Why are NOTAMS so obscure?

[mary meagher]

Just finished reading the latest AAIB bulletin regarding the Augusta A109E that was flying across London in freezing fog and met a crane. And embedded in the report is the following item:

"The following NOTAM relating to the crane was valid at the time of the accident:

Q) EGTT/QOBCE/IV/M/

AE/000/008/5129N00007W001

B) FROM: 13/01/07 17:00C TO: 13/03/15 23:59

E) HIGH RISE JIB CRANE (LIT AT NIGHT)

OPR W1 1NM 5129N 00007W, HGT

770FT AMSL (VAUXHALL, CENTRAL
LONDON), OPS CTC 020 7820 3151

12-10-0429/AS 2/

The following is a plain language translation.

'In the London Flight Information Region an obstacle has been erected affecting both instrument and visual traffic. Aereodrome and enroute traffic is affected. The obstacle is from the surface to 800 ft amsl and is positioned within a 1 nm radius of 51 29 N 000 07 W. The obstacle will be in place from 1700 hrs on 7 Jan 2013 to 2359 hrs on 15 March 2013. It is a high rise jib crane (lit at night).' "

Now I am just a lowly PPL IR lapsed tug pilot and gliding instructor with only 3,000 hours. And fail to understand WHY they insist on publishing NOTAMS in the secret code understood only after indoctrination into the black arts.....instead of the PLAIN LANGUAGE that the AAIB felt compelled to add to the report. When I am supposed to read the current notams that affect our operations, I suffer a bad case of brain freeze. Can somebody give a justification that holds water? or is it just leftover custom like QFE, QNH, and other secret codes designed to be sent by telegraph operators clicking keys.....??

[dublinpilot]

The e section is plain language. The rest is really just for sorting not for reading. Some Notam briefing systems don't even give the q line that the aaib translated.

[abgd]

A few speculations, without knowledge:

-Need to get international agreement to change it?
-Easier to computer-sort the brief format?
-human readable language tends to have more ambiguity?
-easier for people without English as a first language?

[Crash one]

I was under the impression that the Internationally recognised language of aviation was English. Hence the requirement for level 4 /6 or whatever.
So for NOTAM read "Notice To Computers & people who can't speak english & therefore cannot be Airmen"

[2 sheds]

I would suggest that in the context of an AAIB report, the plain language version is for the benefit of Joe Public who might read it and has never even heard of Notam abbreviations/format. However, the exact notam is reported verbatim also, as that was what was actually published.
The advantages of coding are international standardisation, and the user not having to wade through an essay to determine the information. Can't see the problem, myself. The international aviation language of English is not a good argument!

2 s

[hvogt]

I was under the impression that the Internationally recognised language of aviation was English.

Much as I like English, I doubt the speakers of the other official ICAO languages would agree.

[Sky blue and black]

If you want to understand the Q Line then read ICAO doc 8126 or Annex 15.
The Q Line is used worldwide to place the Notam in the correct position in the brief. It's a tool used by AIS.

[localflighteast]

for me it is not judt the obscure langugae it is the sheer number of them that you need to wade through.

In a city that is undergoing a massive construction boom, evey single crane seems to be NOTAMED , even when a lot of them are lower than the surrounding buildings
Runway 15 has been NOTAMED shut for the past three years ( at least) It makes trying to find the actual relevant ones almost impossible

I swear some of those NOTAMS are over 5 years old

[piperboy84]

I,m with you Mary, although i understand the need to produce in a format that is sort-able and automatically constructed from codes generated from computers that make it uniform for international standards , they could make it a little easier. I have program that converts weather to plain English but feel i should not have to depend on it. I attended a MET aviation weather class in Exeter a while back, in the class where pilots far more experienced than me, when the instructor asked them to translate a METAR or TAF they managed it but it took a little while, they didn't just rattle it off as i expected them to do.

I am sure there is happy medium between format and readability, me being low-time VFR haven't a Scooby Doo what those NOTAMS are somtimes

[BackPacker]

HIGH RISE JIB CRANE (LIT AT NIGHT)

OPR W1 1NM 5129N 00007W, HGT

770FT AMSL (VAUXHALL, CENTRAL
LONDON), OPS CTC 020 7820 3151

Sorry to rain on your parade but this is perfectly clear to me. There's a crane moving about in the Vauxhall, Central London area and it's up to 770 feet high. If I would be operating anywhere close there's even a telephone number I can call for its exact status.

Now there are a few minor gripes you can make here. "HGT 770FT AMSL"???? It's either "ALT 770FT AMSL" or "HGT 770FT AGL". Furthermore "Aereodrome [sic] and enroute traffic is affected." Does anybody seriously believe *enroute* traffic will be affected by a 770ft crane over Central London? And why would IFR traffic need to know about this, as it's well below the MSA or MVA for that area?

I swear some of those NOTAMS are over 5 years old

That's something I can agree with. NOTAMs are, in my view, intended for information that's either temporary, or can't wait until the next AIRAC cycle. NOTAMS that are in the system for more than, say, three months are a misuse of the system, as far as I'm concerned.

If you want to understand the Q Line then read ICAO doc 8126 or Annex 15.

More in general, I find that the PPL training course leaves pilots utterly lacking in ability to find information that is not readily available on the clubs noticeboards. I have met a lot of fresh pilots who had to dig very deep in their memory to remember what an "AIP" was, or a "POH", and could not remember at all where they would conceivably find them. Maybe it's because 'air law' is considered a "fire and forget" exam, which you need to get out of the way before first solo.

(Although I agree that the current state of affairs, with EASA taking over from national legislation, and having published the EC rulings but not finalized and published the AMCs and GMs yet, and different countries having filed derogations, and EASA not being applicable to Annex II aircraft anyway, the current legal situation is far from easy.)

[Whopity]

NOTAMS were written in a format that matched the method of transmission. Whilst technology may have moved on in some parts of the World, sometimes it is necessary to retain the Lowest Common Denominator to allow for others where technology has not caught up.

I recall filing a flight plan at Banjul Yundum and the gentleman in the mud hut transmitted my plan using a morse key!

We still use Magnetic Compasses, Pressure Altimeters and AM radios for much the same reason.

[chevvron]

NOTAMs for the UK and Europe are written in the official ICAO format and are distributed centrally from a communications centre in Belgium.

[Another_CFI]

NOTAMs are promulgated for the benefit of the flying community who should be able to interpret the content.

AAIB bulletins are published for the benefit of the flying community and also the general public, who cannot be expected to be able to interpret NOTAMs, hence the need for an interpretation of the contents of the relevant NOTAM(s).

The benefit of the current form of NOTAMs is that the original NOTAM is understandable to everyone irrespective of their native language. If NOTAMs were written in plain language how much room for mis-interpretation would exist for readers who did not speak/read/understand the language used.

How many English speakers would understand the following "In la région d'Information de vol Londres un obstacle a été érigé en affectant instrument et trafic visuel. Trafic Aereodrome et enroute est affecté. L'obstacle de la surface à 800 ft amsl et est placé dans un rayon de 1 mn 51 29 N 07 000 w. L'obstacle sera en place à partir de 1700 hrs sur 7 janvier 2013 à 2359 hrs sur 15 mars 2013. C'est une grue de potence de grande hauteur" if the original was published in French?

[Good Business Sense]

One of the big problems is the sheer number of notams you could be looking at for a given trip - many of them for obstacles - for many, the name of the location means nothing (Vauxhall) and the idea of plotting them .... well !!

I know there are some good software packages which help but most don't pinpoint the locations.

In the days following the incident in London I noticed quite a substantial amount of new obstacle notams appearing at my local airfields.

I would also would not like to take a bet on how many accidents we will have in the future with GA aircraft and wind farms - some of these windmills are incredibly high.

[flybymike]

And in Caernarfon some of them are incredibly close to the runway.

[Agaricus bisporus]

I'd venture to suggest that for flying IFR/IMC over central London then something at 800ft is of no interest or relevance to you whatsoever because you will be nowhere near it vertically.

Further, in VMC it should be of little critical importance as you can see it and you won't, of course, be off the published route at that point.

Other than that it is not much more than an advisory.

[Good Business Sense]

Unfortunately, to know that a NOTAM about an obstacle (or many other things) is of no relevance, whether you are IFR/IMC or VFR/VMC you have to read it and strictly speaking, plot it, to know exactly where it is and if it is an issue - is it just outside the airport boundary, 3 miles or 5 miles away etc

[Torque Tonight]

Does anybody seriously believe *enroute* traffic will be affected by a 770ft crane over Central London?

Clearly the answer is yes, otherwise this accident report wouldn't exist. Whilst many people are experts in their own little niche of aviation, often they have limited understanding of other types of operation.

Regarding NOTAMS, TAFs and METARs, plain language is not plain language for someone with a different first language and aviation is an international activity. Although he codes take a bit of effort to get to grips with, with repetition and familiarity they minimize ambiguity and are fairly easy to understand.

[PompeyPaul]

Obvious

The reason to obfuscate NOTAMs is to give me an advantage over the lowly ground based Luddite. Otherwise why bother spending 45 hours doing a PPL if it was all in plain English and easy to understand?

Why would I need 45 hours of PPL training if the AIS website was as simple as clicking points of where I'll be flying and it giving me the briefings I need?

It's the same reason why we obfuscate IT and build redundancy into laptops. Otherwise there'd be no IT industry and we wouldn't get paid vast piles of cash for pressing a few buttons every day!

[mad_jock]

we wouldn't get paid vast piles of cash for pressing a few buttons every day!

Ehh are you talent limited?

Write a script for a cron job.