37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 1758627 |
Time | |
Date | 202008 |
Local Time Of Day | 1801-2400 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | ZZZ.ARTCC |
State Reference | US |
Environment | |
Light | Dusk |
Aircraft 1 | |
Make Model Name | Commercial Fixed Wing |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
Flight Phase | Cruise |
Flight Plan | IFR |
Person 1 | |
Function | Pilot Flying Captain |
Qualification | Flight Crew Multiengine Flight Crew Instrument Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP) |
Experience | Flight Crew Last 90 Days 70 Flight Crew Total 3230 Flight Crew Type 1045 |
Person 2 | |
Function | Pilot Not Flying First Officer |
Qualification | Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP) Flight Crew Multiengine Flight Crew Instrument |
Events | |
Anomaly | Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence |
Narrative:
We diverted back to ZZZ midflight due to a severe line of thunderstorms.dispatch was pressuring us to go when we did not feel that our planned routing would keep us clear of extremely hazardous weather. They filed us at xx;000 feet right in the convective cloud base on a flight that should have been closer to yy;000 [feet]. The squall line extended from ZZZ1 to east of ZZZ2. There were no gaps in the wall greater than 10 miles between storms prior to departure. I told dispatch that it would be a waste of fuel and the passenger's time to conduct the flight because there was a very good chance of diverting. They still wanted us to go.nearing ZZZ [VOR] way point we observed extreme radar returns and did not see a safe way of maintaining proper distance from the severe weather. We contacted ATC for deviations and then ultimately a return to ZZZ. We had to hold and burn off fuel to land under mlw (maximum landing weight).in times such as these I understand that the company wants to complete as many revenue flights as possible. However if in the opinion of the captain; the flight cannot be completed safely and would in turn cost the company $X's more by attempting the flight; dispatchers should hold the flights crews evaluation of the situation to a higher standard and not be in a position to pressure crews and ultimately waste company dollars.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: Air carrier flight crew reported diverting due to an impassable line of thunderstorms. Crew stated that Dispatch was pressuring them to continue on planned routing to destination.
Narrative: We diverted back to ZZZ midflight due to a severe line of thunderstorms.Dispatch was pressuring us to go when we did not feel that our planned routing would keep us clear of extremely hazardous weather. They filed us at XX;000 feet right in the convective cloud base on a flight that should have been closer to YY;000 [feet]. The squall line extended from ZZZ1 to east of ZZZ2. There were no gaps in the wall greater than 10 miles between storms prior to departure. I told Dispatch that it would be a waste of fuel and the passenger's time to conduct the flight because there was a very good chance of diverting. They still wanted us to go.Nearing ZZZ [VOR] way point we observed extreme radar returns and did not see a safe way of maintaining proper distance from the severe weather. We contacted ATC for deviations and then ultimately a return to ZZZ. We had to hold and burn off fuel to land under MLW (Maximum Landing Weight).In times such as these I understand that the company wants to complete as many revenue flights as possible. However if in the opinion of the Captain; the flight cannot be completed safely and would in turn cost the company $X's more by attempting the flight; dispatchers should hold the flights crews evaluation of the situation to a higher standard and not be in a position to pressure crews and ultimately waste company dollars.
Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site 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.