who uses FSS?

"Dave Butler" wrote in message
...

I can.


So what's the problem then?

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
"Dave Butler" wrote in message
...

I can.



So what's the problem then?

Most people here I think understand the problem. I don't have the time or
interest in explaining it to you. Read the thread, I think you can figure it out
if you want to. If you prefer to be obtuse, OK, that's your choice.

Dave

Remove SHIRT to reply directly.

"John R. Copeland" wrote in message
...

Years ago, FSS publicized they had a way of connecting callers over to a
meteorologist, upon request. Does that still exist? I doubt it.
I don't recall any time in the past fifty years that briefers were
required
to be meteorologists.

On rare occasions, I've encountered briefers who had been meteorologists
in a former life, usually during military service. But when employed as
FSS briefers, their job is to disburse weather data, not interpret it.

In the old days, we pilots could walk into a weather station to get
aviation weather from an actual meteorologist.
That must be the reason they taught us the station model in ground school.


In the old days, prior to 1961, only NWS gave pilot weather briefings. FSS
and it's predecessor facilities could only relay weather reports verbatim.

"Roy Smith" wrote in message
...

A lot of people have the ability to cancel an IFR flight plan right now.
All I need do is call an FSS on the phone and say, "This is N12345, on
the ground at XYZ, cancel IFR" and nobody asks me to prove that I am who
I say I am. For that matter, I can stand on the ramp with a handheld
and pull the same stunt via radio.


A lot of people would have that ability if a lot of people knew N12345 was
on an IFR flight to XYZ. On your typical IFR trips, how many people know
your N-number and destination?



But, in any case, I was talking about a terminal connected to the ATC
system. There is just no good reason (other than continued use of
archaic technology) why a FSS guy in Bridgeport shouldn't be able to
close an IFR flight plan for somebody who just landed at a field in
Texas and is calling in on his Connecticut-based cellphone.


If you're going to imagine a new capability for IFR flight plans why bother
with FSS at all? Why not just route a call to 1-800-IFR-PLAN to the
appropriate ATC position?

Even if it is cancelled with FSS, I don't think that is going to filter to ATC
and result in an automatic cancel without at least querying the pilot.

--
--Ray Andraka, P.E.
President, the Andraka Consulting Group, Inc.
401/884-7930 Fax 401/884-7950
email
http://www.andraka.com

"They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little
temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
-Benjamin Franklin, 1759

"Ray Andraka" wrote in message
...

Even if it is cancelled with FSS, I don't think that is going to filter to
ATC
and result in an automatic cancel without at least querying the pilot.


An IFR flight plan is not cancelled when the pilot calls FSS, it's cancelled
when the FSS then calls ATC.

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:

Not the most expeditious is putting it mildly, especially when you
consider that the needed information is available to the pilot in the
documents the FAA publishes for flight planning purposes.

ATC around here always offers an 800 number for closing the flight plan to
those IFR-ing into untowered fields.

- Andrew

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in
news
A lot of people would have that ability if a lot of people knew N12345
was on an IFR flight to XYZ. On your typical IFR trips, how many
people know your N-number and destination?

My first thought is... "Anyone who paid $9.95 to Flight Explorer."

If you're going to imagine a new capability for IFR flight plans why
bother with FSS at all? Why not just route a call to 1-800-IFR-PLAN
to the appropriate ATC position?

Some of this is not the FAA's problem, it's the phone companies. There
is a mechanism the phone company offers that allows a call to an 800
number to be routed to a "local" service center. Unfortunately, this
was implemented before cell phones. There is NOT a mechanism (that I am
aware of) that allows the calls to be routed based on the LOCATION of
the cell phone, but rather only based on the "licensed" location of the
cell phone... i.e. home.

So if you buy your cell phone in New York, travel to LA, and call FSS -
you get New York FSS. It's dumb, but it's the way it is.

FWIW, I **would** normally have checked the AF/D (which now prints the
local FSS phone numbers), but I had not anticipated the need. The
forecast was for ceilings 6000, which would have easily allowed for both
canceling on the ground and likewise picking up my new clearance
airborne. [Usually good in that area down to about 1200 MSL.] But, as
we all know, there are forecasts, and there is *weather*!

-----------------------------------------------
James M. Knox
TriSoft ph 512-385-0316
1109-A Shady Lane fax 512-366-4331
Austin, Tx 78721
-----------------------------------------------

My experience is that this is completely random. Sometimes my cellphone
gives me the local FSS correspondiong to where I am, sometimes it
gives me Oakland - as it would if I called it from my home airport, except
that there is no cellphone coverage at my home airport.

Generally, implementation of cellphones in the US calls to mind the
observation once made (a long time ago) about Englishwomen's
shoes: that they appear to have been made by someone who has
heard shoes described, but never actually seen one. It blows my mind
that the heart of Silicon Valley has grossly inadequate cellphone coverage,
for example, but it's true. And as for international roaming with a US
phone, good luck.

John

"James M. Knox" wrote in message
...
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in
news
A lot of people would have that ability if a lot of people knew N12345
was on an IFR flight to XYZ. On your typical IFR trips, how many
people know your N-number and destination?

My first thought is... "Anyone who paid $9.95 to Flight Explorer."

If you're going to imagine a new capability for IFR flight plans why
bother with FSS at all? Why not just route a call to 1-800-IFR-PLAN
to the appropriate ATC position?

Some of this is not the FAA's problem, it's the phone companies. There
is a mechanism the phone company offers that allows a call to an 800
number to be routed to a "local" service center. Unfortunately, this
was implemented before cell phones. There is NOT a mechanism (that I am
aware of) that allows the calls to be routed based on the LOCATION of
the cell phone, but rather only based on the "licensed" location of the
cell phone... i.e. home.

So if you buy your cell phone in New York, travel to LA, and call FSS -
you get New York FSS. It's dumb, but it's the way it is.

FWIW, I **would** normally have checked the AF/D (which now prints the
local FSS phone numbers), but I had not anticipated the need. The
forecast was for ceilings 6000, which would have easily allowed for both
canceling on the ground and likewise picking up my new clearance
airborne. [Usually good in that area down to about 1200 MSL.] But, as
we all know, there are forecasts, and there is *weather*!

-----------------------------------------------
James M. Knox
TriSoft ph 512-385-0316
1109-A Shady Lane fax 512-366-4331
Austin, Tx 78721
-----------------------------------------------

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote:
If you're going to imagine a new capability for IFR flight plans why bother
with FSS at all? Why not just route a call to 1-800-IFR-PLAN to the
appropriate ATC position?

Sounds good to me.