A dispatcher does not agree with the automated weather software assessment that an alternate airport...

Narrative:

While preplanning the release for flight abc ZZZ-ZZZ1 arrival time XA45Z; [flight planning software] advised the dispatcher with the following message: no alternate recommended - ZZZ2 input threshold-altitude...done on destination station only per [flight planning software] rules the weather/forecast for ZZZ1 was as follows: a) 22005KT P6SM OVC035 tempo 2716/2721 -RA OVC035 B) 30005KT P6SM -RA OVC035 tempo 2721/2800 4SM -RA brc) ovc 025 D) 14006KT 5SM -RA OVC025 tempo 2800/2806 3SM -RA bre) OVC015 F) 14006KT 5SM br OVC025 tempo 2806/2810 3SM -RA brg) OVC015 note lines D and east above in the weather forecast; [flight planning software] is advising the dispatcher to violate far 121.619. Because of dispatcher interaction; ZZZ2 was added as alternate for ZZZ1 thus ignoring the [flight planning software] automated message advising to violate far 121.619. There is an obvious fallacy in the [flight planning software] program or the team who developed the program does not understand what is required to determine alternate weather minimums per far 121.619. Eliminate [flight planning software] until this product can provide a useful purpose to the dispatcher; otherwise it will continue to mass produce unnecessary messages that will be ignored since it is advising inaccurate and false direction for the dispatcher to implement.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A Dispatcher does not agree with the automated weather software assessment that an alternate airport is not required for the conditions; and expresses his concern about the validity of the flight planning software.

Narrative: While preplanning the release for Flight ABC ZZZ-ZZZ1 arrival time XA45Z; [Flight Planning Software] advised the Dispatcher with the following message: NO ALTERNATE RECOMMENDED - ZZZ2 INPUT THRESHOLD-ALT...DONE ON DESTINATION STATION ONLY PER [FLIGHT PLANNING SOFTWARE] RULES The weather/forecast for ZZZ1 was as follows: A) 22005KT P6SM OVC035 TEMPO 2716/2721 -RA OVC035 B) 30005KT P6SM -RA OVC035 TEMPO 2721/2800 4SM -RA BRC) OVC 025 D) 14006KT 5SM -RA OVC025 TEMPO 2800/2806 3SM -RA BRE) OVC015 F) 14006KT 5SM BR OVC025 TEMPO 2806/2810 3SM -RA BRG) OVC015 Note lines D and E above in the weather forecast; [Flight Planning Software] is advising the Dispatcher to violate FAR 121.619. Because of Dispatcher interaction; ZZZ2 was added as alternate for ZZZ1 thus ignoring the [Flight Planning Software] automated message advising to violate FAR 121.619. There is an obvious fallacy in the [Flight Planning Software] program or the team who developed the program does not understand what is required to determine alternate weather minimums per FAR 121.619. Eliminate [Flight Planning Software] until this product can provide a useful purpose to the Dispatcher; otherwise it will continue to mass produce unnecessary messages that will be ignored since it is advising inaccurate and false direction for the Dispatcher to implement.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2013 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.

Attributes
ACN	1083639
Time
Date	201304
Local Time Of Day	1201-1800
Place
Locale Reference	ZZZ.Airport
State Reference	US
Aircraft 1
Make Model Name	Commercial Fixed Wing
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Flight Phase	Parked
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Function	Dispatcher
Events
Anomaly	Deviation - Procedural FAR Deviation - Procedural Published Material / Policy

A dispatcher does not agree with the automated weather software assessment that an alternate airport is not required for the conditions; and expresses his concern about the validity of the flight planning software.