On Fri, 11 May 2007 16:56:58 -0400, "Peter R."
wrote in :

In addition to filling out Lockheed Martin's survey and complaint form, I
have also emailed AOPA with my concerns about the above scenario. These
problems with FSS cannot continue.


AOPA attempts to wipe egg from face:

AOPA TAKES FSS COMPLAINTS TO LOCKHEED

When the FAA handed off the Flight Service Station system to
Lockheed Martin more than a year ago, AOPA supported the change
(http://www.avweb.com/avwebflash/leadnews/190692-1.html),
expecting to see improved service. But last week AOPA officials
met with Lockheed to complain
(http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsite...4lockheed.html)
about long hold times, disconnects and lost flight plans. "This is
not the level of service pilots expect," AOPA's Andy Cebula told
Lockheed officials at the meeting. "Lockheed and the FAA must live
up to the standards they set." Many of the problems have been
blamed on computer glitches and on temporary staff shortages as
workers are moved and retrained. Lockheed told AOPA that it plans
to work through all these transitions soon, and pilots should see
an overall improvement in quality by July.
http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archive...ll.html#195162

The inability of LocMart to anticipate computer, staffing, and
training issues BEFORE they impact their performance is sadly
demonstrated by this deluge of FSS user complaints. What prevented
LocMart from through debugging FSS computer systems BEFORE they were
put into service? Why wasn't retraining begun BEFORE moving
personnel? Why weren't additional personnel hired and trained BEFORE
they were needed?

And LocMart's stated TWO MONTH wait for performance improvement
attests to their lack of concern regarding their poor performance.
This avoidable degradation of FSS service establishes the attitude and
lack of concern for the negative impact on the smooth running, and
potential hazards LocMart has introduced into the NAS. And by
implication, this unconcerned nonchalance toward their shortcomings
foretells what may be expected of any private contractor managing the
NAS for profit; when there is no impact on revenue due to poor
service, the contractor has no financial incentive to perform.

The apparent FAA acceptance of LocMart's projected TWO MONTH schedule
to demonstrate improvement in their performance attests to the
administrator's lack of appreciation of the problems caused by
LocMart, and the FAA's apparent lack of diligence in rectifying the
situation in a timely manner. Hopefully the IG's report will point
out LocMart's and the FAA's failures.