![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"bob" wrote in message
oups.com... Still haven't heard anything from the FSDO, but not much time has passed. I'll post with whatever they eventually flog me with, but in the meantime here's some comments on the comments: Q. Why would NOTAMs on another frequency or AWOS be easier to check than the current methods? A. Current methods require one to check a web page or make a phone call, an extra effort rather different from simply checking another frequency. It's not so much the time involved, but the relatively different task. You should maybe check NOTAMs at least once. Then you'd see just how many there are, and how impractical it would be to include them on an existing AWOS transmission or similar. I suppose you could set up a new system like HIWAS, etc. with a dedicated NOTAM frequency, but it'd still be relatively impractical (you'd have to listen to several minutes of NOTAMs just to be sure you heard them all) and you'd run into the problem of taking up new radio frequencies for something that really doesn't have to be an in-flight information thing. As far as the current methods requiring extra effort, well dang...there's a lot of extra effort involved in flying. Just how little effort do you want to put in? Compared to most of the other stuff involved in flying creating "extra effort", checking NOTAMs is pretty minimal. Q. Are there pilots that really check before EVERY flight? A. Apparently so. And maybe I will join the ranks. But my computer isn't on all the time and being Windoze takes a while to boot. The fact that my computer isn't on all the time is why it takes at least five minutes. Big deal. Turn on your computer, and then go put your flight bag next to the door, or brush your teeth, or whatever, while it's booting. Dialing 1-800-WX-BRIEF isn't difficult, maybe they could have a recording just for major NOTAMs in the area (they already connect you to your regional FSS station based on your calling phone number). Sure, that would not be a bad idea at all. I haven't phoned for a briefing in a long time (no Class B ADIZ around Sea-Tac, yet) so I don't know what they offer, but a menu option to drop you into a NOTAM menu structure would be useful. No need to limit it to TFRs...just make TFRs a category, and include other stuff (like obstacles to navigation, chart NOTAMs, FDC, etc.) on other menus. Q. Don't you check weather before every flight? A. X-country, yes, local, no. It's a California thing I guess...ya gotta live here a summer to understand. You just don't get it. Even here in Seattle, we often have weather that makes it obvious that I don't need to check the *weather*. That's not the point. A preflight briefing is more than weather. It's not "a California thing". It's a lazy pilot thing. Q. How would an email notification work, they don't know what airport you're at? A. Similar to AOPA's system, the FAA would setup a web page where pilots voluntarily participating would submit their email address and location (either state, zip code, or airport ID) and they would receive emails for TFR and NOTAMs. I would agree that an email notification system would be handy. It should be simple enough to set up, and would serve a useful purpose. However... This would help for the local flights where many pilots don't get a briefing. An email system does not get you out of getting a briefing. It just provides a relatively convenient way to help you know about important information. Email is fundamentally unreliable, and there's no way to prove that you read the email that was sent to you, nor to ensure that you have actually received all applicable NOTAM information. Even if you have an email notification system, you would still need to get a proper briefing before your flight. [...] We might as well recognize that for local VFR flights there are just a lot of pilots that don't get briefings, so why not reduce the number of TFR violations with a simple email system? We might? What is your basis for claiming that "there are just a lot of pilots that don't get briefings"? Near as I can tell, pilots are MUCH more likely to be in the category of "always get a briefing" than "never get a briefing". BTW, there's an interesting report about TFR violations at http://www.volpe.dot.gov/opsad/docs/tfranalysis.pdf. Here's a statistic that caught my eye: "...2900 violations in the two years between June 2002 and June 2004 alone." Compared to the number of flights made during those two years, 2900 violations is a very small number. Obviously the current system isn't working well. Why not be practical and implement additional notification methods to reduce the violation rate? I have to agree with Peter R.'s reply: I see no proof here that "the current system isn't working well". You're not using the current system. How does your experience relate at all to how well it works? Pete |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
CAP SAREX what to expect? | Robert M. Gary | Piloting | 8 | August 22nd 05 02:16 PM |
Class B busted...My problem or the controller's ? | Antoņio | Piloting | 130 | June 4th 05 02:59 PM |
Busted IFR Checkride | Jon Kraus | Instrument Flight Rules | 77 | May 4th 04 02:31 PM |
rec.aviation.questions is busted | Dan Jacobson | General Aviation | 2 | November 18th 03 05:39 PM |
Q: What can a Commercial Helicopter Pilot Licence holder expect to earn? | Trentus | Rotorcraft | 24 | November 15th 03 01:46 AM |