NOTAM site 'upgrade'
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Savannah GA & Portsmouth UK
Posts: 1,784
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AIS Website Proposals
Please go to http://www.telecall.uk.com/ais/news!.htm
to see the proposals for sorting out the problems at the AIS web site.
These are being distributed widely to interested parties for comment prior to a meeting to be held in mid-November with the AIS regulator at the Directorate of Airspace Policy, CAA.
There is an email address at the end of the document which you can use to inform DAP of your views.
Mike
BTW the outage last night lasted about 20 mins and AIS have confirmed that they think it was due to loading the AIRAC update again (same thing happened last time)
to see the proposals for sorting out the problems at the AIS web site.
These are being distributed widely to interested parties for comment prior to a meeting to be held in mid-November with the AIS regulator at the Directorate of Airspace Policy, CAA.
There is an email address at the end of the document which you can use to inform DAP of your views.
Mike
BTW the outage last night lasted about 20 mins and AIS have confirmed that they think it was due to loading the AIRAC update again (same thing happened last time)
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Surrey, UK.
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wanted this back on page one 
More news being posted to www.telecall.uk.com/ais (as soon as I get off PPRuNe
)
Keep your comments coming - we have amassed a huge amount of feedback, but the more the better...
Cheers
More news being posted to www.telecall.uk.com/ais (as soon as I get off PPRuNe
)Keep your comments coming - we have amassed a huge amount of feedback, but the more the better...
Cheers
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Savannah GA & Portsmouth UK
Posts: 1,784
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AIS Meeting
Hi Folks
Another update - things are moving.
A meeting has been provisionally arranged for 15 November. The attendees are likely to include AIS, their regulator from the CAA, other interested parties from the CAA, a representative from the BGA and Russell and myself.
The regulator is John Gentlemean, Manager, Aeronautical Charts and Data at the CAA Directorate of Airspace Policy.
He has agreeed that the email address [email protected] can be used for you to make representations and has already received a number of mails as a result of our putting the address on our proposals, which can be found at
http://www.telecall.uk.com/ais/propo...the_future.htm
SORRY! This forum doesn't like long URL's, try http://www.telecall.uk.com/ais instead. Mike
Please make your voice heard by sending an email. Don't get upset if you don't get a response, there are likely to be too many to reply to individually but they will all be taken into account.
If you support our proposal please say so but it is equally important for you to raise your voice if you disagree with what we are suggesting.
AIS and the CAA have come forward and demonstrated that they are ready and willing to listen to your views and deserve credit for doing so. Please give them a constructive response.
Mike
Another update - things are moving.
A meeting has been provisionally arranged for 15 November. The attendees are likely to include AIS, their regulator from the CAA, other interested parties from the CAA, a representative from the BGA and Russell and myself.
The regulator is John Gentlemean, Manager, Aeronautical Charts and Data at the CAA Directorate of Airspace Policy.
He has agreeed that the email address [email protected] can be used for you to make representations and has already received a number of mails as a result of our putting the address on our proposals, which can be found at
http://www.telecall.uk.com/ais/propo...the_future.htm
SORRY! This forum doesn't like long URL's, try http://www.telecall.uk.com/ais instead. Mike
Please make your voice heard by sending an email. Don't get upset if you don't get a response, there are likely to be too many to reply to individually but they will all be taken into account.
If you support our proposal please say so but it is equally important for you to raise your voice if you disagree with what we are suggesting.
AIS and the CAA have come forward and demonstrated that they are ready and willing to listen to your views and deserve credit for doing so. Please give them a constructive response.
Mike
Last edited by Mike Cross; 23rd Oct 2002 at 11:55.
PPruNaholic!
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Buckinghamshire
Age: 61
Posts: 1,615
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well done guys - I have sent an email to the regulator in support of your proposal, and urge others to do so as well - it took me about 2 minutes.
Best,
Best,
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Gatwick
Age: 53
Posts: 86
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sadly I was one of the unlucky pilots who suffered the "missing NOTAM" problem during the early days, and as a result I very nearly bimbled through the middle of an airshow, save for an alert ATController. That event, exacerbated by my very low level of experience, resulted in my not flying at all for nearly two months, and even now I get a case of the jitters when I plan a flight away from my home airfield. I'm hoping that will pass given time, and I plan to get at IMC rating early next year to rebuild my confidence somewhat.
My case may be an extreme one, but since the removal of the old A1/A8 bulletins and the consequent effect on tools such as NOTAMPlot and NotamPro, I have noticed that the number of pilots I know who check NOTAMs regularly has fallen alarmingly. Most now complain that it is too hard, too slow or just too awkward, and very few bother to try. It is no longer possible for the flying club I am a member of to print out a concise list of NOTAMs for the noticeboard, nor is it quick and easy to get a chart showing "areas of interest" in the local flying area. Even some of the most experienced and cautious pilots I know have been known not to bother any more, with the obvious attendant risks.
Most pilots previously regarded NOTAMs as a necessary evil, now, sadly, they are regarded by many as just evil and no longer necessary. It will take some time to reverse this, and in the meantime there is an increased risk of airspace infringements and other incidents which could have been avoided. Technology will continue to progress, but hopefully future progress will be tempered by the lessons learnt in the last few months, and the changes will be managed with a more sympathetic eye for those who use the service(s) being "upgraded".
I must offer a huge "thank-you" to all of the people who have been trying to improve the current situation, especially Mike Cross, Russell Howton, Ian Fallon and the all of the people behind the scenes in NATS, the CAA, FlyOnTrack, Flyer, ... the list goes on and on. I hope that all your efforts will quickly provide all pilots with a system which NATS can be proud of. To that end I have added my support to Mike and Russell's list of suggestions through the [email protected] email address - have you?
Cheers,
MD
My case may be an extreme one, but since the removal of the old A1/A8 bulletins and the consequent effect on tools such as NOTAMPlot and NotamPro, I have noticed that the number of pilots I know who check NOTAMs regularly has fallen alarmingly. Most now complain that it is too hard, too slow or just too awkward, and very few bother to try. It is no longer possible for the flying club I am a member of to print out a concise list of NOTAMs for the noticeboard, nor is it quick and easy to get a chart showing "areas of interest" in the local flying area. Even some of the most experienced and cautious pilots I know have been known not to bother any more, with the obvious attendant risks.
Most pilots previously regarded NOTAMs as a necessary evil, now, sadly, they are regarded by many as just evil and no longer necessary. It will take some time to reverse this, and in the meantime there is an increased risk of airspace infringements and other incidents which could have been avoided. Technology will continue to progress, but hopefully future progress will be tempered by the lessons learnt in the last few months, and the changes will be managed with a more sympathetic eye for those who use the service(s) being "upgraded".
I must offer a huge "thank-you" to all of the people who have been trying to improve the current situation, especially Mike Cross, Russell Howton, Ian Fallon and the all of the people behind the scenes in NATS, the CAA, FlyOnTrack, Flyer, ... the list goes on and on. I hope that all your efforts will quickly provide all pilots with a system which NATS can be proud of. To that end I have added my support to Mike and Russell's list of suggestions through the [email protected] email address - have you?
Cheers,
MD
It's not foolproof but I have reverted to the Calendar section of Pilot magazine to find out where the airshows are when I am planning to fly.
The NOTAM situation is a fiasco and heads should roll for this situation.
The NOTAM situation is a fiasco and heads should roll for this situation.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Daventry UK
Posts: 487
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mr John Gentleman
Sir
I am one of the GA pilots adversley affected by the Notam fiasco. I was also the author of the Times letter.
I note that you are quoted as being a PPL who has found the current narrow route briefing "usable". Whilst I agree that some of the more outrageous defects have been removed from the site, I cannot agree with your quoted judgement in this case. In my opinion, the site in it's present form creates a sufficient obstacle in the path of pilots wishing to obtain Notams before flight that many flights are in practice conducted without briefing.
As the owner of a software company, I also believe that there are significant issues about whether an interactive web site can EVER provide the reliability, performance, accuracy and usability that is essential in this application. Nats appear to have bought in to a 'consumer quality' product, but even if they matched the IT investment of say, Avis car rental, I doubt that their IT provider would be willing to financially underwrite the safety of flight exposures created as a result.
The idea behind the interactive web site is entirely laudable. However, the reality is what those who employ programmers sometimes refer to as the 90/10 rule: 10% of the effort yields 90% of the result, but to get the last 10% - well, you can guess. If the project is unsuccessful, well, no problem. But if users actually come on line, then is that last 10% that matters.
The real problem with web sites is success - the more users, the bigger the problems and the more unfamiliar the territory. Solve one set of problems and you just get more users. It's a virtuous circle that burns you alive! Worse, I don't belive the current site has even reached the 90% mark yet, while in a safety critical application like this we need better integrity than most commercial applications.
I fully endorse the initiative being persued by Michael Cross and Russell Howton.
However, I suggest that in order to properly address this issue the following steps are needed:
1) Re-instate the manual A1/A8 bulletins temporarily, but immediately - re-hire the personnel if needed.
2) Suspend development of the web site until it is established that it is actually possible to provide a satisfactory service using this technology. Classify the existing site as 'evaluation only - not for use in flight planning' and refer users to the manual A1/A8.
3) Put every effort into providing the information feed specified by Mike and Russell. I predict that there will be a furious competition amongst programmer/pilots to develop the must usuable interpretive software.
Please make no mistake - lives are being put at risk every day. A computer literate friend, unable to obtain Notam, flew to xxxx only to find the into wind runway closed. Vectored to the servicable runway, he conducted a cross wind landing well into his, and the aircraft's, limitations. If he had crashed, it would have been his fault. But if he had had the Notam, he would have gone somewhere else.
Working together, we are in sight of a useful objective - provision of Notam information that can be used by every pilot without excuse for the first time in UK aviation history. For this, graphical rendition and local filtering are essential. The pilot community is offering this escape route to Nats, and to CAA, 'on a plate'. In return, we must have immediate restoration of the manual A1/A8 bulletins without prevarication, so that no more flights are conducted without briefing when one is available.
Yours faithfully
David Viewing
(Copies of this letter posted to relevant forums)
Sir
I am one of the GA pilots adversley affected by the Notam fiasco. I was also the author of the Times letter.
I note that you are quoted as being a PPL who has found the current narrow route briefing "usable". Whilst I agree that some of the more outrageous defects have been removed from the site, I cannot agree with your quoted judgement in this case. In my opinion, the site in it's present form creates a sufficient obstacle in the path of pilots wishing to obtain Notams before flight that many flights are in practice conducted without briefing.
As the owner of a software company, I also believe that there are significant issues about whether an interactive web site can EVER provide the reliability, performance, accuracy and usability that is essential in this application. Nats appear to have bought in to a 'consumer quality' product, but even if they matched the IT investment of say, Avis car rental, I doubt that their IT provider would be willing to financially underwrite the safety of flight exposures created as a result.
The idea behind the interactive web site is entirely laudable. However, the reality is what those who employ programmers sometimes refer to as the 90/10 rule: 10% of the effort yields 90% of the result, but to get the last 10% - well, you can guess. If the project is unsuccessful, well, no problem. But if users actually come on line, then is that last 10% that matters.
The real problem with web sites is success - the more users, the bigger the problems and the more unfamiliar the territory. Solve one set of problems and you just get more users. It's a virtuous circle that burns you alive! Worse, I don't belive the current site has even reached the 90% mark yet, while in a safety critical application like this we need better integrity than most commercial applications.
I fully endorse the initiative being persued by Michael Cross and Russell Howton.
However, I suggest that in order to properly address this issue the following steps are needed:
1) Re-instate the manual A1/A8 bulletins temporarily, but immediately - re-hire the personnel if needed.
2) Suspend development of the web site until it is established that it is actually possible to provide a satisfactory service using this technology. Classify the existing site as 'evaluation only - not for use in flight planning' and refer users to the manual A1/A8.
3) Put every effort into providing the information feed specified by Mike and Russell. I predict that there will be a furious competition amongst programmer/pilots to develop the must usuable interpretive software.
Please make no mistake - lives are being put at risk every day. A computer literate friend, unable to obtain Notam, flew to xxxx only to find the into wind runway closed. Vectored to the servicable runway, he conducted a cross wind landing well into his, and the aircraft's, limitations. If he had crashed, it would have been his fault. But if he had had the Notam, he would have gone somewhere else.
Working together, we are in sight of a useful objective - provision of Notam information that can be used by every pilot without excuse for the first time in UK aviation history. For this, graphical rendition and local filtering are essential. The pilot community is offering this escape route to Nats, and to CAA, 'on a plate'. In return, we must have immediate restoration of the manual A1/A8 bulletins without prevarication, so that no more flights are conducted without briefing when one is available.
Yours faithfully
David Viewing
(Copies of this letter posted to relevant forums)
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: England
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
nice letter David but didn't someone say that the A1 and A8 stuff was not available any more?
I hope the meeting in November isn't a waste of time because what do we do then
does this regluator have any teeth or is this just CAA trying too sound clever before EASA makes them all redundant
what about the software company - are they going to bother sending someone to this meeting or are they going to do a NATS and not bother with GA
I hope the meeting in November isn't a waste of time because what do we do then
does this regluator have any teeth or is this just CAA trying too sound clever before EASA makes them all redundant
what about the software company - are they going to bother sending someone to this meeting or are they going to do a NATS and not bother with GA
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Surrey, UK.
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
david,
Just to clarify (if I may) one thing:
These are still produced -- they are not published as a download from the web though.
I asked for these to be reinstated during my first meeting on September 20th.
Hope that answers your first point as well, bpilatus -- as for the other issues you have mentioned:
We obviously trust that the meeting on November 15th is not a "waste of time" as well!
It's probably worth mentioning that the guys at AIS have bent over backwards to assist and answer questions, but the real problems with NOTAM dissemination today is more to do with the technology...
Web sites falling over repeatedly is nothing to do with the team that put together PIBs or collate NOTAMs - it is totally the responsibility of NATS IS/IT and/or Thales. Let us hope they have someone at the meeting to address this issue.
Writing queries against a database is nowt to do with the team that put together PIBs or collate NOTAMs - it is totally the responsibility of NATS IS/IT and/or Thales. Let us hope they have someone at the meeting to address this issue.
Appallingly slow (web) response times have nothing to do with the team that put together PIBs or collate NOTAMs - it is totally the responsibility of NATS IS/IT and/or Thales. Let us hope they have someone at the meeting to address this issue.
Inability to delete old route briefings, change/update passwords or UK/Europe registration details (etc) have nothing to do with the team that put together PIBs or collate NOTAMs - it is totally the responsibility of NATS IS/IT and/or Thales. Let us hope they have someone at the meeting to address this issue.
Publication of raw data-downloads (including Q-Line info) and other information that would enable NotamPlot/Pro and their ilk to function have nothing to do with the team that put together PIBs or collate NOTAMs - it is totally the responsibility of NATS IS/IT and/or Thales. Let us hope they have someone at the meeting to address this issue.
I sense a pattern forming
Cannot comment about the regulator's role - guess we'll know after 15th November.
We have emailed Thales. They have (quite rightly) said that their relationship is with NATS not us (as users) so anything they need to do must come from an instruction from NATS.
Just to clarify (if I may) one thing:
1) Re-instate the manual A1/A8 bulletins temporarily, but immediately - re-hire the personnel if needed
I asked for these to be reinstated during my first meeting on September 20th.
Hope that answers your first point as well, bpilatus -- as for the other issues you have mentioned:
We obviously trust that the meeting on November 15th is not a "waste of time" as well!
It's probably worth mentioning that the guys at AIS have bent over backwards to assist and answer questions, but the real problems with NOTAM dissemination today is more to do with the technology...
Web sites falling over repeatedly is nothing to do with the team that put together PIBs or collate NOTAMs - it is totally the responsibility of NATS IS/IT and/or Thales. Let us hope they have someone at the meeting to address this issue.
Writing queries against a database is nowt to do with the team that put together PIBs or collate NOTAMs - it is totally the responsibility of NATS IS/IT and/or Thales. Let us hope they have someone at the meeting to address this issue.
Appallingly slow (web) response times have nothing to do with the team that put together PIBs or collate NOTAMs - it is totally the responsibility of NATS IS/IT and/or Thales. Let us hope they have someone at the meeting to address this issue.
Inability to delete old route briefings, change/update passwords or UK/Europe registration details (etc) have nothing to do with the team that put together PIBs or collate NOTAMs - it is totally the responsibility of NATS IS/IT and/or Thales. Let us hope they have someone at the meeting to address this issue.
Publication of raw data-downloads (including Q-Line info) and other information that would enable NotamPlot/Pro and their ilk to function have nothing to do with the team that put together PIBs or collate NOTAMs - it is totally the responsibility of NATS IS/IT and/or Thales. Let us hope they have someone at the meeting to address this issue.
I sense a pattern forming
Cannot comment about the regulator's role - guess we'll know after 15th November.
We have emailed Thales. They have (quite rightly) said that their relationship is with NATS not us (as users) so anything they need to do must come from an instruction from NATS.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Savannah GA & Portsmouth UK
Posts: 1,784
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AIS
For anyone wanting to see more discussion on this subject I have updated
http://www.telecall.uk.com/ais/forums.htm
to include links to all the forums I could find. If you know any more please use the link on that page to let me know where they are.
Mike
http://www.telecall.uk.com/ais/forums.htm
to include links to all the forums I could find. If you know any more please use the link on that page to let me know where they are.
Mike
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Daventry UK
Posts: 487
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mike / Russell
I sense that the direction of your discussions with AIS is increasingly pointing to IT issues.
Can I ask what contact you have had with AIS's IT provider, who the provider actually is, and what response you have had so far?
Keep up the good work!
David
I sense that the direction of your discussions with AIS is increasingly pointing to IT issues.
Can I ask what contact you have had with AIS's IT provider, who the provider actually is, and what response you have had so far?
Keep up the good work!
David
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Savannah GA & Portsmouth UK
Posts: 1,784
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AIS
David:-
My understanding is:-
The software was supplied by Thales Information Systems.
Day to day processing of NOTAM is carried out by AIS at Heathrow. AIS know all about NOTAM but do not have the knowledge or ability to deal with technical issues such as managing the delivery systems or maintaining the hardware. For this they are reliant on NATS.
Most of my contacts have been with Phil Bate, Manager UK AIS, and his staff. They have been very open, helpful and informative, but cannot speak at a technical level with regard to the delivery system.
As Russell has said, we have passed on our proposals to Thales IS and I know that they are monitoring the feedback in the forums. However they decline to enter into discussion with us because it would breach the confidentiality of their contract with NATS. I fully respect that position.
The person introduced to Russell as the Project Manager for the IT side is Alan Burrill of NATS Airport Services. Unfortunately Alan will not communicate with us on a technical level either. I understand that Alan does not have the AIS website as his primary responsibility.
To be fair to AIS, Phil Bate has been away from his office since our suggestions were delivered and has therefore not been in a position to respond. He should be back in the next day or so.
The lack of engagement on a technical level does worry me and I have passed my concerns on to John Gentleman, Manager Aeronautical Charts and Data at DAP and also to Phil Roberts, Assistant Director Airspace Policy 1 also at DAP. Contact details for both of these gentlemen are published by the CAA in CAP 723 (Directory Guide) which can be found at http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP723.pdf
I have also passed my concerns on to Roger Budgen, Head ATO Customer & External Relations at NATS. He is listed, together with his contact details in the NATS Operations Contact Guide for Customers which can be found at http://www.nats.co.uk/operational/Op...il%2020021.pdf
The worry is that we have had no technical feedback at all from NATS. No questions have been asked about our suggestions and no-one has said whether they might be technically flawed, easy, or difficult. All of which leaves us wondering whether the meeting on the 15th will result in any action or merely a thank you and an assurance that our proposals will be borne in mind for the future development of the site.
We do have a couple of weeks left before the meeting and now that Phil is back I hope we will see some signs of movement towards an action plan. It will be a very poor result indeed if three months after the site went live we are still left in limbo.
Hope this answers your question.
Mike
My understanding is:-
The software was supplied by Thales Information Systems.
Day to day processing of NOTAM is carried out by AIS at Heathrow. AIS know all about NOTAM but do not have the knowledge or ability to deal with technical issues such as managing the delivery systems or maintaining the hardware. For this they are reliant on NATS.
Most of my contacts have been with Phil Bate, Manager UK AIS, and his staff. They have been very open, helpful and informative, but cannot speak at a technical level with regard to the delivery system.
As Russell has said, we have passed on our proposals to Thales IS and I know that they are monitoring the feedback in the forums. However they decline to enter into discussion with us because it would breach the confidentiality of their contract with NATS. I fully respect that position.
The person introduced to Russell as the Project Manager for the IT side is Alan Burrill of NATS Airport Services. Unfortunately Alan will not communicate with us on a technical level either. I understand that Alan does not have the AIS website as his primary responsibility.
To be fair to AIS, Phil Bate has been away from his office since our suggestions were delivered and has therefore not been in a position to respond. He should be back in the next day or so.
The lack of engagement on a technical level does worry me and I have passed my concerns on to John Gentleman, Manager Aeronautical Charts and Data at DAP and also to Phil Roberts, Assistant Director Airspace Policy 1 also at DAP. Contact details for both of these gentlemen are published by the CAA in CAP 723 (Directory Guide) which can be found at http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP723.pdf
I have also passed my concerns on to Roger Budgen, Head ATO Customer & External Relations at NATS. He is listed, together with his contact details in the NATS Operations Contact Guide for Customers which can be found at http://www.nats.co.uk/operational/Op...il%2020021.pdf
The worry is that we have had no technical feedback at all from NATS. No questions have been asked about our suggestions and no-one has said whether they might be technically flawed, easy, or difficult. All of which leaves us wondering whether the meeting on the 15th will result in any action or merely a thank you and an assurance that our proposals will be borne in mind for the future development of the site.
We do have a couple of weeks left before the meeting and now that Phil is back I hope we will see some signs of movement towards an action plan. It will be a very poor result indeed if three months after the site went live we are still left in limbo.
Hope this answers your question.
Mike
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: England
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
well it could have answered Davids question but it raised more questions for me.
Why won't the IT people tell you if the proposals can be applied?
If they cannot be applied, where does that leave the users?
are these the same IT gurus who set up swanick?
Why if Thales see this forum has nothing been done. If my company got such bad publicity I would want it fixed now not in three months time.
I reckon this is just stalling. When you have your meeting NATS will tell you that it cannot be done or they cannot afford it or some other garbage and they could have told us already.
and my other question from before. what happens if nothing happens after your meeting? What next?
they have had too much time to think of excuses we should have kept pressure on instead of them seeing no comments here since you guys started your meetings.
Why won't the IT people tell you if the proposals can be applied?
If they cannot be applied, where does that leave the users?
are these the same IT gurus who set up swanick?
Why if Thales see this forum has nothing been done. If my company got such bad publicity I would want it fixed now not in three months time.
I reckon this is just stalling. When you have your meeting NATS will tell you that it cannot be done or they cannot afford it or some other garbage and they could have told us already.
and my other question from before. what happens if nothing happens after your meeting? What next?
they have had too much time to think of excuses we should have kept pressure on instead of them seeing no comments here since you guys started your meetings.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Savannah GA & Portsmouth UK
Posts: 1,784
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AIS
Hi Bpilatus
>>Why won't the IT people tell you if the proposals can be applied?
Assuming that's not a rhetorical question :-) .....
I didn't say they wouldn't tell us, just that they hadn't commented on our proposals. The information on feasibility and costs would have to come from Thales IS, which would mean AIS have to ask Thales IS in order to get the answer. I don't know whether AIS have done so yet but hope that they will have the information in time to provide an informed response at the meeting on 15 Nov.
>>If they cannot be applied, where does that leave the users?
I think it unlikely that the proposals CANNOT be applied. Their application might be seen as too expensive to implement or undesirable on policy grounds, in which case we would be back where we started.
>>are these the same IT gurus who set up swanick?
As far as I am aware Thales IS were not involved with Swanwick. I believe the main software contractor was Lockheed Martin. I have no way of knowing whether any of the individuals working within NATS were involved with Swanwick. However I suspect it would be fair to say that NATS was the customer in both projects.
>>Why if Thales see this forum has nothing been done. If my company got such bad publicity I would want it fixed now not in three months time.
So would I!
[email protected] would probably be a good place to address this query, quoting the product name ANAIS and naming the UK AIS website. If enough of us asked we might get a statement.
I suspect also that NATS expected the implementation to be a lot easier than it has been and it may be that the resources they allocated are overstretched as a result.
>>I reckon this is just stalling. When you have your meeting NATS will tell you that it cannot be done or they cannot afford it or some other garbage and they could have told us already.
I've now had the opportunity to speak to Phil Bate, who has assured me that there will be positive proposals at the meeting and that we can expect attendance from NATS senior management.
>>and my other question from before. what happens if nothing happens after your meeting? What next?
I suspect an all-out blitz on the media and MP's with attendant bad publicity for NATS, the CAA and Thales IS. Let's hope it doesn't come to that.
>>they have had too much time to think of excuses we should have kept pressure on instead of them seeing no comments here since you guys started your meetings.
We have been trying to keep the pressure on, hence my postings asking people to make their views heard by the relevant people.
I know a lot of people have already e-mailed [email protected] with their views - please keep it up.
Keeping the debate alive on the forums is very important too, the more people who post the better.
Many thanks for your input
Mike
>>Why won't the IT people tell you if the proposals can be applied?
Assuming that's not a rhetorical question :-) .....
I didn't say they wouldn't tell us, just that they hadn't commented on our proposals. The information on feasibility and costs would have to come from Thales IS, which would mean AIS have to ask Thales IS in order to get the answer. I don't know whether AIS have done so yet but hope that they will have the information in time to provide an informed response at the meeting on 15 Nov.
>>If they cannot be applied, where does that leave the users?
I think it unlikely that the proposals CANNOT be applied. Their application might be seen as too expensive to implement or undesirable on policy grounds, in which case we would be back where we started.
>>are these the same IT gurus who set up swanick?
As far as I am aware Thales IS were not involved with Swanwick. I believe the main software contractor was Lockheed Martin. I have no way of knowing whether any of the individuals working within NATS were involved with Swanwick. However I suspect it would be fair to say that NATS was the customer in both projects.
>>Why if Thales see this forum has nothing been done. If my company got such bad publicity I would want it fixed now not in three months time.
So would I!
[email protected] would probably be a good place to address this query, quoting the product name ANAIS and naming the UK AIS website. If enough of us asked we might get a statement.
I suspect also that NATS expected the implementation to be a lot easier than it has been and it may be that the resources they allocated are overstretched as a result.
>>I reckon this is just stalling. When you have your meeting NATS will tell you that it cannot be done or they cannot afford it or some other garbage and they could have told us already.
I've now had the opportunity to speak to Phil Bate, who has assured me that there will be positive proposals at the meeting and that we can expect attendance from NATS senior management.
>>and my other question from before. what happens if nothing happens after your meeting? What next?
I suspect an all-out blitz on the media and MP's with attendant bad publicity for NATS, the CAA and Thales IS. Let's hope it doesn't come to that.
>>they have had too much time to think of excuses we should have kept pressure on instead of them seeing no comments here since you guys started your meetings.
We have been trying to keep the pressure on, hence my postings asking people to make their views heard by the relevant people.
I know a lot of people have already e-mailed [email protected] with their views - please keep it up.
Keeping the debate alive on the forums is very important too, the more people who post the better.
Many thanks for your input
Mike
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London, UK
Posts: 778
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Availability of web site
I disagree with David's comments about a web based application being too unreliable to deliver NOTAM information.
Think of the web based systems which, for example, transact billions of dollars worth of securities on a daily basis for the world's investment banks - do you think they'd do this if it couldn't be made reliable enough (for reasonable cost)?
Having said all that, the AIS web site has some way to go. I've been monitoring it (automatically) for 48 hours now and in that time it has been available only 67% of the time. In particular it was completely unavailable for over 7 hours starting at 22:51 last night.
Think of the web based systems which, for example, transact billions of dollars worth of securities on a daily basis for the world's investment banks - do you think they'd do this if it couldn't be made reliable enough (for reasonable cost)?
Having said all that, the AIS web site has some way to go. I've been monitoring it (automatically) for 48 hours now and in that time it has been available only 67% of the time. In particular it was completely unavailable for over 7 hours starting at 22:51 last night.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: England
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
mrcross I have read all you have said but I think the all out blitz on the media should have started before now. it is three months gone and nothing is any better for the users.
The CAA, NATS, the regulator, Thales should all hang there head in shame at this joke of a system
and still no comment from anyone except you guys which makes me mad. why don't people understand that users want information about when it will be better NOW?
I have sent email to vfrcharts but got only a standard answer which must be automatic?
I think CAA don't bother anymore with GA as I said before because they will not be around much soon when EASA is here in the UK.
I will make a post about what to do and see if its only me thinking that NATS should be worried about users and not money for once.
drauk how do you measure this availability? do you ping the web or what do you do? I want some better information to give to my politician and maybe something might happen sooner?
The CAA, NATS, the regulator, Thales should all hang there head in shame at this joke of a system
and still no comment from anyone except you guys which makes me mad. why don't people understand that users want information about when it will be better NOW?
I have sent email to vfrcharts but got only a standard answer which must be automatic?
I think CAA don't bother anymore with GA as I said before because they will not be around much soon when EASA is here in the UK.
I will make a post about what to do and see if its only me thinking that NATS should be worried about users and not money for once.
drauk how do you measure this availability? do you ping the web or what do you do? I want some better information to give to my politician and maybe something might happen sooner?