Narrative:

[Maintenance] was contacted to inquire about a discrepancy that was found on the aircraft; the assistant chief pilot (acp) on duty was conferenced into the call shortly after it started as well. The elevator trim indicator did not have the 'to' marking readable between the nose up and nose down takeoff band markings.[maintenance] was contacted to inquire whether the 'to' marking was required as per crash fire rescue equipment 14 and whether we could defer it under nonessential equipment and furnishings (nef) for placards; markings or labels not required by crash fire rescue equipment 14; or; the nef for placards; markings or labels required by crash fire rescue equipment 14.the maintenance controller asked me whether it was affecting the safety of flight; which at that particular point was not pertinent. Rather; the pertinent question in my mind was: is it in compliance with company policy and FAA regulations.the acp on duty asked the maintenance controller whether the marking was on the approved lists in the maintenance manual. The maintenance controller stated he couldn't find it.at that point I asked whether the nose up and nose down takeoff range limit markings are on the lists as both the acp; as well as; myself are under the impression that there is no relief for such a discrepancy. The maintenance controller stated those markings were not on the lists either.however; he again asked whether it was a safety of flight issue -- it seemed to me that the maintenance controller attempted to push us into accepting the aircraft without a discrepancy being recorded. The acp agreed with us that at this point; [that] the point of the conversation was whether it was compliant to operate without the discrepancy being fixed.we sent the discrepancy in and the discrepancy was fixed while we were in rest.question #1: is the 'to' marking required; or can it be deferred under the deferral program?question #2: can company personnel be reminded that indeed the first question should be whether something affects the safety of the operation; however; the second question should be whether something is compliant or not. Non-compliance should not be an acceptable solution in order to avoid disruptions to the operation.side note: when a maintenance controller or acp questions a pilot whether it affects the safety of the flight; it creates a potential perceived conflict with the pilot that should be avoided.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: C560XLS Captain reported that the Elevator Trim Indicator did not have the 'TO' marking readable between the nose up and nose down takeoff band markings.

Narrative: [Maintenance] was contacted to inquire about a discrepancy that was found on the aircraft; the Assistant Chief Pilot (ACP) on duty was conferenced into the call shortly after it started as well. The Elevator Trim Indicator did not have the 'TO' marking readable between the nose up and nose down takeoff band markings.[Maintenance] was contacted to inquire whether the 'TO' marking was required as per CFR 14 and whether we could defer it under Nonessential Equipment and Furnishings (NEF) for placards; markings or labels not required by CFR 14; or; the NEF for placards; markings or labels required by CFR 14.The Maintenance controller asked me whether it was affecting the safety of flight; which at that particular point was not pertinent. Rather; the pertinent question in my mind was: Is it in compliance with Company policy and FAA regulations.The ACP on duty asked the Maintenance controller whether the marking was on the approved lists in the Maintenance manual. The Maintenance controller stated he couldn't find it.At that point I asked whether the nose up and nose down takeoff range limit markings are on the lists as both the ACP; as well as; myself are under the impression that there is no relief for such a discrepancy. The Maintenance controller stated those markings were not on the lists either.However; he again asked whether it was a safety of flight issue -- it seemed to me that the Maintenance controller attempted to push us into accepting the aircraft without a discrepancy being recorded. The ACP agreed with us that at this point; [that] the point of the conversation was whether it was compliant to operate without the discrepancy being fixed.We sent the discrepancy in and the discrepancy was fixed while we were in rest.Question #1: Is the 'TO' marking required; or can it be deferred under the deferral program?Question #2: Can Company personnel be reminded that indeed the first question should be whether something affects the safety of the operation; however; the second question should be whether something is compliant or not. Non-compliance should not be an acceptable solution in order to avoid disruptions to the operation.Side note: When a Maintenance controller or ACP questions a pilot whether it affects the safety of the flight; it creates a potential perceived conflict with the pilot that should be avoided.

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.