What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

NOTAMs

F

fehdxl

Well Known Member
The one and only runway at my airport closed for two hours in the middle of the afternoon for non-emergency maintenance. The NOTAM was published with 90 minutes notice. This could present a safety issue if one was to arrive with minimum fuel.

Upon speaking with the airport authority, their stance was that the NOTAM system was for actual conditions and not future conditions. Therefore, even though they knew of this closure with a week's notice, they weren't going to publish the NOTAM any sooner.

What do you all think about this? Is the NOTAM system there to notify us of future closures when the situation allows such notification?

Thanks in advance for your thoughts.

Jim
 
The airport I fly out of for work (KSAD) had it's runways closed recently for resurfacing. The NOTAM's were published weeks in advance about each of the two runways. What your describing makes no sense to me, if the closure is known in advance. Glenn
 
I seriously doubt their stated reason has any legitemacy whatsoever - more likely just a lame way to sweep their own negligence under the rug. Regardless, this is just stupid stupid stupid. Can they not admit that it would have been better for everyone to have disseminated that information as soon as possible?

erich
 
I goes against what every pilot is taught that preparation on the ground before the flight is a requirement when flying. Not sure how you are expected to adaquately prepare when you are not given all the available information. I think this is the argument that finally got the TFRs published ahead of time.
 
Last edited:
Thanks guys.

One of their points in response was the closure was somewhat of a moving target. They think that if they published with a week's notice the airport was going to be closed on Thursday, only for a change to happen on Tuesday where they had to slip the closure until Friday, that all the NOTAMS and changes would just confuse us pilots.

My point back was that changes happen and if they would simply keep the NOTAMS up-to-date with the most accurate information, then we could all adjust as necessary.

Kind of makes me want to join the advisory board (not even sure if that's a possibility) just to bring some pilot knowledge into the decision process.

Thanks again.

Jim
 
I submit most of the NOTAMs at my airport and do it with as much advance notice as possible. Runway closures certainly and we email folks as well.

Moving targets just move as required. Even a paint job would be known the day before most likely.
 
I posted a notam a couple weeks ago for an event here at GYB on a saturday.. I tried to post it a week ahead of time, but ATC said no sooner than 3 days prior to an event.
So the wednesday before.. It was for airport closure for ALL air and ground traffic that was to be in effect from 7am to 3pm that saturday.
4 aircraft arrived and departed just after 1pm and left before 3pm.. I learned a posted NOTAM doesnt mean people will check it!!

So one posted 90minutes before an event, is TERRIBLE planning on behalf of the person that posted it!
 
I would strongly suggest you get in touch with the FAA to let them know your local pencil-pusher's take on the NOTAM system, or their abuse thereof.

A NOTAM is just that, an operational notification, that something is different, and should be obtained prior to flight to ensure the flight can be undertaken safely and legally. I suppose you could draw a line within 100 miles of your local field, and then point out that anyone outside that circle is being put at risk by their no-notice runway closure.

To get anywhere in Australia you need to fly a long time, and if I were to suddenly arrive overhead my destination to see X's all over the runway, with min fuel and nowhere else to go, there'd be **** to pay, especially if there was no NOTAM about it.
 
I'd Like to Have All Information Before Departing, But...

I agree that short notices should be avoided whenever possible, but this should NEVER be a safety issue. Could it be inconvenient? Sure. But even a student pilot making his first cross country flight should know enough to have alternatives available (it's actually part of the FARs). As far as arriving at the planned destination with minimum fuel, that's also pretty much Flying 101 (and also covered by FARs). While I can't recall any other times when such short notice resulted in a planned shutdown over the past nearly 40 years, I've seen plenty of unplanned closures - most of them related to accidents before my arrival or unforecast weather. We need to be prepared.
Terry, CFI
RV-9A N323TP
 
NOTAM help

Jim-

I might be able to help prevent this from happening to you again...check your PMs.
 
As Painter John noted, it seems that very few people check on NOTAMs. When we have to close our runway for needed maintenance (crack fill, restriping, etc), we always get numerous people who don't know about it. That is with plenty of advance notice.

I try to accommodate them if it can be done safely but I have had to notify them by radio that the runway is closed.
 
terrykohler said:
I agree that short notices should be avoided whenever possible, but this should NEVER be a safety issue.
Click to expand...
I couldn't disagree more, particularly in Australia.

As I said earlier, to get anywhere down under, you need to fly for a long time. In quite a few instances I can think of, there are no suitable alternates within an hours flying time, yet alone your 45 minute reserve. Carrying more fuel isn't always an option, therefore you are relying on the NOTAM process to ensure your flight can be safely conducted. Afterall, this is the whole reason PNR exists, the point at which you are committed to continuing to your destination.

Unforseen weather I can understand, and if it went below the VFR alternate minima I would continue anyway if I couldn't reach an alternate, perhaps upgrade to IFR if required/qualified, and I'd be quite prepared to land on a taxiway if there was a Bonanza sitting gear-up on the runway, but for planned maintenance there's absolutely zero excuse for not NOTAM'ing a runway/airport/navaid closure. Or publishing said NOTAM with 90 minutes notice.
 
FWIW, when I spoke to the FAA about the short-notice non-emergency closing and my concern about an aircraft arriving min- or emergency-fuel, he mentioned a few options to a pilot in that situation: (a) landing on the taxiway, (b) asking the construction crew to remove the mobile X's at each end and re-open the airfield, or (c) diverting to a nearby airport. Yes experienced pilots would likely consider all three, but a student or inexperience pilot...maybe not.

* Break * Break *

About the 3-day prior limitation...well I did some searching on the FAA site and found JO 7930.2M and this information within:

3-2-3. FILING NOTAM INFORMATION WITH FSSs
NOTAM information should not be filed with an FSS prior to 3 days before the expected condition is to occur. A NOTAM shall be transmitted as soon as practical but not more than 3 days before the expected condition is to occur.

1-4-1. WORD MEANINGS
As used in this order:
b. ?Should? means a procedure is recommended.

So the word in question here is 'should'. IMHO, a known closure deserves more than 3-days notice and therefore if I was an airport manager would use discretion and the latitude inherent with the word 'should' in order to publish the closure with as much notice as possible.

* Break * Break *

Thanks for your inputs, they are all good and I'll pass them a long to the airport authority.

The person I've been speaking with genuinely seems to be receptive to doing the right thing, but it is frustrating being part of the on-going learning process.


Fly safe,

-Jim
 
I wonder about wanting it more than three days in advance. Three days out I don't know if the weather will permit a trip. Even one day out is iffy. If you know about a runway closure seven days out will that really help more than three days?

I agree with 90 minutes being unacceptable but three days seems reasonable.
 
fehdxl said:
A NOTAM shall be transmitted as soon as practical but not more than 3 days before the expected condition is to occur.
Click to expand...

And note for your argument...in the bolded section "shall" is operative word not "should". So if they knew the schedule with a good degree of certainty a week in advance, they should in any practical case always file it 3 days in advance. (Just my $0.02 of course. :))
 
For a day trip, and a two-hour closure I see your point. However, their logic also applied to the daily 2000-0700 local closure associated with this same construction project. If I left on a week-long trip on Sunday only to find out on Wednesday of a Friday closure, I agree it would not be a safety of flight issue. But it sure would be a frustrating logistical problem of landing at another airport when my car is in the hangar or having to significantly alter plans with short-notice.

To add a more to the story (there always is), about two-weeks after this 90-minute-notice closure, they closed the airport from 1400L until 0700L with 7-hours notice. It had been NOTAM'd to be closed daily from 2000L until 0700L for weeks, so it was the additional time during the afternoon and evening that they only gave 7-hours notice to. Yes, 7-hours notice mostly (but not completely) alleviates the min-fuel situation, but not the logistical. IMHO, still grossly inadequate when they knew about this particular closing event for 6 days prior.

The bottom line to me is IMHO, there is no place for the "I've got a secret" attitude in aviation. I view the fact the airport authority knew of the closure but didn't tell us via a NOTAM is keeping a secret.

Thanks for your thoughts.

-Jim
 
Jim, sounds like you need to talk with airport management. Then if that is not productive...AOPA safety folks since it may be an FAA issue.
 
What then is the proceedure for an emergency closure? Monitor the radio until the mess is cleaned up? Or should controlers overseeing a given area be the ones to redirect traffic, after they have been notified? so the ground support can focus on cleaning up the situation.

Repairs, maintence and other such things on a runway/taxiway, lighting system etc.. are not emergencies, therefore closing anything 90 days ahead of time is just silly.

Certainly there is some type of notification that can be posted a week or more prior to a maintence event so that EVERYONE knows about it.. Perhaps a TFR? perhaps a new acronym, something like an SMN "Scheduled Maintence Notification" ? I dont know..

Sure Destination plus 30 or 45 is a great rule of thumb, but like the Austrailian guy said.. there just arent secondary airports with in the 30 or 45 minute range.. So posting an SMN 2 weeks prior would keep everyone aware of whats happening at that airport, and they could make other plans.

I know if we have some big mess out here that would render the airport unsafe to use.. I will put a large X over the runway after i have contacted Austin Aproach and Houston as well... There are plenty of options to land around here well with in destination plus 30.
 
Read the following about a US Senator landing on a closed runway. Imagine what would happen to me if I did this. Bolding added by me

http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archives/avflash/1760-full.html#203537

"Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.) says he won't guarantee he'll be more vigilant about checking NOTAMs after he landed on a closed runway occupied by maintenance workers ten days ago in Texas. "People who fly a lot just don't do it," Inhofe told the Tulsa World. "I won't make any commitments." Inhofe added that while "technically" pilots should "probably" check NOTAMs, it would be impractical for him to do so on the many flights he makes to small airports in Oklahoma each year. The FAA has confirmed it is investigating the Oct 21 incident in which Inhofe landed a Cessna 340 on an occupied closed runway at Port Isabel-Cameron County Airport, Texas, He was reportedly carrying three others in the light twin when he made the landing on a runway bearing oversized painted Xs, a large red truck, other vehicles, and construction workers. The workers were using loud equipment at the time and didn't hear the plane's approach, so one person ran to warn them. A supervisor immediately reported the incident to the FAA and told TulsaWorld.com he was "still shaking" when he reached the hangar to confront the pilot. For his part, Inhofe said he didn't see the Xs until late on final and was concerned he might not be able to abort safely. He said he landed "well off to the side" of the workers. There were no injuries. A few days after his unorthodox arrival, Inhofe Saturday notified "an airport official" of his intent and used a taxiway for departure, according to The Washington Post. The senator has since spoken with the FAA and will "just wait and see what happens." That hasn't stopped him from offering reporters some form of explanation.

TulsaWorld.com reports that Inhofe said he was unaware of the runway's closure NOTAM because of "a bad relationship he has with one individual, who the Senator said declined to take his phone calls before the flight and did not tell him about the NOTAM." In the Washington Post's coverage, Inhofe said an airport official "hates me, I don't know why." The FAA's current interest is why the landing happened while the runway was clearly marked with the requisite oversized Xs. It will attempt to determine why Inhofe was apparently not aware of a NOTAM about the closure and investigate the circumstances of the taxiway departure. The airport has four runways but according to AirNav all except the main one (13/31) are in poor condition. In his 50 years as a pilot, Inhofe has experienced at least two other publicized incidents. In 1999, Inhofe suffered an emergency landing when his aircraft lost its propeller, and in 2006 he ground-looped a Vans RV-8 built by his son."
 
Last edited:
Inhofe

Amazing huh! I think its called the "Sense of Entitlement" disease. Yup, same one Tiger had.
 
Inhofe

I wonder if the press is going to cover his 709 ride? :rolleyes:

John Clark ATP, CFI
FAA FAAST Team Member
EAA Flight Advisor
RV8 N18U "Sunshine"
KSBA
 
Ron Lee said:
Read the following about a US Senator landing on a closed runway. Imagine what would happen to me if I did this. Bolding added by me

http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archives/avflash/1760-full.html#203537

"Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.) says he won't guarantee he'll be more vigilant about checking NOTAMs after he landed on a closed runway occupied by maintenance workers ten days ago in Texas. "People who fly a lot just don't do it," Inhofe told the Tulsa World. "I won't make any commitments." Inhofe added that while "technically" pilots should "probably" check NOTAMs, it would be impractical for him to do so on the many flights he makes to small airports in Oklahoma each year. The FAA has confirmed it is investigating the Oct 21 incident in which Inhofe landed a Cessna 340 on an occupied closed runway at Port Isabel-Cameron County Airport, Texas, He was reportedly carrying three others in the light twin when he made the landing on a runway bearing oversized painted Xs, a large red truck, other vehicles, and construction workers. The workers were using loud equipment at the time and didn't hear the plane's approach, so one person ran to warn them. A supervisor immediately reported the incident to the FAA and told TulsaWorld.com he was "still shaking" when he reached the hangar to confront the pilot. For his part, Inhofe said he didn't see the Xs until late on final and was concerned he might not be able to abort safely. He said he landed "well off to the side" of the workers. There were no injuries. A few days after his unorthodox arrival, Inhofe Saturday notified "an airport official" of his intent and used a taxiway for departure, according to The Washington Post. The senator has since spoken with the FAA and will "just wait and see what happens." That hasn't stopped him from offering reporters some form of explanation.

TulsaWorld.com reports that Inhofe said he was unaware of the runway's closure NOTAM because of "a bad relationship he has with one individual, who the Senator said declined to take his phone calls before the flight and did not tell him about the NOTAM." In the Washington Post's coverage, Inhofe said an airport official "hates me, I don't know why." The FAA's current interest is why the landing happened while the runway was clearly marked with the requisite oversized Xs. It will attempt to determine why Inhofe was apparently not aware of a NOTAM about the closure and investigate the circumstances of the taxiway departure. The airport has four runways but according to AirNav all except the main one (13/31) are in poor condition. In his 50 years as a pilot, Inhofe has experienced at least two other publicized incidents. In 1999, Inhofe suffered an emergency landing when his aircraft lost its propeller, and in 2006 he ground-looped a Vans RV-8 built by his son."
Click to expand...


Inexcusable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top