Narrative:

I am concerned with the lack of information for pilots concerning the recent change about engine overtemps on the B757 engines. Whereas the old procedure for overtemps used to say that the condition causing the overtemp needed to be found and fixed, the new procedure says all the mechanic need to do is not find a reason for the overtemp and no corrective action is needed. In my first experience with this condition we were scheduled to fly to la paz. This requires the use of maximum power. In addition, it is a high altitude airport requiring maximum performance if one loses an engine. I am questioning how wise is it to send an airplane to an airport requiring maximum power, with an engine problem that occurs at maximum power. Maintenance claims that the reason the maintenance procedure has changed is a lack of spare parts for the engines and is related to the burner cans. So what does this mean to me as a pilot. Is it not in our best interest to educate pilots related to a limitation exceedance as to what the potential problems associated with this overtemp problem could exist. This problem refers to the chart on page XXX and the new amended notes found in chapter xx, engine FMM00-XXX aug/sun/00. The software anomaly that would trigger an exceedance on the ground that appears in our paperwork has been explained. It would be nice to see a note or additional detail included in the text relating to those aircraft.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A B757-200 CAPT RPTS CONCERN OVER MAINT PRACTICE OF RELEASING ACFT FOR SVC WITH EXHAUST GAS TEMP LIMITED ENGS.

Narrative: I AM CONCERNED WITH THE LACK OF INFO FOR PLTS CONCERNING THE RECENT CHANGE ABOUT ENG OVERTEMPS ON THE B757 ENGS. WHEREAS THE OLD PROC FOR OVERTEMPS USED TO SAY THAT THE CONDITION CAUSING THE OVERTEMP NEEDED TO BE FOUND AND FIXED, THE NEW PROC SAYS ALL THE MECH NEED TO DO IS NOT FIND A REASON FOR THE OVERTEMP AND NO CORRECTIVE ACTION IS NEEDED. IN MY FIRST EXPERIENCE WITH THIS CONDITION WE WERE SCHEDULED TO FLY TO LA PAZ. THIS REQUIRES THE USE OF MAX PWR. IN ADDITION, IT IS A HIGH ALT ARPT REQUIRING MAX PERFORMANCE IF ONE LOSES AN ENG. I AM QUESTIONING HOW WISE IS IT TO SEND AN AIRPLANE TO AN ARPT REQUIRING MAX PWR, WITH AN ENG PROB THAT OCCURS AT MAX PWR. MAINT CLAIMS THAT THE REASON THE MAINT PROC HAS CHANGED IS A LACK OF SPARE PARTS FOR THE ENGS AND IS RELATED TO THE BURNER CANS. SO WHAT DOES THIS MEAN TO ME AS A PLT. IS IT NOT IN OUR BEST INTEREST TO EDUCATE PLTS RELATED TO A LIMITATION EXCEEDANCE AS TO WHAT THE POTENTIAL PROBS ASSOCIATED WITH THIS OVERTEMP PROB COULD EXIST. THIS PROB REFERS TO THE CHART ON PAGE XXX AND THE NEW AMENDED NOTES FOUND IN CHAPTER XX, ENG FMM00-XXX AUG/SUN/00. THE SOFTWARE ANOMALY THAT WOULD TRIGGER AN EXCEEDANCE ON THE GND THAT APPEARS IN OUR PAPERWORK HAS BEEN EXPLAINED. IT WOULD BE NICE TO SEE A NOTE OR ADDITIONAL DETAIL INCLUDED IN THE TEXT RELATING TO THOSE ACFT.

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.