Originally Posted by
pilotmike
Simple answer: No. It wouldn't work.
Rationale:
Humans are good at inventing systems and procedures which can be put in place to prevent known problems. Call it SOPs if you will. The de-icing / anti-icing procedure is a fine example: it works just fine when rigorously, conscientiously and consistently applied. And it isn't overly expensive in the grand scheme of things.
Humans are also very good at circumventing / flouting / ignoring systems and procedures to suit themselves whenever they believe it will save them time, bother or cost. And often it bites them and others in the a$$ - very hard, very painful and usually at very considerable cost. That might have happened here.
So your suggestion is to invent a very expensive, massively cumbersome, highly inconvenient, almost impossibly difficult to implement system to cater for the few cases where someone chooses not to comply with a simple, relatively cheap, highly effective, known good procedure...
Could you suggest one good reason why anybody who refuses to comply with the simple, effective, cheap, known good (de-icing) procedure will comply with a hugely cumbersome and expensive replacement procedure which only becomes necessary after they fail to comply with a simple de-icing procedure?
Hence my earlier simple answer - NO!