“Did We Get What We Were Promised, Or Is It A Relic?"

By John Ylinen

Recently on an aviation forum, there was a discussion about how pilots were using the current FSS and DUAT/DUATS services being provided by the FAA, CSC and Lockheed Martin. The responses were very interesting. Many said that they never used it anymore. That they could get information required under the FARs far easier and faster using Ad-supported, free, or paid private Internet and PC software services. Some said they just called to see if any new TFRs were posted and to CYA for a TFR bust. This article will discuss the current FSS and DUATs products and provide a potential road map for the future. It will also discuss whether the current FSS system is actually causing accident rather than preventing them.

As a brief history, if you learned to fly before the Internet became ubiquitous ... say before 2005, you probably spent time in a FSS talking to the personnel and getting your briefing. There was no other way to access the weather, and flight data. The FSS personnel became your friends and mentors. They greeted each new pilot as an opportunity to share their knowledge and experience to make your flight safe. These offices were at most major airfields. The operation of those 61 offices was costing the FAA and taxpayer $550 million annually or $15 per pilot contact.

In 2005, as the airlines and fractional/charter companies created their own Dispatch services with experts in weather and flight operation to assist their pilots with planning and execution, the FAA awarded an A76 contract to outsource and “Modernize” the FSS system. Lockheed Martin was awarded a $1.9 billion, 10-year contract that is estimated will save the government $2.2 billion. The question is did it provide what was promised and are the remaining consumers of the FSS system getting what they need to safely operate their aircraft?  Is the current FSS a relic of the past?

For the most part, what LMFS put in their proposal and promised has been delivered. There were initial bumps, but the service as specified by the FAA is functioning. The real question is, did the FAA ask for what is required and are they making the system meet the needs of GA pilots now and for the future?  Why aren’t current pilots using the system?  Forums and surveys by AOPA and others show that most are not using it. Why are there so many private flight planning and weather Internet sites?  Even EAA and AOPA offer their own versions. These are costing their membership to have them developed. Why don't EAA and AOPA push the FAA to provide the needed service rather than spending their members' money to provide the required capability?

Unfortunately, in the 2010 Nall report there were 46 weather related accidents of what 26 were fatal. Did these pilots get the information in the form that they needed. Are they getting the same level of service as Airline Dispatch services?  As GA pilots, most of these individuals are not full time pilots. They are not working in the system every day. If any group needs more help and assistance in flight planning and flight operations, it is this group. With the FAA’s 5 year focus on GA safety has the FAA put forth any new ideas for the FSS?  Have they done any surveys or sessions with GA pilots asking what THEY want for their $1.9 Billion and FSS to provide?

Since this writer has not seen any FAA plan or been asked, here is my idea of what the FSS system should provide and what I think most GA pilots would like to see the FSS provide. This is just one simple scenario of what with current and very low cost computer technology could be done.

There is a website for FSS. You fill out the flight you want to make. You could do this by phone (voice) or smartphone/ipad as well. Then you submit the request. It is process and a suggested flight plan is produced using current weather and flight operations data for the aircraft in the user’s profile. A chat window come up (Instant Message Session) and a briefer asks you if you would like to review it with him? You go over the information with the briefer. You see him and he sees you and you talk by voice through your computer (This is optional and the audio could be by telephone if network bandwidth is not adequate). You have a shared session on the computer so you can see the same information that the briefing is seeing about your flight. In the course of looking at the weather, there is some data that is of concern. The Brief then invites one of his colleague, a Meteorologist to join the chat. They review the information with you and you are able to ask questions and get his expert assistance in reviewing the standard charts. He brings up some other products not normally part of a standard briefing to help you better understand what you might experience. During the standard briefing the briefer web page has camera views of your departure, destination, and points along the route so that the METAR and TAF words/data has a picture of what it looks like right now. Why can most of us look at the highway that we drive through the webcam, but we can see the routes we will fly? When you review the route on the webpage, a computer generated view/simulation of what the weather will be liked is shown. Kind of a simulator/rehearsal of your flight. NOTAMS and TFRs are shown visually so that the pilot can get a very good visual and clearly understand what the words in the NOTAM or TFR are saying. There are many PIREPS to review because with NEXTGEN, spot reports can be submitted through the keypads in the avionics for all GA aircraft. Actual weather at different altitudes and routes are now part of the data. The session is recorded and the pilot can even go play it again to review. It is also a history should it need to be reviewed by accident investigators. You update your flight plan after your session and submit it. You immediately get back your clearance from ATC and you can download the data to a USB device so you can load it in our aircraft avionics. You are also able to get a “TripTik” of the plan with all charts, approach plates, and nav data in electronic format so you can use on your IPAD or PC or print out. Oh, and since you are leaving the US, it is automatically submitted to CBP and no need to use their EAPIS system, since you can enter all of your data in the web page in saved profiles that you can maintain. It is continually updated as you fly it and CBP knows your arrival time is changed due to weather or traffic routing.

This is a simple “Standard Briefing” Scenario that could be done today with software/technology that most GA pilots use. A laptop/desktop/ipad device with screen, webcam, and mike. The other thing that is updated/modernized are the weather/notam products. Rather than looking like OLD MAINFRAME printouts, they are very much brought in to the modern world and provide the pilot with all the information in an easy to understand (non-meteorologist) way that they as non-full time pilots can easily understand.

This is what was promised to you in the FSS modernization. This was what was in the LMFS proposal: “Computer-based Interactive Briefings — Pilots will be able to access flight service via a Web portal and receive an interactive briefing. This gives pilots the ability to file flight plans online and see the same charts and weather maps on their computers as the briefer sees.”

The question is, why is the FAA not improving the FSS system?  Why are most pilots using private solutions rather than DUATS and FSS?  The reason is clear, pilot will use what is best and easiest. FAA, CSC and LMFS, are you providing what is needed and what could improve the safety of GA?  Interestingly, the FAA's FSS feedback site lists a userid and password that do not permit access to the site. That kind of says it all; you can’t provide feedback because it simply doesn't work.

FMI: www.faa.gov