Boeing Direct Routes

[A1TAPE]

Now before anyone calls troll or anything like that, just read this ASRS that was just put up when i checked the database just now. What do you think about this direct route system? The way I read it was as a system that really only took wx and traffic into account but didn't alert flt ops with anything except for a printer notice. Kinda freaky when you think about it. For all you know, the system could have sent that plane into a mountain range without you even knowing it beforehand.

Narrative: 1
[My airline] is conducting a trial of a Boeing system to identify enroute opportunities for more direct routing. The system, called Boeing Direct Routes, claims to use dynamic weather, traffic, and airspace configuration to generate a real-time ACARS text notification to flight crews while enroute without dispatcher's prior knowledge, for a savings opportunity. This system claims to monitor weather and traffic in real time to further optimize routings and provide additional savings, however the sources of their information is not disclosed.

The system identifies and "then notifies" the aircraft when an opportunity for a wind-optimal direct routing exists. The flight crew will be notified via ACARS text that a savings opportunity exists with an automated advisory message. Dispatch will also be notified of the advisory via screen printer, but will not have any advance notice of a proposed reroute to properly evaluate for safety and regulatory compliance.

[My airline] is testing a program that will intentionally violate the aircraft dispatchers responsibility to comply with FAR 121.533, 121.535 and 121.601 by issuing instructions to flight crews while enroute, which will not allow the dispatcher to ensure safety because of the lack of advance notice.

[My airline] needs to cease any addition testing of this program until it can prove it will allow the dispatcher to ensure safety while enroute.
Synopsis
Air carrier Dispatcher reported concern about a proposed new procedure that would generate suggested route changes directly to flight crews without Dispatcher review in the interest of cost savings..

ALSO be sure to watch out to make sure that TAFs on private software, like sabre, match with FAA TAFs, there was a report posted as well about a discrepancy with that.
Narrative: 1
Government TAF for MIA was showing in Sabre. WSI (private weather service) TAF for MIA was not showing in sabre, but was issued. Government TAF did not require an alternate. WSI TAF did require an alternate. WSI TAF is controlling. Some flights into MIA were not holding alternates when they were required to.
Synopsis
Air carrier Dispatcher reported some shortcomings with their software tool.

EDIT: OK last new one i promise, sorry just read this one after resubmitting for the sabre issue.
Narrative: 1
Flight sends an ACARS to dispatch, "PIECE FELL OFF ON TAKEOFF CAN U FIND OUT WHICH AND ADVISE." Then two more ACARS were sent to Dispatch: "HOLDING 1000 FT.... FOB 162K --- CALL ME ON SAT PLS." The only replies that the Dispatcher had to the crew were the canned ACARS replies: "ACKNOWLEDGED, PLEASE STANDBY." Here we have a flight in a possible emergency situation, holding at 10000 FT with possible parts missing and in all of this time never any pertinent replies to the aircraft. The Dispatcher was also unable to call the aircraft on SATCOM. In all of this time, never was Management or the Duty Officer ever advised of this situation. I could not tell if ATC or Tower was ever called. Ramp finally called and advised that inboard slat piece was missing. The crew called Dispatch, and amazingly, the Dispatcher offered a re-analysis with an over burn accounting for missing inboard slat pieces and continue to [destination]. ALL OF THIS WITH MISSING PARTS OF THE WING! And the flight was holding at 10000 FT. I advised Maintenance and the Duty Officer and they went over to the Dispatcher. The crew finally advised Dispatch that they were returning to [departure airport].

There was a serious lack of competency, urgency, and operational control displayed. Dispatcher couldn't dial the aircraft on SATCOM in such an urgent situation. Dispatcher never advised anyone on the situation. Dispatcher relays to the crew over burns to continue to [destination] with aircraft pieces missing, possibly putting the crew and the flight in further danger.
Narrative: 2
Inboard slat broke away from the aircraft on takeoff. Dumped fuel. Air return.
Synopsis
MD11 flight had a loss of a an inboard slat on takeoff which results in a return to departure Airport. Miscommunication issues between Dispatch and the flight crew made the situation worse.

Im wondering WHY the DX didnt even consider alerting a DM or sup about the situation. More amazing is WHY they then did a recalc and suggested continuing to their destination? If anything I would have told them ok, turn back and land we can deal with it on the ground. Yes mgmt might get mad but thats better than possibly endangering 100s of lives.

 

[A-9er]

I don't know how things are now, but when I was @ G7, the TAFs and METARs on LIDO would be 20-30 minutes behind those available on aviationweather.gov. Perhaps that's been fixed and is no longer an issue, but it was when I was there. To work around that, I'd keep a tab open for aviationweather.gov, so I could make sure I had the latest info. That could be a PITA, because we'd have to copy the TAF & METAR, then paste it into the release.

As for routes, ATC has the final say. If there are weather and/or traffic issues, then you'll use what they give you.

 

[SpaceBeagle]

Flight crews take/request shortcuts all the time, without dispatcher notification. What's the difference? If you're aware of what's happening on your desk its pretty obvious. ATC will often give shortcuts for traffic and weather in their airspace, but be aware that a controller's knowledge of weather systems 3+ hours away from their airspace is very limited. Often times you will build a route for weather and sometimes things just change, it's your job to advise the crew if their new route puts them through tops at FL500. Provide some alternate routings, cell movement, location, something! Do not rely on ATC, you're the one with the big picture. Flight following is your job, and it should be emphasised more in training.

I too kept an aviationwather.gov tab open. It's always good to check the times of metars/tafs, if it's +10 minutes past their typical published time and you've got an old one, something is up.

 

[A-9er]

Flight crews take/request shortcuts all the time, without dispatcher notification. What's the difference? If you're aware of what's happening on your desk its pretty obvious. ATC will often give shortcuts for traffic and weather in their airspace, but be aware that a controller's knowledge of weather systems 3+ hours away from their airspace is very limited. Often times you will build a route for weather and sometimes things just change, it's your job to advise the crew if their new route puts them through tops at FL500. Provide some alternate routings, cell movement, location, something! Do not rely on ATC, you're the one with the big picture. Flight following is your job, and it should be emphasised more in training.

I too kept an aviationwather.gov tab open. It's always good to check the times of metars/tafs, if it's +10 minutes past their typical published time and you've got an old one, something is up.

My point was that ATC will do what THEY want to do, not relying on them.

 

[A1TAPE]

My point was that ATC will do what THEY want to do, not relying on them.

Hey A9 off topic here but going to Space beagles comment, at your airline did they emphasize flight following in training?

Flight following is your job, and it should be emphasised more in training.

 

[SpaceBeagle]

True, we will do what is necessary for traffic/wx in our sector, but I was trying to emphasize how unaware controllers can be of down-route weather in other centers. There is no tool like Fusion on the control floor...there's a wx radar that kinda shows something you would see on weather.gov but it's very basic, no tops information or anything. Sometimes an aircraft will come back with "Company/dispatch says direct ABQ is no good, they suggest PNH RSK for weather" you better believe they're getting it unless they are on a published reroute.

 

[A1TAPE]

But doesn't ATC have a national playbook for reroutes when SWAPs occur?

 

[4EngineETOPS]

But doesn't ATC have a national playbook for reroutes when SWAPs occur?

That's what a required reroute is. Tactical reroutes aren't part of the national playbook.

 

[LastMinuteAirline]

1. Get a job and/or hobby.

2. Crews get shortcuts/minor reroutes all the time. Sometimes they ask us how it looks, normally they dont. Depending on the airline, there may be rules as to how many NM different the route can be w/out advising dx. If they dont mention it and we see them doing something inadvisable, it is our job to notice and advise. This happens regularly.

3. How govt vs EWINS TAFs are handled will vary based on airline. Where I work, when an EWINS TAF is ordered the dxers are notified via email (also typically orally by the dx who ordered it). It is up to us to notice and use that info as required.

4. Regarding the slat issue, it sounds fishy. I'd like to hear the dxer's version. He/she probably didnt call right away because he/she didnt have information yet. Someone had to go out there, find the piece, identify it, and then notify the company. They had 162k lbs of fuel to burn so they had enough time to wait for accurate information and make an informed decision. I highly doubt he pulled a burn penalty out of his ass w/out consultation. All of this is conjecture. The dx could very well have handled the situation poorly for all I know, but it is easy to judge someone who cant defend themselves.

 

[Flying Saluki]

Now before anyone calls troll or anything like that, just read this ASRS that was just put up when i checked the database just now. What do you think about this direct route system? The way I read it was as a system that really only took wx and traffic into account but didn't alert flt ops with anything except for a printer notice. Kinda freaky when you think about it. For all you know, the system could have sent that plane into a mountain range without you even knowing it beforehand.

Narrative: 1
[My airline] is conducting a trial of a Boeing system to identify enroute opportunities for more direct routing. The system, called Boeing Direct Routes, claims to use dynamic weather, traffic, and airspace configuration to generate a real-time ACARS text notification to flight crews while enroute without dispatcher's prior knowledge, for a savings opportunity. This system claims to monitor weather and traffic in real time to further optimize routings and provide additional savings, however the sources of their information is not disclosed.

The system identifies and "then notifies" the aircraft when an opportunity for a wind-optimal direct routing exists. The flight crew will be notified via ACARS text that a savings opportunity exists with an automated advisory message. Dispatch will also be notified of the advisory via screen printer, but will not have any advance notice of a proposed reroute to properly evaluate for safety and regulatory compliance.

[My airline] is testing a program that will intentionally violate the aircraft dispatchers responsibility to comply with FAR 121.533, 121.535 and 121.601 by issuing instructions to flight crews while enroute, which will not allow the dispatcher to ensure safety because of the lack of advance notice.

[My airline] needs to cease any addition testing of this program until it can prove it will allow the dispatcher to ensure safety while enroute.
Synopsis
Air carrier Dispatcher reported concern about a proposed new procedure that would generate suggested route changes directly to flight crews without Dispatcher review in the interest of cost savings..

ALSO be sure to watch out to make sure that TAFs on private software, like sabre, match with FAA TAFs, there was a report posted as well about a discrepancy with that.
Narrative: 1
Government TAF for MIA was showing in Sabre. WSI (private weather service) TAF for MIA was not showing in sabre, but was issued. Government TAF did not require an alternate. WSI TAF did require an alternate. WSI TAF is controlling. Some flights into MIA were not holding alternates when they were required to.
Synopsis
Air carrier Dispatcher reported some shortcomings with their software tool.

EDIT: OK last new one i promise, sorry just read this one after resubmitting for the sabre issue.
Narrative: 1
Flight sends an ACARS to dispatch, "PIECE FELL OFF ON TAKEOFF CAN U FIND OUT WHICH AND ADVISE." Then two more ACARS were sent to Dispatch: "HOLDING 1000 FT.... FOB 162K --- CALL ME ON SAT PLS." The only replies that the Dispatcher had to the crew were the canned ACARS replies: "ACKNOWLEDGED, PLEASE STANDBY." Here we have a flight in a possible emergency situation, holding at 10000 FT with possible parts missing and in all of this time never any pertinent replies to the aircraft. The Dispatcher was also unable to call the aircraft on SATCOM. In all of this time, never was Management or the Duty Officer ever advised of this situation. I could not tell if ATC or Tower was ever called. Ramp finally called and advised that inboard slat piece was missing. The crew called Dispatch, and amazingly, the Dispatcher offered a re-analysis with an over burn accounting for missing inboard slat pieces and continue to [destination]. ALL OF THIS WITH MISSING PARTS OF THE WING! And the flight was holding at 10000 FT. I advised Maintenance and the Duty Officer and they went over to the Dispatcher. The crew finally advised Dispatch that they were returning to [departure airport].

There was a serious lack of competency, urgency, and operational control displayed. Dispatcher couldn't dial the aircraft on SATCOM in such an urgent situation. Dispatcher never advised anyone on the situation. Dispatcher relays to the crew over burns to continue to [destination] with aircraft pieces missing, possibly putting the crew and the flight in further danger.
Narrative: 2
Inboard slat broke away from the aircraft on takeoff. Dumped fuel. Air return.
Synopsis
MD11 flight had a loss of a an inboard slat on takeoff which results in a return to departure Airport. Miscommunication issues between Dispatch and the flight crew made the situation worse.

Im wondering WHY the DX didnt even consider alerting a DM or sup about the situation. More amazing is WHY they then did a recalc and suggested continuing to their destination? If anything I would have told them ok, turn back and land we can deal with it on the ground. Yes mgmt might get mad but thats better than possibly endangering 100s of lives.

You have probably heard the saying "A little knowledge is a dangerous thing." But have your heard the rest of it? "Drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring: there shallow draughts intoxicate the brain, and drinking largely sobers us again."

You don't yet know enough yet to have your musings taken seriously on this board, and your posts prove it. Stop trying to prove you're an expert, and go out and become one. Start by getting your dispatcher certificate.

Put all that other stuff aside or you will have to, as master Yoda said, "Unlearn what you have learned."

 

[PugLife]

He doesn’t learn or take criticism and apply it. Could be a problem in this industry...

 

[faceman]

As far as the message about the part coming off he MD11, the crew should have contacted the tower first (FOD) and then initiated a radio call to the dispatcher. The most common piece that could come off would be a fairing and if that was confirmed, providing a fuel burn amendment to the release would be a normal thing to do, IF, dispatcher was able to confirm with maintenance that the aircraft was AIRWORTHY. In reality, maintenance will hesitate to use that word in this situation and there will be no other choice than to land at nearest suitable. IMO.

 

[CPZ9900]

Who the F reads the ASRS? Good lord.

 

[Burrito]

 

[A-9er]

I think A1 is more enthusiastic than anything else. I don't think he's trying to show off what he knows; I don't think he's trying to pretend to be an expert. Isn't it possible he's conveying his love and passion for aviation? Are enthusiasm and passion bad things?

 

[who'swho]

I think A1 is more enthusiastic than anything else. I don't think he's trying to show off what he knows; I don't think he's trying to pretend to be an expert. Isn't it possible he's conveying his love and passion for aviation? Are enthusiasm and passion bad things?

LOL!! When someone on here gives an answer to one of his outlandish questions and his response is some outlandish question to their answer... it's no longer "love and passion for aviation" it's called TROLLING. I'm just not sure why anyone bothers to answer him. At this point... I hope he continues to not have his license so there is no risk of ever having to work with him.