37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 1094076 |
Time | |
Date | 201306 |
Local Time Of Day | 1201-1800 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | ZZZ.Airport |
State Reference | US |
Environment | |
Flight Conditions | VMC |
Light | Daylight |
Aircraft 1 | |
Make Model Name | B737-500 |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
Flight Phase | Parked |
Flight Plan | IFR |
Component | |
Aircraft Component | Electrical Wiring & Connectors |
Person 1 | |
Function | First Officer |
Experience | Flight Crew Last 90 Days 216 |
Events | |
Anomaly | Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe |
Narrative:
Original departure was delayed because of an aircraft swap up line. Off going crew briefed us of multiple mels; most of which were electrical in nature. They also advised us of two more electrical problems they had [on their flight in]. As I began flight deck preflight duties; the captain was discussing history problems from aircraft logbook. I began to realize most involved electrical problems; one stating smell of burning electrical wiring in cabin and smoke in cockpit. It was also noted aircraft was ferried after that incident for maintenance. It was not clear to us as what action was taken to resolve the smoke other than the air cycle machine was low on oil and refilled with no other problems noted. No mention of action taken or investigation into electrical burning smell in cabin. Now aircraft was being handed over to us with two new electrical related problems (cooling fan inop in normal switched to alternate and flickering cabin sidewall lighting). Both crew members simultaneously felt the aircraft may have bigger underlying electrical problems. After further discussion both crew members agreed it would be in the best interest of safety for our passengers and cabin crew members to not operate as a revenue flight. The captain then made calls to both maintenance and dispatch where they were not in agreement to replace the aircraft. They were very adamant about meling the new problems and continuing service. At one point; a maintenance supervisor had told the captain they would find someone who would fly. After an hour of more discussion; it was decided to remove the aircraft from service. The moral of this story was there seemed to be an inordinate amount of pressure from above to get the crew to take the aircraft! If a crew doesn't believe an aircraft is safe to fly given logical facts and reasoning; we should err on the side of safety especially with multiple electrical problems. Aviation history has taught us this can be very deadly!
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: B737-500 First Officer reports an aircraft refusal when the logbook indicates a history of electrical issues that appear not to have been properly addressed by Maintenance. The inbound crew reported and wrote up flickering cabin lights.
Narrative: Original departure was delayed because of an aircraft swap up line. Off going crew briefed us of multiple MELs; most of which were electrical in nature. They also advised us of two more electrical problems they had [on their flight in]. As I began flight deck preflight duties; the Captain was discussing history problems from aircraft logbook. I began to realize most involved electrical problems; one stating smell of burning electrical wiring in cabin and smoke in cockpit. It was also noted aircraft was ferried after that incident for maintenance. It was not clear to us as what action was taken to resolve the smoke other than the Air Cycle Machine was low on oil and refilled with no other problems noted. No mention of action taken or investigation into electrical burning smell in cabin. Now aircraft was being handed over to us with two new electrical related problems (cooling fan inop in normal switched to alternate and flickering cabin sidewall lighting). Both Crew Members simultaneously felt the aircraft may have bigger underlying electrical problems. After further discussion both crew members agreed it would be in the best interest of safety for our passengers and cabin crew members to not operate as a revenue flight. The Captain then made calls to both Maintenance and Dispatch where they were not in agreement to replace the aircraft. They were very adamant about MELing the new problems and continuing service. At one point; a Maintenance Supervisor had told the Captain they would find someone who would fly. After an hour of more discussion; it was decided to remove the aircraft from service. The moral of this story was there seemed to be an inordinate amount of pressure from above to get the crew to take the aircraft! If a crew doesn't believe an aircraft is safe to fly given logical facts and reasoning; we should err on the side of SAFETY especially with multiple electrical problems. Aviation history has taught us this can be very deadly!
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.