KC - we've been on this board long enough and shared opinions that if you say that you didn't mean it that way then there is no reason for me NOT to believe you. Life goes on in either case.

like many coporations KC - I believe the FAA, and gov't in general, is fat - but it is like the USAF in my opinion - fat at the top. We have FAR to many *managers* while the grunts (that would be me even in my new life) still blast away on a daily basis and are eventually loaded down with more and more. When you see more of the process from the inside though - you also come to realize that it is FAr bigger than just the FAA slowing down things. When I see new procedures or redesigns of airspace (or let's use the new DME/DME SIDs and STARs out of KIAH as an example) it is amazing how many hands are involved in that process OUTSIDE of the FAA - just about every aviation alphabet soup I could think of!

The reason for this link KC....but it is wrong to think that it is always the big bad FAA who is slowing things down. there are people (and users like me!) inside the FAA who's job it is too push this and get it out yet they run into financial, technological and political roadblocks at every turn. Peronally I just help push/intitue a new way for my organziation to submit changes to the TPPs and AF/D that is much more efficient and actually gives the flight inspector some feedback that the change will be made/considered/or rejected; yet I seem to have stepped on somebody's toes in the process and gotten *out of my lane* along the way. Luckily in this example I had the *new* boss on my side and it is going to happen anyways. (YEAH - small victory!)


.
I was amazed to find out how often it is the industry itself that resists some changes - most often due to MONEY! many of these new procedures we have been talking about are all about flow and maximizing flow/time/fuel/efficiency. If there is a great idea about something but it costs money - the airlines are the first to cry foul (think rest rules as an example).

 

NOTAMS *are* beamed to my EFB, in my cockpit, via FIS-B, on 978 Mhz...

 

Can not verify the authenticity of the link, but saw this on another forum:

 

NOTAMs being sent to the cockpit or EFBs isn't anything new. I was talking about in the manner portrayed in the video. Does your EFB do this? If so, what brand and make is it?

 

All right... ???

G1000 - displays TFR areas as red shaded on the moving map, updated all via FIS-B near real-time (I think every 2-5 mins or so) parsed from the coordinates in the NOTAM. Most GA flightbag software has similar features - most popular now is foreflight, which will put graphical NOTAM up right on the sectional. NEXTRAD wx on screen with near real-time update on my moving map in G1000. In FF there is ability to have your current position rendered on approach charts, and I think the NOTAMS are also there graphically (or at least a little direct link on the next page.)

It seems as though you haven't played with any of these in the past year or two? Nextgen has made huge headway even since I've started flying, and ADS-B is all over the East. Once 2020 rolls around GA will be safer when out is required.

Nowdays the SA tools we GA pilots play with will be implemented sooner than stuff you guys use, but yeah, the technology is there with NextGen.

What specifically do you mean in the video? I doubt it is possible / desirable to display some of the others because NOTAMS are currently lightweight text transmission and so are approach charts, etc. which are rendered.

So, translating something like "TAXIWAY B CLOSED TO AIRCRAFT >100 FT WINGSPAN BETWEEN F AND H DUE TO VEGETATION" would be exceedingly difficult to "display" on the moving map. In fact, it would then depend on the type of aircraft you are operating whether to display, and any rendering on the airport taxiway diagram would be very prone to error compared to text.

Once you move NOTAMs away from text (these still have legacy of morse-based transmission similar to METAR), then you'd have to have a simple version plus a graphical in order to make it human readable without significant computing power.... With a full and lightweight NOTAM you would then have to make sure they are coordinated, and the complexity rises significantly.

 

The nice thing is that receivers now pretty much have full redundancy with GPS + GLONASS. I assume that commercial aircraft use all possible signals including Galileo system.

I remember back in my engineering days when some of the first GPS receivers started to incorporate the GLONASS signal, controversial! I remember seeing my first demo of the GPS in the 80's with text-only display.

Looks like it was bad programming.

Altus Positioning Systems Pinpoints Cause for GLONASS Default : GPS World

 

Well according to the video, they've developed a programming standard so that NOTAMs could be graphically displayed. I thought that was the intent of the video? "From Teletype to Graphical Display" For example, a taxiway closure or runway closed. And when the pilot looks at the chart, they see red on the part that's closed. That's what I was referring to.

 

I can only tell you why initially the FAA would not let you fly the APCH if the underlying navaid was ots. It was because when FMS, LORAN and GPS was first started all the existing non-rnav approaches were coded by the database providers i.e. Jeppesen, Swissair etc and dumped into the ARINC 424 data. These approaches were referred to as overlay approaches and were never flight checked by FMS or GPS aircraft in NAV to verify the database coding was correct. Back then flight check aircraft flew the approaches using the underlying navaid as guidance not as a NAV approach, not sure how they do it now. Because of this the FAA mandated you must be able to verify the course with RAW data in case the coding was wrong. When GPS or RMAV procedures are created they are tested using a FMS or GPS input and flown in NAV to verify the database coding is correct. I was fortunate to be a part of the ARINC 424 committee back in the early days when the industry was trying to figure out how to get where we are today.