37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 1688578 |
Time | |
Date | 201909 |
Local Time Of Day | 1201-1800 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | OAK.Airport |
State Reference | CA |
Environment | |
Flight Conditions | VMC |
Light | Night |
Aircraft 1 | |
Make Model Name | EMB ERJ 135 ER/LR |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
Flight Phase | Parked |
Flight Plan | IFR |
Component | |
Aircraft Component | APU |
Person 1 | |
Function | Captain Pilot Flying |
Qualification | Flight Crew Instrument Flight Crew Multiengine Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP) |
Person 2 | |
Function | First Officer Pilot Flying |
Qualification | Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP) Flight Crew Instrument Flight Crew Multiengine |
Events | |
Anomaly | Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe Deviation - Procedural FAR Deviation - Procedural Published Material / Policy |
Narrative:
The flight attendant reported peephole from lavatory to baggage area 'blurry.' aircraft had two other issues (APU gen not indicating any amps; lavatory sink inoperative). I wrote up aircraft for three issues; sent emails with docs to maintenance; notified mission control; waited more than 1 hour for technician. After about 60 minutes of work (power-down; gpu; etc) and discussion with maintenance and mission control; the technician returned and was on the phone with maintenance. Two write-ups were closed out. The tech was on phone with maintenance and advised they were deciding how to record the write-up and the next station would advise. I specifically asked 'are we legal to fly' and repeating what I'm assuming he was being told on phone said 'you are legal to fly.' I asked him twice to clarify in front of the first officer. We launched. When I arrived at next station I asked about the issue and they immediately called maintenance who asked 'what open issue? They only sent us two and we resolved them.' I showed my email and was told to [file a report]. I succumbed to operational pressure and relied on an assurance from our technical experts. If we cannot rely on fellow team members; then we have a bigger issue. Integrity is paramount. For myself I will never again move an aircraft with an open write-up; no matter what I am assured.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: ERJ flight crew reported that Maintenance failed to repair and log one of three reported aircraft issues; insisting that the crew was legal to fly.
Narrative: The Flight Attendant reported peephole from lavatory to baggage area 'blurry.' Aircraft had two other issues (APU gen not indicating any Amps; lavatory sink inoperative). I wrote up aircraft for three issues; sent emails with docs to maintenance; notified Mission Control; waited more than 1 hour for Technician. After about 60 minutes of work (power-down; GPU; etc) and discussion with Maintenance and Mission Control; the Technician returned and was on the phone with Maintenance. Two write-ups were closed out. The Tech was on phone with Maintenance and advised they were deciding how to record the write-up and the next station would advise. I specifically asked 'are we legal to fly' and repeating what I'm assuming he was being told on phone said 'you are legal to fly.' I asked him twice to clarify in front of the First Officer. We launched. When I arrived at next station I asked about the issue and they immediately called maintenance who asked 'what open issue? They only sent us two and we resolved them.' I showed my email and was told to [file a report]. I succumbed to operational pressure and relied on an assurance from our technical experts. If we cannot rely on fellow team members; then we have a bigger issue. Integrity is paramount. For myself I will never again move an aircraft with an open write-up; no matter what I am assured.
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.