Primarily for general aviation discussion, but other aviation topics are also welcome.
User avatar
By PeteSpencer
#1852265
TopCat wrote:Fine. I didn't say these NOTAMs should be removed for everyone. I would like the option to suppress them, that's all.

Who needs crane NOTAMs, though, out of interest? Helicopters at night, perhaps?


In the last two years the cluster of cranes all round Cambridge airport which move at intervals as construction progresses significantly affected various distance/safety parameters for their numerous instrument approaches.

So having up-to-date ‘crane Notams’ is pretty essential. :wink:
kanga, AlanM liked this
User avatar
By PeteSpencer
#1852337
low&slow wrote:Anything within an ATZ should be an airfield NOTAM, not an en route or FIR NOTAM.


Some people use airfields as handy waypoints on a long route.

Its possible that one such airfield might be the nearest en route diversion in case of wx or mechanical problems.

So any Airfield Notamed danger area/obstruction IMHO should justifiably be included in en route notams.
User avatar
By AlanM
#1852338
PeteSpencer wrote:
low&slow wrote:Anything within an ATZ should be an airfield NOTAM, not an en route or FIR NOTAM.


Some people use airfields as handy waypoints on a long route.

Its possible that one such airfield might be the nearest en route diversion in case of wx or mechanical problems.

So any Airfield Notamed danger area/obstruction IMHO should justifiably be included in en route notams.


And not all ATZs are H24
By low&slow
#1852401
If your planned route is close enough to an ATZ that you might want to speak to the airfield or use it as a diversion then include the airfield in your NOTAM search. There may well be other airfield specific NOTAMS that you ought to know about that aren't included in an FIR or en route briefing. It doesn't matter if the ATZ is inactive, any aerodrome NOTAMS will still show up if you ask for them.

There is no reason that absolutely everybody flying in the London FIR needs to know about drones in the Duxford ATZ.
Rob P liked this
User avatar
By Rob P
#1852402
low&slow wrote:There is no reason that absolutely everybody flying in the London FIR needs to know about drones in the Duxford ATZ 900ft below circuit height.


Fixed it for you :D

Rob P
By TopCat
#1852409
PeteSpencer wrote:So having up-to-date ‘crane Notams’ is pretty essential. :wink:

I completely agree.

Yet again on the forum, we find ourselves in the situation where it is deemed necessary to argue against a point that hasn't been made. Possibly that's a good thing, as maybe if it didn't happen there would be a lot less to say.

However, just to be clear, I say again, I'm not against the crane NOTAMs existing, I'd just like to be able to suppress them.
User avatar
By lobstaboy
#1852488
At the risk of throwing more fuel on the fire...
Surely with modern mapping software that gives you only the ones near your intended route and a list of them, it's easy to scan down the list and note the ones that are going to be relevant to you?
I don't buy the argument that "all these irrelevant notams mean I might miss the really important one that is going to prevent me becoming a twerp.". Are we really so casual or so busy that that is an issue? Rubbish frankly.
JAFO, AlanM liked this
User avatar
By PeteSpencer
#1852492
TopCat wrote:
Yet again on the forum, we find ourselves in the situation where it is deemed necessary to argue against a point that hasn't been made.


No argument: Just answering your question : (my italics)

TopCat wrote:
Who needs crane NOTAMs, though, out of interest?


Peter :wink:
TopCat liked this
User avatar
By NDB_hold
#1852523
lobstaboy wrote:At the risk of throwing more fuel on the fire...
Surely with modern mapping software that gives you only the ones near your intended route and a list of them, it's easy to scan down the list and note the ones that are going to be relevant to you?
I don't buy the argument that "all these irrelevant notams mean I might miss the really important one that is going to prevent me becoming a twerp.". Are we really so casual or so busy that that is an issue? Rubbish frankly.


Been flying recently? Seen the Covid NOTAMS?
TopCat liked this
By TopCat
#1852527
lobstaboy wrote:I don't buy the argument that "all these irrelevant notams mean I might miss the really important one that is going to prevent me becoming a twerp.". Are we really so casual or so busy that that is an issue? Rubbish frankly.

Don't you? Because in that case, it suggests to me that you're implying that all you have to do is be careful, and then you'll never make a mistake.

I am neither casual nor rushed when checking NOTAMs, but nor am I so complacent as to imagine that I'm incapable of making a mistake, even when I'm being careful.

All I have to do is look really carefully, and I'll see the other traffic. All I have to do is listen really carefully, write really carefully, and I'll never get a clearance wrong. All I have to do is think very carefully, and I'll never accidentally get an OHJ the wrong way round in my mind. All I have to do...

... is not pay too much attention to rubbish, frankly.

Information should be presented as relevantly and clearly as possible, because it reduces the chance that someone will misread the information and then **** something up as a result.

SkyDemon does a pretty good job of polishing the turd that is the NOTAM system. But there's a bit further to go, IMO.
skydriller liked this
User avatar
By lobstaboy
#1852583
NDB_hold wrote:
lobstaboy wrote:At the risk of throwing more fuel on the fire...
Surely with modern mapping software that gives you only the ones near your intended route and a list of them, it's easy to scan down the list and note the ones that are going to be relevant to you?
I don't buy the argument that "all these irrelevant notams mean I might miss the really important one that is going to prevent me becoming a twerp.". Are we really so casual or so busy that that is an issue? Rubbish frankly.


Been flying recently? Seen the Covid NOTAMS?


Yes. Precisely my point. They are irrelevant to me, but they are easy to ignore and no bother at all. Their presence in the list presented to me does not obscure relevant ones.
Getting a system that was so good that it filtered out all the ones that are irrelevant but that also guaranteed to show you everything relevant might be a bit difficult?
JAFO liked this
By low&slow
#1852590
lobstaboy wrote:At the risk of throwing more fuel on the fire...
Surely with modern mapping software that gives you only the ones near your intended route and a list of them, it's easy to scan down the list and note the ones that are going to be relevant to you?
I don't buy the argument that "all these irrelevant notams mean I might miss the really important one that is going to prevent me becoming a twerp.". Are we really so casual or so busy that that is an issue? Rubbish frankly.

Does Skydemon list all the airfield NOTAMS as well?

If it does, that's one less reason for including airfield NOTAMS in the FIR or en route briefings. If SkyDemon doesn't then you need to check the airfield NOTAMS for any airfield that you think you might need to speak to or divert to any way, in which case why include airfield specific NOTAMS in the en route section?

I haven't owned a printer for many years but I thought it would be fun to print today's EGTT VFR briefing to pdf. Apparently it's 56 A4 pages. 56 pages. That is utterly ridiculous.

Never mind drones at Duxford or cranes at Cambridge, it seems that flight planning requirements for departures from Cardiff requires a 999nm radius of influence in the Q line. That is insane. The only reason I would need to know that is if a) I was based at Cardiff or b) I intend to fly in to Cardiff & depart later. Either way, I should be checking Cardiff aerodrome NOTAMS so there's no reason that this drivel should be included in an FIR NOTAM briefing. It seems to me that there's more chance of finding this sort of information in an airfield briefing than burying it in 56 pages of an FIR briefing.

Somebody should be holding NATS accountable for this sort of tripe. If the CAA or the DfT won't do it then maybe AOPA, Flyer, Pilot, LAA, BGA, BHPA, BMAA, whoever. Somebody needs to be metaphorically kneeing NATS in the nuts until they start to exert some quality control.

Please don't tell me your nav software blah blah blah. There are plenty of other pilots that fly differently & plan differently, we don't all fly straight lines from A to B to C. We all deserve a NOTAM system that works.
townleyc, T67M, Tim Dawson liked this
User avatar
By Miscellaneous
#1852595
low&slow wrote:Does Skydemon list all the airfield NOTAMS as well?

If it does, that's one less reason for including airfield NOTAMS in the FIR or en route briefings. If SkyDemon doesn't then you need to check the airfield NOTAMS for any airfield that you think you might need to speak to or divert to any way, in which case why include airfield specific NOTAMS in the en route section?


SD does have the airfield NOTAMS, however linking 3rd party commercial products in such a way is a non starter, IMO. :naughty:
Last edited by Miscellaneous on Sun Jun 13, 2021 10:21 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
By lobstaboy
#1852596
I don't use SD either.

What relevance to the discussion is how many pages of A4 it takes to print them all out?

As an exercise I just planned a typical local flight (wandering around East Anglia - no straight lines more than 10nm) and used SD Lite to call up the notams.
Yes a long list of stuff I don't need about covid, Belarus flights, security warnings etc, but it took me 1 min and 8 seconds to find and understand the four that I might need to know about.
This really isn't a problem.

Whether or not some notams are needed at all by anybody is a separate discussion. To me there are lots that for day vfr are not important (eg crane at Taverham) and my first reaction is to think "why on earth does anybody think that should be notammed?" But that's for me to think and deal with as PIC - I don't want someone else or a fancy AI somewhere deciding for me.
JAFO liked this