Who do you operate for, QF?
No (although I have done some sim training work for them in years gone by) .. as an olde pharte, my airline flying days are well and truly over.
Been involved with a number airlines on the pilot side and most have been what I would refer to as good operations for the ops eng side of things. On the other hand, I have seen a number which I would move to the cowboy end of the scale.
Similarly, I have provided ops eng support for a number of airline operators. All have been very sensitive to their corporate risk responsibilities. Indeed, on occasions when the CP and I took a view, sometimes we chose not to tell the beancounters too much about that view .. preferring just to implement the more conservative approach to life
Perhaps I've just been lucky along the way ?
but that attitude about not going would see you terminated by a number of companies
I appreciate and understand that. However, I probably would have resigned from the role prior to its coming to that. Then again, I have the advantage of having several strings to the bow and the ability to make a crust one way or another.
Sincerely, I do empathise with folks who are involved with such operators.
Even in Oz you see numerous notams on obst that are taken for granted that the ops dept have "see to it". And not enough info to check them out.
When I was actively involved in airline flying, the operators all had adequate general takeoff chart data sufficient for the crew on the day to make a conservative calculation of RTOW using NOTAM data. If you don't have that then the operator should have a call-in support service for the problem. Certainly, for my consultancy's customers, we fielded more than a few calls from commanders on the ground with a need for a go/no go answer.
give us an insight into how one should ... manage to do it within the time constraints allowed?
On the line, you can't do much more than use a general takeoff chart with the advertised obstacle problem. This should amount to a normal turnaround nuisance, time-wise, for folk in practice.
If you needed to run a full manual AFM analysis, one might need to make arrangements for the passengers to amuse themselves. Seriously, it is not a problem for the pilot .. the operator should be addressing it at homeplate.
but buying software, subscribing to outsourced data still means the Commander needs to check - doesn't it?
This Industry abounds with instances where the commander is responsible but can't, realistically, do the coalface work. Provided that the data source is reputable and competent, the usual expectation is that sensible sanity checks be made.
So is there a problem here that the industry needs to address...
As it has been (worldwide) for many a year.
perhaps we should show up for duty three hours before a flight to make sure the buck does not land in our lap?
I'll choose to read that with the wry smile I presume you intended ? Seriously, this either is a Regulator or Union problem to pursue.