Election saturation

[Bob Chilcoat]

This arrived in my inbox from a friend:

You know it's election season when...
Heard on the Green Bay ATIS broadcast:

"...advise on initial contact that you have information Bravo. I'm Green Bay
Ground Control and I approved this ATIS."


--
Bob (Chief Pilot, White Knuckle Airways)

I don't have to like Bush and Cheney (Or Kerry, for that matter) to love
America

[Peter Duniho]

"Bob Chilcoat" > wrote in message
...
> This arrived in my inbox from a friend: [joke snipped]

That was the "Short Final" from AvWeb this week. Undoubtedly, that's where
your friend got it (either directly, or through a chain of forwards).

[Jay Honeck]

> You know it's election season when...

I called Fort Dodge Flight Service today for a briefing. The FSS briefer
asked for my credit card number!

Taken aback, I laughed and asked if they took "Discover." He laughed, but
quite seriously said "That's what it will be like if they out-source us..."

"They" meaning, I suspect, the Bush Administration?

I'll be really glad when this election is behind us.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Peter Duniho]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:ot0dd.273765$D%.135894@attbi_s51...
> [...]
> "They" meaning, I suspect, the Bush Administration?

The Bush Administration doesn't have enough time left to out-source FSSs.

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Peter Duniho" > wrote in message
...
> "Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
> news:ot0dd.273765$D%.135894@attbi_s51...
>> [...]
>> "They" meaning, I suspect, the Bush Administration?
>
> The Bush Administration doesn't have enough time left to out-source FSSs.

51 months should be plenty of time.

[C Kingsbury]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:ot0dd.273765$D%.135894@attbi_s51...
> > You know it's election season when...
>
> I called Fort Dodge Flight Service today for a briefing. The FSS briefer
> asked for my credit card number!
>
> Taken aback, I laughed and asked if they took "Discover." He laughed, but
> quite seriously said "That's what it will be like if they out-source
us..."
>
> "They" meaning, I suspect, the Bush Administration?

Yes, but only after they finish clubbing the baby seals and paving over the
Amazon to make parking for the Super Wal-Mart Extra Mega Supercenter.

I like the idea of FSS. Despite being a self-proclaimed geek I am genuinely
fond of the concept of having knowledgeable *people* to talk to before
making a potentially life-or-death decision. Unfortunately, this does not
describe what FSS has in many cases become. Many of the briefers simply read
what I could have gotten off DUATS just as easily.

If they do outsource it, I suspect it will be some time before we see direct
user fees, but the most immediate effect will be to drive out all of the
good people who remain as FSS becomes one big call center somewhere in
Georgia. Of course, those people are disappearing over time anyway so I'm
not so convinced anything we do at this point is going to make a difference
anyway.

-cwk.

[Geoffrey Barnes]

> If they do outsource it, I suspect it will be some time before we see
direct
> user fees, but the most immediate effect will be to drive out all of the
> good people who remain as FSS becomes one big call center somewhere in
> Georgia.

No way. It will go to a swing state, like Pennsylvania or New Mexico
instead.


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.778 / Virus Database: 525 - Release Date: 10/15/2004

[Jose]

> as FSS becomes one big call center somewhere in
> Georgia.

You mean Pakistan, don't you?

Jose

[Larry Dighera]

On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 15:30:40 GMT, "C Kingsbury"
> wrote in
t>::

>If they do outsource it [FSS], I suspect it will be some time before we see direct
>user fees, but the most immediate effect will be to drive out all of the
>good people who remain as FSS becomes one big call center somewhere in
>Georgia.

Most likely, the FSS personnel would be located in India (or some
other 3rd world country) like AT&T's tech-support staff. Hey, it's
about profitability not safety, right? :-(

[Blanche]

>FSS becomes one big call center somewhere in Georgia

Possibly Georgia in the former USSR...or India.

[John Galban]

"C Kingsbury" > wrote in message t>...
<snip>
> but the most immediate effect will be to drive out all of the
> good people who remain as FSS becomes one big call center somewhere in
> Georgia. Of course, those people are disappearing over time anyway so I'm
> not so convinced anything we do at this point is going to make a difference
> anyway.

This already happened when the AFSS system was implemented in the
early 90s. Prior to that, you could go into a FSS office in, say,
Burley, Idaho on a bad weather day, and get a comprehesive briefing
from a local FSS expert that was familiar with the local terrain and
weather patterns. With the advent of approximately 1 AFSS for each
state (with the exception of Alaska), much of that expertise
disappeared and, more often than not, a briefing turned into a canned
reading of a standard report, from a specialist that could be located
in a windowless room, hundreds of miles away.

As it stands now, it wouldn't make any difference to me if all of
the AFSS were consolidated into a giant call center in Georgia (the
state, not the republic :-)). The briefing I get would be the same
either way.

John Galban=====>N4BQ (PA28-180)

[Newps]

Jay Honeck wrote:

>>You know it's election season when...
>
>
> I called Fort Dodge Flight Service today for a briefing. The FSS briefer
> asked for my credit card number!
>
> Taken aback, I laughed and asked if they took "Discover." He laughed, but
> quite seriously said "That's what it will be like if they out-source us..."
>
> "They" meaning, I suspect, the Bush Administration?
>
> I'll be really glad when this election is behind us.

FSS won't be outsourced. What you'll see is a giant consolidation into
a very few or even one FSS, probably into the middle of the country,
although it doesn't really matter where.

[Newps]

John Galban wrote:

With the advent of approximately 1 AFSS for each
> state (with the exception of Alaska), much of that expertise
> disappeared and, more often than not, a briefing turned into a canned
> reading of a standard report, from a specialist that could be located
> in a windowless room, hundreds of miles away.

This is 100% the fault of the lawyers. The FAA and thus the taxpayers,
cannot afford to have briefers with local knoweledge. Some guy that
knows you should fly over this mountain pass but not that one when the
weather goes to hell is a luxury that the lawyers do not allow the FAA
to have. FSS does not ever suggest anything helpful to you anymore,
they simply read you the weather and you are forced to make your own
interpretation. Because of the lawyers.

[Mike Adams]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote:

> I called Fort Dodge Flight Service today for a briefing. The FSS
> briefer asked for my credit card number!
>

Jay,

What's the rest of the story? Were they really charging you for the briefing? Incredible!

Mike

[C Kingsbury]

"Newps" > wrote in message
...
>
> This is 100% the fault of the lawyers. The FAA and thus the taxpayers,

I wonder how they manage in Alaska. I'm sure plenty of the planes that go
into mountainsides up there received briefings that didn't say, "Don't fly
there today." Alaskans might not sue but I'm sure the families of all the
tourists who go up there are less understanding.

-cwk.

[Chris]

"Mike Adams" > wrote in message
news:0Hldd.32144$bk1.6067@fed1read05...
> "Jay Honeck" > wrote:
>
>> I called Fort Dodge Flight Service today for a briefing. The FSS
>> briefer asked for my credit card number!
>>
>
> Jay,
>
> What's the rest of the story? Were they really charging you for the
> briefing? Incredible!
>
> Mike
Get a life Mike! he was only kidding

[Jay Honeck]

> What's the rest of the story? Were they really charging you for the
> briefing? Incredible!

He was only joking. But it *did* rock me back for a second...
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Art Johnson]

Larry Dighera > wrote in message >...
> On Tue, 19 Oct 2004 15:30:40 GMT, "C Kingsbury"
> > wrote in
> t>::
>
>
> Most likely, the FSS personnel would be located in India (or some
> other 3rd world country) like AT&T's tech-support staff. Hey, it's
> about profitability not safety, right? :-(

Yesterday, I was signing up for DSL with SBC and asked the tech guy
where he was. "India" was the response.
Isn't there some American on welfare that could do that job from home?

[John Galban]

"C Kingsbury" > wrote in message t>...
>
> I wonder how they manage in Alaska. I'm sure plenty of the planes that go
> into mountainsides up there received briefings that didn't say, "Don't fly
> there today." Alaskans might not sue but I'm sure the families of all the
> tourists who go up there are less understanding.
>
You touched on another sore spot I have with current AFSS system.
"VFR not recommended". After the FSS were consolidated in Arizona, I
started getting "VFR not recommended" statements quite often on
flights between Phoenix and Southern New Mexico (I average one or two
a month). On one flight, the vis was reported in excess of 20 miles
with an overcast layer 2,000 ft. above my proposed cruising altitude.
The briefer gave me a VNR. When I asked for the basis for this
recommendation, he told me that it was their policy to say VNR anytime
there was mountain obscuration, even if it would not affect the
planned flight. In my case, there was a single 10,000 ft. peak that
might be obscured, south of my route. I later talked to the
supervisor who comfirmed that this was their policy and it was in
place to cover their butts. I asked him if he'd ever heard of the boy
who cried "wolf". He didn't have an answer for that.

I haven't seen a benefit to talking to a live briefer in a long
time. The exception being the specialists in Fligh****ch. They're
still willing to offer meaningful interpretations of the local weather
situation. I wonder how long that will last.

John Galban=====>N4BQ (PA28-180)

[Gary Drescher]

"John Galban" > wrote in message
om...
> You touched on another sore spot I have with current AFSS system.
> "VFR not recommended". After the FSS were consolidated in Arizona, I
> started getting "VFR not recommended" statements quite often on
> flights between Phoenix and Southern New Mexico (I average one or two
> a month). On one flight, the vis was reported in excess of 20 miles
> with an overcast layer 2,000 ft. above my proposed cruising altitude.
> The briefer gave me a VNR. When I asked for the basis for this
> recommendation, he told me that it was their policy to say VNR anytime
> there was mountain obscuration, even if it would not affect the
> planned flight. In my case, there was a single 10,000 ft. peak that
> might be obscured, south of my route. I later talked to the
> supervisor who comfirmed that this was their policy and it was in
> place to cover their butts. I asked him if he'd ever heard of the boy
> who cried "wolf". He didn't have an answer for that.
>
> I haven't seen a benefit to talking to a live briefer in a long
> time. The exception being the specialists in Fligh****ch. They're
> still willing to offer meaningful interpretations of the local weather
> situation. I wonder how long that will last.

Interesting observations. I too was recently told "VFR not recommended" in
circumstances that didn't call for it. I was flying from BED west to 7B2.
The sky was clear at BED, but the briefer said there was a thin broken layer
to the west at around 2200', and as low as 1900' at CEF (which is near 7B2;
7B2 itself has no weather reporting). Although the clouds were expected to
rise and dissipate shortly (morning, stable air, no front coming through),
and the readings were already almost an hour old, the briefer recommended
against VFR flight. It's true that there are some hills at around 1400' near
7B2 so I wouldn't want to scud-run there if the clouds were really at 1900'
(Class E, sparsely populated terrain) . But I saw no reason not to head over
there and then turn back (or get a pop-up clearance) in the unlikely event
that the clouds were too low.

On the way, I radioed Flight Watch. They still had the same data--now more
than an hour old--and they asked me my intentions. I told them I'd stay
under the clouds and see how things looked as I got further west. They said
"OK, but just for the record, VFR is not recommended". (When I got there,
the clouds were 2400' scattered--no problem at all.)

--Gary

[Richard Russell]

On 20 Oct 2004 12:18:53 -0700, (John Galban)
wrote:

>"C Kingsbury" > wrote in message t>...
>>
>> I wonder how they manage in Alaska. I'm sure plenty of the planes that go
>> into mountainsides up there received briefings that didn't say, "Don't fly
>> there today." Alaskans might not sue but I'm sure the families of all the
>> tourists who go up there are less understanding.
>>
> You touched on another sore spot I have with current AFSS system.
>"VFR not recommended". After the FSS were consolidated in Arizona, I
>started getting "VFR not recommended" statements quite often on
>flights between Phoenix and Southern New Mexico (I average one or two
>a month). On one flight, the vis was reported in excess of 20 miles
>with an overcast layer 2,000 ft. above my proposed cruising altitude.
>The briefer gave me a VNR. When I asked for the basis for this
>recommendation, he told me that it was their policy to say VNR anytime
>there was mountain obscuration, even if it would not affect the
>planned flight. In my case, there was a single 10,000 ft. peak that
>might be obscured, south of my route. I later talked to the
>supervisor who comfirmed that this was their policy and it was in
>place to cover their butts. I asked him if he'd ever heard of the boy
>who cried "wolf". He didn't have an answer for that.
>
> I haven't seen a benefit to talking to a live briefer in a long
>time. The exception being the specialists in Fligh****ch. They're
>still willing to offer meaningful interpretations of the local weather
>situation. I wonder how long that will last.
>
>John Galban=====>N4BQ (PA28-180)

I remember very well something that my CFI told me when I was training
and was concerned about being told VFR not recommended. She told me
that if I stayed on the ground everytime they told me that, I would
never be flying. I live in the Philly area and I can tell you that
she would be right, particularly in the summer. The boy who cried
"wolf" is a good analogy for me because I just don't llisten to that
statement anymore. I'll take the information and make my own decision
based upon what I see.
Rich Russell

[Jay Honeck]

> Yesterday, I was signing up for DSL with SBC and asked the tech guy
> where he was. "India" was the response.
> Isn't there some American on welfare that could do that job from home?

No.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[G.R. Patterson III]

Art Johnson wrote:
>
> Yesterday, I was signing up for DSL with SBC and asked the tech guy
> where he was. "India" was the response.
> Isn't there some American on welfare that could do that job from home?

Not likely.

George Patterson
If a man gets into a fight 3,000 miles away from home, he *had* to have
been looking for it.

[G.R. Patterson III]

John Galban wrote:
>
> You touched on another sore spot I have with current AFSS system.
> "VFR not recommended".

I pretty much quit listening to that after the first time I heard it. Got a briefing
for what seemed to me to be pretty good weather (and I had less than 200 hours at the
time), followed by "VFR not recommended". When I asked why, I was told because there
was a chance of icing in clouds. Excuse me?

Since then, I always ask why and then make my own decision.

George Patterson
If a man gets into a fight 3,000 miles away from home, he *had* to have
been looking for it.

[C Kingsbury]

"Gary Drescher" > wrote in message
news:3azdd.161720$He1.154998@attbi_s01...
>
> Interesting observations. I too was recently told "VFR not recommended" in
> circumstances that didn't call for it. I was flying from BED west to 7B2.

Maybe some day we should get together all the instrument-rated pilots and
regardless of weather, have a chosen day where *everybody* flies and files.
I suspect you'd have a real grade-A mess on your hands, particularly at the
many Class-C fields where you have a heavy mix of GA and airline traffic.
Just to prove the point that VFR benefits the system as well as the
pilots...

-cwk.

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"C Kingsbury" > wrote in message
ink.net...
>
> Maybe some day we should get together all the instrument-rated pilots and
> regardless of weather, have a chosen day where *everybody* flies and
> files.
> I suspect you'd have a real grade-A mess on your hands, particularly at
> the
> many Class-C fields where you have a heavy mix of GA and airline traffic.
> Just to prove the point that VFR benefits the system as well as the
> pilots...
>

That statement would be probably better said in Class E airspace. ATC
already has to work VFR aircraft in Class C airspace.

[John Galban]

(Art Johnson) wrote in message >...
>
> Yesterday, I was signing up for DSL with SBC and asked the tech guy
> where he was. "India" was the response.
> Isn't there some American on welfare that could do that job from home?

There is possibly a qualified tech on welfare that could do that
job. The problem is that he would have to take a pay cut from welfare
in order to compete with the guy in India.

John Galban=====>N4BQ (PA28-180)

[C Kingsbury]

"Steven P. McNicoll" > wrote in message
ink.net...
>
> "C Kingsbury" > wrote in message
> ink.net...
> >
> > Maybe some day we should get together all the instrument-rated pilots
and
> > regardless of weather, have a chosen day where *everybody* flies and
> > files.
> > I suspect you'd have a real grade-A mess on your hands, particularly at
> > the
> > many Class-C fields where you have a heavy mix of GA and airline
traffic.
> > Just to prove the point that VFR benefits the system as well as the
> > pilots...
> >
>
> That statement would be probably better said in Class E airspace. ATC
> already has to work VFR aircraft in Class C airspace.

Yes, but in that case most of us are happy to take visual approaches and all
the shortcuts commensurate with that. If we all asked for the full ILS
eventually we'd back the lines up.

-cwk.

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"C Kingsbury" > wrote in message
nk.net...
>>
>> That statement would be probably better said in Class E airspace. ATC
>> already has to work VFR aircraft in Class C airspace.
>>
>
> Yes, but in that case most of us are happy to take visual approaches and
> all
> the shortcuts commensurate with that. If we all asked for the full ILS
> eventually we'd back the lines up.
>

If you asked for the full ILS under those conditions your request would be
denied.

[leslie]

Art Johnson ) wrote:
:
: Yesterday, I was signing up for DSL with SBC and asked the tech guy
: where he was. "India" was the response.
:

True...

http://makeashorterlink.com/?R1BC539E4
A lively chat with 'Floyd'

Original link wrapped to 2 lines:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?
file=/chronicle/archive/2003/02/19/BU92987.DTL&type=business
A lively chat with 'Floyd'


http://makeashorterlink.com/?I26152E83
SBC's 'Floyd' attracts PUC's eye

Original link wrapped to 2 lines:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?
file=/chronicle/archive/2003/02/21/BU227355.DTL&type=business
SBC's 'Floyd' attracts PUC's eye


:
: Isn't there some American on welfare that could do that job from home?
:

Probably, but not for what someone in India makes.

Most of the U.S. welfare hotlines are answered in India...

http://makeashorterlink.com/?Y2FF53F29
Your Tax Dollars At Work...Offshore:
How Foreign Outsourcing Firms Are Capturing State Government Contracts

The original link, wrapped to 2 lines:

http://www.washtech.org/reports/TaxDollarsAtWork/
offshoring_finaltext_pdf.pdf
Your Tax Dollars At Work...Offshore:
How Foreign Outsourcing Firms Are Capturing State Government Contracts

"...Interviews with EBT officials in every state and the District of
Columbia reveal that:

o Before the offshoring controversy began, the call centers for 42 states
and the District of Columbia were operating offshore. In most cases,
this occurred because the states gave EBT contracts to Citibank
Electronic Financial Services, which in turn subcontracted the call
center work to an Indian firm called MsourcE. (In 2003 Citibank sold
the business to J.P. Morgan Chase, which continued to use MsourcE.)
A smaller number of states ended up with offshore call centers through
their EBT contracts with eFunds Corporation or Affiliated Computer
Services Inc.

o As a result of the controversy, one state (New Jersey) has brought its
call center back to the United States, and five states (Arizona, Kansas,
North Carolina, Oregon and Wisconsin) are planning to do the same.

o Eight states (Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Mississippi, Montana, Ohio, Texas,
and Wyoming) avoided the use of offshore call centers because they hired
EBT contractors that used domestic facilities."



--Jerry Leslie
Note: is invalid for email

[Mike Adams]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote:

>> What's the rest of the story? Were they really charging you for the
>> briefing? Incredible!
>
> He was only joking. But it *did* rock me back for a second...

Whew. I realize it's been awhile since I called for a briefing but this is ridiculous. Sorry for this outburst of
naivete!

Mike

[Eduardo K.]

In article >,
Blanche > wrote:
>>FSS becomes one big call center somewhere in Georgia
>
>Possibly Georgia in the former USSR...or India.
>

Elbonia!


--
Eduardo K. | Darwin pone las reglas.
| Murphy, la oportunidad.
http://e.nn.cl |
| Yo.