Whiners - Part 2

[dispatchguy]

"Just in case". I guess just in case a meteorite takes out the entire airport.

Or, more likely, just in case he flew at firewall power to make a commute home...

 

[405]

FLG2823 in MKE.

FLG4712 in TVC too.

Fun as a heart attack.

 

[405]

Or, more likely, just in case he flew at firewall power to make a commute home...

That may be it but we have some Chuck Yeager's here that don't like clouds.

 

[NoApu]

The Russian asked earlier:
"When is the last time you refused an A/C?"
At least once a day as a matter of fact. Russian, do you have any idea how many knock down drag out fights have occurred between a dispatcher and management before your butt was even out of the bed because some manager wanted to do something stupid?

"When is the last time you made the decision not to go for weather?"
Today as a matter of fact. And often before! Often when there is a line of ts, a hurricane, high winds, severe turb, or an ice and snow event I have made the decision to cancel a flight. It happens all the time behind the scenes. And again I have been the one to stand my ground and argue the old pilot line of "just because its legal doesn't mean its safe" on your behalf to the company.

The Russian stated:

"You have never done either of these because Operation Control and Joint Responsibility have almost nothing to do with PIC decision making."
You truly seem to be mis-informed on what dispatchers really do or what operational control really is. The bottom line is you don't get to make PIC decisions unless someone like me has said the flight can go in the first place. I have made the decision that a flight can go or not before you. You either agree with my decisions or you do not. If we both agree then all is good. If we don't then nothing happens. That's how Joint responsibility is supposed to work.

The Russian asked:

"When is the last time you pressured a crew to take an aircraft because your boss wanted that flight to go?"
I don't know. I don't intend to put pressure on you guys but I can understand how you can feel that way sometimes. Pilots aren't the only ones who feel pressured. And as you have made clear; the final say belongs to you.

I want the flights to go because it is my job to find a way to complete the mission....your job is to review my plan, agree or revise, and then execute that plan. Ultimately it is indeed your call.

I will stipulate that you have a more vested intrest in, and maybe even care more about the safety of a flight because you are actually there but it's naive to think that we don't.

But lets not kid each other about cavalier attitudes towards safety because I've seen too many times a PIC that wanted to operate that last leg back to his domicile on the last day of a three or four day trip when it wasn't a good idea to do so.

When is the last time you pressured your dispatcher to release a flight in that situation?

Has that ever been you?

"Where you thinking about joint responsibility then?"
Yes I was/am. I depend on your feedback and experience to help us both make good decisions. If we happen to come to an impasse then it's no big deal to me. I know that other dispatchers may seem to take it personally but that's not me. You owe it to yourself, the passengers, and all others with a stake in the safety of a given flight to exorcise your PIC authority and speak up. Just don't be surprised when someone asks you why. It's been my experience that some PICs don't have what it takes to make this decision and will fuss and yes, whine until someone else makes it for them. I have never had a problem when a captain exorcises his final authority on operating a flight; it's just that few seem to. Very few stand up and say I refuse this a/c or I will not operate this flight for x, y, or z reasons. I admire those captains that are sure of themselves and just state the facts and do so in a professional way.


The bottom line from me is don't piss down my back and tell me its raining and I will try not to do the same to you.

Cheers!

 

[Ameriagle]

just cuz = only runway shutdown because the aircraft in front of you geared up, airport closed for an emergency. Ever had to divert with flaps out due to mechanical failure? Maybe things you don't think about dispatching a flight that I think about pushing off the gate! I don't think it is unreasonable to put a little extra on for contingencies that we don't normally anticipate. Just because you think it will not or should not happen does not mean it will not happen! But what do I know.....I'm just a pilot!

 

[NoApu]

just cuz = only runway shutdown because the aircraft in front of you geared up, airport closed for an emergency. Ever had to divert with flaps out due to mechanical failure? Maybe things you don't think about dispatching a flight that I think about pushing off the gate! I don't think it is unreasonable to put a little extra on for contingencies that we don't normally anticipate. Just because you think it will not or should not happen does not mean it will not happen! But what do I know.....I'm just a pilot!

I don't think that you will find a single dispatcher on this board that wouldn't give you any amount of fuel you requested but how much fuel is just cuz exactly? Define that for me. Is it a percent over mission fuel or is it enough for a specific amount of time?

How many different contingincies can we possibly plan for on any one flight?

I personally have had flights that I have been responsible for actually be in every single one of the situations that you mentioned and then some. And in every single situation, the fuel on board the aircraft at the time was adequate to land safely somewhere. It might not be where we planned to go but there was always plenty of fuel for where we wound up (that sounded like Yogi Bera).

Our pilots have handled it everytime and with a great deal of skill and profesionalism. Of course at our ailrline most every flight leaves with at least 1 hour of extra fuel between reserve and a standard hold fuel sufficient for at least 15 minutes.

There are very few areas in the lower 48 that that amount of fuel wouldn't be a problem and if your flying in those areas I'd be almost certain that your dispatcher has taken into consideration those extra "what ifs".

I know the old pilot mantra that you can only have too much fuel if your on fire but at what point does what we do change from planning the fuel required to just firguring out the maximum amount of fuel we can take without bumping payload? Our management whats the former while pilots seem to want the latter.

I only ask of pilots to help me help you.

 

[Ameriagle]

The tone of this thread implies pilots are "whiners" or "fuel weenies" because some are inclined to carry additional fuel to cover unexpected circumstances. I can't say how much "just cuz" fuel works for each pilot. I consider many variables when deciding if and how much extra fuel to carry. I doubt if pilots, as a rule, are bumping revenue to carry "just cuz" fuel. One thing I do consider is whether the FAR requirements give me enough margin.....it may be legal but is there adequate margin? Have you ever flown an approach to minimums at your alternate with 50 minutes of fuel in the tanks? Many times what is planned and what actually happens is not the same, and is good reason to add additional fuel. The last time I diverted, after flying the missed, running the icing equipment, being restricted to an altitude about 15,000' lower than planned, not to mention less than ideal routing, I was about 2,500 pounds over planned burn, and glad I had extra fuel! Just because the numbers going on the release say it's going to work,and is legal, does not always mean it comes out that way!

 

[dispatchguy]

The last time I diverted, after flying the missed, running the icing equipment, being restricted to an altitude about 15,000' lower than planned,

Then in that case you shouldve contacted your dispatcher to have him run the numbers at 15K below your planned to see if the lower altitude was even acceptable. Did you even tell your dispatcher that you were flying 15K below planned?

not to mention less than ideal routing,

See response number 1 above. Your dispatcher can run a forward flight plan with your actual routing at the lower altitude. If the fuel is insufficient, you get more gas. In this case, with your 2.5 of captain additional, it worked. If you are airborne already, we do a pit stop for a gas-n-go; which is much more efficient from a system-wide standpoint. Can you imagine the fuel cost for a days ops if every pilot at your carrier carried 2.5 additional for just cuz? I draw a paycheck too, and I want my carrier to survive.

Keep in mind also we are one person. You (and I mean captains at any carrier generally) there is no way in hell that I am going to try and remember if this particular captain that I am planning is one that max fuel in severe VFR is insufficient, or what. When we are planning a flight, when we see the crew names (your flight planning system may vary), all I am looking at is that there are the requisite number of names that need to be there, whether the captain is a high-mins captain, and so on. I dont care at all who the captain is, and try to fit my flight and fuel planning to his own personal whims and interests.

The flight operations manual and FARs have defined the fuel required. Factors for computing fuel required says that I also consider any other condition which may delay landing of the aircraft. There isnt a dispatcher in the airline system that will "what if" a flight to where maximum fuel load is insufficient for a 30 minute flight to a VFR destination. If there is a concrete reason for the additional fuel, as I have said before, you get it (if I didnt add it already - and I remark my releases so you know where my thoughts are on the gas). But, and as I said before, adding "just cuz" for some unforeseen contingency (a UFO landed on the airport and vaporized it - should that be 20 or 30 minutes of additional) fuel is unnecessary and, in the world of $4 fuel, wasteful.

 

[Long Time Gone]

However, maybe Captains should be more worried about taking off on the correct runway and not having an extra 1,000 pounds of fuel, "just cuz".

Way out of line. Does anything ever come out of your mouth (or "key board") that is half useful? At least others in this thread are having a semi-intelligent discussion. You, on the other hand, only seem to inject useless sarcasm just to let people know that you're here.

Like I said before, it's just like the last kid to be chosen in Dodge Ball. You have to say "I'm here" when no one really cares.

 

[Ameriagle]

The point is this.....it does not matter what you plan for me, if ATC will not give it to me! I can call my dispatcher and he/she can run all the numbers they want, if I don't have fuel in the tanks to do it, whats the point! I miss with 7000 pounds in the tanks and I tell ATC what I would like to do. ATC tell's me what they want me to do! I call my dispatcher, he/she runs the numbers.....yup your going to be well over burn. My alternate is 150 miles away....everything is down so we want you to continue to your planned alternate! At this point I can exercise my authority as PIC to do what I deem necessary, but likely I already put a couple thousand extra on! The best laid plans are just that...plans! This doesn't consider plans that are completely unrealistic.....planned altitude to alternate of FL300, to keep required fuel down. Yes, I see this type of planning on occassion! Listen, I'm not trying to tell you how to do your job, I do not really expect you to guess how much extra fuel each pilot needs to be comfortable, and I'm not telling you that you are running an unsafe operation, I am giving you reasons why pilots ask for extra fuel, if I'm a whiner for asking, so be it. If you get your ass chewed and don't like it, well that is the least of my worries. It does give me better insight however, into how decisions are being made! You make it sound as if, I can give my dispatcher a call and all my problems are solved....this is generally not the case.