Lockheed FSS opinions

[[email protected]]

I it just me, or does it seem like since Lockheed took over the FSS the
briefings have gone from relatively objective to overly conservative? It used to be
that you could talk with a briefer and they'd give you the facts and let you make your
own decision. Maybe with a "VFR not recommended, would you like to file IFR?"
Anymore it seems like when you talk to them they always try to talk you out of a
flight unless it's CAVU.

Anyone else experienced similar?

-Cory

--

************************************************** ***********************
* Cory Papenfuss, Ph.D., PPSEL-IA *
* Electrical Engineering *
* Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University *
************************************************** ***********************

[xyzzy]

wrote:
> I it just me, or does it seem like since Lockheed took over the FSS the
> briefings have gone from relatively objective to overly conservative? It used to be
> that you could talk with a briefer and they'd give you the facts and let you make your
> own decision. Maybe with a "VFR not recommended, would you like to file IFR?"
> Anymore it seems like when you talk to them they always try to talk you out of a
> flight unless it's CAVU.
>
> Anyone else experienced similar?
>
>

It's only a matter of time before someone sues Lockheed after a
weather-related fatality, claiming a faulty briefing or not enough
warning, etc. After all they will be the deepest pocket around, by
far. Lockheed knows this and are covering their asses for that
eventuality.

This is an unanticipated disadvantage of turning a government safety
function like this over to a private company, since the government
couldn't be sued over this kind of stuff so they could give more
objective info.

[Margy Natalie]

wrote:
> I it just me, or does it seem like since Lockheed took over the FSS the
> briefings have gone from relatively objective to overly conservative? It used to be
> that you could talk with a briefer and they'd give you the facts and let you make your
> own decision. Maybe with a "VFR not recommended, would you like to file IFR?"
> Anymore it seems like when you talk to them they always try to talk you out of a
> flight unless it's CAVU.
>
> Anyone else experienced similar?
>
> -Cory
>
I spoke to one controller who said they got lots of new training on
T-Storms right after Scott Crossfield was killed. I'm not sure if that
happened nationwide or more specifically in the DC area as he lived here
and his accident was frequently discussed (and I'm sure there will be a
number of investigations). His funeral is at Arlington this coming
Tuesday at 1:00.

Margy

[gyoung]

I flew across-the-country in June (PHF-OAK and return) in a C-172 and I
exchanged pleasantries with -many- FSS folks - at least once for each of
the 26 hops.

'Tis my impression that they -are- more conservative now, very quick to
say "VFR Not Recommended". One even told me that the FAA's guidance
was, in effect, to provide such advice.

I had to press a few of them to give me specifics, to give me enough
information so I could decide for myself. Only once did I get a less
than satisfactory response.

Having said that, all across the country (northern route) and back
(southern route), the support provided by FSSs and ATC (RFF almost every
mile) was outstanding, and the attitudes of those on the other end of
the radio calls was invariable pleasant and helpful. Only when there
were obvious reasons for them to be busy did I not receive more than the
minimum level of support. Thanks to all those controllers.

george

[[email protected]]

: 'Tis my impression that they -are- more conservative now, very quick to
: say "VFR Not Recommended". One even told me that the FAA's guidance
: was, in effect, to provide such advice.

: I had to press a few of them to give me specifics, to give me enough
: information so I could decide for myself. Only once did I get a less
: than satisfactory response.

Well, that seems to match my experiences. I haven't been flying quite as much in the past
year or so since I've been finishing up my degree, but the few times I have I was dissapointed at
the CYA sentiment. Conservative flying should be up to the PILOT, however, and not up to the
briefer. As expressed above, it's even difficult to *GET* objective information from a briefer once
they've decided that you should take your little Cherokee and go play in the pattern.

To me it seems exactly like the icing scAIRMETS during the winter months. They have
overplayed the card so much that it has become the briefer who cried ice... nobody even pays
attention anymore. Rather unfortunate it seems and less safe for the pilots.

-Cory

--

************************************************** ***********************
* Cory Papenfuss, Ph.D., PPSEL-IA *
* Electrical Engineering *
* Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University *
************************************************** ***********************

[Roy Smith]

I recently got a phone briefing that started off with, "Do you have a
storm scope? <long pause>"

[Gig 601XL Builder]

"xyzzy" > wrote in message
ps.com...
>
> wrote:
>> I it just me, or does it seem like since Lockheed took over the FSS the
>> briefings have gone from relatively objective to overly conservative? It
>> used to be
>> that you could talk with a briefer and they'd give you the facts and let
>> you make your
>> own decision. Maybe with a "VFR not recommended, would you like to file
>> IFR?"
>> Anymore it seems like when you talk to them they always try to talk you
>> out of a
>> flight unless it's CAVU.
>>
>> Anyone else experienced similar?
>>
>>
>
> It's only a matter of time before someone sues Lockheed after a
> weather-related fatality, claiming a faulty briefing or not enough
> warning, etc. After all they will be the deepest pocket around, by
> far. Lockheed knows this and are covering their asses for that
> eventuality.
>
> This is an unanticipated disadvantage of turning a government safety
> function like this over to a private company, since the government
> couldn't be sued over this kind of stuff so they could give more
> objective info.
>

I'll bet that hidden somewhere in the mountain that I'm sure the contract
between the US Government and LM there is protection against just that sort
of thing. I'm not saying that it would hold up in court but it would be a
hurdle that would have to be overcome before your could sue them.

[Kyle Boatright]

> wrote in message
...
> I it just me, or does it seem like since Lockheed took over the FSS the
> briefings have gone from relatively objective to overly conservative? It
> used to be
> that you could talk with a briefer and they'd give you the facts and let
> you make your
> own decision. Maybe with a "VFR not recommended, would you like to file
> IFR?"
> Anymore it seems like when you talk to them they always try to talk you
> out of a
> flight unless it's CAVU.
>
> Anyone else experienced similar?
>
> -Cory
>

They do seem more conservative and seem to give me more information than
before. Personally, I don't need the weather at *every* reporting station
along my line of flight, but that seems to be the current trend.

Like someone said, it may be a liability thing.

KB


> --
>
> ************************************************** ***********************
> * Cory Papenfuss, Ph.D., PPSEL-IA *
> * Electrical Engineering *
> * Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University *
> ************************************************** ***********************
>

[Jay Honeck]

> I it just me, or does it seem like since Lockheed took over the FSS the
> briefings have gone from relatively objective to overly conservative?

I haven't noticed that -- but I *have* noticed that they are quicker to
answer the phone, and MUCH more pleasant.

FSS briefers have always, for the most part, been good folks -- but you
could sure tell the disgruntled old-timers. Now, they are just as nice
as pie, with few exceptions.

(Although I got one this morning who would only give information if
asked directly -- nothing was volunteered. After I hung up I wondered
if it was because I never said the magic words "I need a standard
weather briefing..."?)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[[email protected]]

Jay Honeck > wrote:
: I haven't noticed that -- but I *have* noticed that they are quicker to
: answer the phone, and MUCH more pleasant.

: FSS briefers have always, for the most part, been good folks -- but you
: could sure tell the disgruntled old-timers. Now, they are just as nice
: as pie, with few exceptions.

: (Although I got one this morning who would only give information if
: asked directly -- nothing was volunteered. After I hung up I wondered
: if it was because I never said the magic words "I need a standard
: weather briefing..."?)

I have noticed that the wait on the phone has been better since LM took over... that's true. Seems to be similar
with radio FSS enroute... quicker response. The gloom and doom briefings are the problem.... I do suspect it's a
liability thing.

Also, Jay... I'd be willing to bet that without the magic words "standard weather briefing," they try to tell you
as little as possible. The same way that if you ask for one they go right down the list... surface winds at all airports
along a 600nm route seem a bit excessive... but that's what you get if you ask for "standard."

-Cory

--

************************************************** ***********************
* Cory Papenfuss, Ph.D., PPSEL-IA *
* Electrical Engineering *
* Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University *
************************************************** ***********************

[Bob Noel]

In article . com>,
"Jay Honeck" > wrote:

> (Although I got one this morning who would only give information if
> asked directly -- nothing was volunteered. After I hung up I wondered
> if it was because I never said the magic words "I need a standard
> weather briefing..."?)

I've never ever had to say I wanted a standard briefing, unless I've
indicated I had recently received a briefing.

--
Bob Noel
Looking for a sig the
lawyers will hate

[Doug Vetter]

wrote:
> I it just me, or does it seem like since Lockheed took over the FSS the
> briefings have gone from relatively objective to overly conservative? It used to be
> that you could talk with a briefer and they'd give you the facts and let you make your
> own decision. Maybe with a "VFR not recommended, would you like to file IFR?"
> Anymore it seems like when you talk to them they always try to talk you out of a
> flight unless it's CAVU.
>
> Anyone else experienced similar?

Cory,

I have noticed that a lot more recently from the New York and
Williamsport FSS. I wish I could compare it to the FSS I've used for
years (Millville) but the roof of their building collapsed and they shut
down early. I found the problem most acute while trying to get a
briefing for a flight review with the student present. The student
hadn't called FSS in dog's years, so I figured I'd put the FSS guy on
speakerphone and walk the student through it so he could get the next
briefing on his own, know what to ask for and know what to expect.

We had some spotty thunderstorms in the area and while we didn't intend
to fly that day, I didn't tell the briefer that. He immediately said
"Well, you have some thunderstorm activity out there. VFR flight is not
recommended. Can I help you with anything else?" No detail about where
the thunderstorms are, intensity, speed and direction they were moving,
and any suggested alternate routes like I used to get. Funny. I
thought *I* was the pilot and got to make the go/no-go decision.

When I put on my CFI cap and told him that I needed a full standard
briefing for training purposes he balked and said "well, I have a lot of
other people waiting". I told him I needed a standard briefing and
would get it from him OR his supervisor. He reluctantly granted me each
bit of the standard briefing, but only after I prompted him for
everything "and how about the winds....and the notams, etc." Totally
worthless briefer/briefing, if you ask me. And a clear sign of things
to come if we let these damn airline lobbyists privatize ATC.

-Doug

--------------------
Doug Vetter, ATP/CFI

http://www.dvatp.com
--------------------

[Frank Ch. Eigler]

Doug Vetter > writes:

> When I put on my CFI cap and told him that I needed a full standard
> briefing for training purposes he balked and said "well, I have a
> lot of other people waiting". [...]

Consider it from his point of view. Delaying other folks' calls may
negatively impact *their* safety.

> And a clear sign of things to come if we let these damn airline
> lobbyists privatize ATC.

That's a bit of a leap, isn't it?

- FChE

[John Doe[_2_]]

Yea, that's why I quit calling them.


> wrote in message
...
> I it just me, or does it seem like since Lockheed took over the FSS the
> briefings have gone from relatively objective to overly conservative? It
> used to be
> that you could talk with a briefer and they'd give you the facts and let
> you make your
> own decision. Maybe with a "VFR not recommended, would you like to file
> IFR?"
> Anymore it seems like when you talk to them they always try to talk you
> out of a
> flight unless it's CAVU.
>
> Anyone else experienced similar?
>
> -Cory
>
> --
>
> ************************************************** ***********************
> * Cory Papenfuss, Ph.D., PPSEL-IA *
> * Electrical Engineering *
> * Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University *
> ************************************************** ***********************
>

[john smith]

In article >,
Bob Noel > wrote:

> In article . com>,
> "Jay Honeck" > wrote:
>
> > (Although I got one this morning who would only give information if
> > asked directly -- nothing was volunteered. After I hung up I wondered
> > if it was because I never said the magic words "I need a standard
> > weather briefing..."?)
>
> I've never ever had to say I wanted a standard briefing, unless I've
> indicated I had recently received a briefing.

I ask for an "enroute" briefing.
Is that the same as your standard briefing?

[[email protected]]

john smith > wrote:
> In article >,
> Bob Noel > wrote:

> > In article . com>,
> > "Jay Honeck" > wrote:
> >
> > > (Although I got one this morning who would only give information if
> > > asked directly -- nothing was volunteered. After I hung up I wondered
> > > if it was because I never said the magic words "I need a standard
> > > weather briefing..."?)
> >
> > I've never ever had to say I wanted a standard briefing, unless I've
> > indicated I had recently received a briefing.

> I ask for an "enroute" briefing.
> Is that the same as your standard briefing?

There is no such thing as an enroute briefing.

There is En Route Flight Advisory Service (EFAS), but this is for
inflight updates, pireps, etc.

The preflight briefings are standard, abbreviated, and outlook.

AIM 7-1-4.

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

[Carl Orton]

> It's only a matter of time before someone sues Lockheed after a
> weather-related fatality, claiming a faulty briefing or not enough
> warning, etc. After all they will be the deepest pocket around, by
> far. Lockheed knows this and are covering their asses for that
> eventuality.
>
> This is an unanticipated disadvantage of turning a government safety
> function like this over to a private company, since the government
> couldn't be sued over this kind of stuff so they could give more
> objective info.

I work for a gov't contractor. There is such a term as GCD which is
Government Contractor Defense. Now, I don't know how the FSS contract is
worded, but for the stuff *I* do, if the government agrees with the
requirements & design I've provided to them, I'm covered in court if an
aw**** happens.

Caveat: I am not a lawyer. YMMV.

[Denny]

Well, I fly a bit, if 28 hours in the last 5 weeks is a bit.. I flew
2.9 hours Saturday across Lake Huron into the UP of Michigan and
another 3.1 on Sunday into Southern Lake Erie..
I fly across and around the Great Lakes where: "If you like the
weather, just wait, you won't"... So I talk to FSS all the time...
My experience is that right after the change over you got varied
briefings.. Some had diarrhea of the mouth and some you needed to put
the thumb screws on... This has evened out and I give the Lansing FSS
a two thumbs up now...

What I do is tell the briefer what I want... Example:
"The tail number is xxxx and type is a PA23-150, the equipment is slash
alpha with a non certified GPS moving map... I want to fly VFR
Southwest from Saginaw Michigan to Valpariso, indiana and then East to
the Cleveland area, Medina County airport (or where ever)... Time
inroute is estimated at 5 hours with the stops... Altitude 4500 or
higher...
Departing at 1300 Z, that is 9AM local...
I need the weather along that route, any TFR's, notams for those three
airports and anything affecting my route, and the winds at 3, 6 and
nine.."
And you know what? That is exactly what I get...
Now, if the wx is IFR and I need to file then I ask for, and get, a
standard briefing...

The only difference I now see is that some briefers want to hear the
airport designator and others just want the airport name and state...
Apparently that is still a work in progress...
denny

[Jay Honeck]

> Well, I fly a bit, if 28 hours in the last 5 weeks is a bit.. I flew
> 2.9 hours Saturday across Lake Huron into the UP of Michigan and
> another 3.1 on Sunday into Southern Lake Erie..

Dang, Denny. In the last week I've made the flight around the bottom
of Lake Michigan (from Iowa to Michigan) three times -- 15 hours in 7
days -- and each time, the weather has been completely different.

Yesterday we made it home literally minutes ahead of a huge storm
system, after racing it all the way from Lansing. With a headwind, we
were only able to bump along at around 130 knots, and we had to climb
to 8500 feet to get out of the usual August "5 miles and haze"...

With XM we were able to watch in horror as it bore down on Iowa
City...only to inexplicably stall just west of the city for the last 30
minutes. We were able to land uneventfully within sight of the
lightning and rain.

Flight service forecasts was almost useless on all of these flights, by
the way -- the weather was simply too variable. The simply didn't know
what they didn't know.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[john smith]

In article om>,
"Jay Honeck" > wrote:

> Flight service forecasts was almost useless on all of these flights, by
> the way -- the weather was simply too variable. The simply didn't know
> what they didn't know.

Be fair!
They don't make the weather, they just report it and guess what it is
going to do next. :-))

[Denny]

So you're the guy who keeps flying around the bottom of the lake and
stirring up the crud! Well, ya better change your ways.. I've got to
run the route again this weekend and I don't want crud...

denny

[[email protected]]

Denny > wrote:
: So you're the guy who keeps flying around the bottom of the lake and
: stirring up the crud! Well, ya better change your ways.. I've got to
: run the route again this weekend and I don't want crud...

Yeah... keep it clear. Figuring to fly to Milwaukee area around Labor Day.
Keep the crud down... ;-)

Again... to be fair, FSS explaining buildups is a pretty tough row to hoe....
ESPECIALLY on a cross-country where you don't know where anything is. Hearing "line
building from XYZ to PDQ," takes a LONG time to decipher if you don't know where
either XYZ or PDQ is.

-Cory

--

************************************************** ***********************
* Cory Papenfuss, Ph.D., PPSEL-IA *
* Electrical Engineering *
* Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University *
************************************************** ***********************

[Jim Burns[_1_]]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote
>snip< Flight service forecasts was almost useless on all of these flights,
by
> the way -- the weather was simply too variable. The simply didn't know
> what they didn't know.

I too was in MI over the weekend and watched the weather on NOAA's ADDS
site, which from my short term memory I felt was dead on. (although I tend
to subconsciously filter out things that won't effect an easy IFR flight)
The FA's were calling for scattered thunderstorms, some severe for both
eastern IA and central WI to begin around 7pm local. I decided that would
be my deadline to be home. (and what's the deal with every time a
thunderstorm is predicted they also add that stupid disclaimer about "some
possibly severe producing strong and damaging winds with possible hail up to
and inch and 1/2 in diameter...bla bla bla... gees! that drives me nuts IS
there a thunderstorm that isn't capable of that??!) ooopps... off soapbox

We decided that we were better off heading for home early rather than later
on Sunday, just in case we needed to play aerial taxi for those
globetrotting Honeck kids. Around 8am I used ADDS to get another update on
the weather then called Lansing to file. The briefer asked if I had the
weather and advisories, I had, and he really sounded like he couldn't care
less. I asked for TFR's and his name and he made a point of emphasizing
that no TFR's existed at that exact moment. Once we knew that our pond
hopping IFR taxi service wouldn't be needed, we took off into crystal blue
skys. 1:30 hrs later we were home and I shot a DME arc into 21 at STE just
for fun. Life is good.

As 7pm approached the storms rolled in ahead of the cold front but produced
relatively little precip. It was the precip that was scattered, not the
storms, as the squall line slowly approached. Winds varied greatly as I
checked airports both closer to the front and higher in altitude. It would
not been fun nor wise to think that one could pick his way through that
squall line. There were several gaps, one near Dubuque and another near
Stevens Point, but the turbulence and wind would have been wicked. As I
watched the weather on XM it felt good to be on the ground holding onto a
cold one rather than in the air holding a yoke.

Jim

[[email protected]]

: Stevens Point, but the turbulence and wind would have been wicked. As I
: watched the weather on XM it felt good to be on the ground holding onto a
: cold one rather than in the air holding a yoke.

I jealously listen to all of your tales of wicked weather... backed up by weather on XM. Must
be nice.

Summer flying weather sucks VFR, and sucks harder IFR. Now, if only the FAA were to *provide*
datalink service like that for everybody... that'd be some service!

-Cory

--

************************************************** ***********************
* Cory Papenfuss, Ph.D., PPSEL-IA *
* Electrical Engineering *
* Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University *
************************************************** ***********************

[xyzzy]

wrote:
> : Stevens Point, but the turbulence and wind would have been wicked. As I
> : watched the weather on XM it felt good to be on the ground holding onto a
> : cold one rather than in the air holding a yoke.
>
> I jealously listen to all of your tales of wicked weather... backed up by weather on XM. Must
> be nice.
>
> Summer flying weather sucks VFR, and sucks harder IFR. Now, if only the FAA were to *provide*
> datalink service like that for everybody... that'd be some service!
>

ADS-B