Narrative:

On the evening of 11/sat/91 I was PIC of air carrier flight 1 into jnu, ak. On the leg into jnu we noticed that the captain's CDI needle operated normally but occasionally 'wiggled' from a centered position. This very slight movement of the needle was so small and happened only once or twice. Let me emphasize that the #1 CDI was never inoperative, nor did the needle exceed normal or acceptable tolerances. In addition, the instrument comparater light never illuminated nor were there any other indications of an unsafe CDI. We left the aircraft over night in juneau and elected to leave a hand written note for the outbound crew in the morning explaining the CDI with the good intention to keep a 'heads up'. I did not want, nor did I feel that the CDI should be recorded in the logbook (maintenance logbook) as it was still operating normally and perfectly safe! On the following morning the outbound captain of this particular aircraft (flight 2) read our note and elected to record it in the aircraft maintenance logbook referring to the crew of flight 1. I believe his concern was a reference in the note to 'needle close to one DOT' which again was only momentarily and significant. In conclusion, my concern is for being cited for a violation for not recording a write-up in the aircraft maintenance logbook. If it were worthy of being recorded in the book (ie, needs to be fixed or replaced) I would have done so. An unofficial piece of paper with a note to 'be aware' or 'information only' does not constitute grounding the aircraft. The intent and courtesy behind this note was no different than a verbal exchange between 2 crews in the boarding jetway when asked 'how's the aircraft'? I'm sorry another captain elected to read more into this small note than was necessary and document (officially) on out-of- preparation write up.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A 'RETROACTIVE' LOGBOOK WRITE UP RELATED TO AN ADVISORY NOTE CAUSES FLC CONCERN.

Narrative: ON THE EVENING OF 11/SAT/91 I WAS PIC OF ACR FLT 1 INTO JNU, AK. ON THE LEG INTO JNU WE NOTICED THAT THE CAPT'S CDI NEEDLE OPERATED NORMALLY BUT OCCASIONALLY 'WIGGLED' FROM A CENTERED POS. THIS VERY SLIGHT MOVEMENT OF THE NEEDLE WAS SO SMALL AND HAPPENED ONLY ONCE OR TWICE. LET ME EMPHASIZE THAT THE #1 CDI WAS NEVER INOPERATIVE, NOR DID THE NEEDLE EXCEED NORMAL OR ACCEPTABLE TOLERANCES. IN ADDITION, THE INST COMPARATER LIGHT NEVER ILLUMINATED NOR WERE THERE ANY OTHER INDICATIONS OF AN UNSAFE CDI. WE LEFT THE ACFT OVER NIGHT IN JUNEAU AND ELECTED TO LEAVE A HAND WRITTEN NOTE FOR THE OUTBOUND CREW IN THE MORNING EXPLAINING THE CDI WITH THE GOOD INTENTION TO KEEP A 'HEADS UP'. I DID NOT WANT, NOR DID I FEEL THAT THE CDI SHOULD BE RECORDED IN THE LOGBOOK (MAINT LOGBOOK) AS IT WAS STILL OPERATING NORMALLY AND PERFECTLY SAFE! ON THE FOLLOWING MORNING THE OUTBOUND CAPT OF THIS PARTICULAR ACFT (FLT 2) READ OUR NOTE AND ELECTED TO RECORD IT IN THE ACFT MAINT LOGBOOK REFERRING TO THE CREW OF FLT 1. I BELIEVE HIS CONCERN WAS A REF IN THE NOTE TO 'NEEDLE CLOSE TO ONE DOT' WHICH AGAIN WAS ONLY MOMENTARILY AND SIGNIFICANT. IN CONCLUSION, MY CONCERN IS FOR BEING CITED FOR A VIOLATION FOR NOT RECORDING A WRITE-UP IN THE ACFT MAINT LOGBOOK. IF IT WERE WORTHY OF BEING RECORDED IN THE BOOK (IE, NEEDS TO BE FIXED OR REPLACED) I WOULD HAVE DONE SO. AN UNOFFICIAL PIECE OF PAPER WITH A NOTE TO 'BE AWARE' OR 'INFO ONLY' DOES NOT CONSTITUTE GNDING THE ACFT. THE INTENT AND COURTESY BEHIND THIS NOTE WAS NO DIFFERENT THAN A VERBAL EXCHANGE BTWN 2 CREWS IN THE BOARDING JETWAY WHEN ASKED 'HOW'S THE ACFT'? I'M SORRY ANOTHER CAPT ELECTED TO READ MORE INTO THIS SMALL NOTE THAN WAS NECESSARY AND DOCUMENT (OFFICIALLY) ON OUT-OF- PREPARATION WRITE UP.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 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.