Socata Aircraft invited me to its factory in Tarbes, France, in early February to speak at the rollout of a new generation of the company’s single-engine piston aircraft. The new TB20 Trinidad GT, with a sleek new appearance, a three-blade propeller, and more interior space, was presented to some 300 press, distributors, and government dignitaries. My airline flight from Washington, D.C., landed at Charles de Gaulle Airport in Paris on time, and Socata had arranged for a general aviation flight to the factory, some 350 nm to the south.
The pilot, Christian Briand, who generously allowed me to occupy the left seat, conducted a "crew briefing," and when I asked for the destination weather, he produced a fax with a strange cover page. He smiled as I looked at this sheet, with an outline map of France and bold words, Météo en Grève. He asked if I knew the translation, and I did not. With a smile on his face, Briand informed me that it meant the weather service was on strike. He told me this happened a couple of times a year.
This situation made me reflect on our current FAA services in the United States, particularly the flight service station (FSS) system. Many of us have been pilots long enough to remember the more than 300 stations scattered at airports throughout the country. One could walk in, obtain a complete briefing, and then begin a flight with the firsthand knowledge of a qualified specialist. Often these same facilities provided valuable traffic advisories for the local area. The air traffic control specialists who gave the briefings knew the local area and called mountain passes and other weather-sensitive areas by name. In the name of progress, but mainly because of FAA budget concerns, the FSS system was reduced to 61 automated flight service stations (AFSSs), and AOPA was instrumental in keeping auxiliary stations open in some weather-sensitive areas, including 14 in Alaska.
These new AFSS facilities opened during the mid-1980s, but a majority were hidden at airports a considerable distance from where GA aircraft park. The Direct User Access Terminal system (DUATS) was added in 1989, but not all of us are near a computer all of the time.
Before all 61 AFSSs were in place, AOPA heard rumors inside the FAA of further reductions in weather briefing services to pilots. To add fuel to these rumors, specialists were not replaced when they retired, and pay scales encouraged specialists to seek jobs at larger facilities. FAA training of new specialists has been an off-and-on-again situation, making one wonder if a slow death is scheduled for this service that all of us in general aviation hold in such high esteem.
In the early 1990s, a presidential blue-ribbon panel was convened to look at the future of preflight and in-flight weather briefing services for GA pilots. I was privileged to represent GA pilots on this panel, which spent more than six months analyzing data, seeking input, and producing a report. On behalf of AOPA members and all pilots, our position was solid and unwavering, and eventually was the final position of the panel: No matter what new technologies might become available, telephone and in-flight briefings would re-main in place for the foreseeable future. In addition, seeing the increased use of the personal computer, the FAA was to seek a replacement for the aged computer system that would provide better information for the briefing specialist and simultaneously allow DUATS capability. In other words, a pilot might be at his computer at home talking to a briefer on the telephone, and both would be looking at the same text or graphical information.
AOPA has worked hard on this computer replacement program, both with the FAA and in trying to get Congress to understand the small funding requirement needed. It’s a sad fact that radar maps you can view at home, or at your local FBO, are often more up-to-the-minute and detailed than what our AFSS weather briefers can view. The new computer system is called the Operational and Supportability Implementation System (OASIS). The total cost is about $200 million, a small investment compared to other FAA programs. Plus, this investment provides the basis for delivering better weather service, addressing the number one cause of general aviation accidents.
In early 1999, one of our technical affairs staff and I visited the Seattle AFSS, where an OASIS prototype was being tested. During a demonstration and in talking with the specialists, it was evident that this new system had many problems. AOPA worked with the FAA, the union for specialists, and the computer manufacturer, and by midyear it was apparent that the major difficulties had been addressed. The FAA side of the equation appeared to be on track, but late last year the Clinton administration’s budget proposal to Congress cut OASIS funding by some 37 percent.
Although it expresses constant concern about aviation safety, the administration obviously doesn’t put its money where its mouth is. In addition, the White House call for a privatized system might bring future user fees for each weather service contact. In addition, as a private company, could the weather specialists we depend on so heavily end up out of government service, with the ability to go on strike? Seeing that fax page in France made me even more committed to making sure that AOPA continues to fight for the best and most reliable general aviation weather services in the world. We need first-class equipment, trained specialists, and a long-term commitment for our important flight service stations, so that we never face Météo en Grève.
Related Articles
