Notams

brien23

brien23

Pattern Altitude
Joined
May 31, 2005
Messages
1,510
Location
Oak Harbor
Display Name
Display name:
Brien
Who can issue a Notam. Owners of AT6 and P-51 post a aeobatic Notam do what they want in the airport traffic pattern. Can anyone post a Notam change the directon of the traffic pattern and restrict taxi ways and do what they want?
 
I thought the airport manager has to do that by calling it in to FSS or someplace.
 
The Heritage Flight Museum At BVS seems to think they can at will.
 
Matthew said:
I thought the airport manager has to do that by calling it in to FSS or someplace.
Click to expand...

Each airport has (or is supposed to have) a list of people that can issue a NOTAM with LMFS. Those people can issue them.
 
brien23 said:
And they post it just before they do it?
Click to expand...

Seems like, then they get bitchy because you get in the way.

There will be an accident there, its just a matter of time before they drive a P-51 thru a little bug smasher. this was the cause of the dispute at BLI, and the reason they were asked to find a different field.
 
http://fsims.faa.gov/wdocs/8900.1/v03 tech admin/chapter 05/03_005_001.pdf

"Notification shall be made to the [name of AT facility or FSS and telephone number] at least 30 minutes before the beginning of aerobatic activity in the practice area, or, if a letter of agreement exists, notification shall be made as specified in that document. The [name of facility] shall also be notified at the termination of aerobatic activities."


 
Last edited:
Matthew said:
I thought the airport manager has to do that by calling it in to FSS or someplace.
Click to expand...
You think right. Flight Service has an authorized party for each airport, and do not accept anything regarding that airport from anyone else.
 
Tom-D said:
As it should be.

How long prior to the actual effective date are you required to post the notice?
Click to expand...


You can post a notam 72 hours before the event. Not earlier.

Or you can post a notam that goes into effect immediately.
 
EdFred said:
Parties. Plural.
Click to expand...

Exactly, when I was managing 0T3 we had four authorized individuals; me, another pilot who lived adjacent to the airfield, the city administrator and the city worker who mowed the grass.

Changing the list is as easy as faxing a revised form to lockmart.
 
Ron Levy said:
You think right. Flight Service has an authorized party for each airport, and do not accept anything regarding that airport from anyone else.
Click to expand...

With that in mind, can the museum simply call their pilots together and declare a practice session at anytime and just go do it?

The poor sole just flying by wouldn't know squat about what was going.
 
Does this practice session restrict nonparticipating pilots from flying in it like an air show TFR?
 
Tom-D said:
With that in mind, can the museum simply call their pilots together and declare a practice session at anytime and just go do it?
Click to expand...
That's how it works.

Generally there is someone monitoring CTAF to let the airplane in the box know if there is inbound traffic.

Some examples here with copies of the waiver, etc.
 
Tom-D said:
With that in mind, can the museum simply call their pilots together and declare a practice session at anytime and just go do it?
Click to expand...
Sure, but IAW 91.303, they'd have to stay at least 1500 AGL, i.e., well above the regular TPA, not to mention away from "any congested area of a city, town, or settlement". That would prohibit them from doing "what they want in the airport traffic pattern" if "what they want" involves "an intentional maneuver involving an abrupt change in an aircraft's attitude, an abnormal attitude, or abnormal acceleration, not necessary for normal flight". Such activity requires a waiver from 91.303 and an FDC NOTAM ("TFR"), not just an advisory D-NOTAM.

The poor sole just flying by wouldn't know squat about what was going.
Click to expand...
Exactly why 91.303 has the restrictions it does.
 
Ron Levy said:
Sure, but IAW 91.303, they'd have to stay at least 1500 AGL, i.e., well above the regular TPA, not to mention away from "any congested area of a city, town, or settlement". That would prohibit them from doing "what they want in the airport traffic pattern" if "what they want" involves "an intentional maneuver involving an abrupt change in an aircraft's attitude, an abnormal attitude, or abnormal acceleration, not necessary for normal flight". Such activity requires a waiver from 91.303 and an FDC NOTAM ("TFR"), not just an advisory D-NOTAM.
Click to expand...
That doesn't seem to match with what is happening in practice.

The FAA issues a waiver for 91.303 c d and e (which is the 1500 foot rule) along with 91.119 c and 91.127 and the waiver requires a NOTAM.

I have never seen a TFR for any practice / contest that I have attended - and people are flying in and out during the practice. The FAA will call and shut down the box when an IFR arrival is in progress and call again when the box can be re-opened, but VFR is VFR. Airplanes come and go. What I have seen is that aircraft may be requested to use a particular runway to avoid the box - often the word "please" is used.

And, yes, people are flying below 1500 feet - the waiver tends (at least the one's I have read) to go to the surface. IAC rules set a minimum altitude that depends on the aerobatic catagory - from sportsman at 1500 AGL to unlimited at 656 AGL.
 
Ron Levy said:
Sure, but IAW 91.303, they'd have to stay at least 1500 AGL, i.e., well above the regular TPA, not to mention away from "any congested area of a city, town, or settlement". That would prohibit them from doing "what they want in the airport traffic pattern" if "what they want" involves "an intentional maneuver involving an abrupt change in an aircraft's attitude, an abnormal attitude, or abnormal acceleration, not necessary for normal flight". Such activity requires a waiver from 91.303 and an FDC NOTAM ("TFR"), not just an advisory D-NOTAM.

Exactly why 91.303 has the restrictions it does.
Click to expand...

Yesterday while I was at a customers hangar at BVS the History museum's P-51 did a low pass over 4/22 it was about 15' over the runway, and a speed well over the speed limit for aircraft below 10,000'

I had the CTAF on the 170's radio, not a word. 1 pass, pull up, circle to land on 29.
 
I don't see how 91.303 applies to War bird displays/fly bys.
 
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe said:
That doesn't seem to match with what is happening in practice.
Click to expand...
Perhaps, but that's what the regulations require.
The FAA issues a waiver for 91.303 c d and e (which is the 1500 foot rule) along with 91.119 c and 91.127 and the waiver requires a NOTAM.
Click to expand...
So they got a waiver to those regulations. But you didn't say anything about that originally.

I have never seen a TFR for any practice / contest that I have attended - and people are flying in and out during the practice. The FAA will call and shut down the box when an IFR arrival is in progress and call again when the box can be re-opened, but VFR is VFR.
Click to expand...
That would be covered in the terms of the waiver.

And, yes, people are flying below 1500 feet - the waiver tends (at least the one's I have read)
Click to expand...
So did you read the waiver for the airport in question or are you just generalizing?
 
Tom-D said:
I don't see how 91.303 applies to War bird displays/fly bys.
Click to expand...
It doesn't, as long as they don't do "an intentional maneuver involving an abrupt change in an aircraft's attitude, an abnormal attitude, or abnormal acceleration, not necessary for normal flight". However, 91.117 on aircraft speed would definitely apply unless they have a waiver for that regulation. In addition, 91.119 would apply to flying that low over the runway that fast without the intention to land -- again, waiverable, but the waiver would be necessary to make it legal.
 
Ron Levy said:
Perhaps, but that's what the regulations require
So they got a waiver to those regulations. But you didn't say anything about that originally.
Click to expand...
It was in the link I posted.

That would be covered in the terms of the waiver.
Click to expand...
Which are as I posted.

So did you read the waiver for the airport in question or are you just generalizing?
Click to expand...
I am generalizing based on what I have read several waivers.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top