37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 516122 |
Time | |
Date | 200106 |
Day | Sat |
Local Time Of Day | 1201 To 1800 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | airport : isp.airport |
State Reference | NY |
Altitude | agl single value : 0 |
Environment | |
Flight Conditions | VMC |
Light | Daylight |
Aircraft 1 | |
Operator | general aviation : corporate |
Make Model Name | Falcon 2000 |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 91 |
Flight Phase | ground : parked |
Flight Plan | IFR |
Person 1 | |
Affiliation | company : corporate |
Function | flight crew : captain oversight : pic |
Qualification | pilot : cfi pilot : commercial pilot : atp |
Experience | flight time last 90 days : 25 flight time total : 7239 flight time type : 420 |
ASRS Report | 516122 |
Person 2 | |
Affiliation | company : corporate |
Function | flight crew : first officer |
Events | |
Anomaly | aircraft equipment problem : less severe maintenance problem : improper maintenance maintenance problem : non compliance with mel maintenance problem : improper documentation non adherence : published procedure non adherence : company policies non adherence : far other anomaly other |
Independent Detector | other other : 4 |
Resolutory Action | none taken : detected after the fact |
Consequence | other other |
Factors | |
Maintenance | contributing factor : schedule pressure performance deficiency : repair performance deficiency : logbook entry performance deficiency : non compliance with legal requirements |
Supplementary | |
Problem Areas | Maintenance Human Performance Aircraft Company |
Primary Problem | Company |
Narrative:
I was assigned by the company to pick up aircraft X (falcon 2000) at FBO X at isp on the morning of jun/sat/01. The aircraft was being svced for numerous maintenance related items written up by other crew members. One of the write-ups required a functional check flight prior to being released for service. When I arrived in isp, I was 4 hours behind schedule, due to airline delays, for the functional check flight. My first officer was new to the company and assigned to me because I am an instructor pilot. I performed a thorough preflight inspection and reviewed approximately 10 pages of maintenance related items in the aircraft log. I called our maintenance center for a review of the aircraft repairs and discussed the requirement for the functional check flight. I also asked if the aircraft was released from maintenance and were there any other open issues in the computer system. I was told that there were no open issues and the plane was released. I then talked to the program manager on duty to discuss the issues of the functional check flight, which is required by the company. At this time, my understanding was the aircraft was cleared from any maintenance related items and there were no open MEL's. We departed isp and performed the functional check flight, which was uneventful. I operated the aircraft for 4 days and then xferred the aircraft to another crew in mdw. The company informed me 2 days later that I had operated the aircraft with an open MEL for the 4 days. As the PIC of the aircraft, I am the final person responsible for the safe operation of the aircraft I am assigned. In my review of the aircraft logbook, I failed to verify the dates of each write-up and the date each item was cleared. During my investigation of the events, I found that the checks and balances in the company's maintenance system had failed. The MEL item, an inoperative flight deck lighting glare shield light, had expired 5 days prior to my acceptance of the aircraft, and the inoperative sticker had been removed from the related control panel. Based upon my communications with the company, I assumed the company had accurately tracked the MEL's and all the write-ups had been cleared. It was discovered that someone in the maintenance center had cleared the MEL, and FBO X was instructed to process the paperwork. I was handed a release-first officer-flight form from FBO X and placed it in the logbook. In the future, I would recommend when an aircraft is being returned to service, from a service center, the company allow sufficient time for the PIC to review all maintenance related items and instruct them to review each write-up with the maintenance center. This would insure the write-ups in the aircraft logbooks are the same as in the maintenance center computer system. Any issues with dates would be rectified.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: F2TH CREW OPERATED ACFT WITH AN OPEN LOG ITEM.
Narrative: I WAS ASSIGNED BY THE COMPANY TO PICK UP ACFT X (FALCON 2000) AT FBO X AT ISP ON THE MORNING OF JUN/SAT/01. THE ACFT WAS BEING SVCED FOR NUMEROUS MAINT RELATED ITEMS WRITTEN UP BY OTHER CREW MEMBERS. ONE OF THE WRITE-UPS REQUIRED A FUNCTIONAL CHK FLT PRIOR TO BEING RELEASED FOR SVC. WHEN I ARRIVED IN ISP, I WAS 4 HRS BEHIND SCHEDULE, DUE TO AIRLINE DELAYS, FOR THE FUNCTIONAL CHK FLT. MY FO WAS NEW TO THE COMPANY AND ASSIGNED TO ME BECAUSE I AM AN INSTRUCTOR PLT. I PERFORMED A THOROUGH PREFLT INSPECTION AND REVIEWED APPROX 10 PAGES OF MAINT RELATED ITEMS IN THE ACFT LOG. I CALLED OUR MAINT CTR FOR A REVIEW OF THE ACFT REPAIRS AND DISCUSSED THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE FUNCTIONAL CHK FLT. I ALSO ASKED IF THE ACFT WAS RELEASED FROM MAINT AND WERE THERE ANY OTHER OPEN ISSUES IN THE COMPUTER SYS. I WAS TOLD THAT THERE WERE NO OPEN ISSUES AND THE PLANE WAS RELEASED. I THEN TALKED TO THE PROGRAM MGR ON DUTY TO DISCUSS THE ISSUES OF THE FUNCTIONAL CHK FLT, WHICH IS REQUIRED BY THE COMPANY. AT THIS TIME, MY UNDERSTANDING WAS THE ACFT WAS CLRED FROM ANY MAINT RELATED ITEMS AND THERE WERE NO OPEN MEL'S. WE DEPARTED ISP AND PERFORMED THE FUNCTIONAL CHK FLT, WHICH WAS UNEVENTFUL. I OPERATED THE ACFT FOR 4 DAYS AND THEN XFERRED THE ACFT TO ANOTHER CREW IN MDW. THE COMPANY INFORMED ME 2 DAYS LATER THAT I HAD OPERATED THE ACFT WITH AN OPEN MEL FOR THE 4 DAYS. AS THE PIC OF THE ACFT, I AM THE FINAL PERSON RESPONSIBLE FOR THE SAFE OP OF THE ACFT I AM ASSIGNED. IN MY REVIEW OF THE ACFT LOGBOOK, I FAILED TO VERIFY THE DATES OF EACH WRITE-UP AND THE DATE EACH ITEM WAS CLRED. DURING MY INVESTIGATION OF THE EVENTS, I FOUND THAT THE CHKS AND BALS IN THE COMPANY'S MAINT SYS HAD FAILED. THE MEL ITEM, AN INOP FLT DECK LIGHTING GLARE SHIELD LIGHT, HAD EXPIRED 5 DAYS PRIOR TO MY ACCEPTANCE OF THE ACFT, AND THE INOP STICKER HAD BEEN REMOVED FROM THE RELATED CTL PANEL. BASED UPON MY COMS WITH THE COMPANY, I ASSUMED THE COMPANY HAD ACCURATELY TRACKED THE MEL'S AND ALL THE WRITE-UPS HAD BEEN CLRED. IT WAS DISCOVERED THAT SOMEONE IN THE MAINT CTR HAD CLRED THE MEL, AND FBO X WAS INSTRUCTED TO PROCESS THE PAPERWORK. I WAS HANDED A RELEASE-FO-FLT FORM FROM FBO X AND PLACED IT IN THE LOGBOOK. IN THE FUTURE, I WOULD RECOMMEND WHEN AN ACFT IS BEING RETURNED TO SVC, FROM A SVC CTR, THE COMPANY ALLOW SUFFICIENT TIME FOR THE PIC TO REVIEW ALL MAINT RELATED ITEMS AND INSTRUCT THEM TO REVIEW EACH WRITE-UP WITH THE MAINT CTR. THIS WOULD INSURE THE WRITE-UPS IN THE ACFT LOGBOOKS ARE THE SAME AS IN THE MAINT CTR COMPUTER SYS. ANY ISSUES WITH DATES WOULD BE RECTIFIED.
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.