A DC9 was dispatched in non compliance with a cracked fueling receptacle brace not entered in the lo...

Attributes
ACN	571031
Time
Date	200301
Day	Thu
Local Time Of Day	0601 To 1200
Place
Locale Reference	airport : buf.airport
State Reference	NY
Altitude	agl single value : 0
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	DC-9 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Flight Phase	ground : parked
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : first officer
Qualification	pilot : instrument pilot : commercial pilot : multi engine pilot : atp
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 230 flight time total : 14500 flight time type : 6400
ASRS Report	571031
Person 2
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : captain oversight : pic
Events
Anomaly	aircraft equipment problem : less severe maintenance problem : improper documentation non adherence : far non adherence : published procedure
Independent Detector	other other : person 3
Resolutory Action	none taken : anomaly accepted
Consequence	other other
Supplementary
Problem Areas	Aircraft Flight Crew Human Performance
Primary Problem	Flight Crew Human Performance

Narrative:

On last leg of a 5 day trip, we landed at buffalo, ny, with normal operations at XA37. I began my exterior preflight at approximately XB00. Upon arrival at right side of aircraft, the refueler motioned me over to underwing refueling receptacle brace and pointed out a crack in one of the braces. The weight of the hose and fueling nozzle did not seem to be affecting the support structure despite the cracked brace. I asked him if he could continue refueling safely and he said he could. The refueler seemed to be very concerned about the crack and who was to 'blame' I told him it could have been metal fatigue or refuelers in past leaning on hose while refueling or someone just simply driving away with hose still attached to aircraft. It was hard to tell how long the crack had been there. I told the captain of the crack and that the aircraft had been safely fueled and of the 'blame concerns' of the refueler. The refueler had annotated on our refuel form that the aircraft had arrived with the crack. The captain did not write up the crack at that time for whatever reason(south) I don't know. I did know he planned on writing it up at dtw upon arrival. Upon arriving at dtw, captain took maintenance out to refueling panel and showed them the crack. When I later saw the captain (after 15 mins) he mentioned the aircraft was in need of a long repair time at dtw hangar because of the cracked braces. Neither the captain nor myself ever considered this problem a safety concern (especially flight safety). The refueler thought safety was never in question because he successfully uploaded the fuel, and the refueling receptacle was solid -- little or no movement to the structure/piping. I can't honestly say why the captain did not write up the crack. Perhaps it was to wait for qualified maintenance to work on it upon arrival at dtw. In any case, we should have written it up at buffalo.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A DC9 WAS DISPATCHED IN NON COMPLIANCE WITH A CRACKED FUELING RECEPTACLE BRACE NOT ENTERED IN THE LOGBOOK.

Narrative: ON LAST LEG OF A 5 DAY TRIP, WE LANDED AT BUFFALO, NY, WITH NORMAL OPS AT XA37. I BEGAN MY EXTERIOR PREFLT AT APPROX XB00. UPON ARR AT R SIDE OF ACFT, THE REFUELER MOTIONED ME OVER TO UNDERWING REFUELING RECEPTACLE BRACE AND POINTED OUT A CRACK IN ONE OF THE BRACES. THE WT OF THE HOSE AND FUELING NOZZLE DID NOT SEEM TO BE AFFECTING THE SUPPORT STRUCTURE DESPITE THE CRACKED BRACE. I ASKED HIM IF HE COULD CONTINUE REFUELING SAFELY AND HE SAID HE COULD. THE REFUELER SEEMED TO BE VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THE CRACK AND WHO WAS TO 'BLAME' I TOLD HIM IT COULD HAVE BEEN METAL FATIGUE OR REFUELERS IN PAST LEANING ON HOSE WHILE REFUELING OR SOMEONE JUST SIMPLY DRIVING AWAY WITH HOSE STILL ATTACHED TO ACFT. IT WAS HARD TO TELL HOW LONG THE CRACK HAD BEEN THERE. I TOLD THE CAPT OF THE CRACK AND THAT THE ACFT HAD BEEN SAFELY FUELED AND OF THE 'BLAME CONCERNS' OF THE REFUELER. THE REFUELER HAD ANNOTATED ON OUR REFUEL FORM THAT THE ACFT HAD ARRIVED WITH THE CRACK. THE CAPT DID NOT WRITE UP THE CRACK AT THAT TIME FOR WHATEVER REASON(S) I DON'T KNOW. I DID KNOW HE PLANNED ON WRITING IT UP AT DTW UPON ARR. UPON ARRIVING AT DTW, CAPT TOOK MAINT OUT TO REFUELING PANEL AND SHOWED THEM THE CRACK. WHEN I LATER SAW THE CAPT (AFTER 15 MINS) HE MENTIONED THE ACFT WAS IN NEED OF A LONG REPAIR TIME AT DTW HANGAR BECAUSE OF THE CRACKED BRACES. NEITHER THE CAPT NOR MYSELF EVER CONSIDERED THIS PROB A SAFETY CONCERN (ESPECIALLY FLT SAFETY). THE REFUELER THOUGHT SAFETY WAS NEVER IN QUESTION BECAUSE HE SUCCESSFULLY UPLOADED THE FUEL, AND THE REFUELING RECEPTACLE WAS SOLID -- LITTLE OR NO MOVEMENT TO THE STRUCTURE/PIPING. I CAN'T HONESTLY SAY WHY THE CAPT DID NOT WRITE UP THE CRACK. PERHAPS IT WAS TO WAIT FOR QUALIFIED MAINT TO WORK ON IT UPON ARR AT DTW. IN ANY CASE, WE SHOULD HAVE WRITTEN IT UP AT BUFFALO.

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.

A DC9 was dispatched in non compliance with a cracked fueling receptacle brace not entered in the logbook.