Typical NJA management and dispatch

[rvsm410]

Odd, I realize you guys/gals release under 91k now, so is there an point if the Share owner takes responsibility for the flight that dispatch is no longer in operational control? If so what do you do for them on those flights? Also weh do you have operational control and is it like in 121 ops?

Sounds like to many options for the company to control....I am sure none of you dispatchers would send a crew into harms way....in any case...

 

[dsptchrnja]

"I don't think that our dispatchers can be overruled. They have final release authority. They have a license they are protecting as well."


I don't think so, your SOP's or GOM don't require your dispatchers to be licensed, therefore the dispatchers are not operating under there license, having licensed dispatchers is just PR for the company. And reading your post they might have final release authority, but really what does that mean? If a plane crashes its on the pilots license, not the dispatcher because he is not operating under his license, its just something good to have.

If I'm wrong please do tell......

It is NJA policy that all dispatchers hired must be part 121 licensed. Once hired, you are technically not using that certificate - but you could loose it if found negligent by the FAA for some reason, same as you. You don't necessarily have to use it to loose it. It would be like loosing your pilot certificate by getting caught driving a car drunk - you don't even have to be employed as a pilot to loose your pilot's certificate. Same here.

Don't forget, when our plane went up in smoke in Leaky the FAA pulled the dx release and questioned the dispatcher also, during the inquiry. He was not allowed to release any more flights until FAA allowed it just as the crew was DNIF until allowed to fly again.

Actually the PIC has final release authority. Dispatch sends a conditional release for the PIC to review. Once PIC signs it, it becomes the final release, thereby fulfilling the dual-release system. Both retain operational control and can ammend, cancel, divert, or call an emergency at any time. ACP's, CP's, DO, ADO all have operational control also and can override the dispatcher but must assume responsibility for the release. In the history of NJA dispatch, I haven't seen this happen in a case where the dispatcher threw the safety card.

 

[rvsm410]

Ops Control questionable?

It is NJA policy that all dispatchers hired must be part 121 licensed. Once hired, you are technically not using that certificate - but you could loose it if found negligent by the FAA for some reason, same as you. You don't necessarily have to use it to loose it. It would be like loosing your pilot certificate by getting caught driving a car drunk - you don't even have to be employed as a pilot to loose your pilot's certificate. Same here.

Don't forget, when our plane went up in smoke in Leaky the FAA pulled the dx release and questioned the dispatcher also, during the inquiry. He was not allowed to release any more flights until FAA allowed it just as the crew was DNIF until allowed to fly again.

Actually the PIC has final release authority. Dispatch sends a conditional release for the PIC to review. Once PIC signs it, it becomes the final release, thereby fulfilling the dual-release system. Both retain operational control and can ammend, cancel, divert, or call an emergency at any time. ACP's, CP's, DO, ADO all have operational control also and can override the dispatcher but must assume responsibility for the release. In the history of NJA dispatch, I haven't seen this happen in a case where the dispatcher threw the safety card.

So is there a case law that would direct a court, the NTSB or the FAA that would in fact hold the dispatcher responsible for the flight as there is in 121 operations?
I cant seem to find anything that would establish a firm policy or ruling by the FAA that Fractional dispatchers are "actually" held accountable to the point of loosing their certificate for release errors since there are no FAR's like in 121 operations that do so...

I am just trying to understand the Frax dispatcher relationship, not being critical at all...It seems that only company policy can dictate that the companies dispatcher share operational control with the PIC and even then it could be over-ruled by someone else...

thanks for the clairification...

 

[dsptchrnja]

So is there a case law that would direct a court, the NTSB or the FAA that would in fact hold the dispatcher responsible for the flight as there is in 121 operations?
I cant seem to find anything that would establish a firm policy or ruling by the FAA that Fractional dispatchers are "actually" held accountable to the point of loosing their certificate for release errors since there are no FAR's like in 121 operations that do so...

I am just trying to understand the Frax dispatcher relationship, not being critical at all...It seems that only company policy can dictate that the companies dispatcher share operational control with the PIC and even then it could be over-ruled by someone else...

thanks for the clairification...

No, believe me, I understand... it is a hotly debated issue amongst NJA dispatchers themselves. No one can really be dogmatic in their opinion of what would happen because it has never been "tested". Policies and case law doesn't exist on the regulatory level where fractional dispatch is concerned, at least that I am aware.

As far as owners taking "operational control". They have to sign a document saying they delegate the tasks related to operational control to NJA. Realistically, it is no more operational control than you would have when an owner is aboard a part 91 flight. I'm not sure how it is worded, I only saw the document once. Perhaps NJAOwner could chime in on that point if he is reading this thread. But the day the owner is allowed to have operational control in the 121 meaning of the phrase is the day I find employment elsewhere. We have some really quacky owners that have done some unbelievable things in flight.

 

[squonk]

dsptchrNJA:

We have some really quacky owners that have done some unbelievable things in flight.

OH do tell!

 

[transpac]

It is NJA policy that all dispatchers hired must be part 121 licensed.

What is a 121 licensed dispatcher? How do they differ from a dispatcher certificated under Part 65?

 

[dsptchrnja]

There is no difference. Part 121 air carriers are the only type of operation that requires part 65 licensed dispatchers by law, so the term is used interchangably. Dispatch certification schools only teach part 121.

 

[Hogprint]

dsptchr posted:

NJA Meteorologist produce No-Fly zones 48 hours in advance of all hurricane activity. Hurricane Rita and Katrina were no exceptions. No NJA aircraft or crew are ever put in harms way PERIOD.

Dsptch,

Hey another question on these NFZs. After the NFZ is released, what does it take to dispatch into a NFZ? Is that 48 hrs a hard and fast number or is that just a guideline? I looked in the FOM and did not find any guidance. Is there some other place I could see this info?

Thanks, H

 

[cmhslave]

I would like to know what was said to the FO that was sent to cmh.

 

[Hogprint]

I would like to know what was said to the FO that was sent to cmh.

Hah! Which one? This happens on a day to day basis.