Narrative:

September 2014; we were assigned to aircraft X; a cessna ce-560XL in ZZZ. The aircraft came out of maintenance at one of the authorized service centers. The maintenance vendor [at the service center] signed-off in part a 'maintenance check-list;' as well as; at least two discrepancies found by a previous crew. Upon the completion of the pre-flight I was required by regulations and the fom to complete no less then nine of our air carrier's maintenance discrepancy forms. These included repeat discrepancy write-ups to the one's signed-off by the vendor -- paint damage due to an apparent brake hydraulic leak; as well as; aileron flight control binding. The following day we were assigned to aircraft Y; another ce-560XL aircraft in ZZZ. The aircraft came out of maintenance at the same authorized citation service center. The maintenance vendor signed-off in part our 'air carrier's maintenance check-list.' upon the completion of the pre-flight I was required by regulations and the fom to complete no less then seven maintenance discrepancy forms. These included a discrepancy write-up for a suspected engine-oil leak -- engine-oil was leaking out of a non-drain hole on the bottom of the engine cowling. These two cases are but two of many examples of discrepancies found immediately after a company maintenance representative signs-off a 'maintenance check-list;' or; a non-routine aog discrepancy. As someone who is not as well versed and trained in the mechanics and maintenance of the aircraft as an amt; why are pilots being put in the situation in which they have to find and report the discrepancies an amt is better trained with more resources and time to find? Furthermore; why are the company's maintenance representatives not utilizing our air carrier's approved maintenance carry over matrix -- as intended? For example: why do the company's maintenance representatives; while conducting the 'maintenance check-list' not find the numerous paint damage found on the company's aircraft these days; report them; inspect them; and when appropriate defer said damage under the maintenance carry over procedure? Instead; the company insists on requiring pilots to defer such paint damage under the approved maintenance carry over matrix.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A Captain questions Maintenance Checklist sign-off practices by his own Air Carrier Maintenance Representatives and the Authorized Service Center Vendor used for maintenance on their CE560-XL aircraft. He notes that pilots are being put in a situation where they have to find; report; and defer maintenance discrepancies under their Maintenance Carry-Over Matrix that should have been accomplished by Maintenance.

Narrative: September 2014; we were assigned to Aircraft X; a Cessna CE-560XL in ZZZ. The aircraft came out of Maintenance at one of the Authorized Service Centers. The Maintenance Vendor [at the Service Center] signed-off in part a 'Maintenance Check-List;' as well as; at least two discrepancies found by a previous crew. Upon the completion of the pre-flight I was required by regulations and the FOM to complete no less then nine of our Air Carrier's Maintenance Discrepancy Forms. These included repeat discrepancy write-ups to the one's signed-off by the Vendor -- Paint damage due to an apparent brake hydraulic leak; as well as; aileron flight control binding. The following day we were assigned to Aircraft Y; another CE-560XL aircraft in ZZZ. The aircraft came out of Maintenance at the same Authorized Citation Service Center. The Maintenance Vendor signed-off in part our 'Air Carrier's Maintenance Check-List.' Upon the completion of the pre-flight I was required by regulations and the FOM to complete no less then seven Maintenance Discrepancy Forms. These included a discrepancy write-up for a suspected engine-oil leak -- engine-oil was leaking out of a non-drain hole on the bottom of the engine cowling. These two cases are but two of many examples of discrepancies found immediately after a Company Maintenance representative signs-off a 'Maintenance Check-List;' or; a non-routine AOG discrepancy. As someone who is not as well versed and trained in the mechanics and maintenance of the aircraft as an AMT; why are pilots being put in the situation in which they have to find and report the discrepancies an AMT is better trained with more resources and time to find? Furthermore; why are the Company's Maintenance representatives not utilizing our Air Carrier's Approved Maintenance Carry Over Matrix -- as intended? For example: Why do the Company's Maintenance representatives; while conducting the 'Maintenance Check-List' not find the numerous paint damage found on the Company's aircraft these days; report them; inspect them; and when appropriate defer said damage under the Maintenance Carry Over Procedure? Instead; the Company insists on requiring pilots to defer such paint damage under the Approved Maintenance Carry Over Matrix.

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.