121 Alternate legality question

89-LX said:
Trust me, I agree. But also go down farther....

"Amended Dispatch Release 14 CFR Part 121 does not prohibit a flight from continuing towards its destination without an alternate once the flight has departed and the weather conditions deteriorate to the point that an alternate would have been required for dispatch."

The issue comes in with departed. Departed from the gate, or departed from the ground. My interpretation is departed the ground, not the gate. Captain and dispatcher were sold on gate. Was the weather bad enough for me to warrant stopping operations right there and returning as the FO, no, but it's more of a legality situation.



TAF changed to 10SM and OVC020. Actual on arrival I believe was higher ceiling, but like 6SM vis. Our original arrival time had us arriving more than 1 hour before the change over. But with a 2 hour delay on the ground, I realized that it would now put us in the window of needing an alternate then.
Click to expand...
If the ceiling was 2000 you didn't need one anyway, unless your FOM states otherwise.
 
89-LX said:
But then couldn't you argue that with the ground delay, you new arrival time now requires an alternate as you know it would have been needed if you feel within that time to begin with?
Click to expand...
I would say yes. It would be different if you were enroute. It sounds like this is a gray area and you'll have to rely on company policies.

Some things I would take into account: Which day of the trip it is, if it's the flight to a fun overnight, if you're under/over guarantee, and will this affect my commute.
 
Dugie8 said:
Well, I have a min fuel that I have to have onboard as I roll out for take off.
Click to expand...

Right, but every place I've been (and seen) that is worded as "takeoff fuel", not "departure fuel". That case is pretty clear. Stating something must be such and such at "departure" is less clear, unless there is an FAA definition of the word departure somewhere.
 
Kingairer said:
If the ceiling was 2000 you didn't need one anyway, unless your FOM states otherwise.
Click to expand...

It was OVC020, and 2SM. Less than 3, so alternate needed.

PropDriver said:
I would say yes. It would be different if you were enroute. It sounds like this is a gray area and you'll have to rely on company policies.

Some things I would take into account: Which day of the trip it is, if it's the flight to a fun overnight, if you're under/over guarantee, and will this affect my commute.
Click to expand...

BobDDuck said:
Right, but every place I've been (and seen) that is worded as "takeoff fuel", not "departure fuel". That case is pretty clear. Stating something must be such and such at "departure" is less clear, unless there is an FAA definition of the word departure somewhere.
Click to expand...

Exactly, not a clear answer I can find anywhere. Min fuel is minimum fuel at power up on the runway for takeoff. I cannot find an FAA definition anywhere, but I may not have been looking in the right area which is why I'm trying to get a more broad view on this.
 
Where I work, MIN T/O ("Mint-Oh") is the FAR required fuel at thrust/power lever advancement for takeoff. It is the fuel required to:
- fly to the destination
- fly to the most distant alternate to which dispatched if an alternate is required, and
- fly thereafter for 45 min at normal cruising speed.

What it really means, on my airplane, is it's the bare minimum gas for legality and safety. And I do mean the bare minimum. Release fuel is a (more) realistic estimate of the fuel requirement for the flight, and has a company-imposed meaning and requirements.
 
PropDriver said:
Some things I would take into account: Which day of the trip it is, if it's the flight to a fun overnight, if you're under/over guarantee, and will this affect my commute.
Click to expand...

Sounds funny on an internet forum but I really hope you are not serious.

The only thing we have as people is our integrity, where is yours?
 
This scenario might present gray areas to some, but I would argue that an amended release is prudent. Conditions have changed significantly since original dispatch, namely the flight will be arriving when weather conditions do not allow the flight to dispatch without an alternate. Since the company and pilot have the ability to amend the release easily and the aircraft is still on the ground where fuel is readily available, I find it careless to depart without amending and adding fuel if necessary.

This would be a good situation for filing an ASAP report. Whether or not the captain chooses to file, you can provide valuable information for improving safety in similar future scenarios. Also, you might receive official feedback regarding the concept of "departed"---which is significant in this scenario.
 
Kingairer said:
Your post earlier said 2000 Ovc and 10Sm.
Click to expand...

My bad, long day and wasn't thinking when in was typing with what changed. It was 2SM that was the qualifier for the alternate.

Pilot Hopeful said:
This scenario might present gray areas to some, but I would argue that an amended release is prudent. Conditions have changed significantly since original dispatch, namely the flight will be arriving when weather conditions do not allow the flight to dispatch without an alternate. Since the company and pilot have the ability to amend the release easily and the aircraft is still on the ground where fuel is readily available, I find it careless to depart without amending and adding fuel if necessary.

This would be a good situation for filing an ASAP report. Whether or not the captain chooses to file, you can provide valuable information for improving safety in similar future scenarios. Also, you might receive official feedback regarding the concept of "departed"---which is significant in this scenario.
Click to expand...

Conditions didn't change, it was our arrival time that changed due to an extended ground delay (over 120 minutes) in LGA. We could have been on the ground for 10 minutes, but we kept getting different information. The snow that came out of no where messed everything up. We were off the gate, and it was when we were getting deiced that I realized our arrival would put us into that time of needing an alternate. Dispatch stated that we didn't, captain agreed, I felt fine without it as conditions were not that bad there.

If we would have returned to the gate, the flight would have been cancelled. That was NOT a driving force for me. I did ASAP and ASRS it, requesting for an interpretation of departed as that is what the unknown variable is. Captain decided it wasn't worth it to ASAP it, so it's his own butt even though I told him that I did.
 
This would be a great topic to put in the "You're the Captain" sub forum.

@89-LX have you called a chief pilot at your company to get clarification? Company safety department? Any union safety members?
 
PropDriver said:
This would be a great topic to put in the "You're the Captain" sub forum.

@89-LX have you called a chief pilot at your company to get clarification? Company safety department? Any union safety members?
Click to expand...

Shot a few e-mails off to a few departments, waiting on replies.
 
wheelsup said:
Sounds funny on an internet forum but I really hope you are not serious.

The only thing we have as people is our integrity, where is yours?
Click to expand...

If you have a do-hicky, that is unimportant in all aspect to the safe operation of the flight but it technically grounding, that you happen to notice as you are walking back from the lav prior to push back are you ever possibly swayed by any outside factors? Such as location, maintenance, if it is the first flight of the trip or the flight home, mid day or last leg before the hotel, what socks you are wearing? I know that being an internet forum you will probably say one of two things, "It would have zero factor on my decision" or " There is a big difference between that do-hicky and ..."

I would argue that in fact we are all swayed, consciously or subconsciously, by 100's of external factors on many many decisions like these ones. It is human nature. Sure we try to suppress that nature as often as possible through the use of two pilots, managerial oversight, ethics, morals, common sense, checklists, etc. Professionals or not we are still subjected to these influences. It might be hard to admit it at times, but it is true. Many lawyers, pilots, doctors, congressmen, plumbers, car mechanics, etc., have been swayed and made poor decisions that had the potential (or did) affect the lives of many people. To think that one is somehow immune to these same pitfalls leaves one less than safe IMO.
 
flyboy6585 said:
If you have a do-hicky, that is unimportant in all aspect to the safe operation of the flight but it technically grounding, that you happen to notice as you are walking back from the lav prior to push back are you ever possibly swayed by any outside factors? Such as location, maintenance, if it is the first flight of the trip or the flight home, mid day or last leg before the hotel, what socks you are wearing? I know that being an internet forum you will probably say one of two things, "It would have zero factor on my decision" or " There is a big difference between that do-hicky and ..."

I would argue that in fact we are all swayed, consciously or subconsciously, by 100's of external factors on many many decisions like these ones. It is human nature. Sure we try to suppress that nature as often as possible through the use of two pilots, managerial oversight, ethics, morals, common sense, checklists, etc. Professionals or not we are still subjected to these influences. It might be hard to admit it at times, but it is true. Many lawyers, pilots, doctors, congressmen, plumbers, car mechanics, etc., have been swayed and made poor decisions that had the potential (or did) affect the lives of many people. To think that one is somehow immune to these same pitfalls leaves one less than safe IMO.
Click to expand...

It happens to all of us, as you said. I try to be the safest at all time. 2 days ago, I denied working over 13 hours into the 30 minute extension because I didn't feel safe. Earlier in Jan, I denied a DH late at night after a long day that would have had me home that night because I didn't feel safe on the road driving home after that long of a day, so I had to spend another night away from home in the name of safety.

But yesterday, at the end of a long 4 day, I flew M.82 on the freedom leg to get home. Now weather was clear and smooth, which was a factor (if it was rough air, I'd be flying M.78), but everything we do is always a hazard. It's about mitigating the risks. Just like when someone says that after a diversion, emergency, etc, they always look back afterwards and critique as hindsight is always 20/20. But this is how we learn as pilots, by making mistakes as no one is perfect.
 
flyboy6585 said:
If you have a do-hicky, that is unimportant in all aspect to the safe operation of the flight but it technically grounding, that you happen to notice as you are walking back from the lav prior to push back are you ever possibly swayed by any outside factors? Such as location, maintenance, if it is the first flight of the trip or the flight home, mid day or last leg before the hotel, what socks you are wearing? I know that being an internet forum you will probably say one of two things, "It would have zero factor on my decision" or " There is a big difference between that do-hicky and ..."
Click to expand...

One thing I've learned in my 6000+ hours of JV 121 flying is anything and everything that can be safely MEL'd, can be. Even some ridiculous things that you wouldn't even remotely think are possible can be MEL'd for that one leg back to the hub (hence the reason they were created).

The sort of situation you propose only happens in the incestuous training departments at flight schools where CFI's sit around and think up ridiculous situations that never actually happen in the real world. My check ride orals at Embry Riddle were a great example of that.

I've BTDT and got the t-shirt. It's just easier for my conscious to do it the right way. Once in Canada, I refused to push after MEL'ing the ACARS unit because we didn't have a CB collar on the plane. Mx said they'd meet us at the destination with the collars. No dice. After 10 minutes I finally convinced them I wasn't playing around. We got really lucky, in that 10 minutes we found a CB collar rolling around under the rudder pedals. When we got to our destination an FAA inspector was there waiting for a route check just randomly (nothing to do with the mx issue). How would you explain that to the inspector? That is just a small example of why I stopped thinking out of the box and just do it the right way.

We had one guy do something "for the company" that was so egregious the company turned him in to the FAA! He's spent about $25k so far in legal fees trying to fight the violation.

It might be hard to admit it at times, but it is true. Many lawyers, pilots, doctors, congressmen, plumbers, car mechanics, etc., have been swayed and made poor decisions that had the potential (or did) affect the lives of many people. To think that one is somehow immune to these same pitfalls leaves one less than safe IMO.
Click to expand...

No idea what this means. You're saying you're more safe allowing yourself to be swayed? Well I disagree. Allowing yourself to not be swayed is the hardest part of our job IMO. In no way am I a boy scout but I at least try to do the right thing most of the time.
 
Last edited:
wheelsup said:
One thing I've learned in my 6000+ hours of JV 121 flying is anything and everything that can be safely MEL'd, can be. Even some ridiculous things that you wouldn't even remotely think are possible can be MEL'd for that one leg back to the hub (hence the reason they were created).

The sort of situation you propose only happens in the incestuous training departments at flight schools where CFI's sit around and think up ridiculous situations that never actually happen in the real world. My check ride orals at Embry Riddle were a great example of that.

I've BTDT and got the t-shirt. It's just easier for my conscious to do it the right way. Once in Canada, I refused to push after MEL'ing the ACARS unit because we didn't have a CB collar on the plane. Mx said they'd meet us at the destination with the collars. No dice. After 10 minutes I finally convinced them I wasn't playing around. We got really lucky, in that 10 minutes we found a CB collar rolling around under the rudder pedals. When we got to our destination an FAA inspector was there waiting for a route check just randomly (nothing to do with the mx issue). How would you explain that to the inspector? That is just a small example of why I stopped thinking out of the box and just do it the right way.

We had one guy do something "for the company" that was so egregious the company turned him in to the FAA! He's spent about $25k so far in legal fees trying to fight the violation.



No idea what this means. You're saying you're more safe allowing yourself to be swayed? Well I disagree. Allowing yourself to not be swayed is the hardest part of our job IMO. In no way am I a boy scout but I at least try to do the right thing most of the time.
Click to expand...

Congrats on your 6000 hours....ugh not sure why that was relevant to the conversation.

I am not sure what an "incestuous" training dept is, sounds like a problem, but whatever. Apparently the training that you received gave you the knowledge and ability to be above any external influences, it therefore must not have been too terrible. Perhaps those "ridiculous" situations were designed to help you better understand how complex seemingly simple problems/questions can be.

My point was not that you are safer by allowing yourself to be swayed. Rather, my point was that to believe that you are immune to the many potential external factors allows you to put yourself in a less than ideal situation. My point was that all professions have demonstrated repeatedly the human inability to overcome external influences 100% of the time. My point was that there are thousands of people who have died in commercial aviation because the pilots didn't consider that those external influences might have an affect on them. Neither I nor you are infallible.
 
wheelsup said:
One thing I've learned in my 6000+ hours of JV 121 flying is anything and everything that can be safely MEL'd, can be. Even some ridiculous things that you wouldn't even remotely think are possible can be MEL'd for that one leg back to the hub (hence the reason they were created).

The sort of situation you propose only happens in the incestuous training departments at flight schools where CFI's sit around and think up ridiculous situations that never actually happen in the real world. My check ride orals at Embry Riddle were a great example of that.

I've BTDT and got the t-shirt. It's just easier for my conscious to do it the right way. Once in Canada, I refused to push after MEL'ing the ACARS unit because we didn't have a CB collar on the plane. Mx said they'd meet us at the destination with the collars. No dice. After 10 minutes I finally convinced them I wasn't playing around. We got really lucky, in that 10 minutes we found a CB collar rolling around under the rudder pedals. When we got to our destination an FAA inspector was there waiting for a route check just randomly (nothing to do with the mx issue). How would you explain that to the inspector? That is just a small example of why I stopped thinking out of the box and just do it the right way.

We had one guy do something "for the company" that was so egregious the company turned him in to the FAA! He's spent about $25k so far in legal fees trying to fight the violation.



No idea what this means. You're saying you're more safe allowing yourself to be swayed? Well I disagree. Allowing yourself to not be swayed is the hardest part of our job IMO. In no way am I a boy scout but I at least try to do the right thing most of the time.
Click to expand...
I wish I could like this more than once.

Talk to the safety department - this is what they EXPECT.

The level of safety on Day 4, when the AHRS rolls over on final into SBA and we've got one more leg to LAX (true story, bro, that ended with folks driving), is exactly the same as on Day 1.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top