Lesson, learnt. DO NOT DO ANYTHING THAT HELPS. Simple.

Missed the curfew, not Captains fault. Instead he tried to fix the issue and look where it got him.

Cheers OA, thanks for the insight. If it was (and not doubting) then perhaps tea and biccy's were in order; the SMH story didn't mention the uplift. Ass-u-me – I assumed they were only a ton or three short (top off). Even so; that should remain an internal company matter, not really a matter for the SMH. Stand corrected on the fuel – but the rest – stinks to high heaven.

How much fuel does an A320 hold? The min fuel to PER (just guessing) might have been around 12 to 13 tonne anyway, I can't see an A320 being able to take another 14T unless the tanks are bigger than I thought?

Unless iam missing something with this story. (Which is highly likely)

It was a 14T change to the TOW not a 14T change to the fuel load. It happened in J* once except the Captain loaded the plan fuel and didn't question the ZFW change. The "Insufficient Fuel" message on the scratch pad
once he loaded the winds in the climb finally got his attention.

I'd have done what the skipper did. And I reckon so would many others. I'm required to carry enough fuel to meet the relevant contingencies. As captain I would probably by now have a good feel for my aircrafts fuel requirements. So a manual work out of my load, shove on as much as I then can, I would say I meet all legal contingencies - right or wrong, that's what I'd have done

So, I might have one or 2 crazy ex's floating about, if they get the sh!ts they can tell CASA I'm on the Uncle Dougs and boom, I'm suspended from flying until I can prove my innocence? Dear Allah, am I back in the middle east?

This is a very troubling news article.

Probably not CASA that initiated. Would have been company. Seen it before. They Will NOT tolerate any bad press that puts it, or potentially puts it in a bad light. Threats and intimidation are a great way to operate.

Yes, the weight change was in take-off weight, not the change in fuel.

I don't know what the figures are for the 320, but the 737NG often works out at around 10% & I imagine the 320 would be similar. Therefore, a 14,000 kg increase in weight would give an increased burn of about 1,400kg. Plus the extra for VR, FR, etc.

However, SYD-PER is most likely an EDTO flight & if so, perhaps the most important issue regarding fuel is the EDTO requirements. Most, if not all, operators would require a new plan for EDTO operations with a weight change of the reported magnitude. Perhaps that was the reason for both crew members being initially stood down.

The serious organisational issue for Tiger is:

A) They provided the pilots with the incorrect amount of fuel required to do the flight on the company generated flight plan.
B) If the flight to Perth was planned with actual Headwinds, which 99% of the time there are headwinds
C) If the crew had not entered the average or actual Headwinds into the Flight Management Computer System
D) If the Captain had not detected the company produced total weight error preflight
E) It is possible the Flight Management Computer System would indicate that their was sufficient fuel to complete the flight
F) The flight could have departed with insufficient fuel to complete the flight.

MC.

Someone can make an accusation and all this ensues?? :uhoh:

Under what legislation can this be legal or indeed ethical?

If I were the individual involved I'd be going all the way to the High Court. Unless I'm missing something?


Worrying indeed :suspect:

I'm not sure that Tiger has EDTO approval.

Here's the ATSB summary:
Investigation: AO-2014-043 - Pre-flight / Planning event involving an Airbus A320, VH-VNJ at Sydney Airport, NSW on 3 March 2014

Pardon my ignorance but what is EDTO?, is this a uniquely OZ thing?

Tiger's Airbus retirements
 

Got a mate out in ASP where there is a developing "aircraft parking" business prior to sale/scrapping.
Word is that Tiger have one aircraft there already and there are several more due before the end of the year. Also told that the airframes coming aren't that old.
Can anyone confirm?
If true, are Tiger introducing new aircraft - or is it bad news for them?

EDTO is Extended Diversion Time Operations, the old ETOPS, except this is supposed to encompass all aircraft that fly further than 60 minutes from a suitable airport, regardless of the number of engines. Considerations include cargo fire suppression, passenger and crew oxygen systems, air-conditioning/pressurization systems, etc.

Ivan,

Hasn't "your mate" got a smart phone? Get him to snap you a photo and you can post it here as proof := :=

My beers I believe.
 

OEB# 1500 – Thank you kind Sir, for 'facts' (and the couple of beers I won on those facts). Huh? Where did the OEB post 1500 go??? – just vanished - it's a mystery – no matter, you can guess the details.

Why did the SMH publish that article? which BTW has now made the UK media. It's small wonder newspapers are struggling. I expect the facts and a balanced story were not 'sexy' enough and probably threatened advertising dollars. It is a sad indictment; I'm surprised Tiger has not refuted the story, hosed it down. At best punters will not be too interested in travelling with an airline that can't get the flight planning right and has drug fiends for flight crew. We all know that's bollocks, but the punters? well, that's a whole different world.

OEB – points 1 to 8 (inc) – normal day to day; storm-in-teacup stuff until:-

(9) The fact that a flight planning officer went to ATSB first, not to the company. IF accurate it signifies all manner of problems; if not within the company system then with the individual (or both). Either way it merits some close attention. It also begs the question – who went to Virgin and CASA?

(10) IF accurate speaks of a company operating in a bubble of fear, prepared to sacrifice a pilot to protect the AOC. Sad, sad, sad. Nothing to do with past history of course – Nah.

(11) IF accurate supports the bubble of fear argument; or, defines a really unhealthy management ethos. Either way – not good.

(13) I have now nursed two blokes with similar stories through this nightmare of false accusations, no evidence provided against them, yet needing to prove their innocence. One fellah was 'done over' by CASA, now that is a truly ugly story, alas not one for me to tell on Pprune; but the damage done to reputation is, as stated, immeasurable and permanent. The Tiger pilot will need his mates, colleagues (yes, even those who are not mates) his family and his union to stand behind him. Matters like this, not handled immediately and firmly by the Chief pilot (not management) have the potential to do great damage, not only to the individual concerned. Well, it's too late now to worry about 'it' getting out of the box and sadly Avmed have been involved, which reduces the wriggle room somewhat.

Had this been dealt with swiftly, firmly and 'internally' the PIC had the option of saying "Bollocks – no evidence, you prove it". This has all but vanished, now Avmed is involved. Once his medical has been suspended the CASA 'black letter law' process needs to go the full circle. No one there would dare look at the lack of evidence and throw out the unfounded complaint (they will be very liable if they do); not unless management are prepared to back up their pilot to the hilt and legally 'reassure' the Avmed folks, even then it can become a hellish situation.

Most of the SMH beat-up can be written off as the 'normal' day to day bun fight associated with running an operation; CP writing 'stiff' emails, crew arguments, cocked up flight plans, all the usual day to day crap – just part of the deal. But the dope allegations, reporting to external bodies, the company handling of it and the associated hoop-la does not put Tiger in a good light. Shame really, apart from that bloody awful paint scheme it's probably not a bad outfit.

But, whoever made the 'out of school' allegations and dragged the ATSB, CASA and Virgin into the mix needs to be hauled out, tarred, feathered and ran out town on a rail. This unaccountable, anonymous person, who made a serious, unsubstantiated allegation is guilty of an utterly reprehensible, despicable act of cowardice; bastardry toward the company, the crews and the poor bugger at the bottom of it all.

(16 b) Why test at all? - just ask the resident expert for a psychic evaluation, that should do the trick. CASA have one of those, ask them for a lend, saves a fortune on testing...

The aircraft in ASP for storage is a Tiger Singapore aircraft.Not Tiger Australia.

Yes 2 more from Singapore coming.

In the rest of the world, dispatchers are licensed. An aircraft departs under a joint dispatch authority (PIC and dispatcher).

The flight planner in question (I won't use the word dispatcher), claims he was only shown how to "run a plan 3 or 4 times". Clearly there is no adequate training with regards to the requirements of operational control. But under CASA regs, there is no requirement to conduct such training.

Isn't the lack of regulation regarding dispatchers the root cause of the problem here?

TIMA9x
Storage... or Parting ????