Date: 201201
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: MFI.Airport, WI
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Icing
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Citation Excel (C560XL)
Operator: Fractional
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Fractional
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness; Troubleshooting; Time Pressure
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Weather; Procedure; Environment - Non Weather Related; Company Policy; Airport
Primary problem: Company Policy

Narrative: I received a briefing for my duty times and flights for the next morning; which were a positioning flight MFI then a Part 91 flight with 2 passengers. While planning the flights that evening I noticed a FICON (Field Condition Report) NOTAM for MFI that listed both runways being contaminated with PTCHY THN SN BA FAIR; and the same report for all taxiways and the airport apron; a total of four NOTAM's in all. The longest runway at MFI is 5;002 FT; and that is not long enough for either wet or contaminated landing distance numbers. As per Company procedure I contacted Dispatch that night; notified them of the issue that could affect the flight; suggested CWA as an alternative; and was told it would be passed down and looked at in the morning. The next morning; I received my Crew Itinerary listing the flights for the day; which were the same as I was briefed the evening prior. I checked in for duty slightly early and spoke to Dispatch and once again informed him the latest NOTAM I had showed the same unsuitable field conditions at MFI and again suggested CWA as an alternative. I asked him to run landing numbers based on the conditions at MFI and get back to me; however this was only an exercise as I already had run the numbers and I did not have the runway length for the current conditions to legally land at MFI. A little over an hour later I called Dispatch and asked if they had informed the Customer of the NOTAM airport conditions and changed my destination airport to CWA. He told me they spoke to the Customer and the Customer said it had not snowed the day before and thought the airport would be OK to land there. The Dispatcher then asked me to dispatch to MFI and 'Do a flyover' and 'Take a look'. I asked him what 'Take a look' meant; and he responded if the runway looked OK then I could 'Give it a try'; disregard the NOTAM and land anyway. I told him I believed that would be illegal; and I base that on both CFAR 91.103 and 135.69; among others as well. Over the next hour and a half; I received five more calls from the Dispatcher. On every call he again asked me if I would be willing to go 'Do a flyover' and 'Take a look'. On one call he told me he spoke to the airport manager and tried to coerce him to remove the NOTAM but the manager refused; saying the NOTAM was accurate. The Dispatcher called me five times trying to get me to take off for MFI and 'Take a look.' There was literally nothing I could do make him understand that I could not legally land at MFI. I felt like the Dispatcher; in his role in Dispatch; which is to represent the wishes of our Carrier; was trying to make me do something both illegal and unsafe. On every contact I had with Dispatch; I professionally and steadfastly declined to depart to an airport I could not legally land at. Our Chief Pilots and Flight Duty Officer do not have authority over Scheduling. Our Pilots do not have authority over Dispatch.




Synopsis: A fractional airline Captain reported that his Dispatcher attempted to coerce him to depart for an airport where braking action was reported as fair and his performance calculation indicating insufficient runway available for the conditions.