[Rob P]

some people really might not like the idea of meeting 12 aircraft travelling in the opposite direction.

The general principle is that you steer so as to avoid them.

Rob P

[Tim Dawson]

If software that is giving you an incomplete NOTAM briefing feels "right" to you, then good luck. You'll need it.

[Ian Flyer]

If software that is giving you an incomplete NOTAM briefing feels "right" to you, then good luck. You'll need it.

Tim, I think that your SD software is really good.....a credit to you and to safety in the air. I really like it.

But I'm struggling to see how another type of software, that shows all the same notams as yours shows, but which omits the notams that I couldn't possibly need, is something that I will need 'good luck' with.......?

[Tim Dawson]

Thank you very much, you're very kind

It's only that if some software omits those NOTAM, what other NOTAM does it omit? Some NOTAM you really do want to be aware of. As a software designer I couldn't imagine taking that decision away from the pilot. If you want to hide some NOTAM because you think they're stupid, great!

[ratman]

twelve aircraft doing formation training from North Weald, flying virtually the same route I would have been.

OK, let's look at that one a minute.

Why a NOTAM? Twelve aircraft in a formation are going to be approximately 1,200% easier to spot than 12 random aircraft heading into N Weald from different directions for a burger. Something I would guess that happens most fine weekends.

So what actual purpose does that NOTAM serve?

Rob P

Don't disagree with you there at all Rob, but I do at least categorise that one as "nice to know". Along with no. 27 on the list: all grass areas at Old Buck closed (would have got that one via PPR of course).

But a similar format message is used when the Reds are out and about isn't it? That is one which I definitely wouldn't want to miss amongst the noise!

Noise? An overused term that indicates that you feel that the NOTAM (pl) that you are interested in are the only ones that should be promulgated. By using the NATS AIS site you can 'skim through' the V series NOTAM and ignore the; thats what I do (I use Tim's excellent SD tool as an additional barrier against airspace infringements but I prefer to use the AIS site for NOTAMS... maybe I'm biased on that front due to my day job).

The comment re Old Buck and PPR is naive to say the least; if I'm flying from A to B i'd like to know what aerodromes are a no-go/limited just in case i need to divert with a problems etc; you are not telling me surely that you contact every aerodrome en route by landline prior to flying when planning your flight. In which case surely having the information as a NOTAM is ideal.

12 acft in formation is Unusual Aerial Activity and as such needs to be notified as the elements most likely may not be able to fully comply with the Rules of the Air re avoiding collision.

Time to go back to read-only until .....

[Dangerman]

Time to go back to read-only until .....

Fair enough ... wilco

[jollyrog]

If software that is giving you an incomplete NOTAM briefing feels "right" to you, then good luck. You'll need it.

I think your software does the job 100% just fine. It's the publishers I have an issue with. Please carry on the way you are.

It is irritating when I print an en-route chart though and the whole thing has a pink tint..

[James Chan]

If someone finds a published NOTAM about Syria then I'm not terribly bothered. Someone else may find it useful.

But if I am intending to fly from A to B, both locations are within Europe, and I have explicitly put this into flight planning software (e.g. SkyDemon, Narrow Route Brief, or anything else), I don't want it to show me Syria.

It's irrevelant.

[kanga]

.. if I am intending to fly from A to B, both locations are within Europe, and I have explicitly put this into flight planning software (e.g. SkyDemon, Narrow Route Brief, or anything else), I don't want it to show me Syria.

It's irrevelant.

even with today's W'ly winds ..

[ScottC]

I don't want it to show me Syria.

It's irrevelant.

Whilst irrelevant, it's a NOTAM issued by NATS/AIS for every Route Brief.

At work, I use 10nm or 20nm either side of track for the route brief, yet the NOTAM's about Yemen, Syria and a few other places are still shown, even though the routes are all within the UK.

I agree with what Tim said in that, if it's omitting them, what else is being omitted?


P.S. Coincidentally, I also say 'irrevelant' as I can't for the life of me pronounce 'irrelevant' - a typo i'm guessing, but i'm being serious!

[Lefty]

I don't know what all the noise is about.
1) it is dead easy to Set up your SD to hide the ones you don't want to see. I've "hidden" all if these Foreign NOTAM's. However if ever need to fly further south /east than say Italy - then all I need to do is to "unhide" them.

2) if you abdicate that responsiblty to the software designer - then you have to have total - and I really mean TOTAL faith that they have not erased something that you might one need

3) as a s/w developer or vendor, I would not like the potential liability of not showing some piece of "official" flight safety information, which someday might lead to an infringement - or worse an accident and loss of life. If some product vendors are happy to do that, that is their choice. I wouldn't.

4) I note the comments "that another s/w product gets rid of this rubbish for you". However none of the supporters of this seem to have a clue exactly what that other product shows Vs hides. So they have no idea whether or not anything that might be important, has been deleted.

IMHO, SD is doing it the only way that is guaranteed to be safe.