Narrative:

On feb/xa/03, flight was released by the day shift. Mdw was below landing limits, however. The taf for mdw at the time of arrival was to show the airport above limits. The flight was scheduled to arrive at approximately XA40Z. I briefed the crew en route as this flight was in the air prior to me taking over the desk. The flight was put into holding at approximately XA25Z. The WX was changing rapidly as a cold front pushed out of the plains across the midwest. In front of the front, the WX was low IFR and fog. Behind the front the WX was low IFR to IFR rain/snow. At approximately XB00Z I diverted the flight to his new alternate of stl. As the flight approached vla, they were issued holding instructions for approximately 40 mins. The flight was estimated to land within 6300 pounds of fuel with no holding. Now that holding had started, I estimated that the flight would land with approximately 3200 pounds of fuel. I chose stl as the alternate because the front was moving through and I felt it was the best place to land in the midwest. As the flight began to hold, I called ZKC to inquire if the hold was really going to be 40 mins, as stl is famous for issuing unrealistic holding times. ATC said that they were unable to come off the hold. I then advised them, based on that information, I would have to declare a fuel emergency. The flight was cleared direct to the airport and landed without incident. At the same time that this was going on, I had another flight diverting over mci due to an inoperative anti-skid. Mci WX at the time was 1/2 mi in snow. I don't believe that this incident is in violation of any FARS. I was notified on feb/mon/03 that the pilots filed an as soon as possible/NASA report. Air carrier dispatchers do not have an as soon as possible program at this time. Supplemental information from acn 572809: we were en route to mdw when dispatch called to inform us that mdw WX was not coming up as forecast. My flight release alternate was ind. Dispatch wanted to change alternate to stl for passenger accommodations and better aircraft positioning. I agreed since I had plenty of fuel and WX at stl was ok. After holding over bvt for about 30 mins, dispatch called to say mdw WX was getting worse and just go to stl. After getting clearance to stl, ATC informed us of 40 min holds over vla. I passed this on to dispatch and they said they didn't understand because stl was good. They said they would check on situation and get back to me. At this point, I had about 9.0K pounds of fuel and started making plans for a divert to sdf. Switching then to ZKC, they wanted to know our intentions since holding was in progress. I told them we were working on a plan and didn't have the gas for 40 mins of holding since we were already on a diversion. I went off ATC frequency to call sdf operations to check on their gate situation. The first officer then told me that we were cleared direct to stl and no holding. At this time we just figured that they cleared up their mess and were helping us out since we were a diverted flight. On final approach, stl tower advised us that the emergency equipment was standing by on left side of runway. I told them I had no emergency, that they must have wrong flight. They said that I was an inbound fuel emergency. I apologized for the miscom and told the 4 fire trucks following me they were not needed. I then spoke with stl tower supervisor on the phone and she said there was no problem, but the emergency call came down through center. After that, I spoke with dispatch and he said that he declared the emergency after having a rather heated discussion with ZKC on the phone. I told him I was not in an emergency situation at all and landed with over 7.0K pounds of fuel. I also informed him that as PIC I was completely cut out of the loop. I feel this whole fiasco was a result of decisions being made based on company convenience rather than safety. This reversal of priorities is not acceptable. I realize that when an airport such as mdw is shut down for WX that dispatch is chaos. However, at the point when diversions start as the crew in the middle of the mess we are able to get a better idea of the overall situation. This situational awareness is not as easy for dispatch to figure out. Once we start the diversion process andthen our divert airport is starting to have problems, we then need to forget about convenience and focus on getting the aircraft on the ground. We are not in a position to dictate to ATC how to manage their airspace, especially when there are other options available. That type of arrogance gives us a bad name and accomplishes nothing. This whole situation could have been easily avoided if dispatch had kept me in the loop and listened to my suggestion of sdf once stl started having trouble. In the future, I would like to see a review of our diversion procedures, especially when our diversion airport no longer is a good option. I feel at that point we, as a crew, have to make that quick decision and not get too tied up in formal release amendments and communications with dispatch and focus on getting the aircraft on the ground before we put ourselves into an actual fuel emergency. It is one thing to have a fuel emergency because of conditions and events out of our control and quite another to have one as a result of poor planning and priority reversal. Supplemental information from acn 572810: en route in cruise, about 1/2 way to mdw from tpa, dispatch contacted us on SELCAL to inform us mdw was below minimums. We started working on an alternate plan. Proceeded to bvt and entered holding. After holding for about 30 mins, dispatch called and said mdw as not improving and to proceed to stl. At this time we had over 9000 pounds of fuel. The original alternate on the release was ind, but dispatch preferred that we go to stl for better aircraft positioning. We informed ATC we would like to proceed to stl and ATC told us there was holding going into stl of about 25 mins. Dispatch seemed upset and said there should be no reason we should hold going to stl. A few mins later, ATC cleared us direct to stl. On final approach to stl, ATC informed us that the 'trucks are standing by.' we looked at each other with raised eyebrows. Captain asked who they were for and ATC said, due to our 'fuel emergency,' they were for us! We were never even close to a fuel emergency situation. Without our knowledge, our dispatcher got into an argument with ATC about having to hold going into stl and because he wanted the plane in stl, declared us in a fuel emergency situation without even informing us. ATC never mentioned to us that we were getting priority handling either. We landed with 7200 pounds of fuel and could have easily gone to sdf or ind with plenty of fuel. Dispatch took the flight crew completely out of the decision loop and declared a false, low fuel emergency.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A B737-700 DISPATCHER DECLARED A FUEL EMER FOR HIS FLT AFTER BEING TOLD OF EXTENDED HOLDING BEYOND THE ACFT FUEL ENDURANCE. THE CREW HAD ALREADY DIVERTED FROM THE DEST ARPT BECAUSE THE WX WAS BELOW LNDG MINIMUMS.

Narrative: ON FEB/XA/03, FLT WAS RELEASED BY THE DAY SHIFT. MDW WAS BELOW LNDG LIMITS, HOWEVER. THE TAF FOR MDW AT THE TIME OF ARR WAS TO SHOW THE ARPT ABOVE LIMITS. THE FLT WAS SCHEDULED TO ARRIVE AT APPROX XA40Z. I BRIEFED THE CREW ENRTE AS THIS FLT WAS IN THE AIR PRIOR TO ME TAKING OVER THE DESK. THE FLT WAS PUT INTO HOLDING AT APPROX XA25Z. THE WX WAS CHANGING RAPIDLY AS A COLD FRONT PUSHED OUT OF THE PLAINS ACROSS THE MIDWEST. IN FRONT OF THE FRONT, THE WX WAS LOW IFR AND FOG. BEHIND THE FRONT THE WX WAS LOW IFR TO IFR RAIN/SNOW. AT APPROX XB00Z I DIVERTED THE FLT TO HIS NEW ALTERNATE OF STL. AS THE FLT APCHED VLA, THEY WERE ISSUED HOLDING INSTRUCTIONS FOR APPROX 40 MINS. THE FLT WAS ESTIMATED TO LAND WITHIN 6300 LBS OF FUEL WITH NO HOLDING. NOW THAT HOLDING HAD STARTED, I ESTIMATED THAT THE FLT WOULD LAND WITH APPROX 3200 LBS OF FUEL. I CHOSE STL AS THE ALTERNATE BECAUSE THE FRONT WAS MOVING THROUGH AND I FELT IT WAS THE BEST PLACE TO LAND IN THE MIDWEST. AS THE FLT BEGAN TO HOLD, I CALLED ZKC TO INQUIRE IF THE HOLD WAS REALLY GOING TO BE 40 MINS, AS STL IS FAMOUS FOR ISSUING UNREALISTIC HOLDING TIMES. ATC SAID THAT THEY WERE UNABLE TO COME OFF THE HOLD. I THEN ADVISED THEM, BASED ON THAT INFO, I WOULD HAVE TO DECLARE A FUEL EMER. THE FLT WAS CLRED DIRECT TO THE ARPT AND LANDED WITHOUT INCIDENT. AT THE SAME TIME THAT THIS WAS GOING ON, I HAD ANOTHER FLT DIVERTING OVER MCI DUE TO AN INOP ANTI-SKID. MCI WX AT THE TIME WAS 1/2 MI IN SNOW. I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THIS INCIDENT IS IN VIOLATION OF ANY FARS. I WAS NOTIFIED ON FEB/MON/03 THAT THE PLTS FILED AN ASAP/NASA RPT. ACR DISPATCHERS DO NOT HAVE AN ASAP PROGRAM AT THIS TIME. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 572809: WE WERE ENRTE TO MDW WHEN DISPATCH CALLED TO INFORM US THAT MDW WX WAS NOT COMING UP AS FORECAST. MY FLT RELEASE ALTERNATE WAS IND. DISPATCH WANTED TO CHANGE ALTERNATE TO STL FOR PAX ACCOMMODATIONS AND BETTER ACFT POSITIONING. I AGREED SINCE I HAD PLENTY OF FUEL AND WX AT STL WAS OK. AFTER HOLDING OVER BVT FOR ABOUT 30 MINS, DISPATCH CALLED TO SAY MDW WX WAS GETTING WORSE AND JUST GO TO STL. AFTER GETTING CLRNC TO STL, ATC INFORMED US OF 40 MIN HOLDS OVER VLA. I PASSED THIS ON TO DISPATCH AND THEY SAID THEY DIDN'T UNDERSTAND BECAUSE STL WAS GOOD. THEY SAID THEY WOULD CHK ON SIT AND GET BACK TO ME. AT THIS POINT, I HAD ABOUT 9.0K LBS OF FUEL AND STARTED MAKING PLANS FOR A DIVERT TO SDF. SWITCHING THEN TO ZKC, THEY WANTED TO KNOW OUR INTENTIONS SINCE HOLDING WAS IN PROGRESS. I TOLD THEM WE WERE WORKING ON A PLAN AND DIDN'T HAVE THE GAS FOR 40 MINS OF HOLDING SINCE WE WERE ALREADY ON A DIVERSION. I WENT OFF ATC FREQ TO CALL SDF OPS TO CHK ON THEIR GATE SIT. THE FO THEN TOLD ME THAT WE WERE CLRED DIRECT TO STL AND NO HOLDING. AT THIS TIME WE JUST FIGURED THAT THEY CLRED UP THEIR MESS AND WERE HELPING US OUT SINCE WE WERE A DIVERTED FLT. ON FINAL APCH, STL TWR ADVISED US THAT THE EMER EQUIP WAS STANDING BY ON L SIDE OF RWY. I TOLD THEM I HAD NO EMER, THAT THEY MUST HAVE WRONG FLT. THEY SAID THAT I WAS AN INBOUND FUEL EMER. I APOLOGIZED FOR THE MISCOM AND TOLD THE 4 FIRE TRUCKS FOLLOWING ME THEY WERE NOT NEEDED. I THEN SPOKE WITH STL TWR SUPVR ON THE PHONE AND SHE SAID THERE WAS NO PROB, BUT THE EMER CALL CAME DOWN THROUGH CTR. AFTER THAT, I SPOKE WITH DISPATCH AND HE SAID THAT HE DECLARED THE EMER AFTER HAVING A RATHER HEATED DISCUSSION WITH ZKC ON THE PHONE. I TOLD HIM I WAS NOT IN AN EMER SIT AT ALL AND LANDED WITH OVER 7.0K LBS OF FUEL. I ALSO INFORMED HIM THAT AS PIC I WAS COMPLETELY CUT OUT OF THE LOOP. I FEEL THIS WHOLE FIASCO WAS A RESULT OF DECISIONS BEING MADE BASED ON COMPANY CONVENIENCE RATHER THAN SAFETY. THIS REVERSAL OF PRIORITIES IS NOT ACCEPTABLE. I REALIZE THAT WHEN AN ARPT SUCH AS MDW IS SHUT DOWN FOR WX THAT DISPATCH IS CHAOS. HOWEVER, AT THE POINT WHEN DIVERSIONS START AS THE CREW IN THE MIDDLE OF THE MESS WE ARE ABLE TO GET A BETTER IDEA OF THE OVERALL SIT. THIS SITUATIONAL AWARENESS IS NOT AS EASY FOR DISPATCH TO FIGURE OUT. ONCE WE START THE DIVERSION PROCESS ANDTHEN OUR DIVERT ARPT IS STARTING TO HAVE PROBS, WE THEN NEED TO FORGET ABOUT CONVENIENCE AND FOCUS ON GETTING THE ACFT ON THE GND. WE ARE NOT IN A POS TO DICTATE TO ATC HOW TO MANAGE THEIR AIRSPACE, ESPECIALLY WHEN THERE ARE OTHER OPTIONS AVAILABLE. THAT TYPE OF ARROGANCE GIVES US A BAD NAME AND ACCOMPLISHES NOTHING. THIS WHOLE SIT COULD HAVE BEEN EASILY AVOIDED IF DISPATCH HAD KEPT ME IN THE LOOP AND LISTENED TO MY SUGGESTION OF SDF ONCE STL STARTED HAVING TROUBLE. IN THE FUTURE, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE A REVIEW OF OUR DIVERSION PROCS, ESPECIALLY WHEN OUR DIVERSION ARPT NO LONGER IS A GOOD OPTION. I FEEL AT THAT POINT WE, AS A CREW, HAVE TO MAKE THAT QUICK DECISION AND NOT GET TOO TIED UP IN FORMAL RELEASE AMENDMENTS AND COMS WITH DISPATCH AND FOCUS ON GETTING THE ACFT ON THE GND BEFORE WE PUT OURSELVES INTO AN ACTUAL FUEL EMER. IT IS ONE THING TO HAVE A FUEL EMER BECAUSE OF CONDITIONS AND EVENTS OUT OF OUR CTL AND QUITE ANOTHER TO HAVE ONE AS A RESULT OF POOR PLANNING AND PRIORITY REVERSAL. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 572810: ENRTE IN CRUISE, ABOUT 1/2 WAY TO MDW FROM TPA, DISPATCH CONTACTED US ON SELCAL TO INFORM US MDW WAS BELOW MINIMUMS. WE STARTED WORKING ON AN ALTERNATE PLAN. PROCEEDED TO BVT AND ENTERED HOLDING. AFTER HOLDING FOR ABOUT 30 MINS, DISPATCH CALLED AND SAID MDW AS NOT IMPROVING AND TO PROCEED TO STL. AT THIS TIME WE HAD OVER 9000 LBS OF FUEL. THE ORIGINAL ALTERNATE ON THE RELEASE WAS IND, BUT DISPATCH PREFERRED THAT WE GO TO STL FOR BETTER ACFT POSITIONING. WE INFORMED ATC WE WOULD LIKE TO PROCEED TO STL AND ATC TOLD US THERE WAS HOLDING GOING INTO STL OF ABOUT 25 MINS. DISPATCH SEEMED UPSET AND SAID THERE SHOULD BE NO REASON WE SHOULD HOLD GOING TO STL. A FEW MINS LATER, ATC CLRED US DIRECT TO STL. ON FINAL APCH TO STL, ATC INFORMED US THAT THE 'TRUCKS ARE STANDING BY.' WE LOOKED AT EACH OTHER WITH RAISED EYEBROWS. CAPT ASKED WHO THEY WERE FOR AND ATC SAID, DUE TO OUR 'FUEL EMER,' THEY WERE FOR US! WE WERE NEVER EVEN CLOSE TO A FUEL EMER SIT. WITHOUT OUR KNOWLEDGE, OUR DISPATCHER GOT INTO AN ARGUMENT WITH ATC ABOUT HAVING TO HOLD GOING INTO STL AND BECAUSE HE WANTED THE PLANE IN STL, DECLARED US IN A FUEL EMER SIT WITHOUT EVEN INFORMING US. ATC NEVER MENTIONED TO US THAT WE WERE GETTING PRIORITY HANDLING EITHER. WE LANDED WITH 7200 LBS OF FUEL AND COULD HAVE EASILY GONE TO SDF OR IND WITH PLENTY OF FUEL. DISPATCH TOOK THE FLT CREW COMPLETELY OUT OF THE DECISION LOOP AND DECLARED A FALSE, LOW FUEL EMER.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 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.