Why are NOTAMS so obscure?
Join Date: May 2010
Location: the Netherlands
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A tool (developed for personal use, but nowadays used by hunderds of pilots and flight ops departments each day): NOTAM Decoder by mickeyairlines.net
It has its limitations, but if there is standardizes GPS entry in the NOTAM, it will try to plot the affected area in Google Maps. It also decodes the standard FAA and ICAO abbreviations, along with some extra 'commonly used abbreviations'.
It makes my life planning a bit easier. As with any tool, never rely on it too much ;-)
Suggestions are always welcome to improve this tool!
It has its limitations, but if there is standardizes GPS entry in the NOTAM, it will try to plot the affected area in Google Maps. It also decodes the standard FAA and ICAO abbreviations, along with some extra 'commonly used abbreviations'.
It makes my life planning a bit easier. As with any tool, never rely on it too much ;-)
Suggestions are always welcome to improve this tool!
Q) KZOA/QLPAS/IV/BO/A/000/999/3737N12223W005
B) FROM: 13/07/06 22:19C) TO: 13/07/08 22:19 EST
E) RWY 28L PAPI U/S
Q) KZOA/QIGAS/I/NBO/A/000/999/3737N12223W005
B) FROM: 13/06/01 14:00C) TO: 13/08/22 23:59
E) ILS RWY 28L GP U/S
FAA has a 500 plus page document with no info on the Q line. ICAO 8126 looks like a big one too, crashed my browser googling it. We all know KZOA and of course and any idiot can recognize LAT/LONGS.
So to begin, what is QLPAS? How does it differ from QICAS?
What is signified by Q), B), and E)?
B) FROM: 13/07/06 22:19C) TO: 13/07/08 22:19 EST
E) RWY 28L PAPI U/S
Q) KZOA/QIGAS/I/NBO/A/000/999/3737N12223W005
B) FROM: 13/06/01 14:00C) TO: 13/08/22 23:59
E) ILS RWY 28L GP U/S
FAA has a 500 plus page document with no info on the Q line. ICAO 8126 looks like a big one too, crashed my browser googling it. We all know KZOA and of course and any idiot can recognize LAT/LONGS.
So to begin, what is QLPAS? How does it differ from QICAS?
What is signified by Q), B), and E)?
Q stands for the Qline. L is for lighting, P for PAPI.
I is for ILS, G for Glidepath, (L for Localiser).
B is start time, C end time, D any intermediate times, E the Notam text ( or the bit the pilot reads).
The Qline is used to place the Notam in the correct part of a bulletin.
I is for ILS, G for Glidepath, (L for Localiser).
B is start time, C end time, D any intermediate times, E the Notam text ( or the bit the pilot reads).
The Qline is used to place the Notam in the correct part of a bulletin.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Hamburg
Age: 46
Posts: 432
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
- KZOA: the relevant FIR
- QLPAS: The NOTAM code group. This always begins with the letter Q. LP stands for PAPI and AS stands for unserviceable.
- IV: IFR and VFR
- BO: letter B for "NOTAM selected for PIB entry" and letter O for "NOTAM concerning flight operations"
- A: Scope indicator. A stands for aerodrome.
- 000 and 999: Lower and upper limit in FL. No specific height information given in this case, hence 000 and 999.
- 3737N12223W005: co-ordinates and radius of 005 NM
- KZOA: the relevant FIR
- QIGAS: The NOTAM code group. This always begins with the letter Q. IG stands for glide Path (ILS) and AS stands for unserviceable.
- I: IFR
- NBO: letter N for "NOTAM selected for the immediate attention of aircraft operators", letter B for "NOTAM selected for PIB entry" and letter O for "NOTAM concerning flight operations"
- A: Scope indicator. A stands for aerodrome.
- 000 and 999: Lower and upper limit in FL. No specific height information given in this case, hence 000 and 999.
- 3737N12223W005: co-ordinates and radius of 005 NM
Last edited by hvogt; 7th Jul 2013 at 10:31.
Pompey till I die
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Guildford
Age: 51
Posts: 779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Imho
IMHO, from somebody who works in an extremely fast moving tech industry, the thing that surprises me about PPL & Aviation is how resistant to change it is. The cultural resistance permeates everything from the WW2 based PPL syllabus, to the generally aging PPL population to the club houses that are usually adorned with images of their long illustrious history. For example you are far more likely to see a model spitfire in the club house rather than, Virgin Galactic 1 for example. Most of us fly aircraft 30 or 40 years old.
GPS isn't taught on the PPL, everything is done using the whizz wheel (not even an electronic calculator). Flight plans are still transmitted in an archaic language.
I know you can argue back and forth about how, well what if the batteries run out of your calculator? How will you calculate your magnetic bearing then? Or what happens if your GPS packs up? How will you navigate then?
Personally I can't help but believe that a much more modern approach to aviation would be beneficial. With SkyDemon you can snap the points you want, generate your plog, put into your GPS and be out of the club house in about 5 mins flat. It makes flying more fun, it makes passengers more interested in going flying if they're not spending time waiting around for you to calculate the drift, on a whizz wheel, at 2000ft @ 100kts. I wonder if aviation would have less attrition?
Imagine if ALL airfields had ILS, if everybody was required to complete at least the IMCr before graduating? If all the IMC planning was done by computer? I think flying would be far more fun and rewarding.
I also think you'd get fewer infringements, fewer people missing NOTAMs. If you clicked your route, everything was presented plainly and easily for you then you remove one less component to go wrong. At the very least the NOTAM co-ordinates could be plotted onto Google maps and presented to you rather than having to decipher them yourself, with possible errors.
Either way, in my view, from my limited position at the bottom of the aviation PPL world, the culture is historical, nostalgic looking. Resistance to change is everywhere and for the time being the status Quo look like they'll get their way.
Maybe it's just the world we are? We have to accommodate all edge cases, i.e. a mud hut morse code transmission, and so aviation can't move on. The thing is, it's surprising giving the massive leaps forward in the aerospace industry, where innovation and progress rule.
Hence things like archaic NOTAMs, AIS websites that are a shining example in how to make unusable user interfaces are here to stay. There again, that's what makes us cool. We understand all of this stuff that mere mortals can only dream about understanding! Like what do those funny coloured lights mean on the apron?
GPS isn't taught on the PPL, everything is done using the whizz wheel (not even an electronic calculator). Flight plans are still transmitted in an archaic language.
I know you can argue back and forth about how, well what if the batteries run out of your calculator? How will you calculate your magnetic bearing then? Or what happens if your GPS packs up? How will you navigate then?
Personally I can't help but believe that a much more modern approach to aviation would be beneficial. With SkyDemon you can snap the points you want, generate your plog, put into your GPS and be out of the club house in about 5 mins flat. It makes flying more fun, it makes passengers more interested in going flying if they're not spending time waiting around for you to calculate the drift, on a whizz wheel, at 2000ft @ 100kts. I wonder if aviation would have less attrition?
Imagine if ALL airfields had ILS, if everybody was required to complete at least the IMCr before graduating? If all the IMC planning was done by computer? I think flying would be far more fun and rewarding.
I also think you'd get fewer infringements, fewer people missing NOTAMs. If you clicked your route, everything was presented plainly and easily for you then you remove one less component to go wrong. At the very least the NOTAM co-ordinates could be plotted onto Google maps and presented to you rather than having to decipher them yourself, with possible errors.
Either way, in my view, from my limited position at the bottom of the aviation PPL world, the culture is historical, nostalgic looking. Resistance to change is everywhere and for the time being the status Quo look like they'll get their way.
Maybe it's just the world we are? We have to accommodate all edge cases, i.e. a mud hut morse code transmission, and so aviation can't move on. The thing is, it's surprising giving the massive leaps forward in the aerospace industry, where innovation and progress rule.
Hence things like archaic NOTAMs, AIS websites that are a shining example in how to make unusable user interfaces are here to stay. There again, that's what makes us cool. We understand all of this stuff that mere mortals can only dream about understanding! Like what do those funny coloured lights mean on the apron?
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Surrey
Posts: 1,217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No matter what technology is used to deliver the message - you still need to be able to understand it and fly the airplane.
The example NOTAMs pretty clearly (particularly if you include the A line, which tells you it relates to SFO) tells you the glide slope and PAPIs are out of service and you are pretty likely to have to manage the vertical profile yourself (thus avoiding the sea wall) (On reflection, the PAPI one you can see from the B) line is post crash so may simply be that the PAPIs (along with the ALS were destroyed), so the B) line is useful for geeks, but not relevant to pilots).
The E) line is the line intended for humans to read and understand. The Q line for pointy heads gives a good quick summary of what, where, and when.
Having the e) line of -
'RWY 28 PAPI U/S'
(using standard acronyms and abbreviations) is quite a bit shorter and (IMHO clearer) than,
'The precision approach path indicating system associated with runway 28 is not available for use by landing aircraft.'
The first version I can read and understand in a single glance. The second has 4 times as much text to read and in my mind doesn't simplify anything.
There is a fundamental problem that there is quite a lot of information that might be relevant to various types of operation and the public systems just provide the raw data with limited filtering. Determining what to filter is always a challenge, as the filterer really needs to understand exactly what the operator is going to do (i.e. it takes a bit of a brain).
The example NOTAMs pretty clearly (particularly if you include the A line, which tells you it relates to SFO) tells you the glide slope and PAPIs are out of service and you are pretty likely to have to manage the vertical profile yourself (thus avoiding the sea wall) (On reflection, the PAPI one you can see from the B) line is post crash so may simply be that the PAPIs (along with the ALS were destroyed), so the B) line is useful for geeks, but not relevant to pilots).
The E) line is the line intended for humans to read and understand. The Q line for pointy heads gives a good quick summary of what, where, and when.
Having the e) line of -
'RWY 28 PAPI U/S'
(using standard acronyms and abbreviations) is quite a bit shorter and (IMHO clearer) than,
'The precision approach path indicating system associated with runway 28 is not available for use by landing aircraft.'
The first version I can read and understand in a single glance. The second has 4 times as much text to read and in my mind doesn't simplify anything.
There is a fundamental problem that there is quite a lot of information that might be relevant to various types of operation and the public systems just provide the raw data with limited filtering. Determining what to filter is always a challenge, as the filterer really needs to understand exactly what the operator is going to do (i.e. it takes a bit of a brain).
Last edited by mm_flynn; 7th Jul 2013 at 17:56.
Pompey till I die
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Guildford
Age: 51
Posts: 779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree but
No matter what technology is used to deliver the message - you still need to be able to understand it and fly the airplane.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Surrey
Posts: 1,217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree that pictorially representing NOTAMs can help (specifically drop zones, Air display RA, etc.), but the NOTAMs specifically mentioned in this thread won't benefit from pictorial representation
I can not imagine a helicopter pilot using the H lanes in London doesn't know where Vauxhall, Central London is. Equally, I can not imagine a commercial pilot flying to KSFO does not know where the glide slope for KSFO is located.
The helicopter pilot almost surely hadn't expected to be diverting into Battersea from a position where that crane NOTAM was relevant. So he problem read the NOTAM, logged it in his mind as not relevant and then in the pressure of working out his diversion option didn't remember the NOTAM.
I can not imagine a helicopter pilot using the H lanes in London doesn't know where Vauxhall, Central London is. Equally, I can not imagine a commercial pilot flying to KSFO does not know where the glide slope for KSFO is located.
The helicopter pilot almost surely hadn't expected to be diverting into Battersea from a position where that crane NOTAM was relevant. So he problem read the NOTAM, logged it in his mind as not relevant and then in the pressure of working out his diversion option didn't remember the NOTAM.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Savannah GA & Portsmouth UK
Posts: 1,784
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pictorial representation is not as easy as one might think.
Each NOTAM has a centre and radius of influence at the end of the Q Line which should describe the smallest circle capable of containing the activity. A common RAF flight refuelling exercise involves flying up and down the east coast of the UK. Which means that the circle covers most of the FIR. So if you were operating off the east coast and looking at a map of your route it's quite on the cards that neither the centre nor any part of circumference of the plotted activity would appear on the chart of your route. Years ago there was a fatal CFIT in high ground in South Wales. The NAV was found tuned in to the Lands End VOR, no reason why not, the a/c was within its operational coverage, however it was NOTAMMED as out of service. How do you pictorially represent that something well away from your intended route might affect your flight?
Abbreviations are part of the language of aviation and convey a precise meaning. So as a landing aid we have a Precision Approach Path Indicator. That in itself is an abbreviation, a name used for a precisely defined piece of kit. It's abbreviated to PAPI and everyone should understand what it means. A list of the abbreviations used on AIS publications is in GEN 2.2 of every ICAO state's AIP as well as in ICAO 8400. Since the Chicago Convention allows national differences GEN 2.2 is more precise because it includes abbreviations used by that state's AIS that may not be included in ICAO 8400.
While it's true that in aviation we have a lot of TLA's (three letter acronyms!) the use of jargon is certainly not exclusive to us. In the UK the meaning of Zebra Crossing is clearly understood by all motorists but it would have an entirely different meaning in Africa and would be greeted by incomprehension in the US. The overwhelming need for standardisation of terminology in international aviation was recognised many years ago. It is a huge contributor to safety.
Each NOTAM has a centre and radius of influence at the end of the Q Line which should describe the smallest circle capable of containing the activity. A common RAF flight refuelling exercise involves flying up and down the east coast of the UK. Which means that the circle covers most of the FIR. So if you were operating off the east coast and looking at a map of your route it's quite on the cards that neither the centre nor any part of circumference of the plotted activity would appear on the chart of your route. Years ago there was a fatal CFIT in high ground in South Wales. The NAV was found tuned in to the Lands End VOR, no reason why not, the a/c was within its operational coverage, however it was NOTAMMED as out of service. How do you pictorially represent that something well away from your intended route might affect your flight?
Abbreviations are part of the language of aviation and convey a precise meaning. So as a landing aid we have a Precision Approach Path Indicator. That in itself is an abbreviation, a name used for a precisely defined piece of kit. It's abbreviated to PAPI and everyone should understand what it means. A list of the abbreviations used on AIS publications is in GEN 2.2 of every ICAO state's AIP as well as in ICAO 8400. Since the Chicago Convention allows national differences GEN 2.2 is more precise because it includes abbreviations used by that state's AIS that may not be included in ICAO 8400.
While it's true that in aviation we have a lot of TLA's (three letter acronyms!) the use of jargon is certainly not exclusive to us. In the UK the meaning of Zebra Crossing is clearly understood by all motorists but it would have an entirely different meaning in Africa and would be greeted by incomprehension in the US. The overwhelming need for standardisation of terminology in international aviation was recognised many years ago. It is a huge contributor to safety.
Last edited by Mike Cross; 8th Jul 2013 at 06:01.
