What's that supposed to mean?
How can you compare United's fleet of
74 B-777s that probably average 14 hours in the air, every day all year (minus time in maintenance) to a part 91 Gulfstream?
How are those two operations similar in regards to the importance of operating economics?
OK, I'll bite regarding the apparent uproar.
Not bothering to check how old the weather information is and/or using old weather information because the operation says it's ok, or blindly following all of this in regards to what the FMS spits out, or not taking extra fuel "just because" when there is uncertainty sounds complacent to me.
You all have made your arguments with cost, but there are plenty of approved weather sources that can give you current weather within 2 minutes of searching on your own. It seems current weather information that reflected the higher winds aloft was actually available according to a previous post.
Just to be clear, I'm not arguing safety in this particular situation. They did the right thing it seems and their procedures probably would have dictated this outcome anyways. Going from point A-B is the mission of most flights. From a flight crew stand-point, the regs/opspecs for going from point A-B are irrelevant. The PIC of a 172 going from point A-B is facing the exact same things as the PIC of a 747 going from point A-B. Limits are set and can't be exceeded. No difference. Take off limitations, weather enroute, landing limitations. That's the only thing affecting every single airplane. Given that it seems that the current weather was available, someone failed. Not at safety, but at being diligent in successfully getting that plane to point B.
You're making assumptions about the part 91 Gulfstream and I am admittedly making assumptions about 121, but see above. Because current weather was apparently available and not used, the 121 carriers get an F on this day. Sorry, but I do find it odd that any operation, 91/135/121 would ever be OK with not making it to point B because of fuel planning.
Crossing the Carribean isn't identical crossing the Pacific or Atlatic. PNR and ETP is still calculated and used in a slow turbo-prop and it's just as critical. Maybe you're not allowed to use weather you find on your own or even use it as a basis to take more fuel. I'm am allowed, but only because of my operational control authority, but I take extra fuel anyways and I have that flexibility to disregard dispatch. Kind of, but not really. I've landed with 2.5 hours of fuel sometimes with bumped cargo. "The weather looked bad, what of it?".
Arriving at point C instead of B sounds like shady operations. Shady=/= unsafe to me. Shady means someone didn't check something either purposefully or accidentally to arrive at point B to me.
If this is SOP at United, then United is more shady than Ameriflight at arriving at point B...
I'm open to anything though. This just sounds odd to me, given the operation. My avatar is an inflatable shark... I'm not THAT serious about a lot of things.