Narrative:

On takeoff, we aborted at approximately 90 KIAS. When power advanced and autothrust engaged in EPR mode, #2 engine drove to correct takeoff EPR of 1.44. #1 engine hung up at approximately 1.25 EPR. Because in this airplane (and I consider this a serious design flaw) the throttles stop advancing when the first engine reaches the designated takeoff EPR, I thought that we simply had a lagging throttle. I attempted to manually advance the left throttle with no response. I called this to the captain's attention. He took the aircraft and aborted the takeoff. When company engine mechanics examined the engine, they found on the electronic engine computer 1 ground wire completely unattached and 3 cannon plugs vibrated loose. This makes me question the maintenance procedures in effect here. I am uncomfortable with the fact that 4 separate connectors were not secured properly in 1 engine. When reattached, the engine ran normally for the brief ferry flight (20 mins or so to cvg. En route to cvg, we found that fuel would not feed from the left wing tank even with the xfeed open. We elected not to turn the pumps on the right wing off as we were concerned that if maintenance had closed off a valve from the left wing tank during maintenance on the left engine, doing so might result I a dual engine flameout. We landed well outside the imbal limits with +/-11000 pounds in the left tank and +/-5000 pounds in the right tank. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: the reporter stated this airplane was an overnight stay at a non maintenance station with no inbound reports. The reporter said on takeoff roll #1 engine lagged behind #2 and the split was 1 full knob. The reporter said the takeoff was rejected and a contract technician open the engine and discovered the connectors not connected to the electronic engine computer.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A B757-200 REJECTED TKOF AT 90 KTS DUE TO #1 ENG SLOW TO MAKE TKOF PWR DUE TO #1 ENG ELECTRONIC ENG CTL ELECTRICAL AND SENSING CONNECTORS NOT CONNECTED.

Narrative: ON TKOF, WE ABORTED AT APPROX 90 KIAS. WHEN PWR ADVANCED AND AUTOTHRUST ENGAGED IN EPR MODE, #2 ENG DROVE TO CORRECT TKOF EPR OF 1.44. #1 ENG HUNG UP AT APPROX 1.25 EPR. BECAUSE IN THIS AIRPLANE (AND I CONSIDER THIS A SERIOUS DESIGN FLAW) THE THROTTLES STOP ADVANCING WHEN THE FIRST ENG REACHES THE DESIGNATED TKOF EPR, I THOUGHT THAT WE SIMPLY HAD A LAGGING THROTTLE. I ATTEMPTED TO MANUALLY ADVANCE THE L THROTTLE WITH NO RESPONSE. I CALLED THIS TO THE CAPT'S ATTN. HE TOOK THE ACFT AND ABORTED THE TKOF. WHEN COMPANY ENG MECHS EXAMINED THE ENG, THEY FOUND ON THE ELECTRONIC ENG COMPUTER 1 GND WIRE COMPLETELY UNATTACHED AND 3 CANNON PLUGS VIBRATED LOOSE. THIS MAKES ME QUESTION THE MAINT PROCS IN EFFECT HERE. I AM UNCOMFORTABLE WITH THE FACT THAT 4 SEPARATE CONNECTORS WERE NOT SECURED PROPERLY IN 1 ENG. WHEN REATTACHED, THE ENG RAN NORMALLY FOR THE BRIEF FERRY FLT (20 MINS OR SO TO CVG. ENRTE TO CVG, WE FOUND THAT FUEL WOULD NOT FEED FROM THE L WING TANK EVEN WITH THE XFEED OPEN. WE ELECTED NOT TO TURN THE PUMPS ON THE R WING OFF AS WE WERE CONCERNED THAT IF MAINT HAD CLOSED OFF A VALVE FROM THE L WING TANK DURING MAINT ON THE L ENG, DOING SO MIGHT RESULT I A DUAL ENG FLAMEOUT. WE LANDED WELL OUTSIDE THE IMBAL LIMITS WITH +/-11000 LBS IN THE L TANK AND +/-5000 LBS IN THE R TANK. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: THE RPTR STATED THIS AIRPLANE WAS AN OVERNIGHT STAY AT A NON MAINT STATION WITH NO INBOUND RPTS. THE RPTR SAID ON TKOF ROLL #1 ENG LAGGED BEHIND #2 AND THE SPLIT WAS 1 FULL KNOB. THE RPTR SAID THE TKOF WAS REJECTED AND A CONTRACT TECHNICIAN OPEN THE ENG AND DISCOVERED THE CONNECTORS NOT CONNECTED TO THE ELECTRONIC ENG COMPUTER.

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.