got a call from BDR FSS

On Sun, 19 Aug 2007 09:16:55 -0700, Luke Skywalker
wrote in
.com:


There are two questions about the FSS "modernization" which are in
play.

The first is a tactical one, can Lockmart provide the service that
pilots need to fly safely? My guess is that eventually things improve
and get better.

Given the structure LockMart has imposed on privatized FSS, it is
unlikely that briefers with local metrological knowledge will ever be
available again as they were pre-privatization. That is not an
improvement in service nor will it get better.

The more pressing one, the one that AOPA and others seemed to
completly fall down on, is what is the role of aviation in The
Republic and what is the role of the government in aviation. I
realize that to some degree this is politics and I"ll try and stay out
of that.


https://www.reason.org/atcreform09.shtml
Air Traffic Control Reform Newsletter

Issue No. 9
December 2002

By Robert Poole


Controllers, FAA Mistaken on Privatization

Holiday travelers can expect to be greeted at many airports by
off-duty air traffic controllers protesting an alleged Bush
Administration plan to "farm out to the lowest bidder" their
vitally important jobs. In response, the Federal Aviation
Administration has managed to muddy the waters, rather than
defending the validity of what the Bush folks are actually doing.

First, let's clarify the specific change in federal policy which
the President announced last June. He signed a one-sentence
executive order re-affirming that air traffic control (ATC) is not
"inherently governmental." That order overturned a last-minute
executive order issued by President Clinton, which slipped the
"inherently governmental" language into a broader directive on
reforming ATC. Most aviation experts agree that ATC is a high-tech
service business, which can be provided either by government or by
commercial entities—always operating under stringent governmental
safety regulation. It's the safety regulation that most would
agree is inherently governmental. ...


If ATC isn't inherently governmental, why did the government shut it
down immediately after the September 11, 2001 attacks?

But privatization of the FSS system sends a clear message that
nurturing aviation a[n]d maintaining its viability at all levels is no
longer a function of the government of The Republic...It is that
simple.

Sort of like letting the Arabs run the US ports, right?

I think we will all come to regret that as events move forward,
particularly as the next step unless there is a change in thinking in
DC is that the ATC system is next.

You think? :-(

If you like how the space shuttle system is operated...you will love
Lock Mart running the FSS.

Robert

You forgot to mention dismantling the world's safest ATC system and
replacing it with a vulnerable satellite-based system, user fees, and
handing the National Airspace System over to the corporate airline
industry. Perhaps the Bush administration can award a non-competitive
ATC contract to the Arabs instead. :-(

On Thu, 16 Aug 2007 20:30:46 -0700, Jay Honeck
wrote in .com:

Once they've got the right staffing levels,
and their computer systems working together properly, I think we're
gonna like what we see

With the exception of briefers with local metrological knowledge as we
had before the FSS privatization, what do you think we're going to
like about the new FSS?

I've already noticed that the new briefers are treating me like the
CUSTOMER, not an annoyance, as some of the gummint FSS guys would
occasionally do. It's a matter of attitude and tone which makes
calling them much more pleasant.

Personally, I would prefer not trade a briefer with local metrological
knowledge for one adept at shmoozing.

They also clearly have access to superior computer equipment, and are
being encouraged to use every tool at their disposal to help us,
including websites like ADDs. This was NOT the case with the old FSS
guys, whom I often found were using less-capable weather forecasting
tools than I was.

Aviation Digital Data Service was an experimental service, and as
such, it wasn't accepted by FAA for use in complying with preflight
regulations. I guess that has evolved now.

Finally, the fact that many of the new guys are real pilots sure gives
me a sense of confidence that I'm talking to someone who actually
walks the walk. I rarely had the impression with old FSS.

How do you fell about FSS privatization paving the way for ATC user
fees?

How do you fell about FSS privatization paving the way for ATC user
fees?

I don't see the issues as related at all, despite what the FAA may
wish, or AOPA may imply.

User's fees are a dumb, inefficient way to collect taxes, whether the
people working the tower are gummint or private employees.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

On Sun, 19 Aug 2007 19:52:17 GMT, Larry Dighera
wrote:

Personally, I would prefer not trade a briefer with local metrological
knowledge for one adept at shmoozing.

You always mention "local knowledge".

Do you ever leave the area of the FSS that you've called? Personally,
I'm much more interested in the arrival conditions vs. my departure
conditions. The FSS briefer that I talk to in person were always on
the departure end.

Well, the nose of the camel is having the gummint require us to check
in with ATC on every flight (and pay their fees) as is common in some
european countries...

As far as me personally, ATC could vanish and it would affect me very
little - and that 'little' could be worked around... I file IFR less
and less... When I do not file IFR I do not need ATC...
I can, do, and have, flown from one border of this country to the
other without talking to ATC...
Without ATC, if the weather is IFR I would have to lay over until it
improves... That would affect roughly 10% of my trips... From my
point of view an acceptable price for having the gummint off my
back...

denny

Warning... thread drift.

After watching 60 Minutes last night, I am more convinced than ever that
Lock Mart is a disaster and the federal government is so in bed with
them that we're screwed.

On Mon, 20 Aug 2007 04:30:58 -0700, Denny wrote
in . com:

As far as me personally, ATC could vanish and it would affect me very
little - and that 'little' could be worked around... I file IFR less
and less... When I do not file IFR I do not need ATC...
I can, do, and have, flown from one border of this country to the
other without talking to ATC...

Out here in the Los Angeles basin, the air traffic is so thick, that I
wouldn't consider not using Radar Advisory Service on VFR flights. But
if I had to pay for it, I might reconsider that decision.

Privatized, user fee based, ATC must necessarily negatively impact air
safety, because it provides a disincentive (dollar price) against the
use of aviation services meant to enhance safety.

"Larry Dighera" wrote in message ...
On Mon, 20 Aug 2007 04:30:58 -0700, Denny wrote
in . com:

As far as me personally, ATC could vanish and it would affect me very
little - and that 'little' could be worked around... I file IFR less
and less... When I do not file IFR I do not need ATC...
I can, do, and have, flown from one border of this country to the
other without talking to ATC...

Out here in the Los Angeles basin, the air traffic is so thick, that I
wouldn't consider not using Radar Advisory Service on VFR flights. But
if I had to pay for it, I might reconsider that decision.

Privatized, user fee based, ATC must necessarily negatively impact air
safety, because it provides a disincentive (dollar price) against the
use of aviation services meant to enhance safety.


If, with a simple box upgrade, you could be sure that you knew where all the traffic was, would you still want the radar
advisories?

think ADS/B

After hearing all these horror stories, I am so glad that FSS up here in
Alaska has not been privatized.

On Mon, 20 Aug 2007 18:31:53 -0400, "Blueskies"
wrote in
:


"Larry Dighera" wrote in message ...
On Mon, 20 Aug 2007 04:30:58 -0700, Denny wrote
in . com:

As far as me personally, ATC could vanish and it would affect me very
little - and that 'little' could be worked around... I file IFR less
and less... When I do not file IFR I do not need ATC...
I can, do, and have, flown from one border of this country to the
other without talking to ATC...

Out here in the Los Angeles basin, the air traffic is so thick, that I
wouldn't consider not using Radar Advisory Service on VFR flights. But
if I had to pay for it, I might reconsider that decision.

Privatized, user fee based, ATC must necessarily negatively impact air
safety, because it provides a disincentive (dollar price) against the
use of aviation services meant to enhance safety.


If, with a simple box upgrade, you could be sure that you knew where all the traffic was, would you still want the radar
advisories?

think ADS/B


Of course, ADS/B will only "see" transponder equipped aircraft, so it
is not able to provide positional information on ALL aircraft traffic.
Have you any idea of the cost to equip a typical GA aircraft with
ADS/B? Do you agree, that the expense may delay such installations
infinitely?

Doesn't it make more sense to have a few ground-based radar
installations for traffic separation rather than the hundreds of
thousands of ADS/B installations for it to work?

Unless ALL aircraft (including the military) are equipped with ADS/B,
there will be potentially conflicting air traffic that will not be
flagged, won't there?

What is a reasonable period of time to expect ALL aircraft to be ADS/B
equipped?

What is a reasonable period of time to expect FAA Traffic
Information Service–Broadcast (TIS–B) installations to provide
coverage of the entire NAS?

Is ADS/B infallible; is it able to provide absolute confirmation of
the location of conflicting traffic, or does it rely upon the validity
of the information provided by all ADS/B equipped flights?

In the case of low-level flights in sparsely populated areas (such as
military aircraft on MTR routs), how well will ADS/B function for air
traffic deconfliction given its line-of-sight communications
limitations and the military's workaround approach to ADS/B equipping
for military aircraft?*

What sort of backup system will be available for deconflicting air
traffic in the event of a GPS outage as may occur at the next, and
succeeding, periodic eleven-year solar maxima** due to possible CME
events?

As you can see, I am thinking about, not only ADS/B, but
satellite-based NextGen ATC too, and I'm wondering what sort of backup
plan the FAA has to separate aircraft when GPS and radio
communications become unreliable?



*
http://www.mitre.org/work/tech_paper...relli_adsb.pdf



**
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_maximum
Historic maximums
The last solar maximum was in 2001, and on March 10, 2006 NASA
researchers announced that the next cycle would be the strongest
since the historic maximum in 1958 in which northern lights could
be seen as far south as Mexico. [1] This projection was based on
research done by Mausumi Dikpati of the National Center for
Atmospheric Research (NCAR).





http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2...htm?list862664
Solar Storm Warning

03.10.2006

+ Play Audio | + Download Audio | + Historia en Español | + Email
to a friend | + Join mailing list

March 10, 2006: It's official: Solar minimum has arrived. Sunspots
have all but vanished. Solar flares are nonexistent. The sun is
utterly quiet.

Like the quiet before a storm.

This week researchers announced that a storm is coming--the most
intense solar maximum in fifty years. The prediction comes from a
team led by Mausumi Dikpati of the National Center for Atmospheric
Research (NCAR). "The next sunspot cycle will be 30% to 50%
stronger than the previous one," she says. If correct, the years
ahead could produce a burst of solar activity second only to the
historic Solar Max of 1958.

That was a solar maximum. The Space Age was just beginning:
Sputnik was launched in Oct. 1957 and Explorer 1 (the first US
satellite) in Jan. 1958. In 1958 you couldn't tell that a solar
storm was underway by looking at the bars on your cell phone; cell
phones didn't exist. Even so, people knew something big was
happening when Northern Lights were sighted three times in Mexico.
A similar maximum now would be noticed by its effect on cell
phones, GPS, weather satellites and many other modern
technologies.