No-hope or no-point NOTAMS?
Avoid imitations
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,576
Received 428 Likes
on
226 Posts
Indeed. But it is only a REQUEST. Safety of flight in this Class G airspace is entirely up to the pilot so if you're there VFR with a cloudbase of 2100ft you are unlikely to be able to comply if for some reason you are unable to go 2nm south.
To save folks looking it up, here it is, quoted verbatim from the AIS website list of abbreviations:
NOTAM †A notice containing information concerning the establishment, condition or change in any aeronautical facility, service, procedure or hazard, the timely knowledge of which is essential to personnel concerned with flight operations
A little less conversation,
a little more aviation...
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Bracknell, UK
Posts: 696
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
N-S; thanks for the lesson in pilot responsibility. I'd be more likely to go over at 2400 feet IMC with a radar service if necessary. However, there are many that would be unable to do so. If you know the AIS definition of a NOTAM, it seems well outside the scope to put out a non-essential request such as this.
To save folks looking it up, here it is, quoted verbatim from the AIS website list of abbreviations:
To save folks looking it up, here it is, quoted verbatim from the AIS website list of abbreviations:
NOTAMs requesting..or indeed demanding..pilot avoiding action to aid commercial media interests are hardly a new thing.
I'm intrigued to know why this particular example possessed you to get such a monk on.
After all, if you're upset about that, your urine should be boiling over a RA(T) for a simple game of golf
On the other hand, this piece of blatant advertising via the NOTAM channel got my attention:
Free Pizza
Avoid imitations
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,576
Received 428 Likes
on
226 Posts
I'm only making a point using a particular example, that one has nothing to do with flight safety. 
Here's another: Why should pilots be informed about the details of Sqn Ldr Hooton's dedicated transponder codes for exercises? A pilot cannot see what code is being squawked by another aircraft. What's essential to safety about them?
Or another..I rang a contact phone number mentioned in a "permanent" NOTAM about kites being flown up to 1000ft amsl from a location on a choke point on one of my regular routes. The phone was answered by a woman who told me knew nothing about NOTAMs, or even what a NOTAM was. She said I would have to speak to her partner, who did have a kite but flew it very infrequently and he was at work.
Here's another: Why should pilots be informed about the details of Sqn Ldr Hooton's dedicated transponder codes for exercises? A pilot cannot see what code is being squawked by another aircraft. What's essential to safety about them?
Or another..I rang a contact phone number mentioned in a "permanent" NOTAM about kites being flown up to 1000ft amsl from a location on a choke point on one of my regular routes. The phone was answered by a woman who told me knew nothing about NOTAMs, or even what a NOTAM was. She said I would have to speak to her partner, who did have a kite but flew it very infrequently and he was at work.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: UK
Age: 35
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here's another: Why should pilots be informed about the details of Sqn Ldr Hooton's dedicated transponder codes for exercises? A pilot cannot see what code is being squawked by another aircraft. What's essential to safety about them?
Avoid imitations
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,576
Received 428 Likes
on
226 Posts
I've been flying since 1973 and since 1977 for a living and ditto, it's not done, to the best of my knowledge.
Controllers providing LARS often give traffic 'showing 7000 squawk with no altitude' or (for example) 'showing 7000 squawk indicating alt 2000ft unverified' on the assumption that pilots will know what a 7000 squawk means. But this is off the subject.
Sqn Ldr Hooton
FYI, in an earlier discussion someone said that Sqn Ldr Hooton was a role, rather than a person: "High-energy Operations Oversight / Telephone Operators / Notams".
HFD
HFD
Avoid imitations
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,576
Received 428 Likes
on
226 Posts
In which case is should be written Sqn Ldr, HOOTON (in accordance with service writing). Also, military protocol is never to use an abbreviation to someone who might not know what it means, without also writing it out in full. 
But it's still a meaningless NOTAM.
But it's still a meaningless NOTAM.
"meaningless NOTAM" - quite agree!
And the permanent kites of Blandford (1300ft!!!):
Q) EGTT/QWCLW/IV/M/W/000/015/5052N00211W001
B) FROM: 10/09/24 10:45C) TO: 10/12/24 23:59
E) KITE FLYING 1NM RADIUS 5052N 00211W (BLANDFORD FORUM).
ON-SITE CTC, TEL 01258 452411. 10-09-0534/AS 5.
LOWER: SFC
UPPER: 1300FT AMSL
SCHEDULE: 1045-SS PLUS30
Whilst rant mode is switched-on, here is a selection of useless NOTAMs from today's VFR brief:
Q) EGXX/QCSCS/IV/B/E/000/999/5441N00219W999
B) FROM: 10/07/26 00:00C) TO: 10/10/24 23:59
E) SSR CODE 4574 WILL BE ASSIGNED TO CERTAIN MINISTRY OF DEFENCE
ACFT PERFORMING FLYING TRAINING AND OPS OUTSIDE OF CONTROLLED
AIRSPACE (EITHER IN FORMATION OR AS SINGLE ACFT) AND NOT RECEIVING
AN AIR TRAFFIC SERVICE. THE CODE WILL BE UNVALIDATED AND
UNVERIFIED. OPS CTC 01264 784456.
AUS 10-07-0757.
Q) EGXX/QCSCS/IV/B/E/000/999/5441N00219W999
B) FROM: 10/07/26 00:00C) TO: 10/10/24 23:59
E) SSR CODE 7013 WILL BE ASSIGNED TO CERTAIN MINISTRY OF DEFENCE
ACFT PERFORMING FLYING TRAINING AND OPS OUTSIDE OF CONTROLLED
AIRSPACE (EITHER IN FORMATION OR AS SINGLE ACFT) AND NOT RECEIVING
AN AIR TRAFFIC SERVICE. THE CODE WILL BE UNVALIDATED AND UNVERIFIED.
OPS CTC 01407 766623. AUS 10-07-0757 AS 2.
Q) EGXX/QPFCH/IV/NBO/E/000/500/5441N00219W999
B) FROM: 10/09/30 00:00C) TO: 10/10/01 23:59
E) 30 SEP AND 01 OCT, 'FLIGHT LEVEL ADHERENCE DAYS'. TRIAL TO BE RUN
BY EUROCONTROL AND THE CENTRAL FLOW MANAGEMENT UNIT (CFMU). FOR MORE
INFORMATION, PILOTS AND AIR OPERATORS SHOULD CONSULT THE WEBSITES
www.adherencedays.eu (LOWER CASE) OR WWW.EUROCONTROL.INT/ADHERENCE
(LOWER CASE), SFC/FL500.
And the permanent kites of Blandford (1300ft!!!):
Q) EGTT/QWCLW/IV/M/W/000/015/5052N00211W001
B) FROM: 10/09/24 10:45C) TO: 10/12/24 23:59
E) KITE FLYING 1NM RADIUS 5052N 00211W (BLANDFORD FORUM).
ON-SITE CTC, TEL 01258 452411. 10-09-0534/AS 5.
LOWER: SFC
UPPER: 1300FT AMSL
SCHEDULE: 1045-SS PLUS30
Whilst rant mode is switched-on, here is a selection of useless NOTAMs from today's VFR brief:
Q) EGXX/QCSCS/IV/B/E/000/999/5441N00219W999
B) FROM: 10/07/26 00:00C) TO: 10/10/24 23:59
E) SSR CODE 4574 WILL BE ASSIGNED TO CERTAIN MINISTRY OF DEFENCE
ACFT PERFORMING FLYING TRAINING AND OPS OUTSIDE OF CONTROLLED
AIRSPACE (EITHER IN FORMATION OR AS SINGLE ACFT) AND NOT RECEIVING
AN AIR TRAFFIC SERVICE. THE CODE WILL BE UNVALIDATED AND
UNVERIFIED. OPS CTC 01264 784456.
AUS 10-07-0757.
Q) EGXX/QCSCS/IV/B/E/000/999/5441N00219W999
B) FROM: 10/07/26 00:00C) TO: 10/10/24 23:59
E) SSR CODE 7013 WILL BE ASSIGNED TO CERTAIN MINISTRY OF DEFENCE
ACFT PERFORMING FLYING TRAINING AND OPS OUTSIDE OF CONTROLLED
AIRSPACE (EITHER IN FORMATION OR AS SINGLE ACFT) AND NOT RECEIVING
AN AIR TRAFFIC SERVICE. THE CODE WILL BE UNVALIDATED AND UNVERIFIED.
OPS CTC 01407 766623. AUS 10-07-0757 AS 2.
Q) EGXX/QPFCH/IV/NBO/E/000/500/5441N00219W999
B) FROM: 10/09/30 00:00C) TO: 10/10/01 23:59
E) 30 SEP AND 01 OCT, 'FLIGHT LEVEL ADHERENCE DAYS'. TRIAL TO BE RUN
BY EUROCONTROL AND THE CENTRAL FLOW MANAGEMENT UNIT (CFMU). FOR MORE
INFORMATION, PILOTS AND AIR OPERATORS SHOULD CONSULT THE WEBSITES
www.adherencedays.eu (LOWER CASE) OR WWW.EUROCONTROL.INT/ADHERENCE
(LOWER CASE), SFC/FL500.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Savannah GA & Portsmouth UK
Posts: 1,784
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Captain Smithy
Hmmm....... You are exposing your own ignorance I fear, never mind you are not alone.
A NOTAM is "A notice containing information concerning the establishment, condition or change in any aeronautical facility, service, procedure or hazard, the timely knowledge of which is essential to personnel concerned with flight operations"
Try as I might I can't make that match your definition and I can't see the word "Pilot" in it.
Re squawks, I'd suggest that Radar Controllers fall into the category of "personnel concerned with flight operations" who need to know what units squawks have been allocated to so they know who the person on their screen is working.
I dare say a kite at 1300 ft has to be fairly large to lift the weight of its string and also be possessed of a fairly substantial string or wire to cope with the load. Wrapping it round a tail rotor might spoil a helo-jock's day.
It is of course possible for those who want to to tailor briefs to their own particular operations by filtering out NOTAM codes concerning things they feel are irrelevant. Not something that AIS will do though because they have no knowledge of your ops.
That said, I concur that there are things that get issued that have no relevance. They appear to be there for the purpose of backside protection rather than passing on any information that might make it possible for "personnel concerned with flight operations" to make things safer by modifying their behaviour.
Fair point Mike, although I think it misses the issue somewhat.
The NOTAM system is purely for important notices to pilots relating to safety.
The NOTAM system is purely for important notices to pilots relating to safety.
A NOTAM is "A notice containing information concerning the establishment, condition or change in any aeronautical facility, service, procedure or hazard, the timely knowledge of which is essential to personnel concerned with flight operations"
Try as I might I can't make that match your definition and I can't see the word "Pilot" in it.
Re squawks, I'd suggest that Radar Controllers fall into the category of "personnel concerned with flight operations" who need to know what units squawks have been allocated to so they know who the person on their screen is working.
I dare say a kite at 1300 ft has to be fairly large to lift the weight of its string and also be possessed of a fairly substantial string or wire to cope with the load. Wrapping it round a tail rotor might spoil a helo-jock's day.
It is of course possible for those who want to to tailor briefs to their own particular operations by filtering out NOTAM codes concerning things they feel are irrelevant. Not something that AIS will do though because they have no knowledge of your ops.
That said, I concur that there are things that get issued that have no relevance. They appear to be there for the purpose of backside protection rather than passing on any information that might make it possible for "personnel concerned with flight operations" to make things safer by modifying their behaviour.
The kites of Blandford - all is revealed!!!
If you don't believe that fact is often stranger than fiction ... read on.
I just rang the number in the kites NOTAM and spoke to the estates office of Bryanston school. The kite is flown (occasionally!) in order to train birds of prey to take food from the kite as an extra-curricula activity for the kids. Why in
does this infrequent activity justify a permanent NOTAM?
HFD
I just rang the number in the kites NOTAM and spoke to the estates office of Bryanston school. The kite is flown (occasionally!) in order to train birds of prey to take food from the kite as an extra-curricula activity for the kids. Why in
does this infrequent activity justify a permanent NOTAM?HFD
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: London UK
Posts: 517
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FYI, in an earlier discussion someone said that Sqn Ldr Hooton was a role, rather than a person: "High-energy Operations Oversight / Telephone Operators / Notams".
I also made it up, it was an attempt at humour!
I must remember the smilies next time...
niknak
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 2,335
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mike is correct - there's an extremely high degree of lack of appreciation (or you could say ignorance) being displayed on this pointless post.
NOTAMS are for pilots, ATCOs, Operations staff planning on behalf of operators and there are others.
Notams for filming are frequent and, given the costs and logistics of filming outdoors, its a perfectly reasonable request to make.
As for the rest, if you don't understand ask someone who knows, if its not relevant to you, disregard it.
NOTAMS are for pilots, ATCOs, Operations staff planning on behalf of operators and there are others.
Notams for filming are frequent and, given the costs and logistics of filming outdoors, its a perfectly reasonable request to make.
As for the rest, if you don't understand ask someone who knows, if its not relevant to you, disregard it.
Avoid imitations
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,576
Received 428 Likes
on
226 Posts
NOTAMS are for pilots, ATCOs, Operations staff planning on behalf of operators and there are others.
Notams for filming are frequent and, given the costs and logistics of filming outdoors, its a perfectly reasonable request to make.
Notams for filming are frequent and, given the costs and logistics of filming outdoors, its a perfectly reasonable request to make.
BTW, I'm fully aware of the potential danger of kites. I was in a close formation when the aircraft next to me wound up a very long nylon kite line around his tail rotor pitch change links, which bent inwards. Thankfully, there was no-one on the end of it and no-one was reported missing.
However, HFD has discovered something similar to me - birds of prey being flown from kites doesn't happen anything like every day at many of these "permanent" sites. I also rang one such contact number a while back because the area was on a regular route I was required to fly along and also land inside. The person involved told me he trained birds of prey and that I must avoid him by 3 nm. But he went on to say that he flew his kite anywhere within "his" 3 nm NOTAMed area (making it a 6 nm radius / 113 square nm "avoid"). I explained that pilots couldn't possibly avoid all that airspace (it was also in an LFA). I also explained that the airport I operated from (as did scheduled airline flights) only had a 2.5nm ATZ, let alone 6nm. He said that he would put on his Landrover's hazard warning flashers so pilots could see him. I left him to it at that point.
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: just to the left of the filing cabinet
Posts: 255
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NOTAM request - contact details
Rather a cunning stunt for the dyed-in-the-wool NIMBY, buy a kite/bird and NOTAM your very own no fly zone! The common theme here is that all the NOTAM dross serves not only to clutter up the system, but also allows important information to become buried in the noise.
A quick search on the internet turned up very little regarding the criteria for issuing a NOTAM, other than a page on the UK Rocketry Association web site. There they recommend using the following e-mail address or phone number - so it seems logical that this is the contact point for 'feed-back' regarding abuse of what is, after all, a safety system.
I have contacted them by e-mail this morning requesting a copy of their guidelines for accepting a NOTAM request - we'll see what happens.
The UKRA info is as follows, maybe other forumites have alternative/better contact routes?
[From UKRA site]
[email protected] and titled "NOTAM Request". If you want to talk to the cell for advice telephone 020 7453 6589
[Edited to compensate for my inability to spell on a Saturday]
A quick search on the internet turned up very little regarding the criteria for issuing a NOTAM, other than a page on the UK Rocketry Association web site. There they recommend using the following e-mail address or phone number - so it seems logical that this is the contact point for 'feed-back' regarding abuse of what is, after all, a safety system.
I have contacted them by e-mail this morning requesting a copy of their guidelines for accepting a NOTAM request - we'll see what happens.
The UKRA info is as follows, maybe other forumites have alternative/better contact routes?
[From UKRA site]
[email protected] and titled "NOTAM Request". If you want to talk to the cell for advice telephone 020 7453 6589
[Edited to compensate for my inability to spell on a Saturday]
Last edited by znww5; 2nd Oct 2010 at 16:34.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think the problem is that the need to cover one's 6 o'clock (the biggest irritation of the 21st century) results in almost no notam proposal being refused.
Still, skim-reading the E) lines on a typical narrow route briefing takes only 1-2 minutes, max. Most of the stuff is garbage.
Still, skim-reading the E) lines on a typical narrow route briefing takes only 1-2 minutes, max. Most of the stuff is garbage.