AvareX release 72 fixes Notams

[Apps4av Support]

72 is just put on stores and will be available soon.

Notams are fixed as FAA has handed over accounts to their new system and API.

--

Regards,

Apps For Aviators Support,

We encourage users to use the Forum for all questions. Any updates to the forum will help other users, who might have similar questions.
Forum: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/apps4av-forum

[Bradley Spatz]

WARNING: NOTAMs with AvareX-0.72 may be incomplete.  Based on use this weekend it missed several important NOTAMs for GNV-area airports including self-serve closures, airpspace, etc.

Just checked again with a local airport (X60) and important NOTAMs are missing.  Plese see attached screenshots (Android tablets) from 0.72, a customized version I run based on 0.68, and the FAA web page all from a few minutes ago.  I consider the latter as authoritative, and is consistent with other EFBs.

Not sure the new FAA API and integration is ready for confident use, IMO.  Heads up.

Blue Skies!

On Fri, Dec 5, 2025 at 9:18 PM Apps4av Support <app...@gmail.com> wrote:

72 is just put on stores and will be available soon.

Notams are fixed as FAA has handed over accounts to their new system and API.

[snip]

 

[Apps4av Support]

We should contact the FAA and mention the issue. Or maybe there is a bug in the parsing code. But that's the interface going forward by the FAA. If we go with unpublished interface then it can break often because they have no commitment to keep it working with backward compatibility.

Regards,

Apps For Aviators Support,

We encourage users to use the Forum for all questions. Any updates to the forum will help other users, who might have similar questions.
Forum: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/apps4av-forum

[Bradley Spatz]

> If we go with unpublished interface

No one is suggesting this.

The working 0.68-based version mentioned below, screenshots, and code offered as a Github PR uses the API on notams.aim.faa.gov/notamSearch/.  While this site/API will go away in April 2026 it has been stable.  Until something better is working/integrated reliably, I would use that JSON API.

Let's be frank.  AvareX was without NOTAMs for 3+ months.  We either have reliable NOTAMs integrated or we don't.  The rest is noise.

I tried my best to avoid any NOTAM disruption for the AvareX community and have been engaged and following the FAA NOTAM Modernization project.  I'm willing to help further.

On Mon, Dec 8, 2025 at 3:35 PM Apps4av Support <app...@gmail.com> wrote:

We should contact the FAA and mention the issue. Or maybe there is a bug in the parsing code. But that's the interface going forward by the FAA. If we go with unpublished interface then it can break often because they have no commitment to keep it working with backward compatibility.

[Apps4av Support]

We need to fix the issue than to find work arounds. 

The proper way to fix this issue is to notify the FAA and have them fix the issue. This way when they roll out their NMS API, there are less bugs in it. 

I am seeing similar tactical decisions in other areas that I have pushed back on. For example, if the FAA is pushing Metars on ADS-B to contain K on airports that do not have K in their code, then we need to engage in a discussion with the FAA instead of chopping the K (or P or X) out as a work around.  Similarly, if Dynon is doing something bad, we need to tell them and fix it with them and if Stratux is transmitting the roll reversed, we need to inform them to change it in the Stratux settings as default. 

--

[Jeffrey Ross]

But sometimes being a small fish in a very big pond you have to bend to work around other's "mistakes".  Just because a spec is written one way doesn't mean it is being followed and the deviation from that spec maybe so entrenched it is impossible to rectify without everybody else fixing their code.

Jeff

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Apps4Av Forum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to apps4av-foru...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/apps4av-forum/CADA_tR9hWaPd6F7T2uQRGAfyuB2cTp%2ByWN4mv0BQs03_jJqKuQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Apps4av Support]

It's not about being big / small. It's about helping the FAA fix their stuff. We have done that before with good results. 

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/apps4av-forum/9d1ac3c4-f524-4de5-99cc-27d84893afc3%40bubble.org.

[Jeffrey Ross]

so until the FAA fixes their stuff we remain broken?

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/apps4av-forum/CADA_tR_pBupcNaO8WSYsi5ZZpqzOFfND--08ABQ%3DqHy%2Bhfsipg%40mail.gmail.com.

[Apps4av Support]

 Have you verified it is broken and what is broken ? Is it consistently broken? What's the pattern ? 

Regards,

Apps For Aviators Support,

We encourage users to use the Forum for all questions. Any updates to the forum will help other users, who might have similar questions.
Forum: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/apps4av-forum

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/apps4av-forum/80a1e2a3-26e6-4d65-9248-50d927262c20%40bubble.org.