First officer complaint regarding the airline management policy and dispatcher attitude of dispatchi...

Attributes
ACN	319056
Time
Date	199510
Day	Sat
Local Time Of Day	0601 To 1200
Place
Locale Reference	airport : phl
State Reference	PA
Altitude	agl bound lower : 0 agl bound upper : 0
Environment
Flight Conditions	IMC
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	Dash 8 Series Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Flight Phase	ground : preflight
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : first officer
Qualification	pilot : commercial pilot : instrument
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 220 flight time total : 6300 flight time type : 2400
ASRS Report	319056
Person 2
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : captain oversight : pic
Qualification	pilot : atp
Events
Anomaly	aircraft equipment problem : less severe inflight encounter : weather non adherence other other anomaly other
Independent Detector	other flight crewa
Resolutory Action	none taken : detected after the fact
Consequence	Other
Supplementary
Primary Problem	Weather
Air Traffic Incident	other

Narrative:

Our dispatcher, dispatched us with no mention of the intensity of the rain associated with a cold front passing through eastern half of PA. We encountered heavy rain and constant moderate, after bordering on severe, turbulence. The radar was only depicting light to moderate rain in any direction. After landing in philadelphia, the captain wrote up the radar as not functioning properly and talked again to dispatch, who released us to allentown with no mention of potentially hazardous conditions. They arranged for us to take another airplane, one which we felt had a good radar. The wind shifted from 120 degrees to 290 degrees at phl and now with a good radar we departed, thinking the front was now east of philadelphia and any lingering cells could be avoided. We again encountered heavy rain, moderate to close to severe turbulence and not much depiction on the radar. After landing at abe we found our dispatcher had again dispatched us for our next leg to baltimore. The captain however 'pressed' the dispatcher for an exact explanation of their ground based radar depiction and after 10 mins and 2 calls pried enough out of him to realize we had been dispatched 3 times into almost solid level 3 rain with embedded level 4 and level 5 cells. Needless to say, we did not depart until all WX had moved to the east. Our company puts a lot of pressure on dispatch to get all flts out on time. Also, I don't think our dispatchers understand the significance of what they see on their radar screens nor do they understand the limitations of airborne radar due to attenuation. So I believe it is a fear of delaying or canceling a flight that tends to keep our dispatchers from 'volunteering' too much information. If we would have known the extent of the WX, we would have easily understood our radar problem and would have probably refused dispatch on first leg.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: FO COMPLAINT REGARDING THE AIRLINE MGMNT POLICY AND DISPATCHER ATTITUDE OF DISPATCHING PAX FLTS INTO SEVERE WX CONDITIONS WITHOUT PROVIDING ADEQUATE INFO TO THE FLCS.

Narrative: OUR DISPATCHER, DISPATCHED US WITH NO MENTION OF THE INTENSITY OF THE RAIN ASSOCIATED WITH A COLD FRONT PASSING THROUGH EASTERN HALF OF PA. WE ENCOUNTERED HVY RAIN AND CONSTANT MODERATE, AFTER BORDERING ON SEVERE, TURB. THE RADAR WAS ONLY DEPICTING LIGHT TO MODERATE RAIN IN ANY DIRECTION. AFTER LNDG IN PHILADELPHIA, THE CAPT WROTE UP THE RADAR AS NOT FUNCTIONING PROPERLY AND TALKED AGAIN TO DISPATCH, WHO RELEASED US TO ALLENTOWN WITH NO MENTION OF POTENTIALLY HAZARDOUS CONDITIONS. THEY ARRANGED FOR US TO TAKE ANOTHER AIRPLANE, ONE WHICH WE FELT HAD A GOOD RADAR. THE WIND SHIFTED FROM 120 DEGS TO 290 DEGS AT PHL AND NOW WITH A GOOD RADAR WE DEPARTED, THINKING THE FRONT WAS NOW E OF PHILADELPHIA AND ANY LINGERING CELLS COULD BE AVOIDED. WE AGAIN ENCOUNTERED HVY RAIN, MODERATE TO CLOSE TO SEVERE TURB AND NOT MUCH DEPICTION ON THE RADAR. AFTER LNDG AT ABE WE FOUND OUR DISPATCHER HAD AGAIN DISPATCHED US FOR OUR NEXT LEG TO BALTIMORE. THE CAPT HOWEVER 'PRESSED' THE DISPATCHER FOR AN EXACT EXPLANATION OF THEIR GND BASED RADAR DEPICTION AND AFTER 10 MINS AND 2 CALLS PRIED ENOUGH OUT OF HIM TO REALIZE WE HAD BEEN DISPATCHED 3 TIMES INTO ALMOST SOLID LEVEL 3 RAIN WITH EMBEDDED LEVEL 4 AND LEVEL 5 CELLS. NEEDLESS TO SAY, WE DID NOT DEPART UNTIL ALL WX HAD MOVED TO THE E. OUR COMPANY PUTS A LOT OF PRESSURE ON DISPATCH TO GET ALL FLTS OUT ON TIME. ALSO, I DON'T THINK OUR DISPATCHERS UNDERSTAND THE SIGNIFICANCE OF WHAT THEY SEE ON THEIR RADAR SCREENS NOR DO THEY UNDERSTAND THE LIMITATIONS OF AIRBORNE RADAR DUE TO ATTENUATION. SO I BELIEVE IT IS A FEAR OF DELAYING OR CANCELING A FLT THAT TENDS TO KEEP OUR DISPATCHERS FROM 'VOLUNTEERING' TOO MUCH INFO. IF WE WOULD HAVE KNOWN THE EXTENT OF THE WX, WE WOULD HAVE EASILY UNDERSTOOD OUR RADAR PROB AND WOULD HAVE PROBABLY REFUSED DISPATCH ON FIRST LEG.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 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.

First officer complaint regarding the airline management policy and dispatcher attitude of dispatching passenger flts into severe WX conditions without providing adequate information to the flcs.