Twenty minutes in the queue awaiting the new and improved FSS

On Wed, 02 May 2007 22:35:31 GMT, "Steven P. McNicoll"
wrote in
.net:


"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
news

In addition to other reasons, because in the event of a TFR PD, FSS
personnel may be culpable as well as the pilot if they failed to brief
the TFR, thus mitigating pilot culpability.


A telephone briefing that misses a TFR would mitigate pilot culpability but
an internet briefing that misses a TFR would not mitigate pilot culpability?
Why would that be?


If the pilot misses the TFR NOTAM in the DUATS briefing, s/he bears
sole blame for it. If the TFR NOTAM is omitted from either the verbal
or DUATS type of briefing, I would expect it to mitigate the pilots
culpability in the event of a PD. In my experience, it's easier for a
pilot to overlook a single NOTAM among the plethora in a DUATS
briefing, but the live briefer briefs only those NOTAMS that are
pertinent to the flight so the relevant TFRs are not buried in the
clutter of irrelevant NOTAMS.

Of course, this issue will soon be moot when LocMart phases in the
computerized voice to deliver the telephone briefings of the future.

"Speak or say 'one' for a full briefing. Speak or say 'two' for
an updated briefing. Using the touch-tone pad enter the
departure airport identifier. ...."

In the name of reduced costs, the continuing trend of automation
replacing wet-ware will continue until the accident rate starts
increasing. Wile computers are less likely to make errors than
people, it is the people who program the computers, so that expected
increase in accuracy will likely not be achieved.