 |
37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
A maintenance inspector reported that a vendor did not accomplish the repairs required due to lack of information.
| Attributes | |
| ACN | 1451188 |
| Time | |
| Date | 201705 |
| Local Time Of Day | 1201-1800 |
| Place | |
| Locale Reference | ZZZ.Airport |
| State Reference | US |
| Environment | |
| Light | Daylight |
| Aircraft 1 | |
| Make Model Name | Commercial Fixed Wing |
| Flight Phase | Parked |
| Component | |
| Aircraft Component | Trailing Edge Flap |
| Person 1 | |
| Function | Inspector |
| Qualification | Maintenance Inspection Authority |
| Events | |
| Anomaly | Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe Deviation - Procedural Maintenance Deviation - Procedural Published Material / Policy |
Narrative:
[Maintenance paperwork] was generated for aircraft X to oversize the 'inboard carriage to torque tube attach holes and hardware' on the left wing inboard flap assembly. The [paperwork] was started but never completed due to non-routines being written for pitting corrosion on internal mating surfaces of the torque tube and corrosion on the attach fitting. The decision was made to change the flap.when the part was routed to the vendor only the corrosion on the fitting was listed on the repair order. The torque tube pitting non-routines and the incomplete [paperwork] were not mentioned. Without this information the vendor did not separate the torque to look for corrosion nor did they complete service bulletin 737-57a1314 and re-part mark the flap to mpn 113a2100-53A. This is not an unusual occurrence. Often when a component is removed from an aircraft and multiple discrepancies are written against it the only information on the repair order is what the mechanic writes on the back of the removal tag. Create a procedure so that all known discrepancies written against a component are sent with the repair order to the vendor.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: A Maintenance Inspector reported that a Vendor did not accomplish the repairs required due to lack of information.
Narrative: [Maintenance paperwork] was generated for Aircraft X to oversize the 'inboard carriage to torque tube attach holes and hardware' on the left wing inboard flap assembly. The [paperwork] was started but never completed due to non-routines being written for pitting corrosion on internal mating surfaces of the torque tube and corrosion on the attach fitting. The decision was made to change the flap.When the part was routed to the vendor only the corrosion on the fitting was listed on the repair order. The torque tube pitting non-routines and the incomplete [paperwork] were not mentioned. Without this information the vendor did not separate the torque to look for corrosion nor did they complete Service Bulletin 737-57A1314 and re-part mark the flap to MPN 113a2100-53A. This is not an unusual occurrence. Often when a component is removed from an aircraft and multiple discrepancies are written against it the only information on the repair order is what the mechanic writes on the back of the removal tag. Create a procedure so that all known discrepancies written against a component are sent with the repair order to the vendor.
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.