Why so many abbreviations in NOTAMs, etc.?

On 04/18/07 11:34, Gig 601XL Builder wrote:
Erik wrote:
Mxsmanic wrote:

Why are so many things abbreviated in NOTAMs and other similar
documents? Even words that aren't very long to begin with are often
abbreviated, saving only a letter or two. I can't think of any
situation today in which bandwidth would be so severely limited that
saving a letter or two would make a difference, so I assume there is
some historical reason for the abbreviations. Were such messages
transmitted by Morse code or something in the past, or is someone
still transmitting them that way (or over some other extremely slow
channel) today?

I was told that the fewer characters transmitted, the more
cost-effective it became.

I was hoping that in this age of the internet, they would change this
before I had to take my written (no luck). I passed it anyway, but
I'm certain that part of the questions I got wrong were for the stupid
weather reading.

Well then study up because you will be asked at your check ride.



Are you sure about that?

During my check ride, the DE was concerned about my ability to get current
weather, which I did - from sources like DUATS, etc., where the text is
translated already. The DE didn't care whether I knew any of the abbreviations.

This was true both for my PP-ASEL and IR check rides.

I think the only people that think everyone must learn those abbreviations
are the pilots that had to learn them. It just isn't the case any more, but
some just refuse to let go of the 'old ways'.

--
Mark Hansen, PP-ASEL, Instrument Airplane, USUA Ultralight Pilot
Cal Aggie Flying Farmers
Sacramento, CA

Mark Hansen wrote:
On 04/18/07 11:34, Gig 601XL Builder wrote:
Erik wrote:
Mxsmanic wrote:

Why are so many things abbreviated in NOTAMs and other similar
documents? Even words that aren't very long to begin with are often
abbreviated, saving only a letter or two. I can't think of any
situation today in which bandwidth would be so severely limited
that saving a letter or two would make a difference, so I assume
there is some historical reason for the abbreviations. Were such
messages transmitted by Morse code or something in the past, or is
someone still transmitting them that way (or over some other
extremely slow channel) today?

I was told that the fewer characters transmitted, the more
cost-effective it became.

I was hoping that in this age of the internet, they would change
this before I had to take my written (no luck). I passed it
anyway, but I'm certain that part of the questions I got wrong were
for the stupid weather reading.

Well then study up because you will be asked at your check ride.



Are you sure about that?

During my check ride, the DE was concerned about my ability to get
current weather, which I did - from sources like DUATS, etc., where
the text is translated already. The DE didn't care whether I knew any
of the abbreviations.

This was true both for my PP-ASEL and IR check rides.

I think the only people that think everyone must learn those
abbreviations are the pilots that had to learn them. It just isn't
the case any more, but some just refuse to let go of the 'old ways'.

You may well be right but the DE knows what you missed and can test you on
them.

On 04/18/07 11:59, Gig 601XL Builder wrote:
Mark Hansen wrote:
On 04/18/07 11:34, Gig 601XL Builder wrote:
Erik wrote:
Mxsmanic wrote:

Why are so many things abbreviated in NOTAMs and other similar
documents? Even words that aren't very long to begin with are often
abbreviated, saving only a letter or two. I can't think of any
situation today in which bandwidth would be so severely limited
that saving a letter or two would make a difference, so I assume
there is some historical reason for the abbreviations. Were such
messages transmitted by Morse code or something in the past, or is
someone still transmitting them that way (or over some other
extremely slow channel) today?

I was told that the fewer characters transmitted, the more
cost-effective it became.

I was hoping that in this age of the internet, they would change
this before I had to take my written (no luck). I passed it
anyway, but I'm certain that part of the questions I got wrong were
for the stupid weather reading.

Well then study up because you will be asked at your check ride.



Are you sure about that?

During my check ride, the DE was concerned about my ability to get
current weather, which I did - from sources like DUATS, etc., where
the text is translated already. The DE didn't care whether I knew any
of the abbreviations.

This was true both for my PP-ASEL and IR check rides.

I think the only people that think everyone must learn those
abbreviations are the pilots that had to learn them. It just isn't
the case any more, but some just refuse to let go of the 'old ways'.

You may well be right but the DE knows what you missed and can test you on
them.

Of course. But you said that the applicant will be tested and I don't
think that's necessarily true - it's up to the DE...

Mark Hansen wrote:

You may well be right but the DE knows what you missed and can test
you on them.

Of course. But you said that the applicant will be tested and I don't
think that's necessarily true - it's up to the DE...


You're right I should have said "can," "might be" or maybe even "probably
will be." I know I was asked about everything I missed on my written.

Gig 601XL Builder wrote:

You're right I should have said "can," "might be" or maybe even "probably
will be." I know I was asked about everything I missed on my written.

The DE that did my PP required my CFI to add a logbook endorsement that
stated I had been given additional ground training on missed written
questions.

At the actual oral exam, the DE complimented my written score, and never
asked anything regarding the 2 missed questions.