37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 1419918 |
Time | |
Date | 201701 |
Local Time Of Day | 1201-1800 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | ZZZZ.Airport |
State Reference | FO |
Component | |
Aircraft Component | Oil Pressure Indication |
Person 1 | |
Function | Captain Pilot Flying |
Qualification | Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP) |
Experience | Flight Crew Last 90 Days 185 Flight Crew Total 15829.50 Flight Crew Type 5860.27 |
Events | |
Anomaly | Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe Deviation - Procedural Maintenance |
Narrative:
While preflight planning we reviewed all maintenance write-ups and noticed a recurring/chronic theme related to the engine 2 bearing 4 oil system hi pressure ECAM. This had been written up 9 times in four (4) days and fadec had been tested/cycled six times in a week each time this had been written up previously. Called [dispatch] and requested a conference with maintenance. They indicated they would be pulling the transducer and cleaning and reinstalling. [Maintenance] requested that we do [an] engine run to verify operation without ECAM. 10 seconds after start of #2 engine the ECAM returned. [Maintenance] indicated they would be flying 2 [maintenance] personnel and a new transducer to change it out and were confident it would resolve the issue. Returned to same jet and [maintenance] had completed work and they did an engine run lasting approximately 5 minutes at idle thrust only. We boarded our passengers and taxied to runway. On taxi out moved power up to approximately 60% N1. 10 seconds later; just prior to taking the runway; the ECAM returned for the engine 2 bearing 4 oil system hi pressure. Previous deferral stated this was not permitted to be deferred if the 'hi pressure' was associated. Taxied back to gate and cancelled.additional info: during discussion with [maintenance] they indicated that the fadec had been cycled on taxi out at [another airport] and the ECAM had returned during climb out. They stated they requested the crew to notify them if ECAM re-occurred enroute. Post flight report showed the ECAM came back on 2x enroute. [Maintenance] was not notified of this fact. Also during our taxi out to runway; we received the ECAM and it never showed that it had come on during the post flight ACARS data report. Lastly the onsite mechanics (who did a fantastic job) requested [maintenance control] to do a high power run and were overruled. Hence the reason we pushed the power up during taxi-out.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: A320 Captain reported cancelling the flight after a chronic issue ENGINE 2 BEARING 4 OIL SYSTEM HI Pressure recurred during taxi.
Narrative: While preflight planning we reviewed all maintenance write-ups and noticed a recurring/chronic theme related to the ENG 2 Bearing 4 OIL SYS HI Pressure ECAM. This had been written up 9 times in four (4) days and FADEC had been tested/cycled six times in a week each time this had been written up previously. Called [Dispatch] and requested a conference with Maintenance. They indicated they would be pulling the transducer and cleaning and reinstalling. [Maintenance] requested that we do [an] engine run to verify operation without ECAM. 10 seconds after start of #2 engine the ECAM returned. [Maintenance] indicated they would be flying 2 [maintenance] personnel and a new transducer to change it out and were confident it would resolve the issue. Returned to same jet and [maintenance] had completed work and they did an engine run lasting approximately 5 minutes at idle thrust only. We boarded our passengers and taxied to runway. On taxi out moved power up to approximately 60% N1. 10 seconds later; just prior to taking the runway; the ECAM returned for the ENG 2 Bearing 4 OIL SYS HI Pressure. Previous deferral stated this was not permitted to be deferred if the 'Hi Pressure' was associated. Taxied back to gate and cancelled.Additional info: During discussion with [maintenance] they indicated that the FADEC had been cycled on taxi out at [another airport] and the ECAM had returned during climb out. They stated they requested the crew to notify them if ECAM re-occurred enroute. Post flight report showed the ECAM came back on 2x enroute. [Maintenance] was not notified of this fact. Also during our taxi out to runway; we received the ECAM and it never showed that it had come on during the post flight ACARS data report. Lastly the onsite mechanics (who did a fantastic job) requested [maintenance control] to do a high power run and were overruled. Hence the reason we pushed the power up during taxi-out.
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.