Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Airline Pilot Forums > Cargo
UPS-Management Crew Taking Directs >

UPS-Management Crew Taking Directs

Search
Notices
Cargo Part 121 cargo airlines

UPS-Management Crew Taking Directs

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 07-17-2010, 06:22 AM
  #41  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Posts: 120
Default

Originally Posted by Slice View Post
Well, we can't all be sky gods like you dog.
I realize that.

I guess expecting a "professional" to be able to make a simple position report is a bit much...
notadog is offline  
Old 07-17-2010, 06:56 AM
  #42  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Deespatcher's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Aug 2007
Position: protecting my license until I get the next job.
Posts: 122
Default

Originally Posted by MX727 View Post
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
UPS is flag/scheduled. There is no required dispatcher in a Supplemental operation, though most supplemental carriers require some one with a dispatch license to be there to hold the "flight follower" position. 121.537(b) states "The pilot in command and the director of operations are jointly responsible for the initiation, continuation, diversion, and termination of a flight in compliance with this chapter and the operations specifications. The director of operations may delegate the functions for the initiation, continuation, diversion, and termination of a flight but he may not delegate the responsibility for those functions." In most cases, the DO has delegated the function to a flight follower or "dispatcher", but is still held responsible.

So I "believe" that no, the captain cannot just amend his own release and head to the final destination without the re-release message from who ever is on the ground (without using the "emergency authority"). I know of carriers (Tower I think it was) who once had in their Ops manual that in the event of an inability to contact dispatch, the crew could continue on if fuel requirements were satisfied. They also had that they could be planned to land overweight at the dispatched destination... Their POI seemed to be pretty lenient.

The supplemental operations I've worked in both had it spelled out in their ops manual that you must receive a re-release from a dispatcher. I also think the ops specs imply that there has to be a message sent to the crew and they must acknowledge in either case of a redispatch or re-release.
Deespatcher is offline  
Old 07-17-2010, 08:20 AM
  #43  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Gunter's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,931
Default

UPS must have the FAA in their hip pocket with all the buffoonery and misinformation flying around over there. Anybody else would be investigated and have training programs changed.
Gunter is offline  
Old 07-17-2010, 11:32 AM
  #44  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,224
Default

Gunter,

I can't agree more. They actually have people here saying that they will fly to their destination (using Captain's emergency authority) if not re-released. I always thought emergency authority was for EMERGENCY situations, and to me, getting the boxes to their destination doesn't seem like a reason to break the FARs. If their was a typhoon over the rerelease airport, emergency authority might be warranted.

That said, I can't believe we still carry the additional 10% reserve. This Cat 1 reserve was established when we were navigating with inferior equipment. With triple IRS and GPS, navigation is very tight. It seems to me that the 10% reserve should be based on aircraft equipment, much like RNP or RVSM. Don't get me wrong, I like having additional fuel, but this is pretty dated regulation.
golfandfly is offline  
Old 07-17-2010, 11:50 AM
  #45  
Freightmama!
 
Freightpuppy's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Dec 2005
Position: 757/767 FO
Posts: 2,880
Default

Originally Posted by Gunter View Post
UPS must have the FAA in their hip pocket with all the buffoonery and misinformation flying around over there. Anybody else would be investigated and have training programs changed.
DUDE! Money talks! I DO wholeheartedly think this is the case. They get away with so much crap, it's not even funny.
Freightpuppy is offline  
Old 07-17-2010, 09:13 PM
  #46  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Position: 1559
Posts: 1,533
Default

Originally Posted by Deespatcher View Post
The supplemental operations I've worked in both had it spelled out in their ops manual that you must receive a re-release from a dispatcher. I also think the ops specs imply that there has to be a message sent to the crew and they must acknowledge in either case of a redispatch or re-release.

FDX is very clear that you have to receive the re-release too. Just wasn't sure what the UPS situation was and what the general situation is for a Supp.

Thanks for the info.
MX727 is offline  
Old 07-17-2010, 11:36 PM
  #47  
Gets Weekends Off
 
JustUnderPar's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Position: UPS Captain
Posts: 837
Default

Originally Posted by notadog View Post
I realize that.

I guess expecting a "professional" to be able to make a simple position report is a bit much...

Not that dude. Life is just that simple for you isn't it? Its that everyone that flies with you hates your $$$$ing guts....
JustUnderPar is offline  
Old 07-17-2010, 11:41 PM
  #48  
Gets Weekends Off
 
JustUnderPar's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Position: UPS Captain
Posts: 837
Default

Originally Posted by Gunter View Post
UPS must have the FAA in their hip pocket with all the buffoonery and misinformation flying around over there. Anybody else would be investigated and have training programs changed.
That is getting ready to change. The company has very good lawyers is the only reason they don't get into more trouble. This little mess they are in now is going to get very public, it will serve its purpose and the three "test pilots" will be canned.
JustUnderPar is offline  
Old 07-18-2010, 01:18 AM
  #49  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Sep 2009
Position: 767 Seat 1A
Posts: 222
Default

Originally Posted by FrontSeat View Post
Segataki may wear his hat and reports others that don't......and corrects people on using the shortened version of his name......
Aaaaaaah, got it now, thanks. The stars have all aligned and everything is crystal clear.
Lineslug is offline  
Old 07-18-2010, 05:25 AM
  #50  
Gets Weekends Off
 
767pilot's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Mar 2005
Position: 767 captain
Posts: 2,695
Default

Originally Posted by JustUnderPar View Post
That is getting ready to change. The company has very good lawyers is the only reason they don't get into more trouble. This little mess they are in now is going to get very public, it will serve its purpose and the three "test pilots" will be canned.
I think that they skate on this one. At worst, the IRO that didn't tell the captain what he found out gets a wrist slap. Too political with the card drive that is going on.
767pilot is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
757mech
Cargo
24
06-07-2010 07:34 PM
DLax85
Cargo
6
11-04-2009 06:01 AM
FlightPhoenix
Cargo
1
01-21-2009 11:00 AM
vagabond
Cargo
1
11-17-2008 04:05 AM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices