 |
37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Air carrier dispatcher reported some notams for inoperative airport systems preclude use as an alternate airport while others do not.
| Attributes | |
| ACN | 1617885 |
| Time | |
| Date | 201902 |
| Local Time Of Day | 0001-0600 |
| Place | |
| Locale Reference | MCI.Airport |
| State Reference | MO |
| Aircraft 1 | |
| Make Model Name | Commercial Fixed Wing |
| Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
| Flight Plan | IFR |
| Person 1 | |
| Function | Dispatcher |
| Qualification | Dispatch Dispatcher |
| Experience | Dispatch Dispatch 18 |
| Events | |
| Anomaly | Deviation - Procedural Published Material / Policy |
Narrative:
This report is meant to provide information regarding the NOTAM system. As it stands now; the amount of information is excessive but my point of this report is with regards to the notams for mci. I'm making an assumption but it is my belief that the majority of air carriers are operating aircraft with advanced navigation systems which include GPS; IRS; IRU; etc. The fact that these notams prevent the use of an airport as an alternate or an operating instrument approach to derive alternate minimums is unnecessary as these advanced aircraft are capable of RNAV or GPS substituting the inoperative vors in these notams. I want to point out that there is no standardization when it comes to notams such as one airport will completely exclude perfectly good approaches (mci) while other airports do not. In the case of [other airports]; they allow for RNAV subbing the inoperative components.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: Air carrier Dispatcher reported some NOTAMs for inoperative airport systems preclude use as an alternate airport while others do not.
Narrative: This report is meant to provide information regarding the NOTAM system. As it stands now; the amount of information is excessive but my point of this report is with regards to the NOTAMs for MCI. I'm making an assumption but it is my belief that the majority of air carriers are operating aircraft with advanced navigation systems which include GPS; IRS; IRU; etc. The fact that these NOTAMs prevent the use of an airport as an alternate or an operating instrument approach to derive alternate minimums is unnecessary as these advanced aircraft are capable of RNAV or GPS substituting the inoperative VORs in these NOTAMs. I want to point out that there is no standardization when it comes to NOTAMs such as one airport will completely exclude perfectly good approaches (MCI) while other airports do not. In the case of [other airports]; they allow for RNAV subbing the inoperative components.
Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.