Aircraft dispatched on night flight with MEL item restricting it to day VFR.

Attributes
ACN	439319
Time
Date	199906
Day	Sun
Local Time Of Day	1801 To 2400
Place
Locale Reference	airport : mia.airport
State Reference	FL
Altitude	agl single value : 0
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Light	Dusk
Aircraft 1
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	Commercial Fixed Wing
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Flight Phase	ground : preflight
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	other personnel
Qualification	other
ASRS Report	439319
Events
Anomaly	aircraft equipment problem : less severe maintenance problem : non compliance with mel non adherence : far
Resolutory Action	none taken : detected after the fact
Factors
Maintenance	contributing factor : schedule pressure performance deficiency : logbook entry
Supplementary
Problem Areas	Company Maintenance Human Performance
Primary Problem	Ambiguous

Narrative:

The flight should not have departed. It had a day VMC only MEL on the aircraft. The MEL was the standby airspeed indicator. I was the dispatcher of this flight. Our equipment router for the miami hub told me the flight had gone to nassau after it landed. He was told by our maintenance control that maintenance was working to clear the MEL before it left, but had failed to do so. The flight departed 55 mins late and was swapped to a new aircraft, the one with the day only VMC MEL. I do not know if the crew was aware that maintenance was working the MEL prior to departure. I failed to notice the MEL once the equipment had been swapped. What are some of the controling factors? First, I can say that dispatcher workload is always a contributing factor. The amount of releases I am responsible for keeps increasing. We as dispatchers want the FAA to set guidelines as to dispatcher workload. We presently have way too many releases on the desk we dispatch. Company management will keep piling on more and more as long as we do them. Each flight is not getting the attention it deserves and I believe the spirit of the FARS are being violated. We, as hourly employees, are placed in the position of having to carry the increased workload or lose our jobs. I am certain that safety is being compromised on a daily basis.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACFT DISPATCHED ON NIGHT FLT WITH MEL ITEM RESTRICTING IT TO DAY VFR.

Narrative: THE FLT SHOULD NOT HAVE DEPARTED. IT HAD A DAY VMC ONLY MEL ON THE ACFT. THE MEL WAS THE STANDBY AIRSPD INDICATOR. I WAS THE DISPATCHER OF THIS FLT. OUR EQUIP ROUTER FOR THE MIAMI HUB TOLD ME THE FLT HAD GONE TO NASSAU AFTER IT LANDED. HE WAS TOLD BY OUR MAINT CTL THAT MAINT WAS WORKING TO CLR THE MEL BEFORE IT LEFT, BUT HAD FAILED TO DO SO. THE FLT DEPARTED 55 MINS LATE AND WAS SWAPPED TO A NEW ACFT, THE ONE WITH THE DAY ONLY VMC MEL. I DO NOT KNOW IF THE CREW WAS AWARE THAT MAINT WAS WORKING THE MEL PRIOR TO DEP. I FAILED TO NOTICE THE MEL ONCE THE EQUIP HAD BEEN SWAPPED. WHAT ARE SOME OF THE CTLING FACTORS? FIRST, I CAN SAY THAT DISPATCHER WORKLOAD IS ALWAYS A CONTRIBUTING FACTOR. THE AMOUNT OF RELEASES I AM RESPONSIBLE FOR KEEPS INCREASING. WE AS DISPATCHERS WANT THE FAA TO SET GUIDELINES AS TO DISPATCHER WORKLOAD. WE PRESENTLY HAVE WAY TOO MANY RELEASES ON THE DESK WE DISPATCH. COMPANY MGMNT WILL KEEP PILING ON MORE AND MORE AS LONG AS WE DO THEM. EACH FLT IS NOT GETTING THE ATTN IT DESERVES AND I BELIEVE THE SPIRIT OF THE FARS ARE BEING VIOLATED. WE, AS HRLY EMPLOYEES, ARE PLACED IN THE POS OF HAVING TO CARRY THE INCREASED WORKLOAD OR LOSE OUR JOBS. I AM CERTAIN THAT SAFETY IS BEING COMPROMISED ON A DAILY BASIS.

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.