Narrative:

Log history for A319 aircraft showed six days of FMGC # 2 problems dating back to april 2014. It also showed that at ZZZ; before our xa:54AM departure; FMGC # 2 was replaced; operational check [was] good; land verify test good; ok for service. Upon arrival at the aircraft; I noticed that the FM2 annunciator light was illuminated on my first officer's (first officers) mcdu. It appeared that FMGC-2 was still inoperative (eventually got 1fd1); so I followed the reset procedure in the QRH. This did not correct the problem. When the captain arrived at the aircraft; I briefed him on the problem and attempted the reset procedure a second time. The fault remained. After a brief discussion; we attempted the reset a third time. Once again it failed to correct the problem. While I entered the maintenance code into ACARS; the captain called maintenance on the radio and informed them of the discrepancy. Shortly after entering the maintenance code; we received a duplicate maintenance code message. We found this odd as there had been a new maintenance release generated prior to our arrival at the aircraft. It appeared as though the log item was never signed off. The message read already recorded: flight management guidance computer FMGC # 2 inoperative.two mechanics came to the aircraft. We briefed them on the problem and pointed out the circuit breakers (C/bs). They attempted another reset procedure which in turn failed. After a few more attempts they left the aircraft. A short time later they returned with a third mechanic who attempted several reset procedures of his own. Every attempt to reset the FMGC failed. He then attempted to perform a bite test; but didn't know how. He struggled for several minutes going through every page of the ACARS maintenance section in an attempt to figure out how to do a bite test. When he was unable to accomplish the test; he left the aircraft. Shortly thereafter another new mechanic showed up and once again attempted a reset. To save you the suspense; there were no fewer than 12 attempts to reset FMGC # 2. Although I lost track of how many mechanics showed up at the aircraft; eventually the mechanic who failed to accomplish the bite test did come back with paper instructions to follow. This was the first instance of any mechanic having actual troubleshooting/repair information. I want to point out that the mechanics told us that they were almost completely unfamiliar with the airbus. Also; one of the mechanic's informed me that there were legacy air carrier X airbus mechanics on duty; but they are not allowed to work with the legacy air carrier Y mechanics. He stated that our flight was assigned to legacy air carrier Y and that legacy X mechanics only handle the airbus on overnights or ZZZ thru flights. He indicated that even though the legacy X airbus mechanic was in some room where all legacy X guys congregate; he is not allowed/wouldn't come out to assist in our problem. At that point I called the flight office and had a flight manager come to the aircraft. When he arrived; he was able to observe the situation; confer with the mechanics; and eventually speak with the captain. While this was going on; the mechanics advised the captain that maintenance control was requesting to speak with him directly. Maintenance control explained to the captain that the mechanics were unable to convey the exact nature of the malfunction and he didn't understand what was wrong. The legacy Y mechanics did not understand that the malfunction of FMGC # 2 was indicated by several symptoms (1fd1; set offside rng/mode; opp FMGC in prog; FM2 light on the mcdu) and not an FMGC inoperative/warning light. The captain then began to work with the maintenance controller over the phone in an attempt to fix the problem. It was interesting to watch the captain work the problem as three mechanics stood idly by. After over an hour; FMGC # 2 was deferred inoperative and we departed about an hour late. My concerns are numerous. How is work signed-off as complete and tested when it appears; according to maintenance control; that FMGC # 2 was never properly synched with fmcg # 1. How does the FAA allow the [merged] company of legacy air carrier Y to have mechanics; which are unfamiliar with an aircraft type; to freely perform maintenance without any guidance whatsoever? The mechanics; although very professional and well intentioned; were just blindly shooting from the hip trying to fix an aircraft while 120 passengers sat waiting for them to figure it out. How many times do we attempt to reset a system or component before we finally accept that it is inoperative? We constantly hear from management that we are one company; if so; why is the most qualified mechanic prohibited from working where he is needed most? Is this aligned with our company's safety first motto? Is this in the best interest of our customers? Maintenance release issue. System malfunction. Flight deck displays. Airworthiness. Navigation.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: An A319 First Officer raises numerous concerns about maintenance practices at his company involving how maintenance work is signed-off as complete and tested. Or; how many times are attempts to reset a system or component Circuit Breaker (C/B) allowed; before we finally accept that it is inoperative. Reporter also question how the FAA allow mechanics who are unfamiliar with an aircraft type; to freely perform maintenance without any guidance.

Narrative: Log history for A319 aircraft showed six days of FMGC # 2 problems dating back to April 2014. It also showed that at ZZZ; before our XA:54AM departure; FMGC # 2 was replaced; Operational Check [was] good; Land Verify Test good; OK for service. Upon arrival at the aircraft; I noticed that the FM2 Annunciator light was illuminated on my First Officer's (F/Os) MCDU. It appeared that FMGC-2 was still inoperative (eventually got 1FD1); so I followed the reset procedure in the QRH. This did not correct the problem. When the Captain arrived at the aircraft; I briefed him on the problem and attempted the reset procedure a second time. The fault remained. After a brief discussion; we attempted the reset a third time. Once again it failed to correct the problem. While I entered the maintenance code into ACARS; the Captain called Maintenance on the radio and informed them of the discrepancy. Shortly after entering the maintenance code; we received a duplicate maintenance code message. We found this odd as there had been a new Maintenance Release generated prior to our arrival at the aircraft. It appeared as though the log item was never signed off. The message read ALREADY RECORDED: FLIGHT MANAGEMENT GUIDANCE COMPUTER FMGC # 2 INOP.Two mechanics came to the aircraft. We briefed them on the problem and pointed out the Circuit Breakers (C/Bs). They attempted another reset procedure which in turn failed. After a few more attempts they left the aircraft. A short time later they returned with a third Mechanic who attempted several reset procedures of his own. Every attempt to reset the FMGC failed. He then attempted to perform a BITE Test; but didn't know how. He struggled for several minutes going through every page of the ACARS Maintenance section in an attempt to figure out how to do a BITE Test. When he was unable to accomplish the test; he left the aircraft. Shortly thereafter another new mechanic showed up and once again attempted a reset. To save you the suspense; there were no fewer than 12 attempts to reset FMGC # 2. Although I lost track of how many mechanics showed up at the aircraft; eventually the mechanic who failed to accomplish the BITE Test did come back with paper instructions to follow. This was the first instance of any Mechanic having actual troubleshooting/repair information. I want to point out that the mechanics told us that they were almost completely unfamiliar with the Airbus. Also; one of the mechanic's informed me that there were Legacy Air Carrier X Airbus mechanics on duty; but they are not allowed to work with the Legacy Air Carrier Y mechanics. He stated that our flight was assigned to Legacy Air Carrier Y and that Legacy X mechanics only handle the Airbus on overnights or ZZZ thru flights. He indicated that even though the Legacy X Airbus mechanic was in some room where all Legacy X guys congregate; he is not allowed/wouldn't come out to assist in our problem. At that point I called the Flight Office and had a Flight Manager come to the aircraft. When he arrived; he was able to observe the situation; confer with the mechanics; and eventually speak with the Captain. While this was going on; the mechanics advised the Captain that Maintenance Control was requesting to speak with him directly. Maintenance Control explained to the Captain that the mechanics were unable to convey the exact nature of the malfunction and he didn't understand what was wrong. The Legacy Y mechanics did not understand that the malfunction of FMGC # 2 was indicated by several symptoms (1FD1; SET OFFSIDE RNG/MODE; OPP FMGC IN PROG; FM2 light on the MCDU) and not an FMGC inoperative/warning light. The Captain then began to work with the Maintenance Controller over the phone in an attempt to fix the problem. It was interesting to watch the Captain work the problem as three mechanics stood idly by. After over an hour; FMGC # 2 was deferred inoperative and we departed about an hour late. My concerns are numerous. How is work signed-off as complete and tested when it appears; according to Maintenance Control; that FMGC # 2 was never properly synched with FMCG # 1. How does the FAA allow the [merged] company of Legacy Air Carrier Y to have mechanics; which are unfamiliar with an aircraft type; to freely perform maintenance without any guidance whatsoever? The mechanics; although very professional and well intentioned; were just blindly shooting from the hip trying to fix an aircraft while 120 passengers sat waiting for them to figure it out. How many times do we attempt to reset a system or component before we finally accept that it is inoperative? We constantly hear from management that we are one company; if so; why is the most qualified Mechanic prohibited from working where he is needed most? Is this aligned with our company's safety first motto? Is this in the best interest of our customers? Maintenance Release Issue. System Malfunction. Flight Deck Displays. Airworthiness. Navigation.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site 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.