Aircraft flown illegally in violation of minimum equipment list.

Attributes
ACN	106756
Time
Date	198903
Day	Tue
Local Time Of Day	0601 To 1200
Place
Locale Reference	atc facility : prc
State Reference	AZ
Altitude	msl bound lower : 8500 msl bound upper : 8500
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Light	Dawn
Aircraft 1
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	Small Transport, Low Wing, 2 Turboprop Eng
Flight Phase	cruise other
Flight Plan	VFR
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : captain oversight : pic
Qualification	pilot : instrument pilot : commercial pilot : atp
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 100 flight time total : 5500 flight time type : 130
ASRS Report	106756
Person 2
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : first officer
Qualification	pilot : commercial pilot : instrument
Events
Anomaly	aircraft equipment problem : less severe non adherence : far
Independent Detector	other flight crewa
Resolutory Action	none taken : unable
Consequence	Other
Supplementary
Air Traffic Incident	other

Narrative:

After leveling at cruise in our small transport we had a failure of a fuel flow gauge. We notified dispatch and asked if they could do an en route MEL deferment per our airline's approved MEL. They said, 'no problem,' contacted maintenance and gave us the go ahead to write it up and defer it with a white inoperative sticker. We did this, although we couldn't find any stickers and made one out of masking tape. After completing our daily flight schedule (5.9 hours block) our director of maintenance contacted me and said I shouldn't have deferred the item as I had done because a mechanic was supposed to do a visibility inspection of the engine to make sure there were no fuel leaks, so we were operating aircraft illegally. Even when dealing with alleged qualified people I guess it is a good idea to check twice before accepting an airplane or continuing a flight with deferred items. Our aircraft MEL said nothing about the leak check, it was in the maintenance section which we don't carry on board.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACFT FLOWN ILLEGALLY IN VIOLATION OF MINIMUM EQUIPMENT LIST.

Narrative: AFTER LEVELING AT CRUISE IN OUR SMT WE HAD A FAILURE OF A FUEL FLOW GAUGE. WE NOTIFIED DISPATCH AND ASKED IF THEY COULD DO AN ENRTE MEL DEFERMENT PER OUR AIRLINE'S APPROVED MEL. THEY SAID, 'NO PROB,' CONTACTED MAINT AND GAVE US THE GO AHEAD TO WRITE IT UP AND DEFER IT WITH A WHITE INOP STICKER. WE DID THIS, ALTHOUGH WE COULDN'T FIND ANY STICKERS AND MADE ONE OUT OF MASKING TAPE. AFTER COMPLETING OUR DAILY FLT SCHEDULE (5.9 HRS BLOCK) OUR DIRECTOR OF MAINT CONTACTED ME AND SAID I SHOULDN'T HAVE DEFERRED THE ITEM AS I HAD DONE BECAUSE A MECH WAS SUPPOSED TO DO A VIS INSPECTION OF THE ENG TO MAKE SURE THERE WERE NO FUEL LEAKS, SO WE WERE OPERATING ACFT ILLEGALLY. EVEN WHEN DEALING WITH ALLEGED QUALIFIED PEOPLE I GUESS IT IS A GOOD IDEA TO CHK TWICE BEFORE ACCEPTING AN AIRPLANE OR CONTINUING A FLT WITH DEFERRED ITEMS. OUR ACFT MEL SAID NOTHING ABOUT THE LEAK CHK, IT WAS IN THE MAINT SECTION WHICH WE DON'T CARRY ON BOARD.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of August 2007 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.