Frosty Hoar. Interesting name, by the way.
No, I don’t have thousands of flight hours as a pilot in command. But, I do have thousands of flights dispatched safely. And I have had a number of incidents in which I know that I have made a difference in the safety of a flight. And the flight crews almost without exception thanked me for it.
No I wasn’t in the cockpit of the Hapag Lloyd flight, taking notes. But its sounds like somebody should have been helping that crew. I have spoken to the Investigator in Charge and discussed with him about an exact parallel that happened under the US joint responsibility system that DID NOT have an accident. It was an A300 with a gear down problem, fuel supply issue and the crew operating the aircraft at improper speeds, just like the Hapag-Lloyd flight. But in the US incident, the dispatcher advised the crew of the mistake and also gave the crew correct numbers for fuel burn with the gear down, plus what they should arrive with at the destination plus enroute alternates to stop at if it became necessary. That flight arrived safely at its destination with reserve fuel on board. That crew was making errors in judgment and had poor information, just as with the Hapag Lloyd flight, but the errors were corrected with the intervention of a licensed, trained, qualified flight dispatcher, unlike the Hapag-Lloyd flight.
Also, I find your comment about the licensed dispatchers being too slow to make a decision compared to the non-licensed ones simply absurd on its face. Who should the flight crew be dealing with? Someone who is knowledgeable and can really help them or someone who simply pushes buttons but has no clue what they are doing?
Multi-tasking is a natural part of the job, as is the need to make decisions in a timely manner. That is the nature of the business. But making a quick but ignorant decision is far worse. I know hundreds of flight dispatchers who are both very knowledgeable and timely in their decision making. In fact, because they are knowledgeable, they are able to make more timely decisions, as they either already know the answer or know where to look for it.
The point of joint responsibility is not to be in the cockpit. That should be obvious. But it is a clear safety check on human factors, both in errors of poor information and errors of poor judgment. You seem to think that pilots are without fault, so let’s keep dispatchers ignorant, as they are not to be trusted.
Your implication that because pilots fly the aircraft this means that dispatcher should have no decisive role in operational decision-making ignores the fact that the two functions, while having similar and to some extent overlapping knowledge bases, have distinct task and functional differences and their respective contributions to make. Dispatchers use different technologies, function in a different environment and work with many other actors in the operational environment. They often work many flights at once, but also know much more about the airline’s and the operational situation than the particular crew does, on a particular flight. But they must be certified and trained to be effective.
By having a management pilot be the source to go to instead of a flight dispatcher, you take out a fundamental safety check in the system. When a line pilot is dealing with a management pilot he/she is dealing with a superior in the chain of command. It is not an equal relationship. Management can take the pilot off flying status if they disagree with what the pilot is doing. Pressure can easily exist. We are in a deregulated environment where there is tremendous pressure to operate flights. The opposite is true in a joint responsibility system. The PIC and the flight dispatcher are jointly responsible for the safety of the flight. They must agree on the operation and that it is safe. In fact, the flight dispatcher provides a safety buffer from management pressure. This has been the case time after time.
Also, when a management pilot is brought in instead of a flight dispatcher, that pilot does not know the particular flight plan, the MEL situation, the fuel state, crew qualifications, aircraft weight, the weather, the ATC situation, airport issues, etc. of the flight involved. The flight dispatcher that planned the flight does know these things and can be of much more help in a situation such as a diversion or an emergency. Management is always available if needed, no matter which system is used, but with a joint system there is much more of a knowledge infrastructure to draw upon.
So here we have a situation in Europe as follows:
1. Many new pilots being hired with less experience than in previous years.
2. Many new air carriers, especially in the low cost model, with tremendous economic pressures due to economic deregulation on all carriers to operate every flight and get that revenue.
3. The weather patterns have changed, with generally more severe patterns than before.
4. The ATC is in flux and under pressure as it changes radically from what existed before.
Yet you are saying, in effect, that a proven, much more effective, safer system of operational control that provides much better support not just to the flight crews, but especially the passengers, should not be adopted. I think not.
PS. Opsbod. Excellent comments. But it needs the whole works.