USA flights stopped. FAA computer outage.

[MechEngr]

WS - as long as you ignore what I write there is not much point in responding.

[DaveReidUK]

I'm waiting in hope that somebody might explain what on earth ADS-B has to do with NOTAMs.

[ethicalconundrum]

Originally Posted by WideScreen

What you describe is a real reality.

The issue with this is, that with your road example, there are navigation clues (the tarmac itself, potential white stripes, etc), to give drivers the real-time notification "you should not go there" (something which is lost, with heavy fog and we see the results of that). These restriction clues are missing, once you go 3D (or better 4D, since obstacles can move).

The main problem is, the NOTAM system should have some kind of "extra info" option, so it becomes possible to filter out everything that is not supposed to be on your navigation path. Ok, ok, I know, this is an oversimplification ..... Though, why get reported all those windmills up to 500ft, when the only reason for you to get there would be, when things are already out of control and you already lost the nav plot / opportunity to avoid the windmills anyway ?

Granted, there are / can be situations, when these windmills are relevant to be NOTAM'd. For example, when flying low-level inspections with a chopper. Then, you definitely want to know what obstacles could be there. The same applies, for your just "off-center" poles, when not flying regular navigation patterns.

Nope. The power poles adjacent to the road have no line of sight reflectors, are on pavement(tarmacadam), no white line, no curb. Just the existential fact that they exist in time and space and the driver is responsible for 'see and avoid'.

Fully agree that the NOTAM system needs filtering, but I'm at a loss on how to proceed. I am strongly against more technical mandates. While GA pilots continue to find ways to do themselves and pax in using a variety of simple and complex means, the paying 121 and 135 traffic have pretty much eliminated any serious risk to life or limb. Of course, there are exceptions and once in a while a charter will go sideways, but the safety systems in place for the paying public seem to be doing a remarkable job of reducing risk. Part of this(I will opine) a small part is also the NOTAM system which will advise a pilot on something that really matters.

Evidence used was the NOTAM at SFO of a runway OTS. However, even with the NOTAM info published, provided, and noted by one crew, they still decided to line up wrong and missed a string of planes on the taxiway. And - this is WITH the NOTAM system operating nominally. NOTAMs play some role in aviation safety, but as noted, from the FAA(not the airport mgrs) THEY have made it into a CYA dumping ground. If the inspector will stop reporting on my power poles, I will stop adding them to the NOTAM system. In fact, those poles have been there for maybe 20 years. If I could go back in time to 2003 time frame, I would bet that they were not any consideration for operation at my airport.

As for anyone navigating over there near the power poles, it would be already breaking a regulation flying at 65 feet altitude as there are homes and schools, and a golf course nearby. It would not be an area where anyone landing or taking off could possible be a factor, unless on takeoff the plane suffered some kind of loss of power. In that case, I say we should NOTAM the entire surface of the planet and all protrusions as a potential obstruction. Where does it end? The original NOTAM system was well conceived, but like most fed programs implementation has gone into a dark, messy place.

[MechEngr]

Originally Posted by DaveReidUK

I'm waiting in hope that somebody might explain what on earth ADS-B has to do with NOTAMs.

Not ADS-B of itself, but how the system might be upgraded and expanded, since ADS-B is already a system to tell users of the airspace that there are other occupants of the airspace - that is, obstacles. If only one plane was ever in the air there would be little need for ADS-B.

ADS-B is also used for airport ground vehicles - same reason - to identify the location of obstacles.

NOTAMs appear to fill the function of notifying pilots there are obstacles to safe operation - such as closed runways, construction towers along the approach and departure path, and unusual conditions that may not be physical obstacles such as an ILS system that is inoperative.

If they are both providing information about the status of things, it makes sense to have only one source of information about status and an updated version of ADS-B, certainly with a far greater bandwidth could, in conjunction with an internet connection to the airports broadcasting this status information, handle everything that NOTAMs currently try to provide, but with the option during standardization of building automatic recognition systems for aircraft to better inform pilots.

Think of it as ADS-B Mark 2. Rid the system of the NOTAMs which no one seems to like, is getting modified right now into a different format few will like any better, and move that status information into a format that is designed to be software readable while expanding the ADS-B application to include items like drones and ultralight aircraft, which are both currently prohibited from involvement in ADS-B, as well as to notable obstacles.

[ATC Watcher]

Originally Posted by MechEngr

..... an updated version of ADS-B, certainly with a far greater bandwidth could, in conjunction with an internet connection to the airports broadcasting this status information, handle everything that NOTAMs currently try to provide, but with the option during standardization of building automatic recognition systems for aircraft to better inform pilots.
....Think of it as ADS-B Mark 2.

Excellend idea on paper. But not for certified aviation .First ADS-B was designed for surveillance , and because it works , evetybody wants to add things to it but it does not have the bandwidth / capacity to start with and then no way to conect any critical safety on board system with Internet . Secured systems cannot be open to cyber inteference . The idea that all this can be easily solved is nonsense. We have not yet been able to design and implement a proper data link for all the wondrful next tools we are promised like 4D user prefered trajectories, or real time weather, etc. and are working on this since 1990 . . NOTAMs now are mostly if not essentially filled with adminnistative "cover-your-back" stuff more than real safety issues that really need to be changed.
Lots of solutions exists , and some will be implemented I am sure. but it needs cooperation between States to get a a global system / implementation and this takes time .Lots of time The last thing you want is each State making its own NOTAM system with its own codes and priorities.

@ WideScreen :

Actually, I am not against the abbreviations at all, on the contrary. It makes it much easier to "fast-read", than when ordinary (semi- / own-invention-) English is being used.

Sure , you are right, ,but my point was to simplify even further , take as an exmaple the codes used for when the NOTAM takes effect and when it ends : do not tell me that the current system of :
B) 2301261800
C) 2301312359
would not be better understood if it was : FROM 26 JAN 23 1800 TILL 31 JAN 23 2359 ?
The current system uses 22 characters to do it , the plain language one would use 29 . Yes important when this was sent in Morse , but in 21st century ? Plus the curent system is based on the US date format , which 3/4 of the rest of the world have to slowly decode it in their head first.
Anyway just an example among many to prove my point .