FAA plans to shut down the RCO network - first step to eliminate FSS?

[PT20J]

At first I thought this was a bad thing. But, except in Alaska, I cannot remember the last time I contacted a FSS in the air (or on the ground for that matter). On the rare occasions I file a VFR flight plan, I find ForeFlight very convenient for activating and closing them. I get better in flight weather information from ADS-B.

https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all-news/2025/april/03/faa-plans-to-shut-down-rco-network

[EricJ]

I contact them to report forest fires or ELTs, which I've done probably a half-dozen times in the last five years.    I don't think I've contacted them for anything else, but it's always been nice to know they're there, especially in the event of an equipment failure or something.

 

[N201MKTurbo]

When was the last time I called FSS in the air? Humm I can't remember that far back. If you wanted to air file an IFR flight plan, center would send you to FSS, but I can't remember the last time they did that either.

[Ragsf15e]

I actually use them to open and close vfr flight plans on occasion. Ff is great for that but I usually remember to open about level off and service is iffy.  Close before landing.  It is nice if you need to file airborne.

[toto]

Before airborne weather was a thing, I used to use Flight Watch regularly. They were a fantastic resource when bouncing around in the soup. But Flight Service has never been critical when airborne - I’ve only had a handful of times when ATC rejected a pop-up clearance and asked me to call FSS. I guess this just means they won’t have that choice

 

[midlifeflyer]

I think there are two potential problems.

One, it’s not just Alaska where there are remote areas where radar contact and ATC communications can be spotty for VFR flight. We used to teach filing VFR flight plans and periodically updating position in the Rockies.

Second, in-flight filing of IFR flight plans. ATC has been helpful in the past with cold-call popups. It’s always been workload permitted but unless one is staying local, plenty of stories about ATC requiring filing with FSS. This second one might not be an issue long term, but not everyone has inflight internet yet.

[M20F]

“In the mid-1980s, Flight Service received 22,000 service requests per day across this network, while today they receive fewer than 300 per day. In turn, from over 350 Flight Service stations with over 3,000 employees 40 years ago, there are now only two (2) facilities with fewer than 200 specialists.”
 

[M20F]

In 37yrs I want to say I have used a RCO maybe 5 times.  I have never successfully got a GCO to work.  
 
Today with cellphones at minimum and in most cases a Bluetooth headset, no reason.  
 
Even in the day WXBrief and a pay phone with a void time worked better imho.  

[toto]

3 minutes ago, M20F said:

In 37yrs I want to say I have used a RCO maybe 5 times.  I have never successfully got a GCO to work.  
 
Today with cellphones at minimum and in most cases a Bluetooth headset, no reason.  
 
Even in the day WXBrief and a pay phone with a void time worked better imho.  

But we’re also talking about all airborne FSS frequencies, right? Not just the RCOs available on the ground?

 

[M20F]

23 minutes ago, toto said:

But we’re also talking about all airborne FSS frequencies, right? Not just the RCOs available on the ground?

 

The proposal is to end RCO’s the article also talks about the future potential of  FSS, read the article.  
 
RCO/GCO has nothing to do with FSS just expensive hardware that nobody uses today.  

[toto]

2 minutes ago, M20F said:

The proposal is to end RCO’s the article also talks about the future potential of  FSS, read the article.  
 
RCO/GCO has nothing to do with FSS just expensive hardware that nobody uses today.  

Huh, okay. The whole thread seemed to be about people calling FSS in the air. An RCO is just used to get FSS on the ground. If that’s all we’re talking about then I doubt anyone would even notice. 

[M20F]

2 minutes ago, toto said:

Huh, okay. The whole thread seemed to be about people calling FSS in the air.

Because those “people” didn’t actually read the article.  

[toto]

11 minutes ago, M20F said:

Because those “people” didn’t actually read the article.  

I’m pretty confused, really. The article clearly talks about enroute/airborne calls to FSS via RCO. Maybe that’s a term that I misunderstand? I’ve only ever seen the term “RCO” used to refer to a remote FSS frequency that’s available on the ground. 
 

[M20F]

22 minutes ago, toto said:

I’m pretty confused, really. The article clearly talks about enroute/airborne calls to FSS via RCO. Maybe that’s a term that I misunderstand? I’ve only ever seen the term “RCO” used to refer to a remote FSS frequency that’s available on the ground. 
 

Your confusion and lack of understanding of how a RCO let alone a GCO works or what it is for explains why its loss is inconsequential and AOPA should be spending dollars to fight for things that matter. 
 
Nobody uses it today and the article makes it clear.  
 
“In the mid-1980s, Flight Service received 22,000 service requests per day across this network, while today they receive fewer than 300 per day.”

Fewer than 300 and I bet 95% of those requests were in Alaska or the like. 

[toto]

42 minutes ago, M20F said:

Your confusion and lack of understanding of how a RCO let alone a GCO works or what it is for explains why its loss is inconsequential and AOPA should be spending dollars to fight for things that matter. 

Wow, thanks. That’s productive 

[M20F]

23 minutes ago, toto said:

Wow, thanks. That’s productive 

What is unproductive?  You are arguing about an article you haven’t  read, about a service you have never used, nor understand. 
 
That to me is unproductive.  
 
There is no need for RCO/GCO in this day and age and there was barely a need for them 30yrs ago.  If you want to debate the topic then read the article, educate yourself, and make a point. 
 
That would be productive. 

[toto]

44 minutes ago, M20F said:

What is unproductive?  You are arguing about an article you haven’t  read, about a service you have never used, nor understand. 
 
That to me is unproductive.  
 
There is no need for RCO/GCO in this day and age and there was barely a need for them 30yrs ago.  If you want to debate the topic then read the article, educate yourself, and make a point. 
 
That would be productive. 

I’m not sure what’s happening here, but I’m not going to contribute further to this thread. 

[M20F]

2 minutes ago, toto said:

I’m not sure what’s happening here, but I’m not going to contribute further to this thread. 

That would be productive. 

[N201MKTurbo]

It would be more productive if everybody would share their concerns with the FAA.

[midlifeflyer]

12 hours ago, M20F said:

The proposal is to end RCO’s the article also talks about the future potential of  FSS, read the article.  
 
RCO/GCO has nothing to do with FSS just expensive hardware that nobody uses today.  

Oops. Sorry. I didn’t read the article. I read the FAA’s proposal to 

“After decommissioning these RCOs, Flight Service will no longer provide inflight advisory services in CONUS. All emergency frequencies will continue to be monitored through Air Traffic Control Facilities”

the proposal, not the article.

Since RCOs, unlike GCOs, are designed for both ground and airborne communications, I don’t see the limitation you see.

[M20F]

1 hour ago, midlifeflyer said:

I don’t see the limitation you see.

300 calls a day, the money could be better spent.  Why don’t we bring DF steer back.  

[midlifeflyer]

6 hours ago, M20F said:

300 calls a day, the money could be better spent.  Why don’t we bring DF steer back.  

I was referring to your comment suggesting that it was only ground communication that would be affected. The FAA request for comments indicates air communication is also affected. Of course, I might have misunderstood you on that point. 

[M20F]

17 minutes ago, midlifeflyer said:

I was referring to your comment suggesting that it was only ground communication that would be affected. The FAA request for comments indicates air communication is also affected. Of course, I might have misunderstood you on that point. 

I may have been unclear in rereading my posts. I think though we can agree RCO/GCO like DF steer, NDB’s, etc. needs to go, it’s time has past.  

While not the main topic as you shared FSS is under discussion but not as progressed.  I haven’t talked to FSS in probably 10-15yrs and when I was it was only to get on record for checking TFR’s.  Lockmart did a great job but imho it needs to follow Flight Watch into the dustbin of history. 
 
Enhancing ADSB with more datalinking would be great.  We should be spending $$’s for things that benefit and drive aviation.  Not a service that gets 300 calls a day, I shudder to think the cost per call (certainly more than 1 AMU per). 

[Pinecone]

I have called FSS in the air a few times over the past few years.  Mainly to submit a PIREP.

I have called them on the ground (by phone) more times for various reasons.

[AndreiC]

Does this also include 1-800-WX-BRIEF that they plan to decommission? I use that service pretty regularly. It is useful to me when I am in doubt for a go/no-go decision, it is more helpful to have someone else tell you basically "don't go".