Let's not bother with NOTAMs?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Norfolk
Posts: 1,966
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Let's not bother with NOTAMs?
It appears that even though they are easier to access, few folk seem to read them!!
Yesterday - en route to Fenland to enjoy the aerobatic competition THAT WAS NOTTAMED... I tuned into Fenland Radio.....
Aircaft #1 calls FENLAND for a transit through the zone. Asked whether he was aware of the current NOTAM, the silence condemned him
15 secs later
A/c #2 calls - scenario very similar
I call and get the numbers.
1 min later an aircraft on quite an impresive x-country speaks to Fenland with a wish to transit through the overhead at 1800'? NOTAM - ah , err....
Lovely day watching my chums loop and swoop...............................
Time for me to go and as I am "advised" that there is no reason why I shouldn't take off, some numpty requests an o/head join.
With increasing incredulity, I depart. I remain on freq for a further 4 mins to hear 2 new callsigns trying to get into or around Fenland and it is obvious that neither of those has read/seen the NOTAM.
Bemused and confused!
Should we abandon NOTTAMing or should we enforce people to read them. Your thoughts?
Stik
Yesterday - en route to Fenland to enjoy the aerobatic competition THAT WAS NOTTAMED... I tuned into Fenland Radio.....
Aircaft #1 calls FENLAND for a transit through the zone. Asked whether he was aware of the current NOTAM, the silence condemned him
15 secs later
A/c #2 calls - scenario very similar
I call and get the numbers.
1 min later an aircraft on quite an impresive x-country speaks to Fenland with a wish to transit through the overhead at 1800'? NOTAM - ah , err....
Lovely day watching my chums loop and swoop...............................
Time for me to go and as I am "advised" that there is no reason why I shouldn't take off, some numpty requests an o/head join.
With increasing incredulity, I depart. I remain on freq for a further 4 mins to hear 2 new callsigns trying to get into or around Fenland and it is obvious that neither of those has read/seen the NOTAM.
Bemused and confused!
Should we abandon NOTTAMing or should we enforce people to read them. Your thoughts?
Stik
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Euroland
Posts: 2,814
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Everyone should check NOTAMS.......but.....
Since it is in the past, I can not access the notam at this time.
However, it may be the case that the notam was produced as an aerodrome warning and as such would only appear on briefings for pilots who selected Fenland as a departure, destination or alternate for the flight.
If it was produced as an enroute warning, then as far as I am aware warnings of aerobatics flights are a miscelaneous category and are not required by international standards to be included in pre-floght briefings.
If you look at the Q line of the notam then you will get an idea of who was going to see the NOTAM.
if it does not have "AE" (then a for aerodrome and e for enroute) whichever is missing is not going to get the notam.
the next bit is the "NBO". N immediate notification, B to be inlcuded in briefings and O operationally significant. leave out the B and it may not appear on pre-flight briefings.
Finally, was it a NOTAM about some aero flying or was it a RA(T)?
If not an RA(T) and not controlled airspace then pilots are quite entitled to plan their flights through that area. To think that having a NOTAM issued would in any way "sterilise" the airspace is incorrect. Even with the NOTAM issued, you simply have only an "equal" right to operate in the airspace outside controlledairspace as any other pilot enroute.
You are still required to ensure that the airspace is clear before performing an aerobatic manoeuvre and you are still required to conform with the rules for avoiding collisions (rights of way etc) throughout your sequence.
A/C xy and z could have checked the NOTAM, and since there is not ATC, they do not require permission to enter the ATZ. They obtain information and decide what they want to do. I was not aware that Air Ground Radio operators were in the business of giving advice - it being against the law or of questioning the availability of some NOTAM when they could have simply provided the information allowed by law i.e. aerobatics in progress above the aerodrome and had the exact same effect - pilot x, y and z can decide to either continue as planned and see and avoide the other traffic ( as they will also do) or take the probably more sensible route and avoid the area.
If Fenland was NOTAMed as closed due to the competition then you really do have a valid complaint about the arrivial(s). However, if not and PPR had been obtained the arriving flight was entitled to complete their overhead join - doing aero's over the airfield would take you out of the protection afforded to aircraft "operating in the vicinity of the aerodrome".
Simply remember that having a NOTAM issued does not sterilise the airspace or remove the simple right of everyone to operate in class G.
That is why the reds get a RA(T).
regards,
DFC
However, it may be the case that the notam was produced as an aerodrome warning and as such would only appear on briefings for pilots who selected Fenland as a departure, destination or alternate for the flight.
If it was produced as an enroute warning, then as far as I am aware warnings of aerobatics flights are a miscelaneous category and are not required by international standards to be included in pre-floght briefings.
If you look at the Q line of the notam then you will get an idea of who was going to see the NOTAM.
if it does not have "AE" (then a for aerodrome and e for enroute) whichever is missing is not going to get the notam.
the next bit is the "NBO". N immediate notification, B to be inlcuded in briefings and O operationally significant. leave out the B and it may not appear on pre-flight briefings.
Finally, was it a NOTAM about some aero flying or was it a RA(T)?
If not an RA(T) and not controlled airspace then pilots are quite entitled to plan their flights through that area. To think that having a NOTAM issued would in any way "sterilise" the airspace is incorrect. Even with the NOTAM issued, you simply have only an "equal" right to operate in the airspace outside controlledairspace as any other pilot enroute.
You are still required to ensure that the airspace is clear before performing an aerobatic manoeuvre and you are still required to conform with the rules for avoiding collisions (rights of way etc) throughout your sequence.
A/C xy and z could have checked the NOTAM, and since there is not ATC, they do not require permission to enter the ATZ. They obtain information and decide what they want to do. I was not aware that Air Ground Radio operators were in the business of giving advice - it being against the law or of questioning the availability of some NOTAM when they could have simply provided the information allowed by law i.e. aerobatics in progress above the aerodrome and had the exact same effect - pilot x, y and z can decide to either continue as planned and see and avoide the other traffic ( as they will also do) or take the probably more sensible route and avoid the area.
If Fenland was NOTAMed as closed due to the competition then you really do have a valid complaint about the arrivial(s). However, if not and PPR had been obtained the arriving flight was entitled to complete their overhead join - doing aero's over the airfield would take you out of the protection afforded to aircraft "operating in the vicinity of the aerodrome".
Simply remember that having a NOTAM issued does not sterilise the airspace or remove the simple right of everyone to operate in class G.
That is why the reds get a RA(T).
regards,
DFC
(H0956/07 NOTAMN
Q)EGTT/QWBLW/IV/M/AW/000/040/5244N00002W002
A)EGCL B)0704271200 C)0704291900
D)APR 27 1200-1900, 28 0800-1900, 29 0900-1900
E)AUS 07-04-0022/1014/AS2
AIR DISPLAY/AEROBATICS CONTEST WI 2NM 5244N 00002W (FENLAND AD,
LINCOLNSHIRE).
F)SFC G)4000FT AGL)
No indication that the aerodrome is closed for the period, nor that ATZ transit is impossible. I've seen lots of similiar NOTAMs for events that are not taking place continuously throughout the periods indicated, and I think it's reasonable that others should have expected to operate more or less normally in its vicinity. I don't think there's much excuse for not being aware of the NOTAM though.
Q)EGTT/QWBLW/IV/M/AW/000/040/5244N00002W002
A)EGCL B)0704271200 C)0704291900
D)APR 27 1200-1900, 28 0800-1900, 29 0900-1900
E)AUS 07-04-0022/1014/AS2
AIR DISPLAY/AEROBATICS CONTEST WI 2NM 5244N 00002W (FENLAND AD,
LINCOLNSHIRE).
F)SFC G)4000FT AGL)
No indication that the aerodrome is closed for the period, nor that ATZ transit is impossible. I've seen lots of similiar NOTAMs for events that are not taking place continuously throughout the periods indicated, and I think it's reasonable that others should have expected to operate more or less normally in its vicinity. I don't think there's much excuse for not being aware of the NOTAM though.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In the PPL, 2000/2001, I was never taught anything to do with the internet: weather or notams.
The great majority of active PPLs must be in the same category.
Re this notam (thank you bookworm) is like so many which could occur anywhere without notification. I would have given this one a miss though, transiting above 4000ft if going near.
The great majority of active PPLs must be in the same category.
Re this notam (thank you bookworm) is like so many which could occur anywhere without notification. I would have given this one a miss though, transiting above 4000ft if going near.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Norfolk
Posts: 1,966
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My issue is not with the content of the NOTAM - it is with the fact that so many folk were ignorant of it!
Being aware that something slightly unusual is happening at at a destination or a way-point is surely good airmanship?
The BAeA positively encourages spectators, be it by road or by air and several a/c (including me) flew in to watch, support, etc.
Sadly I feel that something is lacking: the fact that sterile airspace RA(T) often gets bust as highly publicised incursions on the Reds are not in the least uncommon, proves that folk either don't read or misinterpret NOTAMS.
So what do we need to do?
Stik
Being aware that something slightly unusual is happening at at a destination or a way-point is surely good airmanship?
The BAeA positively encourages spectators, be it by road or by air and several a/c (including me) flew in to watch, support, etc.
Sadly I feel that something is lacking: the fact that sterile airspace RA(T) often gets bust as highly publicised incursions on the Reds are not in the least uncommon, proves that folk either don't read or misinterpret NOTAMS.
So what do we need to do?
Stik
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Massachusetts Bay Colony
Age: 57
Posts: 476
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The first thing we could do is make the information easier to get to. AIS is not the most user-friendly website and the search engine still gives me reams and reams of junk unrelated to my flight (narrow enroute briefing and I still get every NOTAM for the London FIR). Maybe my skills with AIS aren't what they should be but I find it a real pain in the neck to wade through all the crap looking for the one or two things relevant to my flight.
A free website with all the free information available for flight planning in one place would be handy, with it all presented in a useable, easily digestible format - weather, NOTAMS, RA(T)s, royal flights, etc. The info is all available, but each in its own unique location unrelated to each other. "Flight Planning UK" would be a great website and might reduce some of this avoidance of information.
Just my .02 worth. I now stand by and wait for all the reasons why that's not a good idea, wouldn't solve anything, etc., etc., etc.
Pitts2112
A free website with all the free information available for flight planning in one place would be handy, with it all presented in a useable, easily digestible format - weather, NOTAMS, RA(T)s, royal flights, etc. The info is all available, but each in its own unique location unrelated to each other. "Flight Planning UK" would be a great website and might reduce some of this avoidance of information.
Just my .02 worth. I now stand by and wait for all the reasons why that's not a good idea, wouldn't solve anything, etc., etc., etc.
Pitts2112
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UK, right of centre
Age: 52
Posts: 65
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NOTAMCHECK depicted it clearly on the enroute map, but of course this service costs somewhere in the region of a one off £10 - £20.
Obviously it is not restricted airspace but the fact that lots of pilots didn't know about the NOTAM makes the pointabout it not being restricted a moot point...it could have been for all they knew. The AIS web site should follow the same lines as NOTAMCHECK or similar sites...ie user friendly, but for FREE. Safety in this sense would be relatively cheap, especially as the CAA are running airspace infringement as a theme at the moment.
I was at Fenland, and the few that stik mentioned were just the tip of the iceberg. Not restricted airspace, but still no knowledge of the NOTAM for them to make good airmanship decisions...several were training flights too....
Entitled to go through? maybe so. Wise(esp as it was on all day continuosly)...no.
Obviously it is not restricted airspace but the fact that lots of pilots didn't know about the NOTAM makes the pointabout it not being restricted a moot point...it could have been for all they knew. The AIS web site should follow the same lines as NOTAMCHECK or similar sites...ie user friendly, but for FREE. Safety in this sense would be relatively cheap, especially as the CAA are running airspace infringement as a theme at the moment.
I was at Fenland, and the few that stik mentioned were just the tip of the iceberg. Not restricted airspace, but still no knowledge of the NOTAM for them to make good airmanship decisions...several were training flights too....
Entitled to go through? maybe so. Wise(esp as it was on all day continuosly)...no.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Hunched over a keyboard
Posts: 1,193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"aerobatics - -I wonder if there are restrictions?"
but putting a phrase such as "No access to Fenland without prior permission on telephone (01*** *********)" would make it 100% clear, I would have thought.
I'm not defending the non-readers, but to be honest that NOTAM is about as useful as the proverbial choccy teapot.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: 75N 16E
Age: 54
Posts: 4,729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The first thing we could do is make the information easier to get to.
FOr example, I don't even know where Fenland is, so this Notam means nothing to me. However if in the pre-pre-flight planning stage I can look at a map of the UK and see pertinent notams straight away, then there is no excuse for missing one.
There are many 3rd party products that do this - sort of - but nothing official. What about Notams by phone? Often if you go somewhere for the day it may be impossible to get a proper briefing before you set off home, who knows what has changed in the meantime......?
In the USA I call 1800WXBRIEF before every single leg, mainly to update me on the notams.
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Bonny Scotland
Posts: 97
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Similar thing happened to myself on my CPL X-Country Qualifying flight on 20th August 2005.
My planned route took me overhead Peterborough Conington en-route to Norwich, and I put my entire route into a narrow route brief on ais.org, printed off and studied the Notams the night before and saw nothing that would affect my choice of route. I set off nice and early the following day, got on frequency with Conington Radio, and told the chap that I was intending to transit through his overhead and asked if he had any traffic to affect, only to be told that they had an aero competion on all day that had been notamed.
I meekly aknowleged and routed clear to the south.
Because of the format of inputting info into the ais.org narrow route brief it had not picked up the notams relevent to conington, even though i had inputed my route turning straight overhead.
I would of needed to put conington in as an alternate to get the airfield notams.
I learned a lesson through that and now always put in any airfield that i will transit near to in as an alternate on the brief to make sure that i get all the relevent notams.
StraightLevel.
My planned route took me overhead Peterborough Conington en-route to Norwich, and I put my entire route into a narrow route brief on ais.org, printed off and studied the Notams the night before and saw nothing that would affect my choice of route. I set off nice and early the following day, got on frequency with Conington Radio, and told the chap that I was intending to transit through his overhead and asked if he had any traffic to affect, only to be told that they had an aero competion on all day that had been notamed.
I meekly aknowleged and routed clear to the south.
Because of the format of inputting info into the ais.org narrow route brief it had not picked up the notams relevent to conington, even though i had inputed my route turning straight overhead.
I would of needed to put conington in as an alternate to get the airfield notams.
I learned a lesson through that and now always put in any airfield that i will transit near to in as an alternate on the brief to make sure that i get all the relevent notams.
StraightLevel.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Euroland
Posts: 2,814
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for the info Bookworm.
One can not in any way complain about people no being aware of that NOTAM.
It is a miscelaneous warning. It is not required to be included in pre-flight briefings. Thus it is possible to obtain a perfectly valid pre-flight briefing and not to have it included.
This information is in the "nice to know" category rather than the "need to know" category.
I pray that we do not end up with NOTAMs for everything that is hapening in the Class G airspace in VMC on a see and be seen basis.
-------
IO540,
The NOTAMs are explained in the AIP, as well as the Pratt and Thom books. They were also in Campbell as well as Birch and Bramson but they are long before your time.
Regards,
DFC
One can not in any way complain about people no being aware of that NOTAM.
It is a miscelaneous warning. It is not required to be included in pre-flight briefings. Thus it is possible to obtain a perfectly valid pre-flight briefing and not to have it included.
This information is in the "nice to know" category rather than the "need to know" category.
I pray that we do not end up with NOTAMs for everything that is hapening in the Class G airspace in VMC on a see and be seen basis.
-------
IO540,
The NOTAMs are explained in the AIP, as well as the Pratt and Thom books. They were also in Campbell as well as Birch and Bramson but they are long before your time.
Regards,
DFC
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 647
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Narrow Route
Straight and Level, did your narrow route brief include the parameter "general and miscellaneous"?
(I think that is what is needed to pick up aerodrome NOTAMs as well as en route ones relevant to your narrow route - but no doubt some expert will clarify if I am wrong).
Chris N.
(I think that is what is needed to pick up aerodrome NOTAMs as well as en route ones relevant to your narrow route - but no doubt some expert will clarify if I am wrong).
Chris N.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Daventry UK
Posts: 487
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"general and miscellaneous"? (I think that is what is needed to pick up aerodrome NOTAMs
I think this is symptomatic of the experience of many pilots who find this amateurish website confusing and frustrating. The very poor quality of this site, which has continued now for so many years, is no excuse for ignoring Notams I know, but typical of the profound disrespect that is extended toward private pilots by our regulatory 'masters'.
When eventually the "User Guide" actually loads, it still appears silent on the issue of whether aerodrome notams that happen to be en-route are included in a "miscellaneous" briefing.
At least the wonderful Notamplot, free and very far from amateur despite being built without a penny of public money, does unambiguously show airfield notams in a graphical way that allows a route to be checked visually. (Provided the Notam originators can be bothered to describe the location in a manner that Notamplot can Parse).
I always check both AIS and Notamplot but still recently managed to miss a Notam at my destination that it was closed on the day of my intended departure. So I have a little sympathy for these erstwhile Fenland crossers who might reasonably have expected an en-route aerobatics display to have turned up on virtually any Notam briefing, however it was obtained.
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Q)EGTT/QWBLW/IV/M/AW/000/040/5244N00002W002
It would appear as quoted by DFC, it was miscelaneous and therefore anybody who chose not to see those NOTAMS, wouldn't be aware. However, it is worth noting that the default setting on the AIS website is for General+Misc. I guess there is a reason for that.
So those pilots transiting enroute have there excuse, what about those destined for Fenland. The q code mentions AW- Aerodrome and Navigation warning.
So (I assume) anybody who selected Fenland as their destination aerodrome -regardless of whether they chose to disregard the Misc or not- should have been made aware that there was an aeros competition all weekend. If this is the case, it is surely fair to conclude that a lot of arriving pilots hadn't checked NOTAM (like Stik and KK I also heard several such calls).
NOTAM aside, it's not difficult to pick up a phone and call your destination for a briefing before you depart. That it self would solve problems similar to this one.
It would appear as quoted by DFC, it was miscelaneous and therefore anybody who chose not to see those NOTAMS, wouldn't be aware. However, it is worth noting that the default setting on the AIS website is for General+Misc. I guess there is a reason for that.
So those pilots transiting enroute have there excuse, what about those destined for Fenland. The q code mentions AW- Aerodrome and Navigation warning.
So (I assume) anybody who selected Fenland as their destination aerodrome -regardless of whether they chose to disregard the Misc or not- should have been made aware that there was an aeros competition all weekend. If this is the case, it is surely fair to conclude that a lot of arriving pilots hadn't checked NOTAM (like Stik and KK I also heard several such calls).
NOTAM aside, it's not difficult to pick up a phone and call your destination for a briefing before you depart. That it self would solve problems similar to this one.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: U.K.
Age: 46
Posts: 3,112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In reality, the NOTAM system needs completely renewing. It is unwieldy and difficult to get the information in an easy to digest form.
Many have done good things within the limitations (drauk for example) but the fact is that the system is simply not working. I have no idea how to fix it really, but having a centralised body for writing the NOTAMS rather than relying on the originators may help.
Lats and Longs are also not that easy to use in comparison to standard place names.
I use NOTAMS on a daily basis and I still struggle to find the information sometimes. Infact I usually know more about what's going on from just talking to other pilots and keeping up with local events. How daft is that?
Many have done good things within the limitations (drauk for example) but the fact is that the system is simply not working. I have no idea how to fix it really, but having a centralised body for writing the NOTAMS rather than relying on the originators may help.
Lats and Longs are also not that easy to use in comparison to standard place names.
I use NOTAMS on a daily basis and I still struggle to find the information sometimes. Infact I usually know more about what's going on from just talking to other pilots and keeping up with local events. How daft is that?
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Savannah GA & Portsmouth UK
Posts: 1,784
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK FA, here you are.
The AW in the Q Line kindly posted by Bookworm indicates that the originator of this NOTAM has classed it under the ICAO NOTAM system as an Aerodrome NOTAM and a Navigation Warning.
Under ICAO,Navigation Warnings are classed as "Miscellaneous". If you choose to switch off Miscellanaeous by choosing "General" only you will NOT get Nav Warnings and this one would only appear in that case if you had Fenland down as your Departure. Arrival, or one of the Alternate Aerodromes.
This is entirely in accordance with ICAO Standards and Recommended Practices (SARPS) and is diddly squat to do with the AIS Site. The AIS Site conforms, as it is required to, with ICAO SARPS.
If you don't get it, then the problem lies with you, not with the AIS site. As the AIS User Guide says on Page 7
and again on Pages 8, 9, 10, and 11
Sorry you didn't get it David but of you ask for a Narrow Route Briefing you only get a/d NOTAM for the a/d you enter on the page. If you want Nav Warnings to appear you must include "Miscellaneous" as the guide suggests.
The pdf takes about 30 secs to download for me, the fact that nothing appears to be happening is a function of Acrobat Reader, not of the AIS site.
Pictorial representation of NOTAM raises several issues, not the least of which is that the ICAO standard NOTAM format is not designed for pictorial representation. The AIS site is not exclusively for UK PPL's, the database is worldwide and it's important that the information is presented in the internationally recognised format.
There's a presumption that it's dead easy to provide a pictorial representation. The fact is that it's not. How for example do you depict a NOTAM where neither the geographic centre of the NOTAM nor any part of the periphery of it's Radius of Influence appears on your map, e.g. for something that affects all UK FIR's?
The RAF's No 1 AIDU did experiment with a graphical representation for some years but the project now appears to have been dropped.
The way is of course open for other providers to produce graphic representations and some have done so, but I don't know of a single one that provides the worldwide coverage that the AIS site does.
I represent AOPA UK on NOTAM issues at regular meetings attended by AIS, CAA(DAP) and AUS (Mil) as well as some of the commercial briefing services and airlines, such as AvBrief, Bytron and BA. If you have questions I'll be happy to answer them as best I can.
Mike
The AW in the Q Line kindly posted by Bookworm indicates that the originator of this NOTAM has classed it under the ICAO NOTAM system as an Aerodrome NOTAM and a Navigation Warning.
Under ICAO,Navigation Warnings are classed as "Miscellaneous". If you choose to switch off Miscellanaeous by choosing "General" only you will NOT get Nav Warnings and this one would only appear in that case if you had Fenland down as your Departure. Arrival, or one of the Alternate Aerodromes.
This is entirely in accordance with ICAO Standards and Recommended Practices (SARPS) and is diddly squat to do with the AIS Site. The AIS Site conforms, as it is required to, with ICAO SARPS.
If you don't get it, then the problem lies with you, not with the AIS site. As the AIS User Guide says on Page 7
Important Note: Certain navigation warnings are classified as Miscellaneous.
Purpose: Navigation warnings are classed as miscellaneous. The default will ensure that you don’t miss anything.
The pdf takes about 30 secs to download for me, the fact that nothing appears to be happening is a function of Acrobat Reader, not of the AIS site.
Pictorial representation of NOTAM raises several issues, not the least of which is that the ICAO standard NOTAM format is not designed for pictorial representation. The AIS site is not exclusively for UK PPL's, the database is worldwide and it's important that the information is presented in the internationally recognised format.
There's a presumption that it's dead easy to provide a pictorial representation. The fact is that it's not. How for example do you depict a NOTAM where neither the geographic centre of the NOTAM nor any part of the periphery of it's Radius of Influence appears on your map, e.g. for something that affects all UK FIR's?
The RAF's No 1 AIDU did experiment with a graphical representation for some years but the project now appears to have been dropped.
The way is of course open for other providers to produce graphic representations and some have done so, but I don't know of a single one that provides the worldwide coverage that the AIS site does.
I represent AOPA UK on NOTAM issues at regular meetings attended by AIS, CAA(DAP) and AUS (Mil) as well as some of the commercial briefing services and airlines, such as AvBrief, Bytron and BA. If you have questions I'll be happy to answer them as best I can.
Mike
It is a miscelaneous warning. It is not required to be included in pre-flight briefings. Thus it is possible to obtain a perfectly valid pre-flight briefing and not to have it included.
This information is in the "nice to know" category rather than the "need to know" category.
This information is in the "nice to know" category rather than the "need to know" category.
The legal requirement to satisfy that the flight can be safely made "taking into account the latest information available as to the route and aerodrome to be used" doesn't reference the Annex 15 definition of a PIB. I think someone trundling around VFR at 1500 ft should be looking at Nav Warnings.
Here's another example of a Misc Nav Warning. Nice to know or Need to know?
(H1035/07 NOTAMN
Q)EGTT/QWPLW/IV/M/W/000/090/5050N00153W005
A)EGTT B)0705031230 C)0705031330
E)AUS 07-05-0089/1107/AS1
PJE BY RAF FALCONS FROM C130 WI 5NM RADIUS 5050N 00153W
(WEST MOORS -DORSET). DROP TIME 1300 HRS. SUPPORT ACFT MAY FLYPAST
DROP ZONE ON COMPLETION. AUS ACN 07-05-0089 DATED 16 APR 07 REFERS.
OPS CONTROL BOURNEMOUTH ATC 0120 364150.
F)SFC G)FL090)
FWIW, airspace restrictions are also scope W only but do have the B purpose flag set e.g.
(J1232/07 NOTAMR J0642/07
Q)EGTT/QRTCA/IV/BO/W/000/020/5040N00309W002
A)EGTT B)0703270839 C)0704302359 EST
E)AUS 07-01-0226/784/AS7
RESTRICTED AREA (TEMPORARY) ESTABLISHED DUE TO INCIDENT IN LYME BAY.
RESTRICTION OF FLYING REGULATIONS HAVE BEEN MADE UNDER ARTICLE 96 OF
THE ANO 2005 IN THE AREA BOUNDED BY A CIRCLE RAD 1.5NM CENTRED ON
504021N 0030937W. PILOTS ARE FORBIDDEN TO FLY WI THE RESTRICTED AREA
WITHOUT THE PERMISSION OF HM COASTGUARD COMMANDER FOR DORSET
(EMERGENCY CONTROLLING AUTHORITY) TEL 01305 760439 OR RTF 132.650MHZ.
MIL ACFT SHOULD COMPLY WITH JSP 552 201.135.9
F)SFC G)2000FT AMSL)
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Cambridgeshire
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
S/FISO Fenland Airfield
There was no Fenland Radio at anytime durring the aerobatic weekend at Fenland it was "Fenland Information" as it is every weekend at "Fenland"
This service is provided by CAA licensed Fight Information Service Officers and is a Air Navigation Service Provider
Ray Nicholson
S/FISO Fenland Air Traffic Unit
This service is provided by CAA licensed Fight Information Service Officers and is a Air Navigation Service Provider
Ray Nicholson
S/FISO Fenland Air Traffic Unit
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Daventry UK
Posts: 487
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hello Mike
Agreed. So why not put it in HTML?
Regarding "miscellaneous", why is it an option anyway? It doesn't seem to make much difference to the length of a typical briefing. And something like an en-route airshow is probably more than a 'miscellaneous' interest to transiting pilots. The fact that the user guide points it out repeatedly suggests that there is a problem with this 'option to inadvertantly infringe'.
David
The pdf takes about 30 secs to download for me, the fact that nothing appears to be happening is a function of Acrobat Reader, not of the AIS site.
Regarding "miscellaneous", why is it an option anyway? It doesn't seem to make much difference to the length of a typical briefing. And something like an en-route airshow is probably more than a 'miscellaneous' interest to transiting pilots. The fact that the user guide points it out repeatedly suggests that there is a problem with this 'option to inadvertantly infringe'.
David