 |
37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
When contract maintenance at an enroute stop failed to properly comply with MEL procedures for a thrust reverser failure EICAS message the scenario was duplicated at the next point of landing; after which company maintenance corrected the flawed corrective action.
| Attributes | |
| ACN | 1013585 |
| Time | |
| Date | 201205 |
| Local Time Of Day | 1201-1800 |
| Place | |
| Locale Reference | ZZZ.Airport |
| State Reference | US |
| Environment | |
| Flight Conditions | VMC |
| Aircraft 1 | |
| Make Model Name | EMB ERJ 190/195 ER/LR |
| Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
| Flight Phase | Landing |
| Flight Plan | IFR |
| Person 1 | |
| Function | Pilot Not Flying Captain |
| Qualification | Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP) |
| Person 2 | |
| Function | First Officer Pilot Flying |
| Qualification | Flight Crew Commercial |
| Events | |
| Anomaly | Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical Deviation - Procedural MEL Deviation - Procedural Maintenance Deviation - Procedural Published Material / Policy |
Narrative:
Upon landing we received an engine 1 rev prot fault EICAS message. After arrival at the gate I called maintenance and reported the problem. Contract maintenance was called to come and lock out the engine 1 thrust reverser. Upon completion of the maintenance procedure the mechanic signed off the discrepancy in the maintenance logbook and we boarded and departed on our next leg.during the roll out on the next landing we got two EICAS messages. The first being 'ENG1 rev fail' and the second being 'ENG1 no disp'. The flying pilot stated that he had forgotten that the number 1 thrust reverser was locked out but had been able to pull the thrust lever into reverse. We figured that the maintenance procedures in ZZZ had not been completed properly but there was no reason for us to assume that at that time. Upon arrival at the gate I called maintenance control and reported what had happened and the messages we had. Company maintenance was called out to correct the problem. If an aircraft discrepancy is MEL'd and there will be an [expected] associated EICAS message as a result; then it should be included in the MEL so the crew will not be alarmed when it is displayed.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: When contract Maintenance at an enroute stop failed to properly comply with MEL procedures for a thrust reverser failure EICAS message the scenario was duplicated at the next point of landing; after which company Maintenance corrected the flawed corrective action.
Narrative: Upon landing we received an ENG 1 REV PROT fault EICAS message. After arrival at the gate I called Maintenance and reported the problem. Contract Maintenance was called to come and lock out the engine 1 thrust reverser. Upon completion of the maintenance procedure the Mechanic signed off the discrepancy in the maintenance logbook and we boarded and departed on our next leg.During the roll out on the next landing we got two EICAS messages. The first being 'ENG1 REV FAIL' and the second being 'ENG1 NO DISP'. The flying pilot stated that he had forgotten that the number 1 thrust reverser was locked out but had been able to pull the thrust lever into reverse. We figured that the maintenance procedures in ZZZ had not been completed properly but there was no reason for us to assume that at that time. Upon arrival at the gate I called Maintenance Control and reported what had happened and the messages we had. Company Maintenance was called out to correct the problem. If an aircraft discrepancy is MEL'd and there will be an [expected] associated EICAS message as a result; then it should be included in the MEL so the crew will not be alarmed when it is displayed.
Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2013 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.