http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archive...ll.html#195671
In response to Terry Blumenthal's comment on the state of the FSS
system (AVmail, Jun. 25), it sure does show that he doesn't use
the system much. Since October 3, 2005, the FSS has been a private
company competing for your business. A little-known, frequent
government contractor called Lockheed-Martin continues to try to
make it work. With employees queuing up to put in their two-weeks
notice, and only newbie, full of P&V students coming on board, I
don't see it getting any better. It takes years to season a
briefing specialist with the anomalies of local terrain and local
flyers.
I won't go into the "smoke and mirrors" of the selection process,
that is another story. I will comment on what I was told and have
observed. I've been told the computer systems they use are not
state-of-the art like Phil Boyer was exposed to, but a refit of an
older airline-dispatch configuration. Sure, new flat-screen
monitors, the fastest processors, etc. but there must be a reason
the specialists are calling it FS-64 (Commodore?) Does it do the
job? Not from what some of the folks at the Hubs are saying.
Frequent crashes, two and three backup systems to supplement the
data required to complete a full, legal, pilot weather briefing.
Pages of workarounds and back-door solutions. Non-compatibility
with ARTCC HOST computers (perhaps why so many flight plans are
not getting to the ATCTs).
I can go on but it is all old news now. I will say, however,
Lockheed-Martin FSS specialists can (and have) been fired for poor
performance. It is an "at will" position. No union (for now). The
FAA pours fuel on the flames by performing daily "spot" checks on
the briefings. A pilot weather brief can be failed in the eyes of
the "secret shopper" evaluator if it turns out that the specialist
recorded Joe Pilot in the name data of the flight plan form
instead of Joe D. Pilot.
As much as I despise this hostile, underhanded takeover by
Lockheed-Martin, I feel for the former FAA FSS specialists. No
longer are they able to provide quality, tailored, pilot weather
and flight planning services the pilot deserves as they are being
forced to literally cross all their 'T's and dot their 'I's.
Now Congress is getting involved, stating in the Revitalization
Act that the FAA is to provide all these new quality checks and
safeguards. If the FAA reads the contract they awarded
Lockheed-Martin, they will see they are already there. It's
failing folks. As for the other options (Towers, Approach Control,
etc.), stay tuned. Grant Thorton, Inc., has been visiting some
ATCTs ... that is how it all started with FSS. They were "just
doing a study."
Former FSS Briefer
On Thu, 10 Aug 2006 13:43:02 GMT, Larry Dighera
wrote in :
http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsite...0515audit.html
Inspector general to audit FAA-Lockheed Martin flight service contract
To ensure that general aviation pilots are being served properly, the
Transportation Department's inspector general will be auditing the
contract awarded by the FAA last year to have Lockheed Martin Corp.
take over flight service station (FSS) functions. The contract is one
of the largest nondefense-related outsourcing efforts in the federal
government.
The inspector general's office pointed out in a May 8 memo that it
will be assessing whether the FAA has implemented effective plans and
controls to transition FSS to contract operations and that operational
needs of users continue to be met. The audit is planned to begin
sometime this month. AOPA staff has already talked to officials from
the inspector general's office to make sure they understand pilots'
concerns and experiences with FSS operations. In the course of those
conversations, AOPA has offered to survey its members — Lockheed's FSS
customers — and report back to the inspector general's office in order
to help them determine how well Lockheed is performing.
"The FAA and Lockheed Martin must remain accountable to the users,"
said AOPA President Phil Boyer. "This early look at the program and
the associated plans for changes is important to ensure pilots' needs
are met, which is why AOPA is working closely with the inspector
general of the Department of Transportation."
Lockheed Martin's flight services system is called "Flight Services
21" (FS21) and will be a fully integrated nationwide network that
gives all flight service specialists and pilots access to flight plan
information from a single, common database. AOPA had pushed hard for
specific performance guarantees to improve safety and convenience for
GA pilots.
The FAA has limited experience with outsourcing, and the unusually
large contract deals with important safety issues. Under federal law,
agencies are subject to routine monitoring when they award contracts
to the private sector. It is even more important that there be an
independent examination of the contract because of a revised estimate
of the cost savings. Originally, the FAA said that outsourcing FSS
functions would save the taxpayers some $2.2 billion over the life of
the contract. Because of some unanticipated transition costs, the FAA
now pegs the savings at $1.7 billion over 10 years.
In February 2005, the FAA awarded an initial five-year contract to
Lockheed Martin with an option for a five-year extension. The company
will be consolidating 58 flight service stations — excluding three in
Alaska — into 20 facilities. The move toward outsourcing was triggered
by escalating costs associated with the old FSS system, the FAA's
inability to effectively modernize the FSS computer system, and
widespread inefficiencies.
Updated: May 18, 2006, 1:03 p.m. EDT
On Wed, 19 Apr 2006 19:14:53 GMT, Larry Dighera
wrote in :
On Mon, 03 Oct 2005 01:56:45 GMT, john smith wrote in
::
Anyone have any experiences with the new provider?
It looks like LocMart is not able to meet it's cost savings estimates
nor its schedule:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
AVwebFlash Volume 12, Number 16a -- April 17, 2006
-------------------------------------------------------------------
MODERNIZATION TAKES TIME
(http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archive...ll.html#192030)
A massive effort to replace communications and data lines that stitch
together the air traffic control system is (surprise, surprise) behind
schedule and not achieving its financial goals, according to the New
York Times
(http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/09/us...1&oref=slogin).
The contract to replace the system was issued in 2002, awarded to
the Harris Corporation, was supposed to be completed by now, but
the scheduled was extended in December, 2005. Marion C. Blakey,
the administrator of the F.A.A., acknowledged in a recent
interview that it would be "a climb" to stick to the revised
schedule, which calls for completion in December 2007. And the
initial estimate that the new system could save $800 million over
10 years has been revised, with savings now estimated at $600
million over 15 years.
The Times story also says the program has caused three failures that
resulted in flight delays.
The failures have come from a variety of causes. On March 6, the
system lost contact with a radar near Chicago, leading controllers
to hold scores of planes on the ground. The problem was that a new
line had failed and that the old one had been prematurely
disconnected by the F.A.A., the agency acknowledged.
However, Harris Corp., which won the contract to do the conversion,
said in a news release
(http://www.harris.com/view_pressrele...kup&pr_id=1832)
last week that the work is on schedule and will reduce the FAA's
costs. The program, called the FAA Telecommunications Infrastructure,
was awarded to Harris Corp. three years ago, and will replace all the
lines linking 4,400 installations, including remote mountain radio and
radar sites. It's supposed to be done by the end of the year but
likely won't be finished until the end of 2007, according to the Times
story.
http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archive...ll.html#192030