Sabre Dispatch Monitor

A1TAPE

Well-Known Member
If
Not getting out of the game. But stopping support for the old DM. They wanted people using the newest programs with FPM and said they will still support DM, if the company was willing to pay for the support staff and all costs. So yeah... DM is getting out of the game for them to consolidate the suite
FPM as good as DM? Someone earlier commented it was a downgrade from DM. Wonder why
 

alpine1989

Well-Known Member
Wait, didn’t Sabre announce they were going to sunset DM in 2011 at their user conference? 9 years later and folks are still using it.
 

4EngineETOPS

Well-Known Member
Has anyone been hands on with (or at least seen a demo of) Flightkeys? The idea of a dispatch program built in the current century is nice.
 

FlyingSioux1

Well-Known Member
You don't like getting dropped to 8000 feet just because you had the audacity to put on a legally required alt? Or the weekly outages? Haters gonna hate.
My favorite is when it puts it to 2,000 feet and Sabre thinks that is fine with a mountain range in the way.
 

paincorp

Well-Known Member
Has anyone been hands on with (or at least seen a demo of) Flightkeys? The idea of a dispatch program built in the current century is nice.
They had a rep at the Safety Summit. We didn’t get too deep into it, but I really liked what I saw.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Delta Echo

Well-Known Member
Dispatch Monitor is and outdated joke. I'm pretty sure Sabre has stopped pushing updates for it. Why they don't pull the plug is beyond me.
 

Delta Echo

Well-Known Member
Please no, I’ve nearly forgotten about that nightmare software.
Word is it's about the airline paying for a version that recognizes Part 121 joint operational control and the dispatchers role vs. The less expensive and default European model that only sees the captain as God.
 

dispatchguy

Well-Known Member
UPS uses Lido so it speaks 121, but with a deep accent. Its bread and butter is for an EASA carrier.

There is no perfect flight planning system, and some suck harder than others. I was a SABRE KU, and once I understood its method to its madness, I actually kinda liked it. Its a decent system IF you train it properly (which few airlines do).

I was at my first DX gig (AWI), freshly signed off, and I have a BA46 going into ORD one day when ATC was giving out free airborne reroutes. Had I had been told that K6 meant the United States for an ICAO code would have made all the difference in the world.

I do miss the EGF JR Mask, the best of 1970s mainframe technology.

SWA signed with FlightKeys a year or so ago, but I know nothing about it.
 

flynryan692

Well-Known Member
Why would the FAA have a say in this? That makes no sense.
It's 20 year old software that has no support (outside of regulatory mandates, but even that is pulling teeth) in a world with rapidly changing technology. It uses Actian PSQL and PSQLv12 ended support in 2019, I'm not sure if DM works with the "newer" Zen versions or not. I think when your software loses support and the database it uses loses support an argument can be made that there is a potential safety risk, and a risk to operational reliability. It doesn't make sense for Sabre to suport it, they have newer options available, it doesn't make sense for the FAA to allow it since there is a potential safety risk, and it doesn't make sense for airlines to use it and deal with the headaches it causes when there are more modern options available.
 

alpine1989

Well-Known Member
It's 20 year old software that has no support (outside of regulatory mandates, but even that is pulling teeth) in a world with rapidly changing technology. It uses Actian PSQL and PSQLv12 ended support in 2019, I'm not sure if DM works with the "newer" Zen versions or not. I think when your software loses support and the database it uses loses support an argument can be made that there is a potential safety risk, and a risk to operational reliability. It doesn't make sense for Sabre to suport it, they have newer options available, it doesn't make sense for the FAA to allow it since there is a potential safety risk, and it doesn't make sense for airlines to use it and deal with the headaches it causes when there are more modern options available.
That’s ridiculous! It either calculates a release that complies with all applicable regulations or it doesn’t. If the FAA believes there is noncompliance or deems it unsafe, they would compel the airline to fix it or cease using it immediately.
 
Top