It may be expensive ($15 per pilot contact) but it is still seems necessary
for me personally.

My destinations in the airplane are to out of the way places (including 2P2
just north of you Steve).

I am getting all my WX information over a rotary dial phone, and in some
cases using a void time clearance to depart.
I don't have any form of weather downlink (yet) so I am relying on regular
radio contacts with an AFSS station to
derive a weather picture while aloft. With a tattered laminated copy of the
reporting stations, and a patient briefer
I can derive a very good picture of the current and forecast conditions.

Even when I am not flying in the stone age, in Door County, or rural
Indiana; I used to appreciate talking to a weather specialist to confirm my
appraisal of forecast already derived via DUATS. In the old days, you
could even ask to speak
with the staff meterologist. Now it may have been a hoot to have Todd
Spam-Can challenge the current models based
on his trusty E6B and the winds aloft; but I am convinced the exchanges
augmented my personal safety when operating on the practical limits.

With weather (or perhaps the incapacity to deal with it) being a frequent
component in fatal aviation accidents;
I don't understand the logic in effectively retiring one of our weather
tools.

Todd


"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
...

"YougotitSam" wrote in message
...

Is this how the FAA is trying to kill the FSS system? They have made no
bones about wanting to reduce the coast of the FSS system.


The FAA budget is tight. The FAA needs more money for social programs
rather than silly air traffic control and safety stuff. Who cares about
pilots and air safety anyway?


FSS is costly and unnecessary. Killing it is a very good idea.