Lockheed FSS opinions

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.

"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.

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 work for a gov't contractor. There is such a term as GCD which is
Government Contractor Defense. Now, I don't know how the FSS contract is
worded, but for the stuff *I* do, if the government agrees with the
requirements & design I've provided to them, I'm covered in court if an
aw**** happens.

Caveat: I am not a lawyer. YMMV.