USPA News

WHO IS DRIVING THE BUS TODAY?

(A personal opinion by Steve Uslan)

We all know the FAA when faced with budget shortfalls last came up with the idea of outsourcing the Flight Service Stations (FSS). A contract proposal request was issued and several organizations submitted bids. One of those organizations that submitted bids was a group of current FSS specialists. The FAA awarded the contract to Lockheed Martin who promptly announced the closure of most of the FSS stations around the country and the opening of several (3 or 4) super FSS to service the entire country. I was against this scheme from the beginning, and now I still feel the same way.

What has changed? First several of the losing bidders are litigating the FAA because these bidders were not chosen. Now comes the U.S. House of Representatives that passed an amendment to the Transportation-Treasury-House Appropriations bill terminating the Lockheed-Martin contract before service even begins. Oh yes, there is a mere $350 million dollar penalty if the contract is terminated.

People talk about interminable holds on the phone and briefers who do not have access to all the data in the FAA's system. I have not found this argument persuasive. The current Albuquerque, San Angelo, Fort Worth, or McAlester, OK FSS do not have long waits; even in times of poor weather. I have said before that if the L/M contract goes ahead, we will lose experienced briefers, and no doubt exists that L/M will be back to the bar asking for increases as soon as they can.

The FAA is charged with operating the FSS system. Outsourcing is one way to relieve them of the day to day duties, while still retaining overall control. I am against this whole idea. If the FAA can absorb an increase this year in budget funding, why don't they plow this increase back in the form of uniform radar, additional controllers, and actually do what they are charged by government mandate to do. Control the skies and promote safety.

Now; one other item. Members of Congress are debating a proposed bill that would fine pilots/aircraft owners $100,000 and cause confiscation of their aircraft if an ADIZ violation/penetration occurs in the Washington, DC area and buildings are evacuated. Could someone, anyone, please tell me when the last time was that a Cessna 152 was used to create a terroristic event? I agree that a reasonable monetary fine ($1,000) plus a one year license revocation are in order. Confiscation of an airplane (that was probably rented), I think not. Has anyone connected this issue with the fact that the military wants to be relieved of furnishing satellite information used by all of in GPS navigation? My last questions are these: Will the government fine the pilot/co-pilot of an airliner and confiscate the plane if the crew commits a navigational error in or near the Washington ADIZ? Just who committed the 9/11 acts using what type of equipment? Finally; when you flight plan to Reagan National Airport, where are you going to land first to subject your Cessna 182 to TSA scrutiny, and pick up your mandated armed sky marshall? Inquiring minds want to know.

Why are several of the leaders of other "alphabet" organizations so eager to cozy up to politicians and political hacks? We are being treated as stepchildren. It is time to tell Ms Blakey, enough is enough. We do not want to be made scapegoats for the actions of others. This is solely my opinion and I am not speaking for USPA or anybody else. Feel free to give me an opposing viewpoint if you like.

Steve Uslan