Narrative:

Wrong takeoff power used. This aircraft had a rubber seal missing where the horizontal stabilizer joins the tail. This part has been missing (maintenance deferred) for 9 days as of today. I looked up the cdl requirements, and it has a table requiring a 300 pound penalty for takeoff and I think 600 pounds for cruise. Whatever it was it was tiny. We were way under maximum runway/climb weights, so performance was not a factor at all. In the MEL/cdl there is no mention of the need to use 26000 pounds maximum power with bleeds off. There should be. The reason why is the aircraft gross weight had us incorrectly set for 22000 pounds reduced thrust. You guessed it, we got to the end of the runway, busy as usual, and compared the closeout to the plan, were light and otherwise well within limits, and set 22000 pounds standard power for takeoff. In my initial captain upgrade oral 2 yrs ago on the B727, I remember reciting the items from the performance manual requiring maximum power. Now on the B737, I didn't connect that every weight penalty item required 26000 pounds maximum power. Most items are obvious. Now we're using standard power for wet runways but with a small rubber strip missing from well behind the airflow separation point we need 26000 pound bleeds off maximum power. Furthermore, it turns out we're incurring 9+ days of extra hot section wear and its associated cost. In this cost conscious time it seemed unlikely that we'd allow such an apparent waste. The point is this didn't look like a major problem requiring maximum thrust. The tps said 22000 pounds reduced power, and with no mention of a maximum power requirement in the cdl, I didn't get the alert I needed to recall that maximum power was in fact required. My recommendation is to add another layer of protection by printing maximum power required in that section of the cdl near the penalty table, and probably in other penalty tables too. That would help both crews and dispatchers. A statement could also be added to the logbook. It still seems odd to have to take a weight penalty and add about 10000 pounds of extra thrust for this piece. I took the time to review the cdl carefully, compared it to the 22000 pound aircraft gross weight and still goofed. Our return flight's tps was correct, and we used 26000 pounds maximum power. I left a note for following crew's in the logbook. Please make the information more easily accessible for those of us who get tired, rushed, or just aren't always as sharp as we'd like to be. Also, how about automating the aircraft gross weight so when there's a cdl penalty it only will print out 26000 pounds maximum data. The takeoff was completely normal out of mia. Thanks for this system.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: B737 CREW DID NOT USE RATED TKOF THRUST WITH AN MEL'ED DEFERRED ITEM.

Narrative: WRONG TKOF PWR USED. THIS ACFT HAD A RUBBER SEAL MISSING WHERE THE HORIZ STABILIZER JOINS THE TAIL. THIS PART HAS BEEN MISSING (MAINT DEFERRED) FOR 9 DAYS AS OF TODAY. I LOOKED UP THE CDL REQUIREMENTS, AND IT HAS A TABLE REQUIRING A 300 LB PENALTY FOR TKOF AND I THINK 600 LBS FOR CRUISE. WHATEVER IT WAS IT WAS TINY. WE WERE WAY UNDER MAX RWY/CLB WTS, SO PERFORMANCE WAS NOT A FACTOR AT ALL. IN THE MEL/CDL THERE IS NO MENTION OF THE NEED TO USE 26000 LBS MAX PWR WITH BLEEDS OFF. THERE SHOULD BE. THE REASON WHY IS THE ACFT GROSS WT HAD US INCORRECTLY SET FOR 22000 LBS REDUCED THRUST. YOU GUESSED IT, WE GOT TO THE END OF THE RWY, BUSY AS USUAL, AND COMPARED THE CLOSEOUT TO THE PLAN, WERE LIGHT AND OTHERWISE WELL WITHIN LIMITS, AND SET 22000 LBS STANDARD PWR FOR TKOF. IN MY INITIAL CAPT UPGRADE ORAL 2 YRS AGO ON THE B727, I REMEMBER RECITING THE ITEMS FROM THE PERFORMANCE MANUAL REQUIRING MAX PWR. NOW ON THE B737, I DIDN'T CONNECT THAT EVERY WT PENALTY ITEM REQUIRED 26000 LBS MAX PWR. MOST ITEMS ARE OBVIOUS. NOW WE'RE USING STANDARD PWR FOR WET RWYS BUT WITH A SMALL RUBBER STRIP MISSING FROM WELL BEHIND THE AIRFLOW SEPARATION POINT WE NEED 26000 LB BLEEDS OFF MAX PWR. FURTHERMORE, IT TURNS OUT WE'RE INCURRING 9+ DAYS OF EXTRA HOT SECTION WEAR AND ITS ASSOCIATED COST. IN THIS COST CONSCIOUS TIME IT SEEMED UNLIKELY THAT WE'D ALLOW SUCH AN APPARENT WASTE. THE POINT IS THIS DIDN'T LOOK LIKE A MAJOR PROB REQUIRING MAX THRUST. THE TPS SAID 22000 LBS REDUCED PWR, AND WITH NO MENTION OF A MAX PWR REQUIREMENT IN THE CDL, I DIDN'T GET THE ALERT I NEEDED TO RECALL THAT MAX PWR WAS IN FACT REQUIRED. MY RECOMMENDATION IS TO ADD ANOTHER LAYER OF PROTECTION BY PRINTING MAX PWR REQUIRED IN THAT SECTION OF THE CDL NEAR THE PENALTY TABLE, AND PROBABLY IN OTHER PENALTY TABLES TOO. THAT WOULD HELP BOTH CREWS AND DISPATCHERS. A STATEMENT COULD ALSO BE ADDED TO THE LOGBOOK. IT STILL SEEMS ODD TO HAVE TO TAKE A WT PENALTY AND ADD ABOUT 10000 LBS OF EXTRA THRUST FOR THIS PIECE. I TOOK THE TIME TO REVIEW THE CDL CAREFULLY, COMPARED IT TO THE 22000 LB ACFT GROSS WT AND STILL GOOFED. OUR RETURN FLT'S TPS WAS CORRECT, AND WE USED 26000 LBS MAX PWR. I LEFT A NOTE FOR FOLLOWING CREW'S IN THE LOGBOOK. PLEASE MAKE THE INFO MORE EASILY ACCESSIBLE FOR THOSE OF US WHO GET TIRED, RUSHED, OR JUST AREN'T ALWAYS AS SHARP AS WE'D LIKE TO BE. ALSO, HOW ABOUT AUTOMATING THE ACFT GROSS WT SO WHEN THERE'S A CDL PENALTY IT ONLY WILL PRINT OUT 26000 LBS MAX DATA. THE TKOF WAS COMPLETELY NORMAL OUT OF MIA. THANKS FOR THIS SYS.

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.