37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 209380 |
Time | |
Date | 199205 |
Day | Fri |
Local Time Of Day | 1201 To 1800 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | airport : atl |
State Reference | GA |
Altitude | agl bound lower : 0 agl bound upper : 0 |
Environment | |
Light | Daylight |
Aircraft 1 | |
Operator | common carrier : air carrier |
Make Model Name | Large Transport, Low Wing, 3 Turbojet Eng |
Flight Phase | ground : preflight |
Flight Plan | IFR |
Person 1 | |
Affiliation | company : air carrier |
Function | flight crew : captain oversight : pic |
Qualification | pilot : instrument pilot : flight engineer pilot : cfi pilot : atp pilot : commercial |
Experience | flight time last 90 days : 150 flight time total : 15000 flight time type : 600 |
ASRS Report | 209380 |
Person 2 | |
Affiliation | company : air carrier |
Function | flight crew : first officer |
Qualification | pilot : atp |
Events | |
Anomaly | aircraft equipment problem : less severe other anomaly other |
Independent Detector | other flight crewa other other : unspecified |
Resolutory Action | none taken : anomaly accepted |
Consequence | Other |
Supplementary | |
Primary Problem | Chart Or Publication |
Air Traffic Incident | other |
Narrative:
About 20 min prior to pushback an FAA maintenance inspector riding the jump seat told me there was some loose gasket material near one of the kruger flaps. I called maintenance. The flight crew and maintenance looked at the gasket and it appeared to be WX strip type material along the leading edge device. The lead mechanic determined it was not an airworthy item and along with the maintenance coordinator authorized it to be carried forward. The FAA inspector insisted on getting an MEL number. The coordinator explained that since it was not an airworthy item an MEL number was not available and referred him to our company engineering department. A contributing factor seemed to be that the inspector was not totally familiar with our procedures. Prior to departure I verified we were legal with maintenance and the FAA inspector. He agreed and said he would research our mco procedures after returning to his home base. Pushback was delayed 15 mins!
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: AN ACR MAINT INSPECTOR CHALLENGED THE MAINT STATUS AND MEL OF AN ACR LGT CAUSING A 15 MIN DELAY.
Narrative: ABOUT 20 MIN PRIOR TO PUSHBACK AN FAA MAINT INSPECTOR RIDING THE JUMP SEAT TOLD ME THERE WAS SOME LOOSE GASKET MATERIAL NEAR ONE OF THE KRUGER FLAPS. I CALLED MAINT. THE FLC AND MAINT LOOKED AT THE GASKET AND IT APPEARED TO BE WX STRIP TYPE MATERIAL ALONG THE LEADING EDGE DEVICE. THE LEAD MECH DETERMINED IT WAS NOT AN AIRWORTHY ITEM AND ALONG WITH THE MAINT COORDINATOR AUTHORIZED IT TO BE CARRIED FORWARD. THE FAA INSPECTOR INSISTED ON GETTING AN MEL NUMBER. THE COORDINATOR EXPLAINED THAT SINCE IT WAS NOT AN AIRWORTHY ITEM AN MEL NUMBER WAS NOT AVAILABLE AND REFERRED HIM TO OUR COMPANY ENGINEERING DEPT. A CONTRIBUTING FACTOR SEEMED TO BE THAT THE INSPECTOR WAS NOT TOTALLY FAMILIAR WITH OUR PROCS. PRIOR TO DEP I VERIFIED WE WERE LEGAL WITH MAINT AND THE FAA INSPECTOR. HE AGREED AND SAID HE WOULD RESEARCH OUR MCO PROCS AFTER RETURNING TO HIS HOME BASE. PUSHBACK WAS DELAYED 15 MINS!
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.