Biggest NOTAM area ever !

[AeroJ]

Looking forward to my planned flights tomorrow on the first day of decent weather we've had over here for about 2 weeks, and doing my pre-flight due diligence I see this absolutely vast NOTAM has appeared over most of Southern England !

It's pretty huge duration as well, lasting at least 24 hours, and is a 'Formation Transit by multiple acft' between 250 ft and 3000 ft AGL. Any idea what that's about ? And I do wish they'd let you know in advance if they are going to go red or yellow when they kick in, or did they and I missed it ?!



(that's off dronesafetymap.com if anyone wonders)

 

[mavic3usa]

Not an expert here but I've seen a couple of these huge ones before and they all started that way only to be quickly modified to something closer to normal.

 

[AeroJ]

Interesting. I will continue to monitor it and see what it does ! I have also modified my plans so I am up with the dawn instead, a few hours before it all kicks off !

 

[Felix le Chat]

Looking forward to my planned flights tomorrow on the first day of decent weather we've had over here for about 2 weeks, and doing my pre-flight due diligence I see this absolutely vast NOTAM has appeared over most of Southern England !

It's pretty huge duration as well, lasting at least 24 hours, and is a 'Formation Transit by multiple acft' between 250 ft and 3000 ft AGL. Any idea what that's about ? And I do wish they'd let you know in advance if they are going to go red or yellow when they kick in, or did they and I missed it ?!

View attachment 176144

(that's off dronesafetymap.com if anyone wonders)

There's another of equal size directly north-east of this one. Same NOTAM dates & details. It's military aircraft transit. Scuppered my plans as well.

 

[AeroJ]

Ah I see, thanks. It has gone yellow now, not red, and remains a 'navigation warning' rather than a temporary flight restriction zone.

I believe our machines should let us fly within it right ? But is it OK to do so, (with extra care and vigilance for sky traffic >250 ft obviously) ? I notice the skies are completely clear of other craft all around me at the moment.

 

[RangerEd]

Ah I see, thanks. It has gone yellow now, not red, and remains a 'navigation warning' rather than a temporary flight restriction zone.

I believe our machines should let us fly within it right ? But is it OK to do so, (with extra care and vigilance for sky traffic >250 ft obviously) ? I notice the skies are completely clear of other craft all around me at the moment.

So does it mean you fly below 250 ft?

 

[AeroJ]

So does it mean you fly below 250 ft?

No, the NOTAM itself applies from surface to 3000 ft.
However, the other traffic within the NOTAM area will not be under 250 ft itself, in theory, if I have understood that correctly, which I am not 100% sure I have !

I am still unsure whether to fly today. The skies round here have been almost totally deserted this morning, so I am not seeing any evidence at all of increased risk or air traffic levels, the zone is yellow, not red, so my interpretation of that is that I should be allowed to fly (with extra caution). It might be sensible, though not required, to fly <250 ft and not the full 393 ft we usually get.

I would love it if someone else would chime in and tell me if they would fly under these circumstances.
@Felix le Chat Why did you allow this to scupper your plans, just out of interest ?

My instinct and current understanding of the ever-changing rules says it should be OK, but I still worry...

 

[Felix le Chat]

No, the NOTAM itself applies from surface to 3000 ft.
However, the other traffic within the NOTAM area will not be under 250 ft itself, in theory, if I have understood that correctly, which I am not 100% sure I have !

I am still unsure whether to fly today. The skies round here have been almost totally deserted this morning, so I am not seeing any evidence at all of increased risk or air traffic levels, the zone is yellow, not red, so my interpretation of that is that I should be allowed to fly (with extra caution). It might be sensible, though not required, to fly <250 ft and not the full 393 ft we usually get.

I would love it if someone else would chime in and tell me if they would fly under these circumstances.
@Felix le Chat Why did you allow this to scupper your plans, just out of interest ?

My instinct and current understanding of the ever-changing rules says it should be OK, but I still worry...

If it reads *surface* to 3,000', that's exactly what it means for drones and light aircraft. I use 'Drone Assist' which is part of Altitude Angels Guardian UTM. The info it provides for blue zones are of two types, there's the 'advisory' blue zone that is usually another user registering that they'll be flying on a certain date in a certain place (there is no registered NOTAM for these)... Then there's the blues that are backed by an official NOTAM. I'll ignore the advisories if they conflict with what I want to do - but anything with a registered NOTAM: I'll respect because these can be enforced by police action if necessary.

 

[AeroJ]

Hmmm. Thanks. But not all NOTAMS are relevant to us ! And this one, in particular, isn't a flight restriction - it's a navigation warning. Does that not make a difference to you ?

 

[Felix le Chat]

Hmmm. Thanks. But not all NOTAMS are relevant to us ! And this one, in particular, isn't a flight restriction - it's a navigation warning. Does that not make a difference to you ?

It's a navigation warning to anyone flying another aircraft. I don't fly an aircraft. Reading it: I interpret that there is an increased risk of anything scooting about between the ground and 3,000' being a potential risk to conventional aircraft, so I respect the official AA warning.

To me it's all about playing by the rules. If I respect the rules and abide by the regulations: at least I'm not one of the drone users who blithely hammers nails in other people's coffins. Apart from that, what I can't do today, can always be deferred until tomorrow.

 

[AeroJ]

To me it's all about playing by the rules. If I respect the rules and abide by the regulations: at least I'm not one of the drone users who blithely hammers nails in other people's coffins.

Yes, me too. But according to the rules a yellow zone like this IS legal to fly within, with additional caution. If it was a flight restriction it would be red and non-negotiable. Or am I wrong about that ?!

 

[Felix le Chat]

Yes, me too. But according to the rules a yellow zone like this IS legal to fly within, with additional caution. If it was a flight restriction it would be red and non-negotiable. Or am I wrong about that ?!

As far as I'm aware, the yellow follows the same protocol as the previous DJI geozone flavour (warning zone - fly with caution) but we were talking about blue restrictions backed with NOTAM's.

 

[AeroJ]

but we were talking about blue restrictions backed with NOTAM's.

With respect my friend, no we're not ! It was blue at the time of posting only because it was not active yet. It IS active now, and so has gone yellow. In this context, the blue only means impending.

I haven't flown today as it happens, out of an abundance of caution, and because like you, my plans are not time-sensitive, but I still maintain I could have done ! (and furthermore perhaps should have done - the skies have been all but empty all day !) Despite being on high alert I haven't seen a SINGLE military aircraft today, which is very much a decrease from 'usual' !

 

[Felix le Chat]

There's the full NOTAM text. Times: transit altitudes, etc. So 'blue' means no-fly from the start time to the end time. You fly after the end time: fine. During the transit period: doesn't matter if you're 20' or 200'... It still official and still covers surface to upper ceiling.

 

[AeroJ]

So 'blue' means no-fly from the start time to the end time.

Sorry dude, I hate to bang on about it, but where does it say that ?! According to my information, that is blue because the zone you have shown is not yet active. Presumably it will go yellow on that map too when it is active. And being yellow, I still posit that we can fly in it. Happy to defer to any actual evidence I am wrong about this.

 

[Felix le Chat]

Sorry dude, I hate to bang on about it, but where does it say that ?! According to my information, that is blue because the zone you have shown is not yet active. Presumably it will go yellow on that map too when it is active. And being yellow, I still posit that we can fly in it. Happy to defer to any actual evidence I am wrong about this.

Two of your comments, "...skies have been deserted..." then "...skies have been empty all day...". Did you see any gliders, paragliders, hang-gliders, microlights or any other kind of casual air user? I didn't either and I'm sitting a couple of hundred feet outside a major international airport NFZ... which was also oddly quiet for most of the morning - we normally get the single engine lights and helicopters out for training flights at least a couple of times a day.

*thinks to self* 'Hmmm.... wonder why?'

Perhaps that's down to other casual airspace users interpreting the official Notice to Airmen the same way.

Fly... don't fly... interpret what you read as it suits you best, entirely your choice - the same way it's my choice to interpret a NOTAM as a flight restriction for drone users and not a navigation warning..... Dude .

 

[AeroJ]

Hmm. This thread has not gone how I hoped it might ! I was really looking for some 'definite' confirmation or not as to whether we are allowed to fly within a yellow 'navigation warning' NOTAM. I was hoping there would be lots of UK people here who have their advanced certificates who would just be able to tell me for sure !!

And the truth is I still don't know ! Was I kept out of the skies yesterday completely unnecessarily during what would have been the only decent day of perfect flying weather we've had for a couple of weeks, or not ?! I want to have confidence that every decision I make relating to these sorts of things is the right one, so differences of opinion in this area always unsettle me. It should be 100% clear where and when we are allowed to fly, and it just... isn't !

Anyway, I've written to Sean off Geeksvana about it - he'll know for sure. Will report his findings either way.

 

[AeroJ]

Two of your comments, "...skies have been deserted..." then "...skies have been empty all day...". Did you see any gliders, paragliders, hang-gliders, microlights or any other kind of casual air user? I didn't either and I'm sitting a couple of hundred feet outside a major international airport NFZ... which was also oddly quiet for most of the morning - we normally get the single engine lights and helicopters out for training flights at least a couple of times a day.

Yeah, same - virtually nothing in the sky yesterday - was unusually and eerily quiet in that regard. No recreational guys, just a few high jets at 33,000 ft...

 

[davidarmenb]

The two times I have seen gigantic TFRs like that, covering more than the entire County of Los Angeles, was when the president and/or vice president visited LA.

 

[AeroJ]

The two times I have seen gigantic TFRs like that, covering more than the entire County of Los Angeles, was when the president and/or vice president visited LA.

I'm guessing those ones would have been red zones in that case, right ?!