FAA KEEPS GRAPHICAL TFR PROMISE

From AvWeb:

FAA KEEPS GRAPHICAL TFR PROMISE
A year after promising them, FAA Administrator Marion Blakey will
announce that real-time graphical depictions of current TFRs will be
available on the FAA Web site starting today.
http://tfr.faa.gov/TFR/jsp/list.jsp

Another case where avweb did not check "facts" as promulgated by the FAA.

When I accessed the site the avweb recommended, it was three days
old......supposed to be updated every fifteen minutes....right.

And the hot link with the message in this string shows up as nothing but
useless data.

Yea FAA.

N.

******FAA KEEPS GRAPHICAL TFR PROMISE******


No. They didn't.

The Bremerton TFR is STILL mapped incorrectly. It seems inconcievable that
the FAA map makers can't select a point from LAT/LON and draw a circle
around it. Last time they had it 1/2 mile NW. Now it's about 1/4 mile W.

At least they are getting closer.

Karl
"Curator" N185KG

On 05 Nov 2003 02:47:10 GMT, (COUGARNFW) wrote in
Message-Id: :

Another case where avweb did not check "facts" as promulgated by the FAA.

Perhaps so.

When I accessed the site the avweb recommended, it was three days
old......supposed to be updated every fifteen minutes....right.

It now says:
WED, 5 NOV 2003 3:49 GMT.

And the hot link with the message in this string shows up as nothing but
useless data.

I'm having difficulty parsing that sentence.

I found one California TRF link that would not display the TFR data
due to a Java error, and notified the webmaster. I haven't used the
graphical TFR web site enough to form an opinion, but the resolution
of the sectional overlays isn't what you'd expect.

On Tue, 4 Nov 2003 19:03:57 -0800, "karl gruber"
wrote in Message-Id:
:

******FAA KEEPS GRAPHICAL TFR PROMISE******


No. They didn't.

The Bremerton TFR is STILL mapped incorrectly. It seems inconcievable that
the FAA map makers can't select a point from LAT/LON and draw a circle
around it. Last time they had it 1/2 mile NW. Now it's about 1/4 mile W.

At least they are getting closer.

Send e-mail to: http://www.broaddaylight.com/

Tell them which link your error report references, and the changes you
feel should be made to correct the issue.

That's what I did.

When I accessed the site the avweb recommended, it was three days
old.
--
(for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)

When I accessed the site the avweb recommended, it was three days
old.


It's current for me (but no graphics yet). In some cases you need to force
your browser to fetch the newest version of the page. Your browser caches old
pages, your server caches old pages, and there are other caches everywhere down
the line. This makes (usuallky static) web sites show up faster, but plays
havoc with dynamic ones.

To force a server refresh in IE, hold the CONTROL key down while you click the
reload icon. Try similar things in Netscape (or read the directions. The
level of caching can be set as a default.

AOL is notorious for serving cached pages. It's not a bad thing, but it's
something you should be aware of.

Jose

--
(for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)

still no graphics

You have to click on the name of the TFR to see the graphic - not obvious since
the webmaster pulled a trick to make the names not show up as default links.

Jose

--
(for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)

all parts of the web appear to be working correctly for me.. 2109 Local
Pacific time

poor renditions of the graphics can be made larger by clicking on the
graphic..

who gets a 3nm radius 3000ft AGL VIP TFR at Pierre SD this week. FDC notam
3/0633 1130 local on the third until 1420 local on the 6th...


"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
...

From AvWeb:

FAA KEEPS GRAPHICAL TFR PROMISE
A year after promising them, FAA Administrator Marion Blakey will
announce that real-time graphical depictions of current TFRs will be
available on the FAA Web site starting today.
http://tfr.faa.gov/TFR/jsp/list.jsp

On Tue, 4 Nov 2003 21:15:13 -0800, "BTIZ"
wrote in Message-Id: AH%pb.4025$Zb7.3878@fed1read01:

poor renditions of the graphics can be made larger by clicking on the
graphic..

The graphics seem to get bigger, which helps, but not really better
quality resolution; they're fuzzy and indistinct in my opinion. But
if they accurately depict the TFR in relation to the topography, it
will save plotting them out manually from the NOTAM description.