 |
37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
B737 captain reported maintenance incorrectly identified leak resulting in captain recalling maintenance to return to fix hydraulics.
| Attributes | |
| ACN | 1680312 |
| Time | |
| Date | 201909 |
| Aircraft 1 | |
| Make Model Name | B737 Next Generation Undifferentiated |
| Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
| Flight Phase | Parked |
| Flight Plan | IFR |
| Component | |
| Aircraft Component | Hydraulic System Lines Connectors Fittings |
| Person 1 | |
| Function | Captain |
| Qualification | Flight Crew Instrument Flight Crew Multiengine Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP) |
| Experience | Flight Crew Last 90 Days 165.85 Flight Crew Total 1287.50 Flight Crew Type 1287.50 |
| Events | |
| Anomaly | Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe Deviation - Procedural MEL Deviation - Procedural Maintenance Deviation - Procedural Published Material / Policy |
Narrative:
Upon completing a preflight walk around; my first officer informed me that there was a hydraulic leak in the right wheel well; and 'puddle' underneath. He was trying to count the drips to quantify the extent of the leak; but I felt it was important to have maintenance evaluate to see if it was within any limit. We contacted station maintenance and filled out an elb write-up. This was 27-25 minutes prior to scheduled push. Approx. 10 minutes after push; without any contact by maintenance personnel; I received an mrd that said that there was 'water' coming from the air conditioning; and the hydraulic leak was cleared. This created confusion; as the first officer; who is approx. 6 months on the line was sure it was hydraulic. I went down and inspected the area and there was a puddle of hydraulic fluid with a leaking component above it. I contacted station maintenance and asked for the mechanic to return to the aircraft where I pointed out the hydraulic leak. Subsequently; fittings were tightened and we were on our way. Had we given in to operational pressures to minimize the delay and trust the erroneous mrd we would have flown over 5 hours overwater with a known hydraulic leak. While mistakes happen to everyone; had the mechanic attempted to resolve the discrepancy in the write up; as we did; we could have resolved it as a team.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: B737 Captain reported Maintenance incorrectly identified leak resulting in Captain recalling maintenance to return to fix hydraulics.
Narrative: Upon completing a preflight walk around; my First Officer informed me that there was a hydraulic leak in the Right Wheel well; and 'puddle' underneath. He was trying to count the drips to quantify the extent of the leak; but I felt it was important to have Maintenance evaluate to see if it was within any limit. We contacted Station Maintenance and filled out an ELB write-up. This was 27-25 minutes prior to scheduled push. Approx. 10 minutes after push; without ANY contact by Maintenance personnel; I received an MRD that said that there was 'water' coming from the air conditioning; and the HYDRAULIC leak was cleared. This created confusion; as the First Officer; who is approx. 6 months on the line was sure it was hydraulic. I went down and inspected the area and there was a puddle of hydraulic fluid with a leaking component above it. I contacted Station Maintenance and asked for the mechanic to return to the aircraft where I pointed out the HYDRAULIC leak. Subsequently; fittings were tightened and we were on our way. Had we given in to operational pressures to minimize the delay and trust the erroneous MRD we would have flown over 5 hours overwater with a known hydraulic leak. While mistakes happen to everyone; had the mechanic attempted to resolve the discrepancy in the write up; as we did; we could have resolved it as a team.
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.