 |
37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Air carrier dispatcher reported high work load and ATC confusion about airport conditions contributed to a less than optimum diversion plan.
| Attributes | |
| ACN | 1571253 |
| Time | |
| Date | 201807 |
| Local Time Of Day | 1801-2400 |
| Place | |
| Locale Reference | ZAB.ARTCC |
| State Reference | NM |
| Environment | |
| Flight Conditions | IMC |
| Light | Night |
| Aircraft 1 | |
| Make Model Name | B737 Next Generation Undifferentiated |
| Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
| Flight Phase | Descent |
| Flight Plan | IFR |
| Person 1 | |
| Function | Dispatcher |
| Qualification | Dispatch Dispatcher |
| Events | |
| Anomaly | ATC Issue All Types Deviation - Procedural Published Material / Policy Inflight Event / Encounter Fuel Issue Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence |
Narrative:
The captain advised me he was diverting to abq; with fob (fuel onboard) of 7.0. I advised abq burn of 4;296 pounds with reserve of 3;652 pounds; and suggested las as being less burn since I observed he was using reserve fuel to divert to abq. I made sure he declared minimum fuel with ZAB. I also repeatedly queried his current fob and fuel over destination to verify I was calculating fuel correctly.erroneous ATC communication about tus closure; irregular operations with dust storm at phx. My desk had 4 phx arrivals at the same time during a dust storm; this was not an optimum workload.aircraft attempted to land phx with 2 SM visibility; captain at that point felt weather conditions were unsafe; asked to divert to listed alternate of tus. ATC advised tus was closed; which was incorrect. Captain advised he was diverting to abq. I feel the cause of this low fuel arrival was communications. I was unaware of the fact that ATC had advised the captain that tus was closed. There were a few scattered cells in tus area; which was why I thought he chose abq instead.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: Air carrier Dispatcher reported high work load and ATC confusion about airport conditions contributed to a less than optimum diversion plan.
Narrative: The Captain advised me he was diverting to ABQ; with FOB (fuel onboard) of 7.0. I advised ABQ burn of 4;296 LBS with reserve of 3;652 LBS; and suggested LAS as being less burn since I observed he was using reserve fuel to divert to ABQ. I made sure he declared minimum fuel with ZAB. I also repeatedly queried his current FOB and fuel over destination to verify I was calculating fuel correctly.Erroneous ATC communication about TUS closure; irregular operations with dust storm at PHX. My desk had 4 PHX arrivals at the same time during a dust storm; this was not an optimum workload.Aircraft attempted to land PHX with 2 SM visibility; Captain at that point felt weather conditions were unsafe; asked to divert to listed alternate of TUS. ATC advised TUS was closed; which was incorrect. Captain advised he was diverting to ABQ. I feel the cause of this low fuel arrival was communications. I was unaware of the fact that ATC had advised the Captain that TUS was closed. There were a few scattered cells in TUS area; which was why I thought he chose ABQ instead.
Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.