Author Topic: New FAA CWO to LAWRS Transition Plan from May 14, 2015 Meeting  (Read 16201 times)

Offline skobie

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 1
Hi guys,

I have never posted on here as I am not an air traffic controller, but I thought this is something you should all be aware of. I was looking for some ATC forums to post this info to and I think I have found one. To summarize, like you may be aware from 2 years ago, the FAA again has plans to transfer several dozen weather observing stations from CWO to LAWRS. Some of you may already be LAWRS observers in addition to ACT specialists. Unlike 2 years ago, the FAA is "only" planning to initially transition 57 stations (out of approximately 140) around the US. If that's not bad enough, I believe this is just a cover until the FAA can try to transfer all CWOs to LAWRS. They're just using the divide and conquer method this time because they didn't get their way last time.

If you don't like what you are about to read, then please advise your ATC managers that it is a bad idea. Many of them probably don't even know about this transition plan yet, so feel free to show them it. The FAA plans to start soliciting ATC personnel starting in mid July, with some suggesting a possible changeover as early as October 1 of this year! However, it would be nice if they/you had a heads up. If the FAA gets enough pushback, I don't believe it will happen. So that is where you guys can help. You may be surprised to find your site on the transition list at the end of the document. This document is official:

Thank You For Any Help,
Weather Observer
« Last Edit: August 06, 2015, 11:56:15 PM by skobie »

Offline FLLflyboy

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 24
Re: New FAA CWO to LAWRS Transition Plan from May 14, 2015 Meeting
« Reply #1 on: November 27, 2015, 09:50:47 PM »
This is a bad idea. We are controllers, not meteorologists or weather observers. It is our job to keep airplanes from hitting each other, not to predict what the clouds will do in 45 minutes. It is yet another duty they are requiring us to take on. It is an additional distraction in the operational environment. At my facility, there are times when we get so busy, nobody has the time to take the current observation until well past the hour. Why should we be held liable for erroneous information that serves as a secondary purpose to our job description? It's like asking your mechanic to operate on you.

It is a fruitless effort for us employees to tell management how bad this is. Even the ATM is powerless to stop this from happening. It is up to the users of the system to squawk to the FAA about this plan. It is you, the pilots, that are able to get things done quicker and more efficiently than those of us that work for them. That is a fact. WE have this new RNAV approach being designed into our airport. The pilots requested the FAA develop one, within a few days, preliminary approach plates were designed. It was flight tested just a few weeks ago, and is expected to be fully implemented within the next year or so. If that was one of us requesting it, it would have been tossed in the trash heap. It is truly up to the users of the NAS to convince the FAA this is a terrible idea.