Narrative:

As I write this, I do not have the actual hourly WX data, but visibility was greater than 6 NM with no low ceilings or fog. I started my shift at XA30Z, there were 3 flts scheduled out of fai to which this form concerns, 2 of which were planned and dispatched by another dispatcher. When I started work, I noted the NOTAM for fai indicating the south 600 ft of runway 1/19 was closed from XA05-XA17Z until jun/fri/01. I mentioned this to the dispatchers on duty, and they indicated they had not seen or noted this item, so I do not know when the NOTAM had actually been issued. With the 600 ft closure there was still 11000+ ft available. As a group, we noted that we did not have performance data for runway 1 with this closure, but we did have data for runway 19 with intersection takeoff that would account for the 600 ft closure, and since winds were approximately 5 KTS we could use runway 19 with a slight tailwind component. With over 11000 ft runway available and all flts well under any performance weights, I decided this data would suffice for the night and first couple of morning flts, then we could order the performance data we needed in the morning. The flts departed with no questions or comments from crews, and I do not know for a fact that the portion of the runway was actually closed at the time they departed. It was not until just before the first morning departure out of fai that a captain called and pointed out the error. We immediately held those flts and arranged to get temporary full length for the first 2 morning flts while we ordered and received performance data. The error I had made was, that while the intersection data I had used more than accounted for the 600 ft runway length closure, it would work had the north 600 ft been closed, the NOTAM was for the south 600 ft being closed. Worst case, if the crews actually did use runway 19 at the intersection, plus the 600 ft south closure (if it actually was closed), we still had 10000+ ft of runway available and all flts were light (nothing close to any performance limits). Performance data for the closure was ordered, received, and used thereafter.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: COMPANY DISPATCHER ALLOWED DEP OF FLTS WITHOUT HAVING PERFORMANCE DATA FOR CLOSURE OF THE S 600 FT OF RWY 1-19 AT PAFA.

Narrative: AS I WRITE THIS, I DO NOT HAVE THE ACTUAL HRLY WX DATA, BUT VISIBILITY WAS GREATER THAN 6 NM WITH NO LOW CEILINGS OR FOG. I STARTED MY SHIFT AT XA30Z, THERE WERE 3 FLTS SCHEDULED OUT OF FAI TO WHICH THIS FORM CONCERNS, 2 OF WHICH WERE PLANNED AND DISPATCHED BY ANOTHER DISPATCHER. WHEN I STARTED WORK, I NOTED THE NOTAM FOR FAI INDICATING THE S 600 FT OF RWY 1/19 WAS CLOSED FROM XA05-XA17Z UNTIL JUN/FRI/01. I MENTIONED THIS TO THE DISPATCHERS ON DUTY, AND THEY INDICATED THEY HAD NOT SEEN OR NOTED THIS ITEM, SO I DO NOT KNOW WHEN THE NOTAM HAD ACTUALLY BEEN ISSUED. WITH THE 600 FT CLOSURE THERE WAS STILL 11000+ FT AVAILABLE. AS A GROUP, WE NOTED THAT WE DID NOT HAVE PERFORMANCE DATA FOR RWY 1 WITH THIS CLOSURE, BUT WE DID HAVE DATA FOR RWY 19 WITH INTXN TKOF THAT WOULD ACCOUNT FOR THE 600 FT CLOSURE, AND SINCE WINDS WERE APPROX 5 KTS WE COULD USE RWY 19 WITH A SLIGHT TAILWIND COMPONENT. WITH OVER 11000 FT RWY AVAILABLE AND ALL FLTS WELL UNDER ANY PERFORMANCE WTS, I DECIDED THIS DATA WOULD SUFFICE FOR THE NIGHT AND FIRST COUPLE OF MORNING FLTS, THEN WE COULD ORDER THE PERFORMANCE DATA WE NEEDED IN THE MORNING. THE FLTS DEPARTED WITH NO QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM CREWS, AND I DO NOT KNOW FOR A FACT THAT THE PORTION OF THE RWY WAS ACTUALLY CLOSED AT THE TIME THEY DEPARTED. IT WAS NOT UNTIL JUST BEFORE THE FIRST MORNING DEP OUT OF FAI THAT A CAPT CALLED AND POINTED OUT THE ERROR. WE IMMEDIATELY HELD THOSE FLTS AND ARRANGED TO GET TEMPORARY FULL LENGTH FOR THE FIRST 2 MORNING FLTS WHILE WE ORDERED AND RECEIVED PERFORMANCE DATA. THE ERROR I HAD MADE WAS, THAT WHILE THE INTXN DATA I HAD USED MORE THAN ACCOUNTED FOR THE 600 FT RWY LENGTH CLOSURE, IT WOULD WORK HAD THE N 600 FT BEEN CLOSED, THE NOTAM WAS FOR THE S 600 FT BEING CLOSED. WORST CASE, IF THE CREWS ACTUALLY DID USE RWY 19 AT THE INTXN, PLUS THE 600 FT S CLOSURE (IF IT ACTUALLY WAS CLOSED), WE STILL HAD 10000+ FT OF RWY AVAILABLE AND ALL FLTS WERE LIGHT (NOTHING CLOSE TO ANY PERFORMANCE LIMITS). PERFORMANCE DATA FOR THE CLOSURE WAS ORDERED, RECEIVED, AND USED THEREAFTER.

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.