Aircraft equipment problem.

Attributes
ACN	244793
Time
Date	199306
Day	Mon
Local Time Of Day	1201 To 1800
Place
Locale Reference	airport : elp
State Reference	TX
Altitude	agl bound lower : 0 agl bound upper : 0
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	Medium Large Transport, Low Wing, 2 Turbojet Eng
Navigation In Use	Other Other
Flight Phase	climbout : takeoff ground : preflight
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : captain oversight : pic
Qualification	pilot : flight engineer pilot : atp
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 150 flight time total : 8000 flight time type : 800
ASRS Report	244793
Person 2
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : first officer
Qualification	pilot : atp pilot : flight engineer
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 180 flight time total : 7000 flight time type : 1200
ASRS Report	245326
Events
Anomaly	aircraft equipment problem : less severe non adherence : far non adherence : published procedure
Independent Detector	other flight crewa
Resolutory Action	none taken : detected after the fact
Consequence	Other
Supplementary
Primary Problem	Aircraft
Air Traffic Incident	other

Narrative:

During preflight at elp, I noticed the pbe (portable breathing equipment) had an indication of a broken vacuum seal. This equipment, although not listed in the MEL, is considered a required item for flight. Since elp is not a maintenance station for our air carrier, another pbe had to be sent from dfw, and a contract mechanic from another airline had to install it. While waiting for the pbe to be flown in from dfw, I spoke with our maintenance center and they said there was an eo (equipment order) ongoing which would change the appearance of the pbe somewhat. When the mask arrived from dfw, the contract mechanic removed the old, defective pbe, then mistakenly re-installed the same pbe, leaving the operational mask in the box it was delivered. Both myself and the first officer questioned the mechanic, since the mask which he had just installed still looked defective. He was unfamiliar with our air carrier's pbes. I reasoned that this mask, that I believed to be the operational one just flown in from dfw, must be good since it was inspected in dfw, the appearance change being due to the eo in progress. We took off for dfw and didn't realize the contract mechanic's mistake until one of our mechanics discovered the operational pbe still in its delivery box upon arrival in dfw.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACFT EQUIP PROB.

Narrative: DURING PREFLT AT ELP, I NOTICED THE PBE (PORTABLE BREATHING EQUIP) HAD AN INDICATION OF A BROKEN VACUUM SEAL. THIS EQUIP, ALTHOUGH NOT LISTED IN THE MEL, IS CONSIDERED A REQUIRED ITEM FOR FLT. SINCE ELP IS NOT A MAINT STATION FOR OUR ACR, ANOTHER PBE HAD TO BE SENT FROM DFW, AND A CONTRACT MECH FROM ANOTHER AIRLINE HAD TO INSTALL IT. WHILE WAITING FOR THE PBE TO BE FLOWN IN FROM DFW, I SPOKE WITH OUR MAINT CTR AND THEY SAID THERE WAS AN EO (EQUIP ORDER) ONGOING WHICH WOULD CHANGE THE APPEARANCE OF THE PBE SOMEWHAT. WHEN THE MASK ARRIVED FROM DFW, THE CONTRACT MECH REMOVED THE OLD, DEFECTIVE PBE, THEN MISTAKENLY RE-INSTALLED THE SAME PBE, LEAVING THE OPERATIONAL MASK IN THE BOX IT WAS DELIVERED. BOTH MYSELF AND THE FO QUESTIONED THE MECH, SINCE THE MASK WHICH HE HAD JUST INSTALLED STILL LOOKED DEFECTIVE. HE WAS UNFAMILIAR WITH OUR ACR'S PBES. I REASONED THAT THIS MASK, THAT I BELIEVED TO BE THE OPERATIONAL ONE JUST FLOWN IN FROM DFW, MUST BE GOOD SINCE IT WAS INSPECTED IN DFW, THE APPEARANCE CHANGE BEING DUE TO THE EO IN PROGRESS. WE TOOK OFF FOR DFW AND DIDN'T REALIZE THE CONTRACT MECH'S MISTAKE UNTIL ONE OF OUR MECHS DISCOVERED THE OPERATIONAL PBE STILL IN ITS DELIVERY BOX UPON ARR IN DFW.

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.