Privatizing Flight Service Stations - AOPA

[One's Too Many]

AOPA has an article online right now regarding an FAA study to
possibly privatize the operation of the FSS system.

(http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsitems/2003/03-4-164x.html)

AOPA says, as usual, that they will fight the privatization of the FSS
system as vigorously as possible. I fear that some privatization of
govt aviation infrastructure is inevitable regardless of whether we
like it or not.

If the government is hell-bent on privatizing FSS, the major aviation
support organizations (AOPA, EAA) and the US aviation community at
large should get together instead and step up to the plate to put
together an alternate plan to take over the FSS infrastructure,
modernize it, and operate and manage it instead of putting it up for
bid. The FAA seems to want to wash their hands of the expenses and
responsibilities of FSS and we need an FSS system we can trust and
rely on. I feel the aviation community, with guidance and support of
AOPA/EAA/whoever can likely do a better job of building a non-profit
organization to run the FSS system like a customer-owned co-op. I
wouldn't even mind paying some reasonable annual fees if I knew the
money was going directly to the operation of a non-profit,
run-by-the-pilot-community-itself FSS system, and preventing the money
from lining the pockets of some greedy, low-bidder corporation that
just exists to suck in all the money they can while giving out
half-assed FSS services run on a shoestring budget.

Thoughts anyone?

[Mike Rapoport]

How about $30 for a briefing? That is about what it costs.

Mike
MU-2


"One's Too Many" > wrote in message
om...
> AOPA has an article online right now regarding an FAA study to
> possibly privatize the operation of the FSS system.
>
> (http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsitems/2003/03-4-164x.html)
>
> AOPA says, as usual, that they will fight the privatization of the FSS
> system as vigorously as possible. I fear that some privatization of
> govt aviation infrastructure is inevitable regardless of whether we
> like it or not.
>
> If the government is hell-bent on privatizing FSS, the major aviation
> support organizations (AOPA, EAA) and the US aviation community at
> large should get together instead and step up to the plate to put
> together an alternate plan to take over the FSS infrastructure,
> modernize it, and operate and manage it instead of putting it up for
> bid. The FAA seems to want to wash their hands of the expenses and
> responsibilities of FSS and we need an FSS system we can trust and
> rely on. I feel the aviation community, with guidance and support of
> AOPA/EAA/whoever can likely do a better job of building a non-profit
> organization to run the FSS system like a customer-owned co-op. I
> wouldn't even mind paying some reasonable annual fees if I knew the
> money was going directly to the operation of a non-profit,
> run-by-the-pilot-community-itself FSS system, and preventing the money
> from lining the pockets of some greedy, low-bidder corporation that
> just exists to suck in all the money they can while giving out
> half-assed FSS services run on a shoestring budget.
>
> Thoughts anyone?

[Peter MacPherson]

I'd be curious the percentage of pilots that use FSS for briefings as
opposed to getting the wx off the web(duats). I fly about 300 hours a year
and very rarely call FSS. I'd assume there is some correlation between
FSS use and how often people fly. Meaning that the people that might
fly 50 hours per year on short flights might use FSS a lot more than people
that fly a lot since they don't feel comfortable getting and interpreting wx
from
the web themselves. That being said I believe FSS should not be privatized.
Even though I rarely use it, I would still be willing to pay a yearly fee
for the
times I don't have access to the web.


"One's Too Many" > wrote in message
om...
> AOPA has an article online right now regarding an FAA study to
> possibly privatize the operation of the FSS system.
>
> (http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsitems/2003/03-4-164x.html)
>
> AOPA says, as usual, that they will fight the privatization of the FSS
> system as vigorously as possible. I fear that some privatization of
> govt aviation infrastructure is inevitable regardless of whether we
> like it or not.
>
> If the government is hell-bent on privatizing FSS, the major aviation
> support organizations (AOPA, EAA) and the US aviation community at
> large should get together instead and step up to the plate to put
> together an alternate plan to take over the FSS infrastructure,
> modernize it, and operate and manage it instead of putting it up for
> bid. The FAA seems to want to wash their hands of the expenses and
> responsibilities of FSS and we need an FSS system we can trust and
> rely on. I feel the aviation community, with guidance and support of
> AOPA/EAA/whoever can likely do a better job of building a non-profit
> organization to run the FSS system like a customer-owned co-op. I
> wouldn't even mind paying some reasonable annual fees if I knew the
> money was going directly to the operation of a non-profit,
> run-by-the-pilot-community-itself FSS system, and preventing the money
> from lining the pockets of some greedy, low-bidder corporation that
> just exists to suck in all the money they can while giving out
> half-assed FSS services run on a shoestring budget.
>
> Thoughts anyone?

[Ron Natalie]

"Peter MacPherson" > wrote in message news:BMZGb.484855$275.1380405@attbi_s53...
> I'd be curious the percentage of pilots that use FSS for briefings as
> opposed to getting the wx off the web(duats). I fly about 300 hours a year
> and very rarely call FSS.

In some areas of the country (notably the DC Area), you have to call
the FSS. Your not protected against the wrath of the TSA otherwise.

[John Harlow]

> How about $30 for a briefing? That is about what it costs.

In which case the gov't could save lots of money by _giving_ us all wxworks
systems.

I have a feeling the briefer's days are numbered anyway - everyone will need
a transponnder and a flight plan (and you'd better not deviate from it). Of
course the government will be exempt from this.

[Teacherjh]

>>
I'd be curious the percentage of pilots that use FSS for briefings as
opposed to getting the wx off the web(duats). I fly about 300 hours a year
and very rarely call FSS.
<<

There was a thread on this recently (but it might have been in
rec.aviation.ifr)

I typically check the maps on the web (DUATS via Cirrus, and Accuweather
radar), and then call FSS. What the FSS does that I find difficult is filter
out all the irrelevant stuff. If I get a printout from DUATS, I'll get reams
and reams of data from every station whose uncle has a cousin in the same
country as my flight. Most of these will be similar, a few will be different
in key places, and I don't want to miss those. So, unaided, I'd need to pore
through all of them, gleaning very little additional useful information. The
FSS can do this for me, and it is not just shifting my work to them because
they have done it a hundred times for a hundred different pilots that morning.
They already have a good idea what's in those reports, I do not (having just
gotten them for the first time). So, I much prefer that FSS pick out the
relevant stations and tell me what's in them.

Jose




--
(for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)

[G.R. Patterson III]

Mike Rapoport wrote:
>
> How about $30 for a briefing? That is about what it costs.
>
> Mike
> MU-2
>
> "One's Too Many" > wrote in message
> om...
> > AOPA has an article online right now regarding an FAA study to
> > possibly privatize the operation of the FSS system.
> >
> > (http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsitems/2003/03-4-164x.html)
> >
> > AOPA says, as usual, that they will fight the privatization of the FSS
> > system as vigorously as possible. I fear that some privatization of
> > govt aviation infrastructure is inevitable regardless of whether we
> > like it or not.
> >
> > If the government is hell-bent on privatizing FSS, the major aviation
> > support organizations (AOPA, EAA) and the US aviation community at
> > large should get together instead and step up to the plate to put
> > together an alternate plan to take over the FSS infrastructure,
> > modernize it, and operate and manage it instead of putting it up for
> > bid. The FAA seems to want to wash their hands of the expenses and
> > responsibilities of FSS and we need an FSS system we can trust and
> > rely on. I feel the aviation community, with guidance and support of
> > AOPA/EAA/whoever can likely do a better job of building a non-profit
> > organization to run the FSS system like a customer-owned co-op. I
> > wouldn't even mind paying some reasonable annual fees if I knew the
> > money was going directly to the operation of a non-profit,
> > run-by-the-pilot-community-itself FSS system, and preventing the money
> > from lining the pockets of some greedy, low-bidder corporation that
> > just exists to suck in all the money they can while giving out
> > half-assed FSS services run on a shoestring budget.
> >
> > Thoughts anyone?

--
George Patterson
Great discoveries are not announced with "Eureka!". What's usually said is
"Hummmmm... That's interesting...."

[G.R. Patterson III]

Mike Rapoport wrote:
>
> How about $30 for a briefing? That is about what it costs.

Then you need to add something for the overhead of tracking and billing. Probably
at least a $5 handling fee.

George Patterson
Great discoveries are not announced with "Eureka!". What's usually said is
"Hummmmm... That's interesting...."

[Andrew Gideon]

Teacherjh wrote:

> The FSS can do this for me, and it is not just shifting my work to them
> because they have done it a hundred times for a hundred different pilots
> that morning. They already have a good idea what's in those reports, I do
> not (having just
> gotten them for the first time). So, I much prefer that FSS pick out the
> relevant stations and tell me what's in them.

No, it's not shifting your work to them. You do your work anyway.

I do pretty much what you do: I do everyone via computer on my own, and I
then call FSS as "backup". They might know of something I've missed or
that wasn't available to me, for example.

But what some people may forget during these threads is that FSS is also
available in-flight...where many of us don't have Internet access.
Recently, for example, I'd made a last-minute decision to flight the Hudson
VFR corridor instead of my preplanned route north. But what about possible
TRFs?

A quick call to FSS answered my question (in the negative, happily).

A while back, I was tootling along the Connecticut coast heading for
Nantucket. All earlier reports were "great weather" at the destination.
But looking down, I saw that the entire coastline was covered in fog. If
Connecticut, why not Nantucket?

Worried, I called FSS. A quick discussion with the briefer confirmed the
weather reports I'd received earlier, and I was also able to learn where
the fog stopped.

I could have accomplished this same thing with uploaded weather, I suppose.
But that still wouldn't have handled the earlier case...and it's a lot
easier to keep up my scan for traffic while talking than while futzing
around with a weather display.

[Why do no aviation electronics use voice recognition yet?]

- Andrew

[Teacherjh]

>>
I do pretty much what you do: I do everyone via computer on my own, and I
then call FSS as "backup".
<<

I do the maps, but not the text, via Duats. I rely on FSS to filter through
the irrelevant text so I don't have to.

Jose

--
(for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)

[Dave Stadt]

"Andrew Gideon" > wrote in message
online.com...
> Teacherjh wrote:
>
> > The FSS can do this for me, and it is not just shifting my work to them
> > because they have done it a hundred times for a hundred different pilots
> > that morning. They already have a good idea what's in those reports, I
do
> > not (having just
> > gotten them for the first time). So, I much prefer that FSS pick out
the
> > relevant stations and tell me what's in them.
>
> No, it's not shifting your work to them. You do your work anyway.
>
> I do pretty much what you do: I do everyone via computer on my own, and I
> then call FSS as "backup". They might know of something I've missed or
> that wasn't available to me, for example.
>
> But what some people may forget during these threads is that FSS is also
> available in-flight...where many of us don't have Internet access.
> Recently, for example, I'd made a last-minute decision to flight the
Hudson
> VFR corridor instead of my preplanned route north. But what about
possible
> TRFs?
>
> A quick call to FSS answered my question (in the negative, happily).

FSS has missed numerous TFRs in the past in which case you are still the bad
guy if you bust one. I would never trust what they say without backing it
up via DUATS if at all possible. Especially TFRs.

[Andrew Gideon]

Dave Stadt wrote:

>> A quick call to FSS answered my question (in the negative, happily).
>
> FSS has missed numerous TFRs in the past in which case you are still the
> bad
> guy if you bust one. I would never trust what they say without backing it
> up via DUATS if at all possible. Especially TFRs.

It's tough to use DUATS from the air.

I don't know...our FSS (Millville) has always seemed to be on top of things
in the neighborhood. I'd not expect details on a TFR elsewhere, but around
here?

- Andrew