AIS, NATS, CAA, MOD etc will be attending. I will be representing the LAA (and possibly the BMAA). If any of you have anything you would like me to bring up please PM me.
Rod1
Notam meeting on the 17TH JULY
Moderators: John Dean, Moderator
1 WELCOME
2 INTRODUCTIONS
3 AIS REPORTS
3.1 ACCOMODATION MOVE
3.2 MIGRATION TO EAD
3.3 AIS WEB SITE
3.4 STATISTICS
4 PROJECTS & ACTIVITIES
AOB
Bored yet?
In addition, I have suggested a gross error check to display the route on a map. This is just to check that the route you entered is the route you meant to enter, not graphical Notams. There are many examples of pilots who have tried to drive the system, got a brief, but the brief was not for the right route, pilots have not realised and gone flying. I have done this myself and was very lucky to get away with it.
Rod1
2 INTRODUCTIONS
3 AIS REPORTS
3.1 ACCOMODATION MOVE
3.2 MIGRATION TO EAD
3.3 AIS WEB SITE
3.4 STATISTICS
4 PROJECTS & ACTIVITIES
AOB
Bored yet?
In addition, I have suggested a gross error check to display the route on a map. This is just to check that the route you entered is the route you meant to enter, not graphical Notams. There are many examples of pilots who have tried to drive the system, got a brief, but the brief was not for the right route, pilots have not realised and gone flying. I have done this myself and was very lucky to get away with it.
Rod1
021864
-
Mike Cross
- Site Admin
- Posts: 228
- Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2008 10:24 am
Hi Harry
LAA gets two bites of the cherry on this one as I shall also be at the meeting but representing AOPA UK.
The reason why you can't use an airfield in a route is because the site follows the ICAO standards for a Flight Plan. A 4 letter a/d Locator is not valid in a Flight Plan Route and is therefore also not valid in a route on the AIS site. Personally I think it best to have a single standard rather than being able to do something one way in one application and a different way in another.
There are a couple of problems with your other suggestions:-
1. The data format laid down by ICAO is not designed for graphical presentation. There is an ongoing joint Eurocontrol/FAA project called xNotam (google it for more info) which WILL allow accurate graphical presentation but until that standard, or something similar, is adopted by ICAO the NOTAM system will continue not to support accurate graphical presentation.
2. All of the abbreviations are in AIP GEN 2.2
Insertion of code to allow a pop-up to translate the abbreviation is indeed possible (as it would be with TAF or METAR) but would require some labour-intensive re-coding of the data. Remember that AIS don't originate the data, they simply deliver it. Bear in mind also that the AIS site contains NOTAM for the entire world while the abbreviations in GEN 2.2 are only applicable to NOTAM for the UK FIR's.
It would be a simple matter for a software author to provide a "translator". Simply cut and paste the NOTAM into a box to get the same data with the abbreviations expanded, in much the same way that Google language tools work. Same would apply to TAF & METAR. If you ask CAA to fund this you'll end up with something expensive, the cost of which will have to be recovered from users. Better to my mind to get some generous soul to produce a tool to do it in his spare time. It's not hugely difficult. All of the data is readily available.
LAA gets two bites of the cherry on this one as I shall also be at the meeting but representing AOPA UK.
The reason why you can't use an airfield in a route is because the site follows the ICAO standards for a Flight Plan. A 4 letter a/d Locator is not valid in a Flight Plan Route and is therefore also not valid in a route on the AIS site. Personally I think it best to have a single standard rather than being able to do something one way in one application and a different way in another.
There are a couple of problems with your other suggestions:-
1. The data format laid down by ICAO is not designed for graphical presentation. There is an ongoing joint Eurocontrol/FAA project called xNotam (google it for more info) which WILL allow accurate graphical presentation but until that standard, or something similar, is adopted by ICAO the NOTAM system will continue not to support accurate graphical presentation.
2. All of the abbreviations are in AIP GEN 2.2
Insertion of code to allow a pop-up to translate the abbreviation is indeed possible (as it would be with TAF or METAR) but would require some labour-intensive re-coding of the data. Remember that AIS don't originate the data, they simply deliver it. Bear in mind also that the AIS site contains NOTAM for the entire world while the abbreviations in GEN 2.2 are only applicable to NOTAM for the UK FIR's.
It would be a simple matter for a software author to provide a "translator". Simply cut and paste the NOTAM into a box to get the same data with the abbreviations expanded, in much the same way that Google language tools work. Same would apply to TAF & METAR. If you ask CAA to fund this you'll end up with something expensive, the cost of which will have to be recovered from users. Better to my mind to get some generous soul to produce a tool to do it in his spare time. It's not hugely difficult. All of the data is readily available.
030881
Mike,
With respect, there is no use hiding behind what ICAO require. The consumers of the information on the NOTAM website are light aircraft pilots who generally do not file flight plans (and do not have an ops department to file flight flight plans for them) and do usually route airfield to airfield.
Please look at what the users of the service want and provide that - then we will all stop saying the AIS site is rubbish (which I believe it is at the moment). How many infringements of NOTAMed airspace would be avoided if the AIS website could provide a graphical representation of the NOTAMs? Would that be a massive improvement in air safety - yes, significantly so, in my view.
Who cares about most of the stuff that is in the NOTAMs? Sure, it has to be NOTAMed, but to VFR light aircraft pilots it is spam and makes filtering out the important information very difficult. Please listen to ordinary pilots who say they don't bother checking NOTAMs because it is just too difficult. I suggest they are in the majority. There is money available to improve safety (look at all the publications that drop through our letter boxes), better to use the budget for the A5 format accident summary to produce readable NOTAMs in my view.
There needs to be some coordination with software tools. I used to use a tool at the gliding club that depicted NOTAMs, but it stopped working a few weeks ago when the format for some data was changed. That made all the efforts by amateur software writers useless overnight. I don't know what the change was, and I'm sure there was a reason for it, but it did seriously annoy many people who could be used to help the poor old GA pilot.
Please think about the customers for the data and provide a service that meets the needs of the majority of those customers. The current offering does not.
Regards, Peter
With respect, there is no use hiding behind what ICAO require. The consumers of the information on the NOTAM website are light aircraft pilots who generally do not file flight plans (and do not have an ops department to file flight flight plans for them) and do usually route airfield to airfield.
Please look at what the users of the service want and provide that - then we will all stop saying the AIS site is rubbish (which I believe it is at the moment). How many infringements of NOTAMed airspace would be avoided if the AIS website could provide a graphical representation of the NOTAMs? Would that be a massive improvement in air safety - yes, significantly so, in my view.
Who cares about most of the stuff that is in the NOTAMs? Sure, it has to be NOTAMed, but to VFR light aircraft pilots it is spam and makes filtering out the important information very difficult. Please listen to ordinary pilots who say they don't bother checking NOTAMs because it is just too difficult. I suggest they are in the majority. There is money available to improve safety (look at all the publications that drop through our letter boxes), better to use the budget for the A5 format accident summary to produce readable NOTAMs in my view.
There needs to be some coordination with software tools. I used to use a tool at the gliding club that depicted NOTAMs, but it stopped working a few weeks ago when the format for some data was changed. That made all the efforts by amateur software writers useless overnight. I don't know what the change was, and I'm sure there was a reason for it, but it did seriously annoy many people who could be used to help the poor old GA pilot.
Please think about the customers for the data and provide a service that meets the needs of the majority of those customers. The current offering does not.
Regards, Peter
Rod, Mike
I boned up xnotam a few months back.
The latest docs refered to the last ICAO meeting in Peru in 2004 - just how much input the Peruvians added is a matter of conjecture - just a jolly junket ??
I know the NATs/CAA cannot just go their own way, but someone needs to light the blue touch paper - so don't bother with techy speak about narrow routes, remind folks that we are waiting for results.
Regarding the bogus statement about ICAO conformity, there is of course a need for full conformance to the minimal standards, but that does not stop NATs implementing enhanced features, there is nothing to stop NATS publishing Notams in XML format today, even if in the future the data schema changes, a change to the schema is easy for enhanced service providers to alter their code. It's the complete lack of a schema that makes changes difficult.
So please guys, the message to NATS is simple - extract digit
I boned up xnotam a few months back.
The latest docs refered to the last ICAO meeting in Peru in 2004 - just how much input the Peruvians added is a matter of conjecture - just a jolly junket ??
I know the NATs/CAA cannot just go their own way, but someone needs to light the blue touch paper - so don't bother with techy speak about narrow routes, remind folks that we are waiting for results.
Regarding the bogus statement about ICAO conformity, there is of course a need for full conformance to the minimal standards, but that does not stop NATs implementing enhanced features, there is nothing to stop NATS publishing Notams in XML format today, even if in the future the data schema changes, a change to the schema is easy for enhanced service providers to alter their code. It's the complete lack of a schema that makes changes difficult.
So please guys, the message to NATS is simple - extract digit
Peter Diffey
029340
029340
-
Mike Cross
- Site Admin
- Posts: 228
- Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2008 10:24 am
Penguin & Pete
You are missing the point entirely I'm afraid. NATS are funded by CAA to produce NOTAM that meet the UK's obligations under the Chicago Convention. They have to do that and the data is used by any aircraft intending to fly in UK airspace. That includes everything from the Sunday bimbler to the airlines and the military. No matter what country they are based in or where the aircraft is registered, if it intends to fly in UK Airspace it needs UK NOTAM and these will be provided by whoever they get their briefings from, anywhere in the World. For example the US Military get theirs from the Defense Internet NOTAM Service (DINS)
It therefore follows that any non ICAO-compliant system for UK NOTAM will be in addition to the above and not be a replacement for it.
NATS are responsible for delivering the data, not for originating it. Before anyone (NATS included) could produce reliable graphical plots the data would have to be suitable for graphical plotting. Currently it is not.
While the CAA COULD require the authors of UK NOTAM to produce two parallel outputs, one in the ICAO standard format for upload into the European AIS Database run by Eurocontrol and a second output suitable for graphical plotting and input into a new database run by someone else this raises a lot of issues:-
A new database would have to be devised and hosted to hold the new data. This would also require a new web interface to allow users access to the data. Quality Assurance would have to be put in place to ensure that the data integrity was maintained and some form of backup would have to be provided to allow for failure. (In the current setup the data is housed in two separate datacentres in two different countries to cover this). A software house would have to be appointed to write the software as this would be a bespoke application (it does not exist anywhere else in the World). There would also be issues with EU law regarding the certification of Air Navigation Service Providers and with non-compliance with Eurocontrol's OPADD standards (Operating Procedures for AIS Dynamic Data)
Additional staff would be required as the workload would be effectively doubled.
It is highly unlikely that NATS, who are a commercial organisation, would wish to take on the task of running a non ICAO-compliant system, but you never know. If they declined to do so you'd be faced with finding a commercial provider. Any such system would become redundant if ICAO adopted the xNOTAM standard.
The result would be a tailored solution for UK light aircraft pilots that only contained UK NOTAM so it would not be possible to use it for a flight to another country. It would have to be funded from users and it's not hard to see how high the cost would be and where it would fall.
Anyone flying abroad needs to understand how the ICAO NOTAM system works, in the same way that the need to understand how TAF and METAR work. My personal preference is to educate users so that they can cope with the system that applies all over the World, rather than devise something non-standard that would load a lot of additional cost on to my flying.
It is of course not uncommon for third-party providers to supply value-added briefing services. The airlines do it as do commercial briefing companies such as Avbrief and Bytron (Skybook). There are also a number of low-cost or free to user services such as NotamPlot, Notam Map, Notam Check etc.
You are missing the point entirely I'm afraid. NATS are funded by CAA to produce NOTAM that meet the UK's obligations under the Chicago Convention. They have to do that and the data is used by any aircraft intending to fly in UK airspace. That includes everything from the Sunday bimbler to the airlines and the military. No matter what country they are based in or where the aircraft is registered, if it intends to fly in UK Airspace it needs UK NOTAM and these will be provided by whoever they get their briefings from, anywhere in the World. For example the US Military get theirs from the Defense Internet NOTAM Service (DINS)
It therefore follows that any non ICAO-compliant system for UK NOTAM will be in addition to the above and not be a replacement for it.
NATS are responsible for delivering the data, not for originating it. Before anyone (NATS included) could produce reliable graphical plots the data would have to be suitable for graphical plotting. Currently it is not.
While the CAA COULD require the authors of UK NOTAM to produce two parallel outputs, one in the ICAO standard format for upload into the European AIS Database run by Eurocontrol and a second output suitable for graphical plotting and input into a new database run by someone else this raises a lot of issues:-
A new database would have to be devised and hosted to hold the new data. This would also require a new web interface to allow users access to the data. Quality Assurance would have to be put in place to ensure that the data integrity was maintained and some form of backup would have to be provided to allow for failure. (In the current setup the data is housed in two separate datacentres in two different countries to cover this). A software house would have to be appointed to write the software as this would be a bespoke application (it does not exist anywhere else in the World). There would also be issues with EU law regarding the certification of Air Navigation Service Providers and with non-compliance with Eurocontrol's OPADD standards (Operating Procedures for AIS Dynamic Data)
Additional staff would be required as the workload would be effectively doubled.
It is highly unlikely that NATS, who are a commercial organisation, would wish to take on the task of running a non ICAO-compliant system, but you never know. If they declined to do so you'd be faced with finding a commercial provider. Any such system would become redundant if ICAO adopted the xNOTAM standard.
The result would be a tailored solution for UK light aircraft pilots that only contained UK NOTAM so it would not be possible to use it for a flight to another country. It would have to be funded from users and it's not hard to see how high the cost would be and where it would fall.
Anyone flying abroad needs to understand how the ICAO NOTAM system works, in the same way that the need to understand how TAF and METAR work. My personal preference is to educate users so that they can cope with the system that applies all over the World, rather than devise something non-standard that would load a lot of additional cost on to my flying.
It is of course not uncommon for third-party providers to supply value-added briefing services. The airlines do it as do commercial briefing companies such as Avbrief and Bytron (Skybook). There are also a number of low-cost or free to user services such as NotamPlot, Notam Map, Notam Check etc.
030881
Mike, the main thrust of my argument is that NATS ICAO Eurocontrol are taking far too long to get xnotam in place.
The x for xtensible in the title is the clue, they could actually promolgate an xml schema today.
- take the basics
We have airfield, so we know there will be a airfield tag and airfields will have a set of attributes such as name, lat, long alt, so that part of the schema can be published today. the great thing about XML is that at a later date it can be extended as required.
We know that NATS will need a new database to hold the data, again by their nature it's a straight forward job to add fields to the database schema as and when they are needed.
Now tomorrows meeting, are you going there to defend NATS inertia or to get them to actually get off the padded rumps and do something ?
The x for xtensible in the title is the clue, they could actually promolgate an xml schema today.
- take the basics
We have airfield, so we know there will be a airfield tag and airfields will have a set of attributes such as name, lat, long alt, so that part of the schema can be published today. the great thing about XML is that at a later date it can be extended as required.
We know that NATS will need a new database to hold the data, again by their nature it's a straight forward job to add fields to the database schema as and when they are needed.
Now tomorrows meeting, are you going there to defend NATS inertia or to get them to actually get off the padded rumps and do something ?
Peter Diffey
029340
029340
-
Mike Cross
- Site Admin
- Posts: 228
- Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2008 10:24 am
Summary of the meeting (more detail to follow)
Data feed
No progress from last year, in fact things have gone back. We have been promised a meeting very soon to try to move this forward
Gross Error Check
I have taken them through the logic, and an awaiting a response.
Official graphical display of Notams.
Possible big movement on this. Promise of a meeting in very near future, but requested not to make details public yet.
X-Notam
Promised more info on progress very soon, I will forward this ASAP.
Help and training material
This had improved for the old site, but is poor or non-existent for the new site.
I would say on balance progress has been disappointing in the last 12 months, but there is some hope for the near future.
Rod
Representing the LAA and BMAA
Data feed
No progress from last year, in fact things have gone back. We have been promised a meeting very soon to try to move this forward
Gross Error Check
I have taken them through the logic, and an awaiting a response.
Official graphical display of Notams.
Possible big movement on this. Promise of a meeting in very near future, but requested not to make details public yet.
X-Notam
Promised more info on progress very soon, I will forward this ASAP.
Help and training material
This had improved for the old site, but is poor or non-existent for the new site.
I would say on balance progress has been disappointing in the last 12 months, but there is some hope for the near future.
Rod
Representing the LAA and BMAA
021864
Thanks for the heads-up on fly dsc.
Things just got easier again.
Also nice to see peace breaking out and more of a united front on what needs to be done hence forward.
Mind you it still disgusts me the amount of effort that people have had to put in to make the AIS site even vaguely usable. Maybe in a few years it might even be the tool of choice?
Things just got easier again.
Also nice to see peace breaking out and more of a united front on what needs to be done hence forward.
Mind you it still disgusts me the amount of effort that people have had to put in to make the AIS site even vaguely usable. Maybe in a few years it might even be the tool of choice?
“Maybe in a few years it might even be the tool of choice?”
If we want to get the usage rate up from 45% to 80% then the existing system will not help, even with the odd tweak and a decent help/education package. The future is in a data feed and intuitive s/w aimed at our sort of flying. I am still waiting for a response from my email, but I will chase it up next week.
Rod1
If we want to get the usage rate up from 45% to 80% then the existing system will not help, even with the odd tweak and a decent help/education package. The future is in a data feed and intuitive s/w aimed at our sort of flying. I am still waiting for a response from my email, but I will chase it up next week.
Rod1
021864