PIC COMPLAINT OF ACR DISPATCHER PROCS NOT BEING CONSERVATIVE ENOUGH IN THE FACE OF ENRTE AND TERMINAL AREA WX AND TURB FORECASTS.

Narrative

DISPATCH INTO AREA OF FORECAST AND RPTED SEVERE TURB. WHEN I ARRIVED AT THE SJC OPS OFFICE AND BEGAN MY PREFLT PAPERWORK; I WAS HANDED A PRINTED HAZARDOUS WX ADVISORY WITH A HANDWRITTEN NOTE AT THE TOP OF IT WHICH SAID 'SHOW TO ALL FLCS PER SEA DISPATCH.' I BELIEVE THAT THIS WAS EITHER A SIGMET OR CTR WX ADVISORY. I READ IT AND IT DESCRIBED AN AREA OF SEVERE TURB WHICH INCLUDED THE SJC ARPT AND STATED IN THE RPT THAT SEVERE TURB HAD ACTUALLY BEEN RPTED BY NUMEROUS ACFT WITHIN THE AREA DESCRIBED. THE RPT ENDED BY SAYING THE CONDITIONS WERE EXPECTED TO CONTINUE BEYOND AC00Z (MY PROPOSED DEP WAS AB46Z). I IMMEDIATELY CALLED DISPATCH AND QUESTIONED WHETHER IT WAS LEGAL TO DISPATCH INTO AN AREA OF KNOWN SEVERE TURB SINCE OUR FOM SPECIFICALLY STATES; 'DO NOT INTENTIONALLY CONDUCT FLT THROUGH AREAS OF SEVERE TURB.' THE DISPATCHER ASSURED ME THAT IT WAS LEGAL AND THAT HE HAD NO CONCERNS WHATSOEVER REGARDING THE SAFETY OF DEPARTING IN THIS AREA SINCE HE HAD NO KNOWLEDGE OF ANY SUCH RPTS OVER THE PAST 5 HRS. I HAD BEEN AT MY HOTEL IN SAN JOSE ALL DAY AND HAD BEEN WATCHING THE NEWS WHICH INCLUDED NUMEROUS RPTS OF PROPERTY DAMAGE THROUGHOUT THE BAY AREA FROM WIND GUSTS IN EXCESS OF 65 MPH. ONE OF THE RPTS WAS REGARDING A SEMI-TRAILER TRUCK WHICH HAD BEEN BLOWN ONTO ITS SIDE BY THE WIND AS IT WAS XING ONE OF THE BRIDGES ACROSS THE BAY. THERE WAS ANOTHER COMPANY FLT LEAVING PRIOR TO OUR DEP AND IT WAS TAXIING OUT AT THE TIME I WAS TALKING TO DISPATCH. I ASKED THE OPS AGENT TO REQUEST A PIREP FROM THIS FLC. A FEW MINS LATER; THE CREW RPTED THAT THEY HAD EXPERIENCED SEVERE TURB AT 100 FT AGL AND AT APPROX 1000 FT THAT THE WINDSHEAR RECOVERY SYS ACTIVATED INCLUDING ANNUNCIATION OF 'TAILWIND SHEAR;' FIRING OF THE ART SYS; AND RECOVERY GUIDANCE COMMANDS ON THE ATTITUDE INDICATORS. UPON FURTHER QUESTIONING THE FLC; THEY CHANGED THE TURB TO 'UPPER END OF MODERATE.' I CALLED DISPATCH BACK AND INFORMED THE DISPATCHER OF THIS RPT AND HE STILL FELT THAT IT WAS LEGAL AND SAFE TO DISPATCH THE FLT. I DEFINITELY FELT PRESSURED BY THE DISPATCHER TO GET THE FLT OUT ON SCHEDULE AND THAT MY CONCERNS ABOUT THE LEGALITY AND SAFETY OF THE FLT WERE NOT EVEN WORTH HIS CONSIDERATION. I THEN WENT TO THE AIRPLANE AND DISCUSSED THE WHOLE SIT WITH THE FO. WE DECIDED THAT WE WOULD TAXI OUT FOR DEP AND GET RPTS FROM OTHER ACFT WHICH HAD DEPARTED AFTER OUR COMPANY FLT AND PRIOR TO OUR DEP. WE DID THIS AND MADE THE DECISION TO DEPART BASED ON THE ABSENCE OF ANY FURTHER RPTS OF SEVERE TURB. WE EMPLOYED ALL THE WINDSHEAR PRECAUTIONARY TECHNIQUES AND DID NOT IN FACT ENCOUNTER ANYTHING GREATER THAN LIGHT TO MODERATE TURB DURING THE DEP AND NO SIGNIFICANT WINDSHEAR. I STILL QUESTION THE LEGALITY OF DEPARTING DURING THE TIME PERIOD DURING WHICH THE HAZARDOUS WX ADVISORY INDICATED THAT SEVERE TURB COULD BE ENCOUNTERED. I AM ALSO QUITE CONCERNED ABOUT THE CAVALIER ATTITUDE OF OUR DISPATCHERS WITH RESPECT TO THIS TYPE OF RPT. I HAVE FOUND FROM JUMPSEATING ON OTHER MAJOR AIRLINES THAT THEIR DISPATCHERS ARE GENERALLY MORE CONSERVATIVE THAN THE PLTS WITH REGARD TO THE 'GO OR NO-GO' DECISION; FUEL PLANNING; ETC. THIS IS NOT THE CASE AT OUR AIRLINE. OUR DISPATCHERS HAVE BEEN FORTUNATE ENOUGH ('LUCKY' I THINK) NOT TO HAVE BEEN INTERROGATED AT AN NTSB HEARING IN RECENT YRS. THEIR ATTITUDES COULD CAUSE THIS TO CHANGE. THE DISPATCHER EXPLAINED TO ME THAT THEY 'INTERPOLATE' BTWN THESE RPTS AND THAT IS HOW WE COULD BE LEGALLY DISPATCHED. IF MY DEP FROM SJC HAD RESULTED IN A WINDSHEAR ACCIDENT; I DON'T THINK THAT THE NTSB WOULD INTERPOLATE THE WX FORECASTS AND RPTS. THEY WOULD READ THIS HAZARDOUS WX ADVISORY AS IT STANDS AND QUESTION WHY IT WAS DISPATCHED INTO THESE KNOWN CONDITIONS. I WOULD PROBABLY NOT BE AROUND TO TAKE THE WITNESS STAND AND THE DISPATCHER WOULD BE THE ONE WHO WOULD HAVE TO EXPLAIN HOW HIS INTERPOLATION SYS COULD HAVE RESULTED IN 145 FATALITIES.