What's the dumbest thing a crew has ever asked or requested?

[405]

Thanks, Punch.

 

[UALfurloughee]

Uh, I don't think you are idiots, and I appreciate your help...

That said, UAL used to have a provision in the FOM (which makes it law) that if there was a forecast for CB you did need an alternate, regardless of the 123. Maybe that sheds light on that one?

Thanks for the scores by the way!

Randy

 

[PunchTheClown]

Actually, that was pretty funny

 

[Princedietrich]

Trust me, we think your all idiots. I cant remember how many times I've had to correct a dispatcher. Thank god pilots are in control, otherwise we'd all be in trouble.

Do the world a favor and go dive headfirst into a Trent900 running at full blast. Sorry pieces of arrogant crap like you don't deserve to be pilots. You don't even deserve to be alive. NOw make yourself useful and wipe my butt you scumsucking recessive trait.

 

[XPOO]

Ok, here's a few for you:

1. Didn't happen to me, but a Captain called asking a dispatcher to copy a page out of the AFDs and fax them to him. Only, he asked that the dispatcher first punch holes in the copies before faxing them over so that he could clip them directly into his Jeps.

2. Had a Captain insist that SPI was in Missouri and flew to SGF instead. Imaging explaining that one to your Chief Pilot.

3. Had a Captain call yesterday saying he was a new Captain and that he didn't understand what "flow" was.

 

[kack911]

Ah yes...where were we? Oh thats right...

So I had released a CRJ with the APU intake door deferred open. If I remember correctly, the MTOW was performance limited and we were going to have to bump pax. So I decided it would be best to accept the speed restriction of 300kt rather than add 400 unnecessary pounds of fuel for the APU to burn for 2 hours. The conversation went something like this:

Ca: "You forgot the fuel for the APU burn."

Me: "I didn't forget, I planned the flight at 300kt so we don't have to run the APU."

Ca: "Well...uh...I'm only landing with 2100lb, so I'd like the extra APU fuel."

Me: "Well...uh...if you run the APU for 2 hours, that extra fuel will be gone by the time you land."

Ca: "I don't understand."

Me: "Do you want the 400lb of fuel for the APU, or do you want it for when you arrive at CLT?"

Ca: "Both."

Me: "Ma'am, you can't have it both ways. If you run the APU then you'll have burned that fuel, and you'll still only land with 2100lb onboard."

Ca: "Well, I'd feel more comfortable if I had the extra fuel"

Me: "Ok, but you understand you're bumping 2 pax, and you're still going to land with the same amount of fuel, right"

Ca: "Yes, I want the extra fuel. And refile me so I'm not limited to 300kt."

Me: <heavy sigh>

The Kack

 

[XPOO]

Sidenote: Very interesting. Here, our software automatically figures in what's called a Performance Degradation Factor for that MEL. No way around it. Imagine explaining that one to a pilot. Takes awhile, trust me.

 

[kack911]

Sidenote: Very interesting. Here, our software automatically figures in what's called a Performance Degradation Factor for that MEL. No way around it. Imagine explaining that one to a pilot. Takes awhile, trust me.

Ours only accounted for burn penalties associated with CDL's like missing gear doors or aerodynamic sealant, and even then you still had to manually input the weight penalty.

The computer didn't do squat for MEL's like 49-14-01, so it was up to you to change the cruise mach/airspeed or add HOLD fuel to comply with the APU burn requirements as appropriate.

Another good example (on the CRJ), is the FMS deferral that requires a reduced-speed climb profile. The computer wouldn't do anything to remind you that it had to be done, thus a lot of people would forget to do it.

The Kack

 

[propsarebest]

ya'all need to stop pissing around with those little POCS (thats piece of canuk @*^$) RJ's and get a REAL airplane like the 747... It don't need no stinkin' CDL. 833,000 MTOW, YEA BABY!

 

[ss9e]

Ca: "Well, I'd feel more comfortable if I had the extra fuel"

i hate the heavily used, not often needed comfort card.

 

[Famous Dave]

i hate the heavily used, not often needed comfort card.

Care to explain why?

 

[kack911]

ya'all need to stop pissing around with those little POCS (thats piece of canuk @*^$) RJ's and get a REAL airplane like the 747... It don't need no stinkin' CDL. 833,000 MTOW, YEA BABY!

747's don't have CDL's?

The DC-10's I dispatched certainly did. Sh*t, we could defer the entire center landing gear (retracted) on the DC-10...albeit with a 125,000lb weight penalty.

As far as MTOW's go, we topped out at 572,000lb. Any points for second place?

The Kack

 

[kack911]

Care to explain why?

I think he's referring to the captain who "needs" 2000lb of Hold fuel on a leg from IAD to DAY when IAD is P6SM SKC and DAY is P6SM SCT080. No outbound delays, no enroute restrictions, and definitely no delays getting into DAY.

2100lb of Reserve, 300lb of Tanker, and 2000lb Hold fuel equals 4400lb Fuel-Over-Destination...or roughly 1.6 hours of fuel remaining.

Why?

I've never, ever disagreed with a PIC who wanted more fuel when flying into the hub at peak traffic, or into any kind of marginal weather enroute or at the destination, or with anticipated holding, or a dozen other things.

But when I ask why he/she needs extr fuel for that DAY leg, all I ever get is "I'm not comfortable landing that close to Min-Fuel."

As if it's somehow unsafe to land with 46 minutes of fuel remaining when its a beautiful summer evening with no shortage of suitable alternates nearby.

The Kack

 

[pw4000]

This one time at band camp

 

[Mr Wu]

One thing you guys need to realize is that when we call you we're not asking your permission, we're telling you what we're going to do. You can save yourself a whole lot of heartburn by just agreeing with us.