Narrative:

Far part 135.65(B) and the operations specifications under which this company operates requires: 'the PIC shall enter or have entered in the aircraft maintenance log each mechanical irregularity that comes to pilot's attention during flight time. Before each flight, the PIC shall, if the pilot does not already know, determine the status of each irregularity entered in the maintenance log at the end of the preceding flight.' additionally, part 135.65(C) requires: 'each person who takes corrective action or defers action concerning a reported or observed failure or malfunction of an airframe, pwrplant, propeller, rotor, or appliance, shall record the action taken in the aircraft maintenance log under the applicable maintenance requirements of this chapter.' at the xx base of company the lead pilot and mechanic decide: 1) whether or not a discrepancy is logged. 2) whether the discrepancy 'downs' the aircraft (MEL notwithstanding). 3) if a part is changed, whether it should be logged or not (eg, just put the part on, but don't do any paperwork). 4) whether the next pilot (or any pilot) should be informed of any of the above. In short, what is going on here is an attempt to 'look good' with his superiors, to avoid 'OTS' time and to 'keep the numbers looking good' (number of patients flown, etc), the lead pilot, captain, has decided that the FARS, operations specifications and the MEL are subject to interpretation (his). This company employs its pilots on 'at will' contracts and constantly reminds all that they '...can be terminated at any time and for any reason....' captain xx uses this to intimidate the other pilots and with the willing concession of the mechanic, circumvents that which is not to his liking. Remember that management almost certainly must know what's going on and haven't done anything to curb it. They at least should be putting 2 and 2 together with the parts ordered and little 'OTS' time. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: reporter states that he has resigned from the company since sending the report. He had no idea how bad things really were. When he became aware he could not stay in that environment any longer. His great concern is for the patients being transported who also do not know how bad things are. He is going to follow up with a call to the hotline to which analyst referred him. It was also recommended that he contact the regional FAA office since he feels the local FSDO is aware of the problem and has not taken action.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: PLT RPTR STATES THAT AN EMS COMPANY IS FAILING TO ACCOMPLISH PROPER MAINT ON HELI ACFT AND SENDING OUT UNAIRWORTHY ACFT WITH PATIENTS ABOARD.

Narrative: FAR PART 135.65(B) AND THE OPS SPECS UNDER WHICH THIS COMPANY OPERATES REQUIRES: 'THE PIC SHALL ENTER OR HAVE ENTERED IN THE ACFT MAINT LOG EACH MECHANICAL IRREGULARITY THAT COMES TO PLT'S ATTN DURING FLT TIME. BEFORE EACH FLT, THE PIC SHALL, IF THE PLT DOES NOT ALREADY KNOW, DETERMINE THE STATUS OF EACH IRREGULARITY ENTERED IN THE MAINT LOG AT THE END OF THE PRECEDING FLT.' ADDITIONALLY, PART 135.65(C) REQUIRES: 'EACH PERSON WHO TAKES CORRECTIVE ACTION OR DEFERS ACTION CONCERNING A RPTED OR OBSERVED FAILURE OR MALFUNCTION OF AN AIRFRAME, PWRPLANT, PROP, ROTOR, OR APPLIANCE, SHALL RECORD THE ACTION TAKEN IN THE ACFT MAINT LOG UNDER THE APPLICABLE MAINT REQUIREMENTS OF THIS CHAPTER.' AT THE XX BASE OF COMPANY THE LEAD PLT AND MECH DECIDE: 1) WHETHER OR NOT A DISCREPANCY IS LOGGED. 2) WHETHER THE DISCREPANCY 'DOWNS' THE ACFT (MEL NOTWITHSTANDING). 3) IF A PART IS CHANGED, WHETHER IT SHOULD BE LOGGED OR NOT (EG, JUST PUT THE PART ON, BUT DON'T DO ANY PAPERWORK). 4) WHETHER THE NEXT PLT (OR ANY PLT) SHOULD BE INFORMED OF ANY OF THE ABOVE. IN SHORT, WHAT IS GOING ON HERE IS AN ATTEMPT TO 'LOOK GOOD' WITH HIS SUPERIORS, TO AVOID 'OTS' TIME AND TO 'KEEP THE NUMBERS LOOKING GOOD' (NUMBER OF PATIENTS FLOWN, ETC), THE LEAD PLT, CAPT, HAS DECIDED THAT THE FARS, OPS SPECS AND THE MEL ARE SUBJECT TO INTERP (HIS). THIS COMPANY EMPLOYS ITS PLTS ON 'AT WILL' CONTRACTS AND CONSTANTLY REMINDS ALL THAT THEY '...CAN BE TERMINATED AT ANY TIME AND FOR ANY REASON....' CAPT XX USES THIS TO INTIMIDATE THE OTHER PLTS AND WITH THE WILLING CONCESSION OF THE MECH, CIRCUMVENTS THAT WHICH IS NOT TO HIS LIKING. REMEMBER THAT MGMNT ALMOST CERTAINLY MUST KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON AND HAVEN'T DONE ANYTHING TO CURB IT. THEY AT LEAST SHOULD BE PUTTING 2 AND 2 TOGETHER WITH THE PARTS ORDERED AND LITTLE 'OTS' TIME. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR STATES THAT HE HAS RESIGNED FROM THE COMPANY SINCE SENDING THE RPT. HE HAD NO IDEA HOW BAD THINGS REALLY WERE. WHEN HE BECAME AWARE HE COULD NOT STAY IN THAT ENVIRONMENT ANY LONGER. HIS GREAT CONCERN IS FOR THE PATIENTS BEING TRANSPORTED WHO ALSO DO NOT KNOW HOW BAD THINGS ARE. HE IS GOING TO FOLLOW UP WITH A CALL TO THE HOTLINE TO WHICH ANALYST REFERRED HIM. IT WAS ALSO RECOMMENDED THAT HE CONTACT THE REGIONAL FAA OFFICE SINCE HE FEELS THE LCL FSDO IS AWARE OF THE PROB AND HAS NOT TAKEN ACTION.

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.