning points because the route format follows the ICAO Flight Plan format. You can't put a/d's into a FP so you can't do it here. Frustrating but logical.
As I said, please don't take my constructive criticism to heart... we really do appreciate everything you've done. In fact, I've found myself guilty of exactly the same thing I'm accusing you of (i.e. defending an IT system's flaws, instead of listening to the users and working out how to address the issues) in my day-job many times, so I know it's very easy to do!
As for what I want: basically as Pulse1 says - the ability to get NOTAMs not just for a pre-planned route, but also for a local bimble wherever I happen to want to fly. I appreciate that there are now third-party graphical tools out there, and I really must get them installed on my PC and have a look at them, because I suspect that at least one of them would do what I want. Anyone know a way of adding a day or two to the week, because the current week isn't long enough!
FFF
--------------
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 369
Likes: 0
From: UK
With the present format there would be nothing stopping you using aerodromes as turning points, you would just have to to several searches breaking your route up in to a/d A to a/d B a/d B to a/d C a/d C to a/d A etc.
I peronally think that the only thing is missing is a decode to help us inteperate what we read since it was one thing that was not taught fully in my PPL training. I really do want to get to a stage where I can say I understand the notams as well as have read them.
I peronally think that the only thing is missing is a decode to help us inteperate what we read since it was one thing that was not taught fully in my PPL training. I really do want to get to a stage where I can say I understand the notams as well as have read them.
Thread Starter
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 1,784
Likes: 0
From: Savannah GA & Portsmouth UK
FFF
Absolutely no offence taken.
There is a finite resource here. AIS are not a huge operation. They operate 24x365 with around 30 staff. While GA is important it is the airlines that fund most of the work, and the airlines in general do not have AIS custom building software for them. They take the raw data as a feed from AIS and produce briefings using their own staff and resources or else they contract it out to a commercial briefing service who do it for them.
What AIS have done is to buy an off the shelf NOTAM delivery package for use by the GA community. Having bespoke mods done to software is not cheap. Few corporations would ask Microsoft to re-write any of the Office programs for them for example. With around 200 ICAO States the market for NOTAM delivery software is also limited, as is the revenue stream available to software authors.
My own personal view is that the AIS solution will always be "one size fits all". It typically has to cope with air charter operators flying long overseas sectors at one end of the spectrum and local bimblers, microlighters, balloonatics and glider pilots at the other end. Solutions that better fit the requirements of individual user groups are more likely to come from independent authors such as Ian Fallon with NotamPlot.
The fly in the ointment is as always money. CAA will not allow NATS/AIS to provide the raw data required by these programs, even though NATS have no objection to doing so. Ian's program works because AvBrief are, with the consent of the CAA, making the data available for the UK FIR's free of charge.
Why won't the CAA allow NATS to make the data freely available? Because there are moves afoot to charge for the information. At the moment there is no charge for the data. The airlines, commercial briefing services, and the manufacturers of equipment and publications like FMCS, GPS databases, flight planning software, charts, approach plates, flight guides etc. do not have to pay for the data. The test case referred to in my earlier posting between Jeppesen Sanderson Inc and AirServices Australia will do a lot to decide the issue. EuroControl's European AIS Database project (EAD) seeks to become the AIS provider for most European states and to be funded by charging for the data. While the UK CAA are not currently wholeheartedly in the EAD club they are refraining from making the data publicly available because it would undermine their ability to charge in the future.
The daft thing is that the raw data is available from the EAD site anyway.
Sorry this is a bit of a ramble but I hope it illustrates the complexities of the animal.
WRT some of the things being asked for:-
In some cases the benefit is unlikely to justify the cost. For example Mozilla has about two percent of the browser market so should a lot of money be thrown at making the site compatible to suit someon'e personal preferences when Netscae and IE are available as free downloads or would it better be spent on improvements in other areas?
If we have a standard format for a Flight Plan is it sensible to pay to have a different format designed for NOTAM briefings? The manufacturer's design for the site allows for it to be used for flight plan filing although this is not currently implemented in the UK.
I'm not arguing against any of these views and they will all be presented. I thoroughly endorse the need for the site to be made more intuitive in use. (It was designed by a French company says he ducking to avoid a fusillade of stale croissants)
Many thanks to all who are contributing.
Mike
Absolutely no offence taken.
There is a finite resource here. AIS are not a huge operation. They operate 24x365 with around 30 staff. While GA is important it is the airlines that fund most of the work, and the airlines in general do not have AIS custom building software for them. They take the raw data as a feed from AIS and produce briefings using their own staff and resources or else they contract it out to a commercial briefing service who do it for them.
What AIS have done is to buy an off the shelf NOTAM delivery package for use by the GA community. Having bespoke mods done to software is not cheap. Few corporations would ask Microsoft to re-write any of the Office programs for them for example. With around 200 ICAO States the market for NOTAM delivery software is also limited, as is the revenue stream available to software authors.
My own personal view is that the AIS solution will always be "one size fits all". It typically has to cope with air charter operators flying long overseas sectors at one end of the spectrum and local bimblers, microlighters, balloonatics and glider pilots at the other end. Solutions that better fit the requirements of individual user groups are more likely to come from independent authors such as Ian Fallon with NotamPlot.
The fly in the ointment is as always money. CAA will not allow NATS/AIS to provide the raw data required by these programs, even though NATS have no objection to doing so. Ian's program works because AvBrief are, with the consent of the CAA, making the data available for the UK FIR's free of charge.
Why won't the CAA allow NATS to make the data freely available? Because there are moves afoot to charge for the information. At the moment there is no charge for the data. The airlines, commercial briefing services, and the manufacturers of equipment and publications like FMCS, GPS databases, flight planning software, charts, approach plates, flight guides etc. do not have to pay for the data. The test case referred to in my earlier posting between Jeppesen Sanderson Inc and AirServices Australia will do a lot to decide the issue. EuroControl's European AIS Database project (EAD) seeks to become the AIS provider for most European states and to be funded by charging for the data. While the UK CAA are not currently wholeheartedly in the EAD club they are refraining from making the data publicly available because it would undermine their ability to charge in the future.
The daft thing is that the raw data is available from the EAD site anyway.
Sorry this is a bit of a ramble but I hope it illustrates the complexities of the animal.
WRT some of the things being asked for:-
In some cases the benefit is unlikely to justify the cost. For example Mozilla has about two percent of the browser market so should a lot of money be thrown at making the site compatible to suit someon'e personal preferences when Netscae and IE are available as free downloads or would it better be spent on improvements in other areas?
If we have a standard format for a Flight Plan is it sensible to pay to have a different format designed for NOTAM briefings? The manufacturer's design for the site allows for it to be used for flight plan filing although this is not currently implemented in the UK.
I'm not arguing against any of these views and they will all be presented. I thoroughly endorse the need for the site to be made more intuitive in use. (It was designed by a French company says he ducking to avoid a fusillade of stale croissants)
Many thanks to all who are contributing.
Mike
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
From: EuroGA.org
On a slight tangent, the biggest improvement one could make to the Notam system would be to force every flying school to have a PC, accessible to all, with internet on it, for streamlined flight planning and for accessing the AIS notam website.
During my PPL training, I never looked at a single Notam, and neither did most of the instructors.
I am very sure that the great majority of today's PPL don't routinely look at Notams either.
During my PPL training, I never looked at a single Notam, and neither did most of the instructors.
I am very sure that the great majority of today's PPL don't routinely look at Notams either.
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
From: Surrey, UK.
HelenD
There are ways to include airports as turning points, but you need to forget, momentarily, that they are airports...
As per the FP system, you can nominate a turning point in a variety of ways, for example:
Beacons
Beacon/Radial/DME
Lat/Long
Airways reporting Point
...
So if you wanted to route OVER Cranfield, you don't have to include EGTC in the routing (disallowed) but you could include CFD (the VOR)...
Or, for Blackbushe, you could include this as a flyover point - not with EGLK (disallowed), but as BLK (the NDB) or CPT130017 the beacon/radial/distance location...
Popham - use PEPIS as the turning point in FP and Notam. (Or lat/long or beacon/radial/dme)
The ADvantage of doing this is that the NOTAM will be relevent to your trip height-wise...
The DISadvantage of doing three (or X) different Notam grabs airfield to airfield is that each "flight" has a take-off and landing "phase", so NOTAM outside your selected height band will be displayed.
There are ways to include airports as turning points, but you need to forget, momentarily, that they are airports...
As per the FP system, you can nominate a turning point in a variety of ways, for example:
Beacons
Beacon/Radial/DME
Lat/Long
Airways reporting Point
...
So if you wanted to route OVER Cranfield, you don't have to include EGTC in the routing (disallowed) but you could include CFD (the VOR)...
Or, for Blackbushe, you could include this as a flyover point - not with EGLK (disallowed), but as BLK (the NDB) or CPT130017 the beacon/radial/distance location...
Popham - use PEPIS as the turning point in FP and Notam. (Or lat/long or beacon/radial/dme)
The ADvantage of doing this is that the NOTAM will be relevent to your trip height-wise...
The DISadvantage of doing three (or X) different Notam grabs airfield to airfield is that each "flight" has a take-off and landing "phase", so NOTAM outside your selected height band will be displayed.
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 2,814
Likes: 0
From: Euroland
Mike,
Thanks for all the hard work.
Only a very small possible improvement;
I fly regular routes each day or so and have these routes stored in the briefing handbook. This makes it very easy to simply select the route and click on use.
However, while the date of the flight changes automatically to the current day, the dates for the effective period remains fixed at the setting for the previous briefing.
Very small point but it would be easier if all the dates changed to the current day. If I am briefing for tomorrow then I will change all the dates.
Thanks.
DFC
PS I was told that there is no such thing as purple airspace anymore. Such airspace is now NOTAMed as temporary Class A airspace and is included in the briefings. Also the jet formation flights are publshed in the briefings also as well as in an AIC. Am I correct?
Thanks for all the hard work.
Only a very small possible improvement;
I fly regular routes each day or so and have these routes stored in the briefing handbook. This makes it very easy to simply select the route and click on use.
However, while the date of the flight changes automatically to the current day, the dates for the effective period remains fixed at the setting for the previous briefing.
Very small point but it would be easier if all the dates changed to the current day. If I am briefing for tomorrow then I will change all the dates.
Thanks.
DFC
PS I was told that there is no such thing as purple airspace anymore. Such airspace is now NOTAMed as temporary Class A airspace and is included in the briefings. Also the jet formation flights are publshed in the briefings also as well as in an AIC. Am I correct?