 |
37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Air carrier captain reported the NOTAM format needs many improvements for safety reasons.
| Attributes | |
| ACN | 1750320 |
| Time | |
| Date | 202007 |
| Local Time Of Day | 1201-1800 |
| Environment | |
| Flight Conditions | VMC |
| Light | Daylight |
| Aircraft 1 | |
| Make Model Name | Commercial Fixed Wing |
| Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
| Flight Phase | Parked |
| Route In Use | Direct |
| Flight Plan | IFR |
| Component | |
| Aircraft Component | Electronic Library (other than Nav database) |
| Person 1 | |
| Function | Captain |
| Qualification | Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP) Flight Crew Instrument Flight Crew Multiengine Flight Crew Flight Instructor |
| Experience | Flight Crew Last 90 Days 180 Flight Crew Total 18750 Flight Crew Type 1250 |
| Events | |
| Anomaly | Deviation - Procedural FAR Deviation - Procedural Published Material / Policy Deviation - Procedural Clearance |
Narrative:
The dispatch paperwork for our flight contained 119 notams. Those notams filled 12 1/3 pages of standard 8 1/2 x 11 paper. Connected end-to-end; these notams stretched to 11 1/3 feet. That is a lot of information; all of which the PIC of a flight is required by 14 crash fire rescue equipment 91 to read; understand; absorb; and apply. Oh; and let's not forget that all of it is written in cryptic code developed 70 years ago to accommodate the limited bandwidth of mid-twentieth century teletype technology. Recall the near-disaster event when an air carrier Y almost landed on a taxiway occupied by several wide body aircraft at sfo; missing a collision by mere seconds. A finding in that event was that the abundance of notams; and the fact that they were presented in a format which does not lend to assessment by importance or risk by the flight crew resulted in the crew failing to notice a runway closure; which factored in the event. Thankfully; the industry has developed weather planning and assessment tools in formats which recognize human factors; are intuitive; and easy to apply to pilot decision making. It is well past the time when the FAA should do the same with the NOTAM system. Present notams graphically when applicable. Move from cryptic coding to an intuitive presentation of information. Prioritize notams by risk.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: Air carrier Captain reported the NOTAM format needs many improvements for safety reasons.
Narrative: The dispatch paperwork for our flight contained 119 NOTAMs. Those NOTAMs filled 12 1/3 pages of standard 8 1/2 x 11 paper. Connected end-to-end; these NOTAMs stretched to 11 1/3 feet. That is a lot of information; all of which the PIC of a flight is required by 14 CFR 91 to read; understand; absorb; and apply. Oh; and let's not forget that all of it is written in cryptic code developed 70 years ago to accommodate the limited bandwidth of mid-twentieth century teletype technology. Recall the near-disaster event when an Air Carrier Y almost landed on a taxiway occupied by several wide body aircraft at SFO; missing a collision by mere seconds. A finding in that event was that the abundance of NOTAMs; and the fact that they were presented in a format which does not lend to assessment by importance or risk by the flight crew resulted in the crew failing to notice a runway closure; which factored in the event. Thankfully; the industry has developed weather planning and assessment tools in formats which recognize human factors; are intuitive; and easy to apply to pilot decision making. It is well past the time when the FAA should do the same with the NOTAM system. Present NOTAMs graphically when applicable. Move from cryptic coding to an intuitive presentation of information. Prioritize NOTAMs by risk.
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.