"Matthew P. Cummings" wrote in message
news
"it" you mean "why you feel that using flight planning software is a
necessity".

I don't believe it is for those who fear it, or can't afford it.

By definition, if you can qualify the need to have the tool by whether a
person is afraid of it (what an odd qualification) or whether they can
afford it, it cannot possibly be a "necessity". Fuel in the airplane,
that's a necessity. A weather briefing of some sort, that's a necessity.
Flight planning software, not a necessity, not for anyone.

I think voice is slower than computer, especially when you have to look up
the phone number. The other guy said airnav.com shows the data, I already
posted that my software uses airnav as a basis for airport information
regarding fuel pricing.

But neither your software nor Airnav has information that is guaranteed to
be accurate or complete. You are falling into the same trap many people who
use technology-based solutions do, by thinking that just because it's on a
computer, the information is somehow better. Just because the fuel price is
displayed in pixels on your computer screen, that doesn't mean that the
information is correct.

Beyond that, using the computer does not get you out of having to look up
the phone number and calling the FBO, to ensure that they are going to be
open and have fuel available for you. You should have that conversation
with any FBO where you plan a stop, if not the alternates as well.

[...] You don't even have a vested interest in this
thread and for some reason have decided to tell those of us who use it
that doing manually is best.

Again, you need to quit putting words into my mouth. I have NOT ONCE made a
judgment about which method of flight planning is "best". The rest of your
post continues in similar fashion, claiming that I am somehow objecting to
the use of flight planning software, even though I have done nothing of the
sort.

Pete