Narrative:

I feel that the format for presenting NOTAMS to flcs is confusing and difficult to read. The required and important information is buried in text form that is arduous at best. Look at ord no 13/1 (fdc 5/5120). There is information for no less than 10 approachs buried in this one NOTAM. Ord no 13/2 continues fdc 5/5120 and is just as cluttered. My suggestion is to arrange the NOTAMS into usable clusters, ie, closures and reductions to takeoff and landing distances. Approach and landing information. Takeoff information. Field conditions. Taxiway information. Miscellaneous, etc. Next, list the runways and txwys in sequential or alphabetical order (runways left,C,right). Finally, for approachs to runways, order NOTAMS from lowest to highest minimums -- CAT III to visual. Make sure that the runway is the first item of the NOTAM and that the airport reference numbers and fdc numbers are the last items of the NOTAMS -- preferably in a separate r-hand margin -- and not grouped with the critical information. I understand the need for reference numbers and defining data, but, putting this group in a separate margin or block to the right or bottom might actually make this information easier to use. Look at bos 13/1 fdc 5/3465. I see 'bos' twice. Fi/T? -- Nobody knows what this means. Then, give me a break, general edward lawrence logan international -- they're pretty proud of this guy. Next, boston ma -- as if nobody knew what bos meant the first 2 times. The next item is the type of approach which is listed before identing the runway. Just about completely backwards, in my opinion. This is not a good or efficient way to disseminate information. I've spent up to 5 mins reviewing NOTAM information, sorting out what is pertinent. If during this same flight I have 5 tp's (turbulence plot system for locating turbulence and cumulo nimbus -- these are plotted using a latitude/longitude system) to plot, 2 mels to look up, as well as an open maintenance write-up, something is going to get missed. Please help.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: NOTAM FORMAT RECOMMENDED CHANGES.

Narrative: I FEEL THAT THE FORMAT FOR PRESENTING NOTAMS TO FLCS IS CONFUSING AND DIFFICULT TO READ. THE REQUIRED AND IMPORTANT INFO IS BURIED IN TEXT FORM THAT IS ARDUOUS AT BEST. LOOK AT ORD NO 13/1 (FDC 5/5120). THERE IS INFO FOR NO LESS THAN 10 APCHS BURIED IN THIS ONE NOTAM. ORD NO 13/2 CONTINUES FDC 5/5120 AND IS JUST AS CLUTTERED. MY SUGGESTION IS TO ARRANGE THE NOTAMS INTO USABLE CLUSTERS, IE, CLOSURES AND REDUCTIONS TO TKOF AND LNDG DISTANCES. APCH AND LNDG INFO. TKOF INFO. FIELD CONDITIONS. TXWY INFO. MISC, ETC. NEXT, LIST THE RWYS AND TXWYS IN SEQUENTIAL OR ALPHABETICAL ORDER (RWYS L,C,R). FINALLY, FOR APCHS TO RWYS, ORDER NOTAMS FROM LOWEST TO HIGHEST MINIMUMS -- CAT III TO VISUAL. MAKE SURE THAT THE RWY IS THE FIRST ITEM OF THE NOTAM AND THAT THE ARPT REF NUMBERS AND FDC NUMBERS ARE THE LAST ITEMS OF THE NOTAMS -- PREFERABLY IN A SEPARATE R-HAND MARGIN -- AND NOT GROUPED WITH THE CRITICAL INFO. I UNDERSTAND THE NEED FOR REF NUMBERS AND DEFINING DATA, BUT, PUTTING THIS GROUP IN A SEPARATE MARGIN OR BLOCK TO THE R OR BOTTOM MIGHT ACTUALLY MAKE THIS INFO EASIER TO USE. LOOK AT BOS 13/1 FDC 5/3465. I SEE 'BOS' TWICE. FI/T? -- NOBODY KNOWS WHAT THIS MEANS. THEN, GIVE ME A BREAK, GENERAL EDWARD LAWRENCE LOGAN INTL -- THEY'RE PRETTY PROUD OF THIS GUY. NEXT, BOSTON MA -- AS IF NOBODY KNEW WHAT BOS MEANT THE FIRST 2 TIMES. THE NEXT ITEM IS THE TYPE OF APCH WHICH IS LISTED BEFORE IDENTING THE RWY. JUST ABOUT COMPLETELY BACKWARDS, IN MY OPINION. THIS IS NOT A GOOD OR EFFICIENT WAY TO DISSEMINATE INFO. I'VE SPENT UP TO 5 MINS REVIEWING NOTAM INFO, SORTING OUT WHAT IS PERTINENT. IF DURING THIS SAME FLT I HAVE 5 TP'S (TURB PLOT SYS FOR LOCATING TURB AND CUMULO NIMBUS -- THESE ARE PLOTTED USING A LATITUDE/LONGITUDE SYS) TO PLOT, 2 MELS TO LOOK UP, AS WELL AS AN OPEN MAINT WRITE-UP, SOMETHING IS GOING TO GET MISSED. PLEASE HELP.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 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.