Narrative:

On dec/xa/00, I was called for overtime for a road trip. We were to replace a pair of first stage fan blades on an MD80 aircraft right engine, with 1 FOD damaged fan blade. I was the lead mechanic, and 4 mechanics and an inspector were also called for the trip. The inspector went up first on an air taxi to borescope the engine. When the borescope was done, we started to remove the nose cowl. When the nose cowl was removed we went back to the line office. The inspector said engineering called and wanted to know if the blade could be blended so maintenance could ferry the aircraft back to ZZZ to change the blades in the hangar. The WX was bad, and we were supposed to have a tent set up with heaters to work in when we got there, but there were none available. Due to the working conditions, the duty manager was concerned the job would take longer than planned to get the aircraft back in service. Engineering was concerned about the bearing torque and seating the bearing in cold WX. We went out to measure the damaged area of the blade. We then faxed the information to engineering. He called back and told us to crop the damaged area of the blade per maintenance manual xa-back course-dg, and remove the small amount of damage left at the leading edge of the blade with a stop drill, and blend to the stop drill. The area was dye checked by inspection and no cracks or tears noted. The item was short-signed by a mechanic on a job card written by inspection. The item was left open until the fan blade replacement was accomplished in ZZZ. Engineering said they would facsimile a drawing of the repair. He drew it on a blade in his office and would make a drawing and facsimile it to us. The nose cowl was inspected and reinstalled. The aircraft was taken out for a power run by line maintenance. We were sent out on the engine run. Both engines ran normally, no vibration or compressor stalls noted. I called the duty manager. He informed me on the signing off of the logbook item. (We left the item open for the blade set replacement in ZZZ.) another item was written in the logbook to release the aircraft for the maintenance ferry flight. In hindsight, verbal instructions from a power plant engineer are not an acceptable way to repair an engine. We should have insisted on an engineering authorization being faxed to us to allow us to deviate from the maintenance manual and for its use in the logbook signoff.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: AN MD80 WAS DISPATCHED IN NON COMPLIANCE ON A MAINT FERRY WITH #2 ENG FAN BLADE INTERIM REPAIR BUT NO ENGINEERING REPAIR DOCUMENTATION.

Narrative: ON DEC/XA/00, I WAS CALLED FOR OVERTIME FOR A ROAD TRIP. WE WERE TO REPLACE A PAIR OF FIRST STAGE FAN BLADES ON AN MD80 ACFT R ENG, WITH 1 FOD DAMAGED FAN BLADE. I WAS THE LEAD MECH, AND 4 MECHS AND AN INSPECTOR WERE ALSO CALLED FOR THE TRIP. THE INSPECTOR WENT UP FIRST ON AN AIR TAXI TO BORESCOPE THE ENG. WHEN THE BORESCOPE WAS DONE, WE STARTED TO REMOVE THE NOSE COWL. WHEN THE NOSE COWL WAS REMOVED WE WENT BACK TO THE LINE OFFICE. THE INSPECTOR SAID ENGINEERING CALLED AND WANTED TO KNOW IF THE BLADE COULD BE BLENDED SO MAINT COULD FERRY THE ACFT BACK TO ZZZ TO CHANGE THE BLADES IN THE HANGAR. THE WX WAS BAD, AND WE WERE SUPPOSED TO HAVE A TENT SET UP WITH HEATERS TO WORK IN WHEN WE GOT THERE, BUT THERE WERE NONE AVAILABLE. DUE TO THE WORKING CONDITIONS, THE DUTY MGR WAS CONCERNED THE JOB WOULD TAKE LONGER THAN PLANNED TO GET THE ACFT BACK IN SVC. ENGINEERING WAS CONCERNED ABOUT THE BEARING TORQUE AND SEATING THE BEARING IN COLD WX. WE WENT OUT TO MEASURE THE DAMAGED AREA OF THE BLADE. WE THEN FAXED THE INFO TO ENGINEERING. HE CALLED BACK AND TOLD US TO CROP THE DAMAGED AREA OF THE BLADE PER MAINT MANUAL XA-BC-DG, AND REMOVE THE SMALL AMOUNT OF DAMAGE LEFT AT THE LEADING EDGE OF THE BLADE WITH A STOP DRILL, AND BLEND TO THE STOP DRILL. THE AREA WAS DYE CHKED BY INSPECTION AND NO CRACKS OR TEARS NOTED. THE ITEM WAS SHORT-SIGNED BY A MECH ON A JOB CARD WRITTEN BY INSPECTION. THE ITEM WAS LEFT OPEN UNTIL THE FAN BLADE REPLACEMENT WAS ACCOMPLISHED IN ZZZ. ENGINEERING SAID THEY WOULD FAX A DRAWING OF THE REPAIR. HE DREW IT ON A BLADE IN HIS OFFICE AND WOULD MAKE A DRAWING AND FAX IT TO US. THE NOSE COWL WAS INSPECTED AND REINSTALLED. THE ACFT WAS TAKEN OUT FOR A PWR RUN BY LINE MAINT. WE WERE SENT OUT ON THE ENG RUN. BOTH ENGS RAN NORMALLY, NO VIBRATION OR COMPRESSOR STALLS NOTED. I CALLED THE DUTY MGR. HE INFORMED ME ON THE SIGNING OFF OF THE LOGBOOK ITEM. (WE LEFT THE ITEM OPEN FOR THE BLADE SET REPLACEMENT IN ZZZ.) ANOTHER ITEM WAS WRITTEN IN THE LOGBOOK TO RELEASE THE ACFT FOR THE MAINT FERRY FLT. IN HINDSIGHT, VERBAL INSTRUCTIONS FROM A PWR PLANT ENGINEER ARE NOT AN ACCEPTABLE WAY TO REPAIR AN ENG. WE SHOULD HAVE INSISTED ON AN ENGINEERING AUTHORIZATION BEING FAXED TO US TO ALLOW US TO DEVIATE FROM THE MAINT MANUAL AND FOR ITS USE IN THE LOGBOOK SIGNOFF.

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.