37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 535552 |
Time | |
Date | 200201 |
Day | Sat |
Local Time Of Day | 1201 To 1800 |
Place | |
State Reference | FO |
Altitude | msl single value : 31000 |
Environment | |
Flight Conditions | VMC |
Light | Daylight |
Aircraft 1 | |
Operator | common carrier : air carrier |
Make Model Name | MD-80 Series (DC-9-80) Undifferentiated or Other Model |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
Flight Phase | cruise : level |
Flight Plan | IFR |
Person 1 | |
Affiliation | company : air carrier |
Function | flight crew : captain oversight : pic |
Qualification | pilot : commercial pilot : flight engineer pilot : multi engine pilot : instrument pilot : atp |
Experience | flight time last 90 days : 30 flight time total : 12500 flight time type : 5500 |
ASRS Report | 535552 |
Person 2 | |
Affiliation | company : air carrier |
Function | flight crew : first officer |
Events | |
Anomaly | aircraft equipment problem : critical other anomaly other |
Independent Detector | aircraft equipment other aircraft equipment : fuel gauges other flight crewa |
Resolutory Action | none taken : anomaly accepted other |
Consequence | other other Other |
Supplementary | |
Problem Areas | Aircraft Flight Crew Human Performance Environmental Factor Maintenance Human Performance Company |
Primary Problem | Aircraft |
Narrative:
Shortly after departing mzt and leveling at FL310, the fuel quantity indicator failed. It indicated erratic quantities in all 3 tanks. It seemed to enter a sort of maintenance test mode at times displaying 3000-3000-3000, and then indicating rapidly changing numbers up and down (several thousand pounds). It displayed a series of dashes in all 3 windows at times and the gross weight window displayed rapidly changing values as well. The indicator would not work on either channel a or B. Consideration was given to returning to mzt, but since fuel flow gauges and associated fuel used indicators were working normally and could be compared with the flight plan, and WX at destination was good, it was decided to continue to lax. A discussion of this problem with an MD80 instructor pilot was desired to validate our decision to continue since a second abnormal even would make the inoperative fuel quantity indicators critical (ie, engine failure, fuel leak, abnormal fuel xfer between tanks, WX deterioration at destination, etc). We contacted maintenance control and advised them of the problem and asked to have dispatch patch us through to an MD80 check captain or at least the flight operations duty officer. Maintenance control told us that they (maintenance) were comfortable with us continuing to lax and that the dispatcher was listening and he/she was comfortable with it as well. We apparently must have flown out of company radio range, and about 10 mins later we got an ACARS message that they were not having any luck contacting the flight operations duty officer. About 15-20 mins after that, we got an ACARS message that the flight operations duty officer had been contacted and that he/she agreed we should continue to lax. We were never able to discuss the problem with him/her.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: AN MD80 FLC CONTINUES THEIR FLT FROM MZT WITH ALL 3 FUEL GAUGES MALFUNCTIONING AFTER ATTEMPTING RESOLUTION AND ADVICE FROM COMPANY ABOUT 1 HR FROM DEST, LAX, CA.
Narrative: SHORTLY AFTER DEPARTING MZT AND LEVELING AT FL310, THE FUEL QUANTITY INDICATOR FAILED. IT INDICATED ERRATIC QUANTITIES IN ALL 3 TANKS. IT SEEMED TO ENTER A SORT OF MAINT TEST MODE AT TIMES DISPLAYING 3000-3000-3000, AND THEN INDICATING RAPIDLY CHANGING NUMBERS UP AND DOWN (SEVERAL THOUSAND LBS). IT DISPLAYED A SERIES OF DASHES IN ALL 3 WINDOWS AT TIMES AND THE GROSS WT WINDOW DISPLAYED RAPIDLY CHANGING VALUES AS WELL. THE INDICATOR WOULD NOT WORK ON EITHER CHANNEL A OR B. CONSIDERATION WAS GIVEN TO RETURNING TO MZT, BUT SINCE FUEL FLOW GAUGES AND ASSOCIATED FUEL USED INDICATORS WERE WORKING NORMALLY AND COULD BE COMPARED WITH THE FLT PLAN, AND WX AT DEST WAS GOOD, IT WAS DECIDED TO CONTINUE TO LAX. A DISCUSSION OF THIS PROB WITH AN MD80 INSTRUCTOR PLT WAS DESIRED TO VALIDATE OUR DECISION TO CONTINUE SINCE A SECOND ABNORMAL EVEN WOULD MAKE THE INOP FUEL QUANTITY INDICATORS CRITICAL (IE, ENG FAILURE, FUEL LEAK, ABNORMAL FUEL XFER BTWN TANKS, WX DETERIORATION AT DEST, ETC). WE CONTACTED MAINT CTL AND ADVISED THEM OF THE PROB AND ASKED TO HAVE DISPATCH PATCH US THROUGH TO AN MD80 CHK CAPT OR AT LEAST THE FLT OPS DUTY OFFICER. MAINT CTL TOLD US THAT THEY (MAINT) WERE COMFORTABLE WITH US CONTINUING TO LAX AND THAT THE DISPATCHER WAS LISTENING AND HE/SHE WAS COMFORTABLE WITH IT AS WELL. WE APPARENTLY MUST HAVE FLOWN OUT OF COMPANY RADIO RANGE, AND ABOUT 10 MINS LATER WE GOT AN ACARS MESSAGE THAT THEY WERE NOT HAVING ANY LUCK CONTACTING THE FLT OPS DUTY OFFICER. ABOUT 15-20 MINS AFTER THAT, WE GOT AN ACARS MESSAGE THAT THE FLT OPS DUTY OFFICER HAD BEEN CONTACTED AND THAT HE/SHE AGREED WE SHOULD CONTINUE TO LAX. WE WERE NEVER ABLE TO DISCUSS THE PROB WITH HIM/HER.
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.