Graphical NOTAMs (not just TFRs)

[[email protected]]

Hi, I'm mostly a lurker, sometime poster on this forum and the other
rec.aviation forums. I've been a private pilot for almost two years
now, and to support my flying habit I'm also a software programmer
(yeah, throw a rock at a group of private pilots and there's a good
chance you'll either hit a doctor, lawyer or computer geek).

Anyway more to the point, I'm a huge fan of looking up aviation
information online, especially weather (I'm addicted to
adds.aviationweather.gov). But I'm disappointed in the lack of decent
software for accessing NOTAMs. There's DUATs and PilotWeb...and not
much else.

So a year ago I decided to build an application to get NOTAMs and
graphically draw the geographical data in the NOTAM text and overlay it
on a map. If you have some time feel free to take a look (its free, no
registration or signup required) its called Preflight Pro and its
located at http://www.notduats.com.

To see some sample NOTAM results take a look at the following links:
http://www.notduats.com/notam.aspx?search=washington,dc&radius=20
http://www.notduats.com/notam.aspx?search=Corrona,%20California&radius=20
http://www.notduats.com/notam.aspx?search=Cambridge,%20Maryland&radius=20
http://www.notduats.com/notam.aspx?search=Armstrong,%20Texas&radius=20

If you have any questions or feedback I'd like to hear them. Thanks for
your time!

Patrick Pohler
PP-SEL

[cpu]

It is fantastic!!

[Jay Honeck]

> located at http://www.notduats.com.

Terrific site, Patrick -- I'll be using it often.

Now if you could only figure out a way to decode the absurd government-speak
abbreviations used in NOTAMs, you'd REALLY have a winner!

:-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[three-eight-hotel]

I've entered "SAC" and "Sacramento" and keep getting the same image of
Columbus... Am I missing something?

Best Regards,
Todd

[Jay Honeck]

> I've entered "SAC" and "Sacramento" and keep getting the same image of
> Columbus... Am I missing something?

Strangely, when I first entered "KIOW", Columbus came up for me, too. In a
second or two, it displayed Iowa City correctly.

Maybe you've gotta have the "K" in "KSAC"?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[three-eight-hotel]

hmmm...??? That didn't work either... I also tried "MHR" and "KMHR",
which should have returned something, but keep getting the same picture
of Columbus with the following response: "No available notams found for
this search!"

Todd

[[email protected]]

Yup, it looks like a bug. It does take a second while the search runs,
but SAC, KSAC, Sacramento don't return any search results at all (even
nearby airports like MHR aren't coming up either). I'll get to work on
that over the weekend, I'll let you guys know what I find. Thanks for
spotting that error Todd!

[[email protected]]

Thanks a lot Jay! I'm a big fan of your posts, and I hope to visit the
Inn someday soon. I'm from the Midwest and I've only been West of the
Mississippi twice. <g>

I have written an experimental decoder, but every time I run it my
computer starts to smoke.... :P

Pat

[three-eight-hotel]

I'm a developer too... I know how it goes! ;-)

I've bookmarked it, and will check it out again later...

Best Regards,
Todd

[John Clonts]

Nice concept! Here's a couple of thoughts for you:

1) My worst peeve with NOTAMs in general is all the "tower lights out
of service" NOTAMs. Provide a way to filter these out and I'll
DEFINITELY use this!

2) Allow a way to put in more than one airport at a time and get the
union of the applicable NOTAMs

--
Cheers!
John Clonts
Temple, Texas
N7NZ

[Jay Honeck]

> Thanks a lot Jay! I'm a big fan of your posts, and I hope to visit the
> Inn someday soon. I'm from the Midwest and I've only been West of the
> Mississippi twice. <g>

Well, we're gonna have to fix that. Stop in sometime, and we'll doing some
hangar lying, er, flying!

:-)

Where are you based?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Casey Wilson]

> wrote in message
ups.com...
>>
> So a year ago I decided to build an application to get NOTAMs and
> graphically draw the geographical data in the NOTAM text and overlay it
> on a map. If you have some time feel free to take a look (its free, no
> registration or signup required) its called Preflight Pro and its
> located at http://www.notduats.com.
>

Thanks Patrick, I've added this to my Preflight favorites folder. Now
if I could just get Verizon to switch me to DSL.... but that's my problem,
not yours.

Casey

[JohnH]

Nice! Google maps rule, don't they?

- from yet another geek

[[email protected]]

Thanks John, I really like the filter idea! That's going to be high on
the list of new features. For idea number 2, are you talking about two
different airports that aren't close together (20 nm)? Right now a
regular airport search will get the notams for the airport and any
surrounding airports within 20nm.

Here's something you might want to try, you can do a flight path search
by separating the two airport ids with the word "TO" for example:

LOU TO CMH

It's a longer running search, so you'll have to be paitent, but it'll
list the notams for your starting point and destination, then list the
surrounding airports and center notams. It might be a workaround for
your right now.

Thanks a lot for your feedback!

Pat

[[email protected]]

That sounds great! Currently I'm based at OSU in Columbus Ohio.
Although I started my training two years ago in Louisville, KY (LOU) at
Bowman Field.

[Newps]

Here's another pet peeve. I don't care what coalition forces are doing
in Iraq, I don't care that credible reports indicate terrorist
activities in Kenya. Filter out the crap. If it isn't within about 100
miles of my route why am I seeing it?




John Clonts wrote:

> Nice concept! Here's a couple of thoughts for you:
>
> 1) My worst peeve with NOTAMs in general is all the "tower lights out
> of service" NOTAMs. Provide a way to filter these out and I'll
> DEFINITELY use this!
>
> 2) Allow a way to put in more than one airport at a time and get the
> union of the applicable NOTAMs
>

[Gig 601XL Builder]

> wrote in message
ups.com...
> Thanks John, I really like the filter idea! That's going to be high on
> the list of new features.

I wouldn't be too quick to filter the NOTAMS. I realize that you SHOULD be
creating no liability for your self by creating the site (which is pretty
cool by the way) every lawyer and jury in the land might not think so. If
someone gets a NOTAM report from your site and filters something out, like
an out of surface tower light, and then runs into the tower you might be
left hanging in the wind.

[[email protected]]

That's an excellent and sobering point Gig. Thanks for reminding me
about that aspect. I'm taking a legal risk anyway in even having the
site in the first place, which is a shame because I believe fear of
liability is enforcing the status quo in all aspects of aviation. It's
something I have to consider when evaluating possible features.

Thanks Gig

[Gig 601XL Builder]

You need to put some type of liability verbiage on the site ASAP.


> wrote in message
oups.com...
> That's an excellent and sobering point Gig. Thanks for reminding me
> about that aspect. I'm taking a legal risk anyway in even having the
> site in the first place, which is a shame because I believe fear of
> liability is enforcing the status quo in all aspects of aviation. It's
> something I have to consider when evaluating possible features.
>
> Thanks Gig
>

[[email protected]]

Well I have the following diclaimer on the main page:

This site is informational in nature. Current NOTAMs are available from
Flight Service Stations at 1-800-WX-BRIEF (1-800-992-7433). Notices,
restrictions, and advisories may change at any time and without notice.
Do not attempt any operation in the National Airspace System without
first obtaining and understanding a thorough pre-flight briefing.

Which is the same disclaimer the FAA uses on the PilotWeb site.

[Scott Skylane]

Gig 601XL Builder wrote:
> You need to put some type of liability verbiage on the site ASAP.
>
God, what a pathetic society we live in...

Happy Flying!(if that's possible without getting sued)
Scott Skylane

[Morgans]

> wrote

> Yup, it looks like a bug.

It locked up my old slow machine, but just before it did, it did post a
solution for DC - for about 3 seconds; then the "program not responding,
will be shut down" box came up, and it closed your site's window.
--
Jim in NC

[Morgans]

> wrote in message
oups.com...
> That's an excellent and sobering point Gig. Thanks for reminding me
> about that aspect. I'm taking a legal risk anyway in even having the
> site in the first place, which is a shame because I believe fear of
> liability is enforcing the status quo in all aspects of aviation. It's
> something I have to consider when evaluating possible features.
>
> Thanks Gig

Perhaps you could put the "filtered" notams up on the map, but make them
somewhat "transparent," or a different color that would still show up, but
be barely noticeable.
--
Jim in NC

[Martin Hotze]

On 9 Feb 2006 20:54:36 -0800, wrote:

>Hi, I'm mostly a lurker, sometime poster on this forum and the other
>rec.aviation forums. I've been a private pilot for almost two years
>now, and to support my flying habit I'm also a software programmer
>(yeah, throw a rock at a group of private pilots and there's a good
>chance you'll either hit a doctor, lawyer or computer geek).

if the rock is big enough you are doing a good thing hitting the lawyer.
:-)

btw: good site!

#m
--
We reject Gilmore’s right to travel argument because the Constitution does
not guarantee the right to travel by any particular form of transportation.
http://makeashorterlink.com/?P27712B8C

[Martin Hotze]

On Fri, 10 Feb 2006 11:17:44 -0600, Gig 601XL Builder wrote:

>I wouldn't be too quick to filter the NOTAMS. I realize that you SHOULD be
>creating no liability for your self by creating the site (which is pretty
>cool by the way) every lawyer and jury in the land might not think so. If
>someone gets a NOTAM report from your site and filters something out, like
>an out of surface tower light, and then runs into the tower you might be
>left hanging in the wind.

well, you can workaraound by using checkboxes:
[ ] hide reports about tower lights
[ ] don't show me where the prez is
[ ] ...

#m
--
We reject Gilmore’s right to travel argument because the Constitution does
not guarantee the right to travel by any particular form of transportation.
http://makeashorterlink.com/?P27712B8C

[.Blueskies.]

> wrote in message ups.com...
> That sounds great! Currently I'm based at OSU in Columbus Ohio.
> Although I started my training two years ago in Louisville, KY (LOU) at
> Bowman Field.
>


Go Bucks!

[Montblack]

("Martin Hotze" wrote)
> if the rock is big enough you are doing a good thing hitting the lawyer.


Jesus sees an angry mob stoning a poor wretched woman. He stands in front of
the mob and asks why are they stoning this woman? The mob replies - she's a
prostitute.

Jesus holds out his hands and says, Let ye who is without sin cast the first
stone (or something like that). A hush comes over the angry mob.

Just then, a huge rock comes flying out from the back of the pack - hits the
woman in the head, she falls down dead. Jesus shakes his head in
disgust..."Mother, stop doing that!"


Montblack

[[email protected]]

> I've entered "SAC" and "Sacramento" and keep getting the same image of
> Columbus... Am I missing something?

> Best Regards,
> Todd

I've just made an update to the site, NOTAMs for Sacramento and the
surrounding area should now show up. Thanks to Todd for finding the bug
early on and notifying me about it!

BTW, the NOTAMs for Sacramento are pretty interesting, it looks like
they're doing Hurricane research in the Pacific.

http://www.notduats.com/notam.aspx?search=SAC&radius=20

Pat

[[email protected]]

> It locked up my old slow machine, but just before it did, it did post a
> solution for DC - for about 3 seconds; then the "program not responding,
> will be shut down" box came up, and it closed your site's window.
> --
> Jim in NC

Hey Jim, I apologize for your first experience with the site being
pretty bad. :( Can you tell me what OS, Internet browser and version
you were using? I'd like to know so I can run some tests and see what
might be causing the problem.

BTW, thanks for your comments about the filtering. It's a pretty hot
topic apparently.

Pat

[[email protected]]

> What is really, really sad is the fact that when I clicked on the Washington, DC URL, three > of the four the ads at the bottom of the page were for aviation law firms.

Yeah that's pretty weird, the Google's ad algorithms can be pretty
spooky. They rotate automatically based on what the content of the
page.

And per their Terms of Service, I think that's about all I can really
say about them. ;)

Pat

[Martin Hotze]

On Sat, 11 Feb 2006 10:19:18 -0600, Montblack wrote:

>Just then, a huge rock comes flying out from the back of the pack - hits the
>woman in the head, she falls down dead. Jesus shakes his head in
>disgust..."Mother, stop doing that!"

do you know the Monty Python version of this scene? :-))

a snipped here (Windows Media Player req):
<http://www.amazon.com/gp/music/wma-pop-up/B000000HQ9001007/ref=mu_sam_wma_001_007/002-7924370-4721650>


>Montblack


#m
--
We reject Gilmore’s right to travel argument because the Constitution does
not guarantee the right to travel by any particular form of transportation.
http://makeashorterlink.com/?P27712B8C

[Martin Hotze]

On Sat, 11 Feb 2006 10:26:04 -0800, RST Engineering wrote:

>I just hit the site and Columbus is STILL coming up. FIrefox on dialup.

same here:
W2K, broadband, both with Firefox 1.5.0.1 and IE 6.0.2800.1106 (both
germand versions and german OS, JS etc not restricted).

#m

>Jim
>
>> http://www.notduats.com/notam.aspx?search=SAC&radius=20
>>
>> Pat
>>
>
--
We reject Gilmore’s right to travel argument because the Constitution does
not guarantee the right to travel by any particular form of transportation.
http://makeashorterlink.com/?P27712B8C

[Montblack]

("Martin Hotze" wrote)
> a snipped here (Windows Media Player req):
> <http://www.amazon.com/gp/music/wma-pop-up/B000000HQ9001007/ref=mu_sam_wma_001_007/002-7924370-4721650>

Hehehe :-)


Montblack
What? A swallow carrying a coconut?

King Arthur: It could grip it by the husk!

It's not a question of where he grips it! It's a simple question of weight
ratios! A five ounce bird could not carry a one pound coconut.

King Arthur: Well, it doesn't matter. Will you go and tell your master that
Arthur from the Court of Camelot is here?

Listen. In order to maintain air-speed velocity, a swallow needs to beat its
wings forty-three times every second, right?

King Arthur: Please!

Am I right?

[Morgans]

> wrote

> Hey Jim, I apologize for your first experience with the site being
> pretty bad. :( Can you tell me what OS, Internet browser and version
> you were using? I'd like to know so I can run some tests and see what
> might be causing the problem.
>
> BTW, thanks for your comments about the filtering. It's a pretty hot
> topic apparently.

Using Win 2000, most recent Internet Explorer (7.0?) and somewhere in the
area of 400Mhz with 256 ram

[Gig 601XL Builder]

"Morgans" > wrote in message
...
>
> > wrote
>
>> Hey Jim, I apologize for your first experience with the site being
>> pretty bad. :( Can you tell me what OS, Internet browser and version
>> you were using? I'd like to know so I can run some tests and see what
>> might be causing the problem.
>>
>> BTW, thanks for your comments about the filtering. It's a pretty hot
>> topic apparently.
>
> Using Win 2000, most recent Internet Explorer (7.0?) and somewhere in the
> area of 400Mhz with 256 ram
>

My bet the problem is with your browser. The Beta IE7.0 is buggy as hell.
I've got a second computer I keep clean of all non-OS software for testing
of software before I drop it into the rest of the companies computers. I
tested the Beta 7.0 the other day and it would barely run.

[Morgans]

"Peter Duniho" > wrote

>But the previous poster
> isn't using IE7, since he says he's using Windows 2000.

You are right. I have 6.0. Somehow I recalled it incorrectly. First
mistake I have made this year. <g> I'll try to do better.

> If someone's computer has locked up as a result of trying
> to load these pages, then they have something wrong with their computer.
> Only a religious fanatic would go around claiming there was something
> inherently wrong with the software.

At first, there was something wrong with the software, and the writer
admitted it. It hardly makes me a religious fanatic.

All is well, now. I just checked the site, and it is running well, even on
my old machine! <g>
--
Jim in NC

[[email protected]]

>At first, there was something wrong with the software, and the writer
>admitted it. It hardly makes me a religious fanatic.

>All is well, now. I just checked the site, and it is running well, even on
>my old machine! <g>
>--
>Jim in NC

I'm really glad to hear its working fine on your machine Jim! There was
a bug in the software for a particular NOTAM search in CA. And I'm
grateful for your early feedback (and I encourage anyone to call out
and similar defects). I think it's also hard to tell when a search is
running, right now the website doesn't good a great job letting you
know its actually doing something. So I hope to create some kind of
animated graphic letting everyone know that its searching within the
week.

> (I'm surprised that no one, not even
> the author, mentioned the fact that it's basically just using the Google
> Maps API).

Hey Peter, I didn't mention it because I thought it would be a pretty
boring technical detail that'd put everyone asleep :P. I think an
earlier poster mentioned the Google maps in their post though. I'm
pretty impressed with Google's Map API, without it or a similar
off-the-shelf (and free) mapping tool I don't think I would have been
able to release something like this in the amount of time I was able
too. I think this kind of tool has a lot of potential for aviation in
the future!

In general, I'm really overwhelmed by the positive feedback I've been
receiving. You guys are awesome! I know this is probably the honeymoon
stage, but it's extremely satisfying knowing you've created something
that people find useful!

Sincerely,
Pat
Preflight Pro - www.notduats.com

[Peter Duniho]

(this quote appears to be from the previous poster, who had problems on his
400 Mhz computer)

> wrote in message
ps.com...
> >At first, there was something wrong with the software, and the writer
>>admitted it. It hardly makes me a religious fanatic.

My comment about "religious fanatics" was not directed at the users of the
NOTAM mapping software. It was the person who was so quick to jump on IE7
being the culprit in your woes (even though it was obvious that it could not
possibly have been IE7).

Pete

[Gig 601XL Builder]

"Peter Duniho" > wrote in message
...
> "Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATcox.net> wrote in message
> ...
>> My bet the problem is with your browser. The Beta IE7.0 is buggy as hell.
>
> Hardly. It's actually quite good, for a beta. But the previous poster
> isn't using IE7, since he says he's using Windows 2000. The beta is only
> available on XP SP2 and Vista.
>
> Whatever his problems, they are unrelated to the IE7 beta. The combined
> passions of every Firefox zealot isn't sufficient to change that fact.
>
>> [...] I tested the Beta 7.0 the other day and it would barely run.
>
> What are you running it on? A 90 Mhz Pentium?
>
> I'm using IE7 as my sole browser, on a 550Mhz PIII. It runs *great*,
> including this Google Maps NOTAM tool (I'm surprised that no one, not even
> the author, mentioned the fact that it's basically just using the Google
> Maps API). And I'm so thankful to be back to just one good browser, now
> that IE7 has RSS support.
>
> I haven't tried the site on my 200 Mhz PPro box, but I'll bet it works
> just fine there too. If someone's computer has locked up as a result of
> trying to load these pages, then they have something wrong with their
> computer. Only a religious fanatic would go around claiming there was
> something inherently wrong with the software.
>
> Pete
>


No my test computer is a 1.8 GHz PIII. I also had significant problems on a
3.55 GHz PIII Alienware A-51.

[Gig 601XL Builder]

"Peter Duniho" > wrote in message
...
> (this quote appears to be from the previous poster, who had problems on
> his 400 Mhz computer)
>
> > wrote in message
> ps.com...
>> >At first, there was something wrong with the software, and the writer
>>>admitted it. It hardly makes me a religious fanatic.
>
> My comment about "religious fanatics" was not directed at the users of the
> NOTAM mapping software. It was the person who was so quick to jump on IE7
> being the culprit in your woes (even though it was obvious that it could
> not possibly have been IE7).
>
> Pete
>

Go visit the Microsoft's Beta newsgroup for IE7. I'm not alone with the
issues. It seems that the religious fanatic tag might be placed on someone
that got that worked up over someone questioning the workings of a Beta
program.

[Larry Dighera]

On Mon, 13 Feb 2006 14:46:56 -0800, "Peter Duniho"
> wrote in
>::

>It runs *great*, including this Google Maps NOTAM tool (I'm surprised
>that no one, not even the author, mentioned the fact that it's basically
>just using the Google Maps API).

It would be interesting to be able to see the NOTAMs against this
aeronautical chart database:
https://aviationtoolbox.org/Members/kyler/tools/map_explorer

[Peter Duniho]

"Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATcox.net> wrote in message
...
> Go visit the Microsoft's Beta newsgroup for IE7. I'm not alone with the
> issues.

When you distribute a program to millions of people, there are bound to be
issues that are discovered. That is the whole point of a beta. Duh.

But there's a different between reality and your characterization of the
situation.

> It seems that the religious fanatic tag might be placed on someone that
> got that worked up over someone questioning the workings of a Beta
> program.

That's true. If there were someone around here simply "questioning the
workings of a Beta program", then that might be relevant.

[Gig 601XL Builder]

"Peter Duniho" > wrote in message
...
> "Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATcox.net> wrote in message
> ...
>> Go visit the Microsoft's Beta newsgroup for IE7. I'm not alone with the
>> issues.
>
> When you distribute a program to millions of people, there are bound to be
> issues that are discovered. That is the whole point of a beta. Duh.
>
> But there's a different between reality and your characterization of the
> situation.
>
>> It seems that the religious fanatic tag might be placed on someone that
>> got that worked up over someone questioning the workings of a Beta
>> program.
>
> That's true. If there were someone around here simply "questioning the
> workings of a Beta program", then that might be relevant.
>

Look Peter, I'm not trying to knock MS or IE7. I tried the Beta version on
two different computers both of which are well above the minimum system
requirements and one of which is specifically kept clean to test new
software on. The browser failed within the first 5 minutes of use on both
machines.

This sort of surprised me because MS usually has software much further along
before they open beta it.

Then a poster on this newsgroups chimes in that he is having problems with a
web site and is running IE 7 and I mentioned that his problem might be in
the software and not in the site.

You are now acting like I have some personal issue with MS and IE. Well, I
don't and you need to chill.

[Morgans]

"Peter Duniho" > wrote

> My comment about "religious fanatics" was not directed at the users of the
> NOTAM mapping software. It was the person who was so quick to jump on IE7
> being the culprit in your woes (even though it was obvious that it could
not
> possibly have been IE7).

Ahh, thanks for the clarification.
--
Jim in NC

[Peter Duniho]

"Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATcox.net> wrote in message
...
> Look Peter, I'm not trying to knock MS or IE7.

I guess it was a different "Gig 601XL Builder" that wrote the following:

"Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATcox.net> wrote in message
...
> My bet the problem is with your browser. The Beta IE7.0 is
> buggy as hell.

> I tried the Beta version on two different computers both of which are well
> above the minimum system requirements and one of which is specifically
> kept clean to test new software on. The browser failed within the first 5
> minutes of use on both machines.

You are one unlucky fellow. However, your own personal experience is hardly
typical, and as "clean" as you'd like to believe your computers are, the
successful experience of millions of people belie your "buggy as hell"
characterization.

> This sort of surprised me because MS usually has software much further
> along before they open beta it.

Occam's Razor. If your experience does not match your expectations, but
most people's do, perhaps there is something unique to your experience. Why
jump to conclusions, as you have?

> Then a poster on this newsgroups chimes in that he is having problems with
> a web site and is running IE 7 and I mentioned that his problem might be
> in the software and not in the site.

He did not say he is running IE7. He said he's running the most recent IE,
and that he's using Windows 2000. That information is sufficient to tell
you that he is NOT running IE7.

> You are now acting like I have some personal issue with MS and IE. Well, I
> don't and you need to chill.

Chill? I'm not the one using inflammatory language.

Pete