Narrative:

On 9/wed/01, I departed ZZZ airport. The airport has no telephone, and there were no other people or aircraft on the field, which is normal for this unattended and seldom used facility. I'd been on a camping trip, so while I'd heard about the national tragedy, my only briefing was that I'd watched the WX on the weather channel at a café and I'd called the destination airport about six hours previously. They advised that they knew of no restrictions to flight. I'd noted on television that 'commercial flts' were banned, but I was operating under far 91 and therefore, presumably not affected. Since the WX was clear at my departure point and destination, I knew that a VFR flight was safe. The flight was normal, but after landing, I decided to check the NOTAMS, since I noticed very little other traffic during the flight. The NOTAMS showed nothing, until I asked duats to show me the fdc NOTAMS, an option that I had to toggle to 'yes', since the default on my version is not to show the fdc NOTAMS. There, about four paragraphs down, I discovered a poorly worded NOTAM that I prohibited flight, but only after issuing exceptions to the prohibition. Here are several shortcomings, I think, of the FAA's actions on this issue: first, since duat is an approved method of accessing preflight information, the opening banner should proclaim in big bold letters that 'all airspace is closed to all flts except for blah, blah,....' such an important, indeed unprecedented, announcement should not be buried four paragraphs down in the (not always read) fdc NOTAMS. Second, the FAA should have issued a clear, concise press release describing exactly what flts were prohibited from flying, and when cnn reported it as 'commercial flts' only, the FAA should have called cnn (and other media outlets) and clarified the issue, so that those of us who were flying non-commercially would understand the situation. I reread far 91.103, and I believe that I conformed with the letter of the law, but despite this, I may have violated an emergency regulation. The FARS do, and should not, require a telephone call to FSS before VFR flight: do so would prohibit takeoff from many remote landing strips.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: AFTER ARR AT DEST ARPT, PLT CHKS DUATS (DIRECT USER ACCESS TERMINAL SYS) AND FINDS A NATIONAL AIRSPACE RESTR.

Narrative: ON 9/WED/01, I DEPARTED ZZZ ARPT. THE ARPT HAS NO TELEPHONE, AND THERE WERE NO OTHER PEOPLE OR ACFT ON THE FIELD, WHICH IS NORMAL FOR THIS UNATTENDED AND SELDOM USED FACILITY. I'D BEEN ON A CAMPING TRIP, SO WHILE I'D HEARD ABOUT THE NATIONAL TRAGEDY, MY ONLY BRIEFING WAS THAT I'D WATCHED THE WX ON THE WEATHER CHANNEL AT A CAFÉ AND I'D CALLED THE DEST ARPT ABOUT SIX HRS PREVIOUSLY. THEY ADVISED THAT THEY KNEW OF NO RESTRICTIONS TO FLT. I'D NOTED ON TELEVISION THAT 'COMMERCIAL FLTS' WERE BANNED, BUT I WAS OPERATING UNDER FAR 91 AND THEREFORE, PRESUMABLY NOT AFFECTED. SINCE THE WX WAS CLR AT MY DEP POINT AND DEST, I KNEW THAT A VFR FLT WAS SAFE. THE FLT WAS NORMAL, BUT AFTER LNDG, I DECIDED TO CHECK THE NOTAMS, SINCE I NOTICED VERY LITTLE OTHER TFC DURING THE FLT. THE NOTAMS SHOWED NOTHING, UNTIL I ASKED DUATS TO SHOW ME THE FDC NOTAMS, AN OPTION THAT I HAD TO TOGGLE TO 'YES', SINCE THE DEFAULT ON MY VERSION IS NOT TO SHOW THE FDC NOTAMS. THERE, ABOUT FOUR PARAGRAPHS DOWN, I DISCOVERED A POORLY WORDED NOTAM THAT I PROHIBITED FLT, BUT ONLY AFTER ISSUING EXCEPTIONS TO THE PROHIBITION. HERE ARE SEVERAL SHORTCOMINGS, I THINK, OF THE FAA'S ACTIONS ON THIS ISSUE: FIRST, SINCE DUAT IS AN APPROVED METHOD OF ACCESSING PREFLT INFO, THE OPENING BANNER SHOULD PROCLAIM IN BIG BOLD LETTERS THAT 'ALL AIRSPACE IS CLOSED TO ALL FLTS EXCEPT FOR BLAH, BLAH,....' SUCH AN IMPORTANT, INDEED UNPRECEDENTED, ANNOUNCEMENT SHOULD NOT BE BURIED FOUR PARAGRAPHS DOWN IN THE (NOT ALWAYS READ) FDC NOTAMS. SECOND, THE FAA SHOULD HAVE ISSUED A CLEAR, CONCISE PRESS RELEASE DESCRIBING EXACTLY WHAT FLTS WERE PROHIBITED FROM FLYING, AND WHEN CNN RPTED IT AS 'COMMERCIAL FLTS' ONLY, THE FAA SHOULD HAVE CALLED CNN (AND OTHER MEDIA OUTLETS) AND CLARIFIED THE ISSUE, SO THAT THOSE OF US WHO WERE FLYING NON-COMMERCIALLY WOULD UNDERSTAND THE SITUATION. I REREAD FAR 91.103, AND I BELIEVE THAT I CONFORMED WITH THE LETTER OF THE LAW, BUT DESPITE THIS, I MAY HAVE VIOLATED AN EMERGENCY REGULATION. THE FARS DO, AND SHOULD NOT, REQUIRE A TELEPHONE CALL TO FSS BEFORE VFR FLT: DO SO WOULD PROHIBIT TKOF FROM MANY REMOTE LANDING STRIPS.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.