Flight Watch

[GPC]

After the recent accident involving an aircraft running out of fuel, is it not time that the European Authorities recognised the need for a proper flight watch system. This is the second such major accident in recent times. Why is it, that in European skies, the crew are very much on their own or relying on ATC to give them information regarding alternates, developing weather etc. ATC are pretty good at what they are trained to do but they know diddly squat about crew time limitations, aircraft performance or aircraft emergency procedures and limitations.
In the USA, flight watch is performed by trained and licensed personnel who are in continuous contact with aircraft in flight giving all relevant information and qualified advice and instruction to flight crew.
Why should we be different in European skies? When flight crew are begging ATC for an emergency landing due fuel shortage then surely the time has come for change.... or must we wait for another (not so lucky) case of an aircraft running out of fuel before the authorities react?

[gofer]

Dear GPC,

Before we go any further, are you sure of a) your facts (that to me seem to be fundamentally missing in the mail above), and b) that you have any foundation whatsoever to your insinuations and implicit accusations - which are now posted on a public forum, for the media to misunderstand and twist to their hearts content.

Sorry if I sound somewhat, bold, rude or attacking, that is not my intent. Oh how could I be so naive, help me please Mr. moderator could GPC be one of the dreaded press in disguise.

You mail can easily be misunderstood to be an accusation of certain people, who have to date not be accused officially or openly. Unless you are their boss, its probably not your place to do so or even to make not very subtle inuendos in that direction. And if are their boss then have the guts to do so the their faces and legal representatives and suffer the consiquences if any, rather than use this forum.

Remember defamation of character is a very expensive mistake to make.

[fourthreethree]

Nicely put Gofer.

I wanted to post a reply to this topic but was unable to come up with the required diplomacy. What you have written Ibelieve sums up the sentiments of the other 75 people who have viewed this topic and failed to come up with the words.

[Notso Fantastic]

Why is this in REPORTING POINTS? It should be in QUESTIONS.
Now which one of these applies?:
<Rumours and News that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots>
or
<If you have a question for professional pilots please post it here. If it isn't a Rumour or News then this is where you will probably find it.>

And YES, it does matter!

[HotDog]

It's an Irish joke, for sure for sure!!:D

[Doctor Cruces]

OK. So tell me how this doesn't affect pilots?? I would have thought that a professional and properly regulated Flight Ops system a la US model would be highly beneficial to you.

The NERVE of someone who by his profile is NOT a pilot (but highly qualified by the look of it) posting on this page, what is the world coming to?



GPC

You will never get Ops recognised in Europe until you can educate pilots to understand that Ops are not just something they have to put up with before they can get on to more important things, but a professional group of people with something useful to contribute to the safe conduct of the flight!

Keep the faith dude, I'm with you on the principle of this.

Brgds

Doc C. :(

[Whalerider]

Unfortunately you are correct that many ATCOs do not understand a/c performanbce limitations - reason being that it is now so difficult to get jump seat rides !
Not conducive to flight safety.
:mad: :mad: :mad:

[Captain Airclues]

I think that GPC's post was entirely reasonable, and was intended to promote a reasoned discussion about the pros and cons of the Flight Watch system. I don't think that he was accusing anyone of anything.
The fact is that in Europe we are very much on our own when we get into a low fuel situation. ATC do their best to help, but in a busy TMA they do not have the spare capacity, or the information available to provide the sort of help that the Flight Watch dispatchers give.
As GPC says, the US dispatchers are fully licenced, and accept full responsibility for their advice. They have info on weather trends, holding delays at all alternate airfields, runway states, landing aid servicability etc. The people that we speak to on our company freqency do not have this information, and are not qualified to give it.
In a critical fuel situation we need all the help and advice that we can get. Although there are many stongly held views on both sides, I think that we need to discuss it in a logical manner without getting emotional. Posts such gofers do nothing to encourage this.

Airclues

[canberra]

the raf has had a flight watch system for years both in uk and world wide.

[opsbod]

In Europe Ops departments are required under JAR to provide Flight watch and to exercise operational control. However, that’s about it, most of what is conducted by Ops teams in Europe is more flight management, ATC slot control and basic weather and Notam watch.

But the European systems aren’t geared up for your Ops department to give you much more than that. Weather Radar feed is only available commercially for the UK and Pyrenees. Much of the weather data available to US dispatchers is not available, oh and half the time we can’t accurately see where you are because ATC information isn’t available in the public domain. For our deliveries we know exactly where one of our Boeing’s is from lift off out of Seattle to landing in London, but, on it’s first commercial flight we will lose it somewhere just south of the English channel because ATC providers don’t want us to know what they’re doing with our aircraft, so its best guess from the Computer Flight plan and takeoff time.

I have to agree with Doc C that most of this is because pilots in Europe see joint responsibility as an erosion of their status. However, we are a professional group of people with something useful to contribute to the safe conduct of the flight.

[Capt. Crosswind]

One Ship one Captain
Divided responsibilty is a hazard to a good operation.
The best operation is provided by a pilot in command who analyzes enroute & alternate weather, plans responsibly, and then maintains an up to the minute assessment of conditions throughout the flight by utilising the Volmet ,& an F/O with a sharp pencil.

[Doctor Cruces]

The above post proves what I wrote earlier about educating pilots.

I don't think anyone has suggested that the ultimate responsibility should not rest with the Captain. No argument with that. I have to agree with GPC that a properly trained and licenced Ops profession would be an asset rather than a drag factor. A crew in difficult weather conditions, juggling a hold, traffic avoidance, ATC instructions, fuel remaining etc, and looking for PROFESSIONAL advice would not find most Ops people wanting but probably wouldn't think to look there. However, if we have a Licenced Dispatcher system as in the US, pilots would be widely aware of the professional expertise of the people back on the ground and perhaps be more ready to seek their input.

Don't expect all pilots to agree, heck I even know some ops people who don't agree but it's worth discussion.

Doc C:)

[Captain Airclues]

I agree that most Ops staff would do their best to help. However, they do not have the facilities available to them in Europe that their colleagues in the US have. I have visited a Flight Watch Centre in the US where the dispatchers had direct feeds from ATC radar and weather radar. They were able to give advice on weather trends and holding delays at both the destination and all of the alternates.
I don't think that the Flight Watch system deminishes the captains responsibility, it just provides him with more reliable information.

Airclues