AUS high winds

Reply Subscribe

Page 5 of 18

Last »

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

03-08-2025 | 05:51 PM

#41

MrMustache

Line Holder

Joined: May 2013

Posts: 1,271

Likes: 0

From: The Parlor

Quote:

Originally Posted by notEnuf

I requested extra fuel for deice the other day and was told they can't because we were payload optimised. I didn't push the issue because I figured it would be tight but ok. We waited to start and when we got to the deice line we shut down. I made it work and then kept asking for short cuts. It all worked out but had I said no, his tone told me there was going to be a resistance. In the end we landed over min fuel so no issues but the gray area was black and white for him. I did make 2 non-revs happy though.

really? IGAF, if I want fuel I'm getting fuel. Simple.

03-08-2025 | 05:54 PM

#42

WickedSmaht

Line Holder

Joined: Oct 2012

Posts: 301

Likes: 3

From: Sic semper tomato

Quote:

Originally Posted by notEnuf

Fair enough but aside from the tone did you actually ask? There is an ability for them to add fuel and "blame" it on the crew, PRF (pilot requested fuel). Nobody in the OCC gets lectured about fuel, nobody and if you get resistance then politely press the issue.

03-08-2025 | 06:25 PM

#43

Buck Rogers

Gets Weekends Off

Joined: Apr 2018

Posts: 3,580

Likes: 35

Or, you could ask for additional fuel and if resistance is encountered then do it their way with the fuel they pushed for. Then if enroute, you are not going to have enough fuel, pre-emptively divert. Done and done. Not your problem,you contentiously tried.

I think I have read on these very forums it's not your job to fix their problems, or did I misread that?

03-08-2025 | 06:33 PM

#44

bugman61

Line Holder

Joined: Oct 2014

Posts: 1,015

Likes: 13

Quote:

Originally Posted by WickedSmaht

And did they tell you that because they wanted to be just legal to go or because the next METAR might demonstrate that it was within limits and safe to operate in there? Legit question.

“I suggest you don’t push until we see the next metar because the winds are currently above limits”

The next observations were within limits, but if not I would have expected them to want us to wait (it was a ~30 min flight).

03-08-2025 | 06:39 PM

#45

Guppydriver95

Line Holder

Joined: Mar 2018

Posts: 1,376

Likes: 57

Quote:

Originally Posted by Buck Rogers

Except now it becomes the crew’s problem. Now we have to deal with the added headache/threat of an unnecessary divert, potentially timing out, and failing to get the people where they need to be instead of just doing it right to begin with. We should never cave to the company’s desire to cut safety margins to the bare minimum in order to maximize revenue.

03-08-2025 | 08:10 PM

#46

WickedSmaht

Line Holder

Joined: Oct 2012

Posts: 301

Likes: 3

From: Sic semper tomato

Quote:

Originally Posted by Guppydriver95

Except now it becomes the crew’s problem. Now we have to deal with the added headache/threat of an unnecessary divert, potentially timing out, and failing to get the people where they need to be instead of just doing it right to begin with. We should never cave to the company’s desire to cut safety margins to the bare minimum in order to maximize revenue.

Agreed, of course. I'm just not convinced that the certificated group of people who coincidentally happen to be members of the only other organized group on property are interested in maximizing revenue over safety. Some conversation might help to better understand eachothers motivations. If you're convinced that it wasn't right to begin with, don't take it and have that conversation. Irrational or unsafe argument from them? Ask for the senior and work it out, reasonably sure (with the obligatory exceptions) that it will never get that far.

03-08-2025 | 08:16 PM

#47

m3113n1a1

Gets Weekends Off

Joined: Apr 2018

Posts: 4,110

Likes: 485

Quote:

Originally Posted by WickedSmaht

United pilots can add up to 2000 lbs of fuel with a click of a button on their iPad..zero questions asked. Why can't we do this?!

Buck is right though, IF there was resistance (I've never encountered it from a Delta dispatcher they've all been awesome), just evaluate your fuel state enroute and divert if necessary.

03-08-2025 | 08:17 PM

#48

WickedSmaht

Line Holder

Joined: Oct 2012

Posts: 301

Likes: 3

From: Sic semper tomato

Quote:

Originally Posted by bugman61

“I suggest you don’t push until we see the next metar because the winds are currently above limits”

The next observations were within limits, but if not I would have expected them to want us to wait (it was a ~30 min flight).

100% yes. That should always be the expectation. If it's not met, run it up the ProStands flagpole, the two groups talk frequently with pretty good results. If it's in the immediate, not safe and you don't like it? Don't do it. Period. Full stop. I would expect that you'd have the support of everyone involved.

Cheers.

03-08-2025 | 08:21 PM

#49

WickedSmaht

Line Holder

Joined: Oct 2012

Posts: 301

Likes: 3

From: Sic semper tomato

Quote:

Originally Posted by m3113n1a1

Nail. Hammer. Head...

03-08-2025 | 08:32 PM

#50

m3113n1a1

Gets Weekends Off

Joined: Apr 2018

Posts: 4,110

Likes: 485

Quote:

Originally Posted by bugman61

FOM 14.1.3.1 Says you can't dispatch to an airport forecast below minimums. I remember from a regional where we did lots of short flights under an hour, this meant that we needed a current observation at the destination (METAR) above minimums on those short flights in order to depart. Longer flights were legal if the TAF was legal. I can't find that written in our convoluted manuals here though.