SEGATAKI

The point is that the terms re-dispatch and re-release are often miss interpreted The re-released destination is on the ICAO flight plan not the re-dispatched destination which is a company term. The ICAO flight plan sees it as a re-release point.

RIF (Re-clearance In Flight per ICAO DOC 8400/4) Routing from the re-dispatch point to the released destination. Is what is noted on the ICAO flight plan

On a re-dispatch flight, the flight is filed from the origin to the desired destination but “released” to a closer, intermediate destination. The fuel plan meets all the FAR 121.645 fuel requirements to the filed destination with the exception of the 10% reserve fuel. The 10% reserve fuel for the flight is modified to require only reserve fuel in the amount of 10% of the time from a “re-dispatch point” to the filed destination, rather than the full 10% of the time from the origin to the filed destination. This “re-dispatch point” is a point chosen by Flight Control along the route, common to both flight plans and relatively close to the end of the flight.

That should explain what your required arrival fuel is!

In no way am I saying that you violate a filed clearance, but clearly if you have the required fuel on board to reach your destination, you have the right to exercise your captain's authority to continue your flight to your re-dispatched destination or your cleared destination. It is the job of both captain and the dispatcher to ensure that a re-release is obtained in order to continue the flight. Thus the reason for obtaining your clearance 2 hours prior to your re-dispatch point. If in the span of two hours you can not contact a dispatcher something is a little amiss!

Lineslug

Apparently you did not read my previous post. We had 3 experienced intl pilots on board plus a check airman. I've been flying intl for 35 years, and EVERY available means to contact the dispatcher was used to no avail.

Something was amiss alright - the company's refusal to put satcomm on all of our aircraft a long time ago.

I may have the "right" to use my emergency authority anytime, but in my opinion the packages not arriving at their intended destination is NOT an emergency, and would not be viewed as such by the FAA or ICAO authorities. Exactly what do you consider the emergency to be in this situation? GMAFB.

It sounds like you were one of those company drones who believed it was just fine for us to fly around for so many years without TCAS in our airplanes as well.

Airbum

I just reread Segataki's post, my take from it was that he advocated landing at the filed dest airport and not the dispatched airport if unable to contact your dispatcher by the redispatch point.

If my understanding is incorrect then I am wrong. if its not ..... well then i stand by my statement

SEGATAKI

Where in my post do I mention anything regarding TCAS. GMAFB you are so busy trying to bash someone or make them appear foolish you can't stick to the topic! Offer me some proof that I am a company drone as you claim and by the way I have been flying international for 39 years.

Deespatcher

Are you guys not familiar with your own manuals? Redispatch is used in the case of flag ops, the term re-release is used in the case of supplemental ops. They are otherwise the same thing.

Let's say you're flying from PANC to RCTP on a redispatch flight plan. You are technically dispatched to the intermediate airport, ie RJBB. The dispatch release that you as a captain signs, the very top part, says your destination is RJBB. Therefore, the legal document in the eyes of the FAA says you're are dispatched to RJBB. You are filed with ATC to RCTP with the RIF that at some intermediate point you may be refiled to RJBB. Again, you are dispatched to RJBB until you receive an amendment, within the 2 hours prior to the planned redispatch point, from you dispatcher (or in the case of a supplemental operation to your rereleased point until you receive an amendment from the person designated to exercise operational control of the flight) indicating that you are no redispatched to the final destination, in this case RCTP.

If you're not able to contact flight control, then you are required to go to the original destination (ie RJBB) UNLESS in the PIC's opinion that continuing to RJBB (in this case) is unsafe and he/she may use his/her authority to continue to any destination he/she feels is safe. In previous lifetimes, this has been interpreted by the FAA as an emergency situation and the PIC is required to submit a report per FAR 121.557. Then the FAA is probably going to ask why you felt it was unsafe, and not merely inconvenient.

Granted, being unable to contact your dispatcher for 2 hours is highly unlikely, but not unheard of. In such cases, regulations and company manuals all state the course of action that is expected in normal operations.

In relation to "FAA required arrival fuel", no FAR I'm aware of states a quantity of fuel that must be on an aircraft at the destination. 121.645 and 121.639 all stated that no plane ""may dispatch or take off without... ". After take off, it becomes total fuel on board, and can be used at the captains discretion. Some companies designate in their ops manuals a minimum fuel required before declaring a fuel emergency, but these numbers are based on individual operational experience. If I'm incorrect, please supply the FAR. I love to learn new things.

Lineslug

Deespatcher: You are spot on. I still cannot believe that someone with "39 years" of international experience would consider it ok to use their emergency authority, or advocate that it is ok for someone else to do it, when no actual emergency exists. With that logic, we should all just declare an emergency and proceed direct to the marker whenever we are running late.

Like you say, unless I have a damn good reason (i.e. unsafe) not to go to that released airport, that's exactly where I'm going in the event of no contact (again).

Segataki: You're going to cause somebody to lose their ticket by advocating it's ok to proceed to the filed destination without a re-release. And the no contact DOES happen, albeit rarely, as I tried to point out to you. If you really have 39 years of international experience you should know this already. It is professionally irresponsible for you to be telling folks incorrect information that could potentially cost them their ticket - please tell me that you are not in a position of management, are you?

Signal Delta

I had an enlightening conversation with some of the dispatchers involved in this. Apparently the crew had been "briefed" on the AMU ahead of time by one of the ANC APCs. Dispatch management had also been "briefed" by an ANC ACP that it was LEGAL to route a MD11 through the AMU. When the dispatcher didn't do it he was "briefed" as to why it was "ok to go ahead and just do it. DM up in ANC said we can." The non-management dispatchers stuck to their guns (opspecs) and routed around it. When the crew flew through it (twice) there really wasn't too many surprised looks in dispatch.

Now why wasn't the dispatcher's ASAP report also posted on airupsers for contrast and comparison???

Zapata

You know what? I think that your first read is correct after all. Disregard my previous post....my bad.

That is all. Carry on.

SEGATAKI

In no way am I saying that you violate a filed clearance!!!!!!!

MX727

I'm not sure if UPS is Supp or Flag. However, Supplemental doesn't require a dispatcher and there is no joint responsibility once the aircraft is airborne, correct? It seems from the below FARs, that a Supplemental captain would just need to record the his re-release on the FPR.

121.533

121.535

121.537

121.597

121.631