Lockheed FSS opinions

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 *
************************************************** ***********************

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.

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

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

: '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 *
************************************************** ***********************

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

"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.

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 *
************************************************** ***********************

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"

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 *
************************************************** ***********************