More stories of long FSS hold times and another issue

On Fri, 11 May 2007 22:22:17 -0400, "Kyle Boatright"
wrote in
:


My guess is that some beancounter at Lockmart wanted to be a hero and cut
back the number of briefers to below the figure the engineers deemed
necessary.

There should be a penalty clause in the LocMart AFSS contract. Then
LocMart would have an incentive to perform.

On Fri, 11 May 2007 16:56:58 -0400, "Peter R."
wrote in :

In addition to filling out Lockheed Martin's survey and complaint form, I
have also emailed AOPA with my concerns about the above scenario. These
problems with FSS cannot continue.


AOPA attempts to wipe egg from face:

AOPA TAKES FSS COMPLAINTS TO LOCKHEED

When the FAA handed off the Flight Service Station system to
Lockheed Martin more than a year ago, AOPA supported the change
(http://www.avweb.com/avwebflash/leadnews/190692-1.html),
expecting to see improved service. But last week AOPA officials
met with Lockheed to complain
(http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsite...4lockheed.html)
about long hold times, disconnects and lost flight plans. "This is
not the level of service pilots expect," AOPA's Andy Cebula told
Lockheed officials at the meeting. "Lockheed and the FAA must live
up to the standards they set." Many of the problems have been
blamed on computer glitches and on temporary staff shortages as
workers are moved and retrained. Lockheed told AOPA that it plans
to work through all these transitions soon, and pilots should see
an overall improvement in quality by July.
http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archive...ll.html#195162

The inability of LocMart to anticipate computer, staffing, and
training issues BEFORE they impact their performance is sadly
demonstrated by this deluge of FSS user complaints. What prevented
LocMart from through debugging FSS computer systems BEFORE they were
put into service? Why wasn't retraining begun BEFORE moving
personnel? Why weren't additional personnel hired and trained BEFORE
they were needed?

And LocMart's stated TWO MONTH wait for performance improvement
attests to their lack of concern regarding their poor performance.
This avoidable degradation of FSS service establishes the attitude and
lack of concern for the negative impact on the smooth running, and
potential hazards LocMart has introduced into the NAS. And by
implication, this unconcerned nonchalance toward their shortcomings
foretells what may be expected of any private contractor managing the
NAS for profit; when there is no impact on revenue due to poor
service, the contractor has no financial incentive to perform.

The apparent FAA acceptance of LocMart's projected TWO MONTH schedule
to demonstrate improvement in their performance attests to the
administrator's lack of appreciation of the problems caused by
LocMart, and the FAA's apparent lack of diligence in rectifying the
situation in a timely manner. Hopefully the IG's report will point
out LocMart's and the FAA's failures.

On Fri, 11 May 2007 16:56:58 -0400, "Peter R."
wrote:

This past week I spoke with a CFII out of Michigan who lamented that his and
his students hold times awaiting a live FSS briefer had significantly
increased to between 30 minutes to one hour. Coincidentally both AOPA and
Avweb had articles this week discussing the frustration of long hold times
many are experiencing.

Hey Peter,

Last time you posted, I commented that I had NEVER in 13 years of
flying waited more than 1 minute for the Kanakee FSS. Well, of course
that changed within a few days - specifically, the next time I went
flying. I held on the phone for 5 minutes, eventually hung up and
went flying in the local area.

I had previously checked my home PC for reports of NOTAMs and TFRs,
and the weather was CAVU, so the call to WX-BRIEF was for CYA
purposes.

I would be really ****ed if I was trying to get somewhere, especially
if I was IFR and needed a void time for a release. I suppose we can
write to the FAA to complain, and of course cc our good friends at
AOPA.

-Nathan

On Sat, 12 May 2007 08:03:11 -0500, Nathan Young
wrote in
:

I would be really ****ed if I was trying to get somewhere, especially
if I was IFR and needed a void time for a release. I suppose we can
write to the FAA to complain,

And after you fail to receive a satisfactory response from the FAA,
you can e-mail your Congressional representatives, and point out that
the AFSS contractor is accomplishing the exact opposite of what FAA,
at AOPAs urging, got LocMart to promise. Of course, that presumes
that you might want to see future FAA privatization contracts written
with financial penalty clauses in the event such promises/terms are
not met.

http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsite...60623afss.html
From the beginning, AOPA demanded performance standards to hold
Lockheed Martin accountable for the commitments they made to serve
pilots," said Melissa Rudinger, AOPA vice president of regulatory
affairs. "We want to make sure the modernization is done right,
and this Web site allows pilots to report what services are and
aren't working for them."

What customer service standards did Lockheed agree to?

The FAA didn't have performance standards, but Lockheed has set
the bar for high-quality services.

Your phone calls must be answered within 20 seconds and radio
calls within five seconds.

You must receive service from your radio call within 15 seconds.
Pilot reports (pireps) must be processed within 30 seconds and
within 15 seconds if they are urgent.

Briefers must have knowledge of the unique weather conditions in
your area.

They must live up to those standards whether it is a busy, clear
summer day or a slow, dreary day in the winter. And if Lockheed
doesn't live up to those standards, they will face financial
consequences.

"If your telephone or radio call isn't answered promptly, I would
be registering a complaint through their Web site," said Rudinger.
"If pilots report when and where they have service problems,
Lockheed will be able to address and correct those issues."

The modernization of FSS is expected to save taxpayers $1.7
billion over the next 10 years. The FAA initially estimated that
FSS modernization would save taxpayers $2.2 billion over 10 years,
but the agency later revised that cost savings estimate down to
$1.7 billion.



http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsite...050201fss.html
FAA will pay Lockheed $1.9 billion over the course of the 10 years



And if you're unsatisfied with LocMart's AFSS privatization
performance now, how well do you think they might perform if awarded
the NextGen contract:


NEXT FOR LOCKHEED, THE NATIONAL AIRSPACE SYSTEM?
(http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archive...ll.html#192588)
If Lockheed Martin proves successful with the AFSS transition,
will the airspace system be next? The company recently teamed up
with Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University to create the "Airport
of the Future (http://erau.edu/research/erau_research_park.html),"
a technology test bed at Daytona Beach International Airport. This
"teaching airport" will demonstrate how to provide more
comprehensive data to air traffic controllers, airport operators,
security officials and airline dispatchers. "We believe that a
strong transportation infrastructure is critical to our nation's
economic well-being and our citizens' way of life," Judy Marks,
president of Lockheed Martin Transportation and Security
Solutions, said last week



http://sev.prnewswire.com/aerospace-...3062006-1.html)
Currently composed of over 500 certified airports, 35,000 daily
airline flights, 600,000 pilots, 300 sea ports, 2 million rail
cars, and 11 million trucks, the U.S. transportation system must
continuously evolve to safely meet the needs of more travel and
trade.

In article ,
"Morgans" wrote:

"Jim Burns" wrote

Please! Take the time to tell AOPA about the problems we are having with
Flight Service. We need to keep the current "crisis" situation from
becoming the norm and ultimately losing this valuable and necessary
resource.

Wow. All of this from the FAA, who is now solidly in bed (so it would seem)
with the airlines.

All of this is spinning (rapidly) out of control, I fear. Is it too late to
save it?

I would say that the next year, or possibly six months, may decide if
general aviation will survive in any manner that is close to as good as what
we have now.

Is that overly pessimistic?

Heck, I think it's an open question whether the whole COUNTRY will
survive in any manner that is close to as good as what we have now, let
alone GA.

rg

---
* This emoticon deliberately left blank.

"Robert M. Gary" wrote in message
oups.com...
snip

I always require my private and instrument students to call the FSS in
addition to using the computer. For new pilots, its very important to
have a human point out significant issues that may have missed (like a
giant icing AIRMET). I've had student pilots miss the fact that the
destination was reporting 2 SM even though every place inroute was
CAVU or instrument students miss a giant icing AIRMET.


Your student would have found out soon or later :-)

Having put down some tounge and cheek humor I agree. A trained human
weather briefer is better than using the computer yourself. Having had
said, see my new thread on briefers that give bad briefings in an effort to
keep you on the ground -- especially for a few thunderstorms.

Danny Deger
-robert, CFII

On 5/12/2007 9:03:10 AM, Nathan Young wrote:

Last time you posted, I commented that I had NEVER in 13 years of
flying waited more than 1 minute for the Kanakee FSS. Well, of course
that changed within a few days - specifically, the next time I went
flying. I held on the phone for 5 minutes, eventually hung up and
went flying in the local area.

Sorry to read that. Thank big business for that change, I guess.

--
Peter

"Peter R." wrote in message
...
On 5/12/2007 9:03:10 AM, Nathan Young wrote:

Last time you posted, I commented that I had NEVER in 13 years of
flying waited more than 1 minute for the Kanakee FSS. Well, of course
that changed within a few days - specifically, the next time I went
flying. I held on the phone for 5 minutes, eventually hung up and
went flying in the local area.

Sorry to read that. Thank big business for that change, I guess.

So does this mean that you're giving up you computer, your car, that spamcan
you fly?

Does it, hotshot?

"Ron Garret" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Morgans" wrote:

"Jim Burns" wrote

Please! Take the time to tell AOPA about the problems we are having
with
Flight Service. We need to keep the current "crisis" situation from
becoming the norm and ultimately losing this valuable and necessary
resource.

Wow. All of this from the FAA, who is now solidly in bed (so it would
seem)
with the airlines.

And congress.


All of this is spinning (rapidly) out of control, I fear. Is it too late
to
save it?

I would say that the next year, or possibly six months, may decide if
general aviation will survive in any manner that is close to as good as
what
we have now.

Is that overly pessimistic?

Heck, I think it's an open question whether the whole COUNTRY will
survive in any manner that is close to as good as what we have now, let
alone GA.

Leave the FAA as is, and in a dozen years all the spam cans will be
relegated to VFR with virtually NO services.

As the ancient axiom goes, "Be (damn) cafeful what you ask for". (paren'ed
word- mone)

kontiki wrote:
Or 1-800-IFR-CANCEL

The Cancer Research Institute, in NY probably won't be any better at
closing flight plans than LM. They have the WX-CANCEL phone number.

Savannah Electric (has the IFR-CANCel number) may be a bit better, but
they would have to undergo some training.