 |
37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
B737-700 captain reported difficulty complying with restrictions on the arrival due to a deferred nose cowl anti-ice valve.
| Attributes | |
| ACN | 1513063 |
| Time | |
| Date | 201801 |
| Place | |
| Locale Reference | ZZZ.Airport |
| State Reference | US |
| Aircraft 1 | |
| Make Model Name | B737-700 |
| Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
| Flight Phase | Initial Approach |
| Flight Plan | IFR |
| Component | |
| Aircraft Component | Intake Ice System |
| Person 1 | |
| Function | Captain |
| Experience | Flight Crew Last 90 Days 386 |
| Events | |
| Anomaly | Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe Deviation - Procedural MEL Deviation - Procedural Published Material / Policy Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence |
Narrative:
MEL engine and nose cowl anti-ice valves; valve inoperative open is not flyable in icing conditions and should not be allowed. We had this MEL for two legs and I will never take it again. It may be legal but it is not safe. This first leg I found very distracting because it was nearly impossible to keep 60 percent on the affected engine while in icing conditions and complying with restrictions on the arrival. In addition; getting the aircraft slowed and configured for the approach with split power in icing conditions was overly distracting. The first officer and I discussed not accepting the aircraft for the second leg but came to the conclusion it would be ok if we dirtied up; slowed down earlier and 'dragged it in' to get configured and stabilized. We were wrong. The power setting for the ILS approach would have been less than 60 percent on both engines (flaps 40). To obtain an N1 setting on the #2 engine of a minimum of 60 percent and keep the airspeed from increasing; I had to reduce power on the #1 engine to 50 percent or so (estimate). This resulted in a very distracting split throttle; split power approach. I will never accept this MEL again if icing conditions exist on the arrival or approach. This MEL should not be allowed in icing conditions. It is unsafe. I'm sure it works great at boeing or in the simulator world; but it has no place in line operations.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: B737-700 Captain reported difficulty complying with restrictions on the arrival due to a deferred Nose Cowl Anti-Ice Valve.
Narrative: MEL Engine and Nose Cowl Anti-Ice Valves; Valve Inoperative Open is not flyable in icing conditions and should not be allowed. We had this MEL for two legs and I will never take it again. It may be legal but it is not safe. This first leg I found very distracting because it was nearly impossible to keep 60 percent on the affected engine while in icing conditions and complying with restrictions on the arrival. In addition; getting the aircraft slowed and configured for the approach with split power in icing conditions was overly distracting. The First Officer and I discussed not accepting the aircraft for the second leg but came to the conclusion it would be ok if we dirtied up; slowed down earlier and 'dragged it in' to get configured and stabilized. We were wrong. The power setting for the ILS Approach would have been less than 60 percent on both engines (flaps 40). To obtain an N1 setting on the #2 engine of a minimum of 60 percent and keep the airspeed from increasing; I had to reduce power on the #1 engine to 50 percent or so (estimate). This resulted in a very distracting split throttle; split power approach. I will never accept this MEL again if icing conditions exist on the arrival or approach. This MEL should not be allowed in icing conditions. It is unsafe. I'm sure it works great at Boeing or in the simulator world; but it has no place in line operations.
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.