So the next time a pilot does something ridiculousy stupid, whether directly in dealing with me, or even if I only hear of it happening to someone else, I should then assume that ALL pilots are the same...? And even if I have only one little piece of the picture, I should then fill in the rest of the blanks with my own imagination?

And FYI...at some stations, FSS are working more then one MF....just because you can't hear them talking, doesn't mean they aren't busy with something else on a different frequency.

Brown Bear wrote:WOXOF, your whole post is a smoke screen, that some of us can see through.

Huh???? Smoke screen? I think you're smoking something, that's for sure.

Just telling it like it is. I can tell you though, that I can't remember the last time I refused to pass along a weather. But I certainly wouldn't hesitate to deny a pilot the local weather if an issue/duty came up that I deemed a higher priority.

Be assured though that safety is always # 1, that is how we prioritize. So if that means the big Brown Bear doesn't always get the same service he gets at the Holiday Inn, oh well....................

W0XOF wrote: Just telling it like it is. I can tell you though, that I can't remember the last time I refused to pass along a weather. But I certainly wouldn't hesitate to deny a pilot the local weather if an issue/duty came up that I deemed a higher priority

That's what's weird here. Nobody would expect you to ignore a higher priority call/situation to give the wx. Must admit, I've never been refused a simple request from most FSS units. And you just know how popular I can be. Maybe just a "We're really busy mate, call 122.*&"

To be clear - a Lear 120 out and asking for the WX on the MF - not critical....yet. If denied on the MF another freq should be given and preferably a reason. However, that Lear 120 out may be bingo fuel and needing to make an alternate decision..as in now. The weather becomes pretty fucking important at that point.

I have to admit I have an unhidden agenda to my rant. Back when I was a pup FSS was there for the WX first and foremost. NOTAM breifings in person came second. Except for once at a small Alberta airport most were always professional and helpful. Now I'm sensing a slide towards pretend ATC...making sure a snow plow is off the runway at an uncontrolled airport. You know the pilot is responsible to make sure the runway is clear at uncontrolled airports right? That may be what you are told to do...but that don't make it right.

Unless you are legally allowed (and responsible) to say the magic phrase "cleared to land", I'm sorry but the "advisory" is right up there with refusing me the WX because VFR was not recommended. Everyone needs to know their place and ultimate responsibility in aviation or bad things happen quickly. FSS being misled into thinking they are anything other than a service to pilots is totally wrong IMHO.

FamilyGuy wrote: Now I'm sensing a slide towards pretend ATC...making sure a snow plow is off the runway at an uncontrolled airport. You know the pilot is responsible to make sure the runway is clear at uncontrolled airports right?

How is the pilot going to know if a vehicle is on the runway, when doing an approach to minimums, in half mile vis, and the vehicle at the other end of a mile long runway heading towards said pilot?

The airport may be uncontrolled, but the vehicles ARE controlled by the FSS.

FamilyGuy wrote:To be clear - a Lear 120 out and asking for the WX on the MF - not critical....yet. If denied on the MF another freq should be given and preferably a reason. However, that Lear 120 out may be bingo fuel and needing to make an alternate decision..as in now. The weather becomes pretty fucking important at that point.

I have to admit I have an unhidden agenda to my rant. Back when I was a pup FSS was there for the WX first and foremost. NOTAM breifings in person came second. Except for once at a small Alberta airport most were always professional and helpful. Now I'm sensing a slide towards pretend ATC...making sure a snow plow is off the runway at an uncontrolled airport. You know the pilot is responsible to make sure the runway is clear at uncontrolled airports right? That may be what you are told to do...but that don't make it right.

Unless you are legally allowed (and responsible) to say the magic phrase "cleared to land", I'm sorry but the "advisory" is right up there with refusing me the WX because VFR was not recommended. Everyone needs to know their place and ultimate responsibility in aviation or bad things happen quickly. FSS being misled into thinking they are anything other than a service to pilots is totally wrong IMHO.

Family Guy, why would you open your mouth without any knowledge of what you are talking about and show your ignorance. Really doesn't help when you try to make a point.

For the record, FSS (or pretend ATC, just like your pretend knowledge) have been tasked with providing Vehicle Control Service since after the YXC crash in 1978. Over 30 years now and you didn't know that?

Oh BTW, Transport Canada says we are legally allowed (and responsible) to control vehicles. No sorry, make that legally bound to control vehicles. Exact same vehicle control service from a control tower.

Local Flight Service Stations are no longer like the full service sites pre FIC. You the user allowed this to happen.

When denied weather, the FIC frequency will always be given.

Since we have a MANOPS which has to be followed to a "T", constant tape and over the shoulder monitoring, Nav Canada audits and Transport Canada audits every two years, I think we know our place in aviation. Maybe you should stop by for a visit.....

W0XOF wrote:Maybe you should stop by for a visit.....

I for one think this is an excellent idea and think this would be time well spent. Were you serious? Can someone just "drop in" or is there some sort of procedure that has to be followed? I am only a short flight away from the London FIC.

PAJ wrote:I for one think this is an excellent idea and think this would be time well spent. Were you serious? Can someone just "drop in" or is there some sort of procedure that has to be followed? I am only a short flight away from the London FIC.

It depends on the site on how easy it is to drop in. In the case of London, they still do walk-in briefings so you can drop in unannounced anytime and they'd be happy to show you around.

Sounds like a plan then. Thanks hydro

I've seen examples of the "slide to pretend ATC". YTH used to be famous for it.
FSS is required to control ground traffic.
FSS is an advisory service for pilots.
I'd like to be able to say "I don't like this or that...." without WOXOF taking it as a personal attack.
I think we do with a lot less talk on the MF when conflicting traffic is involved. We (after we are advised that said traffic exists) are better at sorting out conflicts than you are. And, by being allowed to do so will reduce radio calls by more than 50%. That's my pet peeve. That, and the dreaded RSC!

Doc wrote: I'd like to be able to say "I don't like this or that...." without WOXOF taking it as a personal attack.

If you perhaps presented it in that manner it would NOT seem a personal attack. You do tend to disparage FSS on a regular basis, which usually comes across as "why don't all you FSS just sit there and shut up?" As has been said before, if you have a particular beef with a particular FSS on a particular day, call the customer service 800 number or their site manager with the details.

lilfssister wrote:

Doc wrote: I'd like to be able to say "I don't like this or that...." without WOXOF taking it as a personal attack.

If you perhaps presented it in that manner it would NOT seem a personal attack. You do tend to disparage FSS on a regular basis, which usually comes across as "why don't all you FSS just sit there and shut up?" As has been said before, if you have a particular beef with a particular FSS on a particular day, call the customer service 800 number or their site manager with the details.

Point taken. In the future, expect the phone calls.

FamilyGuy wrote:To be clear - a Lear 120 out and asking for the WX on the MF - not critical....yet. If denied on the MF another freq should be given and preferably a reason. However, that Lear 120 out may be bingo fuel and needing to make an alternate decision..as in now. The weather becomes pretty fucking important at that point.

That latest weather should be available from the FIC. Should the weather indicate a need to find an alternate destination, they will have to contact the FIC for further information on weather at other sites, anyway. The FIC specialists DO keep a watch on actual, forecast and inflight weather for a large area. At an Airport Advisory site specialists are only required to be aware of the weather conditions in the immediate vicinity of our own airport (or airports if we are doing RAAS at additional site(s)).

In addition, Advisory sites usually have limited NOTAM information, while the FICs have everything. So again, to ensure you get everything needed to make that alternate decision, the FIC is the place to contact.

Hey, lay off the FSS... everytime someone asks for the weather I have to take my feet off the desk, and put my book down. Have some considerence 'eh?

Seriously though, we are (or used to be) trained to tell the pilot to contact the FIC, as they can provide a full briefing. So a complaint to a manager will do nothing.

natej, the discussion started with a refusal to give an aircraft weather for the site where the FSS was located. There was a directive, after the start up of the FICs that we give local weather on request, prioritizing with other duties of course, when it was misinterpreted by some that we give NO weather-including our own.

W0XOF wrote:

FamilyGuy wrote:To be clear - a Lear 120 out and asking for the WX on the MF - not critical....yet. If denied on the MF another freq should be given and preferably a reason. However, that Lear 120 out may be bingo fuel and needing to make an alternate decision..as in now. The weather becomes pretty fucking important at that point.

I have to admit I have an unhidden agenda to my rant. Back when I was a pup FSS was there for the WX first and foremost. NOTAM breifings in person came second. Except for once at a small Alberta airport most were always professional and helpful. Now I'm sensing a slide towards pretend ATC...making sure a snow plow is off the runway at an uncontrolled airport. You know the pilot is responsible to make sure the runway is clear at uncontrolled airports right? That may be what you are told to do...but that don't make it right.

Unless you are legally allowed (and responsible) to say the magic phrase "cleared to land", I'm sorry but the "advisory" is right up there with refusing me the WX because VFR was not recommended. Everyone needs to know their place and ultimate responsibility in aviation or bad things happen quickly. FSS being misled into thinking they are anything other than a service to pilots is totally wrong IMHO.

Family Guy, why would you open your mouth without any knowledge of what you are talking about and show your ignorance. Really doesn't help when you try to make a point.

For the record, FSS (or pretend ATC, just like your pretend knowledge) have been tasked with providing Vehicle Control Service since after the YXC crash in 1978. Over 30 years now and you didn't know that?

Oh BTW, Transport Canada says we are legally allowed (and responsible) to control vehicles. No sorry, make that legally bound to control vehicles. Exact same vehicle control service from a control tower.

Local Flight Service Stations are no longer like the full service sites pre FIC. You the user allowed this to happen.

When denied weather, the FIC frequency will always be given.

Since we have a MANOPS which has to be followed to a "T", constant tape and over the shoulder monitoring, Nav Canada audits and Transport Canada audits every two years, I think we know our place in aviation. Maybe you should stop by for a visit.....

Read this line again "that may be what you are told to do but that don't make it right".

You can be legally bound to do vehicle safety inspections for all I care - you still can't say "Cleared to land" and you still are not responsible to make the decision whether landing on a particular runway is safe or not regardless of what you do with the snowplows. Tell me I'm wrong.

I know pretty well what the rules are and I think I have a pretty good idea where all this is sliding to....I actually don't begrudge any FSS types for wanting more - it's just that it has to be an above board open decision by all players - not just a company trying to cut costs and workers trying to protect their own. Then there needs to be training, licensing standards, communication of who can say what and when....

Ironically, I spoke with some IFR buds today who said they give out WX all the time on freq - metars, tafs, RCS's etc. So ATC can give out WX while being responsible for IFR separation but FSS has other more pressing duties? WTF indeed.

FamilyGuy wrote:

Read this line again "that may be what you are told to do but that don't make it right".

You can be legally bound to do vehicle safety inspections for all I care - you still can't say "Cleared to land" and you still are not responsible to make the decision whether landing on a particular runway is safe or not regardless of what you do with the snowplows. Tell me I'm wrong.

I know pretty well what the rules are and I think I have a pretty good idea where all this is sliding to....I actually don't begrudge any FSS types for wanting more - it's just that it has to be an above board open decision by all players - not just a company trying to cut costs and workers trying to protect their own. Then there needs to be training, licensing standards, communication of who can say what and when....

Ironically, I spoke with some IFR buds today who said they give out WX all the time on freq - metars, tafs, RCS's etc. So ATC can give out WX while being responsible for IFR separation but FSS has other more pressing duties? WTF indeed.

You do know that the duty FSS is not just making up the rules to make their lives easier? Most of us don't WANT more. Compensation has not kept pace with additional duties and responsibilities over the years.

We're doing what MANOPS, ATSAMM, MANOBS, CARS and our UOMs tell us to do. SO therefore, it IS right. We do have rules that say what we can say and when. We have training. And recurrent training. We have Operational skill and Communication skill proficiency reviews every six months. We have a KVT every year. We have OIIs. We're not just making things up to suit ourselves.

If we don't have ATIS we give out METAR, RSCs, etc. If we are busy (even though the one aspect (MF) pilots can hear may not sound busy) we send people to the FIC frequency so THEY CAN GET WHAT THEY WANT FASTER. Some of the information requested we DO NOT HAVE, so we send them to the FIC frequency.

I really don't know why some of you have such a hard time understanding this. A poster or two mentions a problem with a communication on occasion from the thousands FSS have daily, and the band wagon is overflowing.

respectfully,

i think the major complaint from the pilot is that navcanada has reduced our local FSS to a robot. we key the mic and are often responded to by what sounds like a robot at the other end instead of a living person. it's sad and unfortunate that navcanada has reduced you to this. you deserve better as your services can be extremely helpful. robots can't always meet my needs, especially when i don't have the owner's manual.

Brown Bear wrote:GN, you're correct of course. We really are up here because you're down there. Just one more example of "service" going the way of the dodo bird. That's not my job. That's your story, and you're welcome to stick to it. Just don't bother asking us to give you ceiling checks etc. It's not my job. I jest of course...but you do get it, no?

Oh, here's a good one one I missed earlier!

Yup, those PIREPs on arrival and departure are for FSS's benefit! We are really worried about icing and turbulence and ceiling height affecting us personally.

Good grief...

Hey lilfssister, not to get off topic, but what is it with "the Leader of the application of the search function?" as your sig??

Somebody called an unspecified moderator a "thread nazi" for posting "view topic" links and then locking redundant threads.

ZZZ

DP

lilfssister wrote:

FamilyGuy wrote: Now I'm sensing a slide towards pretend ATC...making sure a snow plow is off the runway at an uncontrolled airport. You know the pilot is responsible to make sure the runway is clear at uncontrolled airports right?

How is the pilot going to know if a vehicle is on the runway, when doing an approach to minimums, in half mile vis, and the vehicle at the other end of a mile long runway heading towards said pilot?

The airport may be uncontrolled, but the vehicles ARE controlled by the FSS.

Ah therein lies the rub.

How does the pilot know at any other airport not served by FSS or an FIC?

If it's busy enough to warrant snow removal AND have IFR service, then it deserves to be controlled. That should have been the recomendation out of YXC in 78. The actual reaction was all about $$$$

Here's a link to the transcript:

http://www.planecrashinfo.com/cvr780211.htm

Alot more went wrong than just FSS not controlling vehicles.

Read this line again "that may be what you are told to do but that don't make it right".

You can be legally bound to do vehicle safety inspections for all I care - you still can't say "Cleared to land" and you still are not responsible to make the decision whether landing on a particular runway is safe or not regardless of what you do with the snowplows. Tell me I'm wrong.

Familyguy. You are wrong. If you think that for one minute that if you land on a runway with a vehicle on it and I hadn't asked you to overshoot that I wouldn't lose my job, your delusional. Even though the final responsibility is the pilots (just as at a controlled airport I might add) it is my job to ensure that the runway is safe to land on.

What don't you get about this?

"that may be what you are told to do but that don't make it right".

Just because that's what you think, doesn't make your statement true. Far from it. Like a little kid who covers their eyes to make something bad go away.

ATS operational duties/jobs (that includes FSS whether you want to believe it or not) are some of the most regulated in the Country. You think we make the job up as we go? If it's good enough for the Minister of Transport it should be good enough for you.

How would have putting a tower in YXC after the crash been the thing to do? No crashes since with the FSS there.

There always seems to be one like you in every forum. Pick any topic. Just like the 55 yr old man that you see on every beach during every vacation that wears the leopard print thong with the bad hair and George Hamilton tan.

You can think what you want. Must be little plane syndrome. Even Doc isn't backing you up.