A DISPUTE AROSE BTWN CAPT AND DISPATCHER OVER THE AMOUNT OF FUEL NECESSARY TO SAFELY FLY THE PLANNED FLT. DISPATCHER REFUSED THE CAPT'S SUGGESTED FUEL STOP DEST DUE TO FUEL COST WHICH IGNORED WX FACTORS.

Narrative

ON A RECENT FLT FROM ARUBA TO BOSTON WITH A FUEL STOP IN ORLANDO; THE PROGRAMMED TKOF WT FOR THE ARUBA-ORLANDO LEG WAS 5000 LBS OVER THE MAX ALLOWABLE GIVEN THE CURRENT TEMP AND PRESSURE ALT. WHEN THE DISPATCHER WAS MADE AWARE OF THIS; HIS SOLUTION WAS TO ELIMINATE THE 'ADDITIONAL' FUEL. THIS FUEL IS ADDED 'WHEN AN ASSESSMENT OF FORECAST OR KNOWN CONDITIONS INDICATE THAT DELAYS ARE PROBABLE.' THE CAPT DID NOT FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH THIS FUEL BEING ELIMINATED GIVEN THE WX CONDITIONS AT MCO; IE; TSTMS. THE CAPT SUGGESTED CHANGING THE DEST TO NASSAU; BUT THE DISPATCHER REFUSED THE REQUEST STATING THAT REFUELING WAS ALREADY SET UP FOR ORLANDO AND THAT THE COST OF FUEL WAS CHEAPER IN ORLANDO! THE CAPT THEN LISTED SEVERAL REASONS WHY NASSAU WOULD BE A BETTER REFUELING STOP; AND THE DISPATCHER RESPONDED WITH; 'I AM NOT GOING TO ISSUE A FLT PLAN TO NASSAU. WHAT ARE YOUR INTENTIONS?' THE CAPT ACCEPTED THE REDUCED FUEL LOAD; REALIZING HE WAS GOING TO STOP IN NASSAU ANYWAY. THE WX THROUGHOUT MOST OF FLORIDA WAS SEVERE TSTMS AT THE TIME THE FLT WAS DUE TO ARRIVE IN ORLANDO. HOWEVER; NASSAU; WHICH THE FLT WAS PROGRAMMED TO FLY OVER ANYWAY; WAS FORECAST TO BE RELATIVELY CLR. THE FALLACY HERE IS THAT THE DISPATCHER WAS MORE CONCERNED ABOUT ECONOMIC MATTERS (THE PRICE OF FUEL) THAN HE WAS ABOUT THE SAFE OP OF THE FLT. THIS IS A VERY DANGEROUS SIT AND ONE THAT COULD EASILY RESULT IN AN ACCIDENT IF AN INEXPERIENCED CAPT WERE TO ACCEPT AN UNSAFE FLT PLAN. THIS INCIDENT HAS BEEN RPTED TO THE SAFETY DEPT AND THE PLTS ASSOCIATION. HOPEFULLY; CORRECTIVE ACTION WILL BE TAKEN.