Narrative:

When the flight was planned; roc (rochester; ny) was used as the alternate. This showed correctly on the flight plan. When the release was generated; the alternate appeared on the release as rode (ie shima aux ab; japan). This was not noticed when the release generated. The flight crew called and said that their FMS showed the alternate as over 6;000 miles away and gave a message of insufficient fuel. Regenerating the release resulted in rode being appended to the new release. The flight planning system; 'dispatch monitor'; would not allow me to use the 'rebuild sequence' procedure to start over in the flight plan process. I closed the application and on restarting it; I used the 'rebuild sequence' procedure which allowed me to restart the flight plan process from the beginning. The alternate carried over normally and we amended the release to provide the crew with a correct and legal document to conduct the flight.there have been innumerable problems with the flight planning system since it was upgraded recently. These include incorrect altitudes; refusal of the system to plan a normal altitude or step climb to altitude; problems with the calculation of the flight plan with certain payloads etc. Dispatchers are reluctant to file reports on these problems due to workload; the sheer number of problems and the time consuming process to file a report. Although these problems have been reported to dispatch it support; they have not been corrected. We have been offered ineffective workarounds. Dispatchers have developed their own methods for dealing with the problems as they arise. This; in my opinion; is going to result in an adverse safety impact at some point. If additional documentation of problems is required for the company to compel proper repair of the flight planning application; an easy to use reporting system should be set up to document problems as they occur. In any event; the dispatch flight planning system should be diagnosed and properly fixed so that errors do not occur.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: EMB175 Dispatcher is informed by the flight crew that the Release shows an alternate over 6;000 miles away. Reporter blames flight planning software which was upgraded recently and has numerous faults.

Narrative: When the flight was planned; ROC (Rochester; NY) was used as the alternate. This showed correctly on the flight plan. When the release was generated; the alternate appeared on the release as RODE (IE Shima aux ab; Japan). This was not noticed when the release generated. The flight crew called and said that their FMS showed the alternate as over 6;000 miles away and gave a message of insufficient fuel. Regenerating the release resulted in RODE being appended to the new release. The flight planning system; 'dispatch monitor'; would not allow me to use the 'rebuild sequence' procedure to start over in the flight plan process. I closed the application and on restarting it; I used the 'rebuild sequence' procedure which allowed me to restart the flight plan process from the beginning. The alternate carried over normally and we amended the release to provide the crew with a correct and legal document to conduct the flight.There have been innumerable problems with the flight planning system since it was upgraded recently. These include incorrect altitudes; refusal of the system to plan a normal altitude or step climb to altitude; problems with the calculation of the flight plan with certain payloads etc. Dispatchers are reluctant to file reports on these problems due to workload; the sheer number of problems and the time consuming process to file a report. Although these problems have been reported to Dispatch IT support; they have not been corrected. We have been offered ineffective workarounds. Dispatchers have developed their own methods for dealing with the problems as they arise. This; in my opinion; is going to result in an adverse safety impact at some point. If additional documentation of problems is required for the company to compel proper repair of the flight planning application; an easy to use reporting system should be set up to document problems as they occur. In any event; the dispatch flight planning system should be diagnosed and properly fixed so that errors do not occur.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of April 2012 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.