Narrative:

Upon arrival to the aircraft (B737-500, #xyz), I found the #4 window (eyebrow) above my seat cracked. I notified the captain and went outside to accomplish the exterior aircraft inspection. By the time I returned to the cockpit, the captain had notified maintenance and wrote up the discrepancy in the aircraft log. A mechanic was in the cockpit signing off the discrepancy while showing us photocopied pages from the aircraft maintenance manual outlining procedures for cracked windows. As it turns out, the inner window pane is structural, and that is addressed in the maintenance manual. The middle pane is not addressed in the manual, therefore, no maintenance procedures address a cracked middle pane. The first leg went uneventfully to dfw. While in-flight, captain called dispatch and asked the dispatcher to check into the cracked window and to advise maintenance control. I checked the aircraft MEL, and a cracked window has no procedure -- either maintenance or operationally. Captain, however, found a procedure in the aircraft QRH addressing a cracked window that recommends an altitude of FL260 and a maximum differential of 5 psi. The next leg was redispatched to comply with the altitude restr, with fuel added also. Upon arrival in ewr, the captain remained with the aircraft to ensure the new crew was aware of the QRH restrs and to coordinate their cruise altitude, fuel, etc with their dispatcher.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A B737-500 WAS DISPATCHED IN NON COMPLIANCE WITH THE FO'S #4 EYEBROW WINDOW INNER PANE CRACKED AND DEFERRED WITH NO LIMITS.

Narrative: UPON ARR TO THE ACFT (B737-500, #XYZ), I FOUND THE #4 WINDOW (EYEBROW) ABOVE MY SEAT CRACKED. I NOTIFIED THE CAPT AND WENT OUTSIDE TO ACCOMPLISH THE EXTERIOR ACFT INSPECTION. BY THE TIME I RETURNED TO THE COCKPIT, THE CAPT HAD NOTIFIED MAINT AND WROTE UP THE DISCREPANCY IN THE ACFT LOG. A MECH WAS IN THE COCKPIT SIGNING OFF THE DISCREPANCY WHILE SHOWING US PHOTOCOPIED PAGES FROM THE ACFT MAINT MANUAL OUTLINING PROCS FOR CRACKED WINDOWS. AS IT TURNS OUT, THE INNER WINDOW PANE IS STRUCTURAL, AND THAT IS ADDRESSED IN THE MAINT MANUAL. THE MIDDLE PANE IS NOT ADDRESSED IN THE MANUAL, THEREFORE, NO MAINT PROCS ADDRESS A CRACKED MIDDLE PANE. THE FIRST LEG WENT UNEVENTFULLY TO DFW. WHILE INFLT, CAPT CALLED DISPATCH AND ASKED THE DISPATCHER TO CHK INTO THE CRACKED WINDOW AND TO ADVISE MAINT CTL. I CHKED THE ACFT MEL, AND A CRACKED WINDOW HAS NO PROC -- EITHER MAINT OR OPERATIONALLY. CAPT, HOWEVER, FOUND A PROC IN THE ACFT QRH ADDRESSING A CRACKED WINDOW THAT RECOMMENDS AN ALT OF FL260 AND A MAX DIFFERENTIAL OF 5 PSI. THE NEXT LEG WAS REDISPATCHED TO COMPLY WITH THE ALT RESTR, WITH FUEL ADDED ALSO. UPON ARR IN EWR, THE CAPT REMAINED WITH THE ACFT TO ENSURE THE NEW CREW WAS AWARE OF THE QRH RESTRS AND TO COORDINATE THEIR CRUISE ALT, FUEL, ETC WITH THEIR DISPATCHER.

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.