Primarily for general aviation discussion, but other aviation topics are also welcome.
#1778466
Rob P wrote:
FlarePath wrote:No expert, but, what is a high energy manoeuvers for a helo doesn't equate to the same for fixed wing. I read that notam as to include fast moving jet traffic in combination with ground support helos also doing their own high energy moves. But probably wrong.


That's the only sensible conclusion I can come to also. But if they are going to the trouble of putting HEL for helicopters, why have they not put in FJ (or whatever) for the proper aircraft?

The AIC shows an example notam with blank spaces for lat/long, phone nos, frequencies etc.

It's more likely that whoever issued this notam has a similar template & just replaced FAST-JET with HEL without bothering to adjust the up to speed.
Rob P, Tim Dawson liked this
#1778469
low&slow wrote:Wrong year, Y056/2017

Thank you!
Doh - it was truncated, and I assumed...

Having now read AIC Y056/2017, I see that it is explicitly written around fast jets operating with JTAC (tactical air controllers) on the ground.
#1779152
How is one supposed to know Solent CTA/Z is deactivated? All I have is

B1349/20 (RAC)
N50°50.00 W001°32.00 23nm
Monday, 15 Jun 05:30 to Tuesday, 30 Jun 2020 21:45
Elevation: SFC - 5500
COVID 19 INFORMATION:
SUN-FRI 1100-1900 - SOUTHAMPTON ATZ/CTR AND SOLENT CTA ARE ACTIVE
SAT - SEE DAILY NOTAM FOR ANY ACTIVITY
PLEASE NOTE OUTSIDE OF THESE TIME DETAILED ABOVE, SOUTHAMPTON
ATZ/CTR AND SOLENT CTA CAN RE-ACTIVATE AT SHORT NOTICE.
ON SATURDAYS BETWEEN 1100-1900 PILOTS ARE REQUESTED TO MAKE BLIND
CALLS ON SOLENT 120.230 AND MONITOR UNTIL CLEAR . SQUAWK MONITOR
7011 FOR SOLENT/SOUTHAMPTON IS ADVISED. IF DEPARTING FROM A SITE
INSIDE THE ATZ/CTR, TRY CALLING SOUTHAMPTON ATC ON THE LANDLINE OR
MAKE BLIND CALLS.

which tells me when they are ACTIVE. Nowhere does it say they revert to Class G outside these times. I could ASSUME it, but is that a safe way to proceed with an aviation activity? At the least I may find myself on the infringers' punishment course. And on a non-Saturday, before 11:00, if I've decided to assume I'm in class G, am I NOT supposed to make blind calls? To my mind it is an absolutely ludicrous NOTAM.

Anyway, I gave up and funnelled down the narrow gap between Southampton and Middle Wallop instead. Like several other people at the same time :shock:
#1779179
I've flown through Southampton when they weren't active. As I recall there are a couple of NOTAMS (or were at the relevant time) and it took careful reading but all worked out fine. Took a service from Bournemouth when overhead SAM. There were a few talking to So'ton Traffic who weren't sure if it was open or closed but I didn't advise them other that 'check the NOTAMs'.
[edit]the following week they gave me excellent service and some practice approaches in proper IMC, all for a very reasonable price. I was very impressed (didn't ace the approaches but all safely done...)[/edit]
#1779184
neilmurg wrote:... it took careful reading ...

In other words, you had to interpret something that was unclear.

You presumably needed to convince yourself that your interpretation was correct.

But why is that YOUR task, rather than the task of the NOTAM originator, whose actual job it is to inform readers?

And... If you got it wrong, why should you be assumed to be guilty, as history suggests you would be, by the gauleiter(s)* that "investigate" infringements - evidently from a starting position that the pilot (and only the pilot) can contribute to the situation in which they find themselves?




*Suspect this may ruffle feathers. That is unfortunate, but sadly an inevitable result of an unwillingness to openly address numerous public complaints - in forums and magazine opinion pieces - over recent months and years.
flybymike, David Wood liked this
#1779197
Dave W wrote:Or demand an unambiguous, clearly written NOTAM.

Think of the phonecalls that might save.


Dave, I completely understand you have an agenda, but I’m trying to be helpful in the tactical sense. Basic aviation, if you’re unsure of something, either make sure it’s not a problem, by re-route, or by asking to clarify. For @matthew_w100 future ref Farnborough can definitely tell you. :thumleft:
#1779200
@GonzoEGLL, I have no "agenda" as you put it, other than to express my grave disappointment that decades of human factors knowledge and experience in aviation and elsewhere is too frequently not used to best effect.

It is too often excused by people who should know better, IMO, when improved performance could aid clarity in the information that pilots and controllers require to help avoid infringements.

Excusing it means that continuous improvement does not happen.

If anybody implies that ATCOs or NOTAM originators have nothing to learn, and it is only pilots that need to buck up, then those people become part of the wider infringement problem.

If pointing out - in my opinion, and with extensive supporting evidence quoted here and elsewhere - that NOTAM originators are too often guilty of very poor communication skills is an "agenda", then so be it.



PS A different but related issue: I am also very happy to state publicly, once again, that my observation of the manner in which infringement investigations have sometimes been handled, and the wider management of that by the CAA, has (at least in the fairly recent past) left a lot to be desired. That is also not an "agenda" - it is a statement of experience.
flybymike, FrankS, townleyc and 3 others liked this
#1779205
GonzoEGLL wrote:
matthew_w100 wrote:But it's not explicit. And it should be. It's a NOTAM of the gaps.


If you weren’t sure, then always best to check, either by trying to phone beforehand, or maybe try calling en-route. Farnborough and London Info would have known the status.


Of course it's best to check :scratch: but I tried that last time. They were snotty. "We are NOTAMed, closed, as you should know". Farnborough have one controller doing the job of four at the moment and why should the chap at London Info be any better at interpreting a badly written NOTAM than I am?

I'm sorry but for all your attempts at justification, I do not think the phrase "may be reactivated at short notice" is the correct nor sufficient language to announce that Class D airspace has been temporarily re-designated as Class G at particular times, but may be reverted on a whim. It's far too important a change to be described in any way other than explicitly and completely, and I shall be mentioning the matter to aissupervisor@nats.co.uk.
Tim Dawson, flybymike, T67M liked this
#1779215
18 years ago next month NATS introduced the "super" new online NOTAM briefing system and it was a right bag of spanners. ISTR a couple chaps from here plus the AIS bods worked together(?) to create a help pack and quick reference guide to enable use, and I also remember narrow route briefs started to be narrow instead of whole FIR!!

At the time the quality of data going into the system was questionable too.

So it seems we have got the tooling right but the data is still a bit iffy.

Quite why NATS staff both past and present take it so personally when the NOTAM detritus is discussed I know not - it isn't personal, some of the data is just rubbish and needs sorting before someone dies.

:cyclopsani: