Takeoff aborted by an A319 flight crew after receiving an ECAM message related to a navigation discr...

Attributes
ACN	608273
Time
Date	200402
Day	Wed
Local Time Of Day	1201 To 1800
Place
Locale Reference	airport : phl.airport
State Reference	PA
Altitude	agl single value : 0
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	A319
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Flight Phase	ground : takeoff roll ground : parked ground : preflight
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : captain oversight : pic
Qualification	pilot : atp
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 195 flight time total : 15280 flight time type : 1935
ASRS Report	608273
Person 2
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : first officer
Events
Anomaly	aircraft equipment problem : critical non adherence : company policies non adherence : published procedure other anomaly other
Independent Detector	aircraft equipment other aircraft equipment : ecam other flight crewa other flight crewb
Resolutory Action	flight crew : overcame equipment problem flight crew : became reoriented flight crew : rejected takeoff other
Consequence	other Other
Factors
Maintenance	contributing factor : schedule pressure
Supplementary
Problem Areas	Aircraft Airport Environmental Factor Flight Crew Human Performance
Primary Problem	Flight Crew Human Performance

Narrative:

During preflight when aligning the IRU's, IRU #1 showed fault. After trying to shut off the IRU's and initialize again, the fault remained. Contacted maintenance who directed us to try again and pull the appropriate circuit breakers. This also resulted in a fault. Our maintenance personnel were then contacted and a discrepancy was entered in the logbook. The technician tried another alignment and this one worked. However, maintenance control and the technician noted this aircraft had a recent history of problems with IRU #2. Since IRU #1 now had a problem, there was concern about a software problem. A system test was performed on all 3 IRU's. Test was good. Logbook was completed and based on the history, the aircraft was downgraded to cati and the flight release was amended. Flows, briefing, and checklist were accomplished. The release showed runway 27L and the ATIS reported runway 9L in use. Takeoff card and briefing were based on runway 9L. Weight and balance were corrected for runway 9L and passenger count (remove 1 infant). Push was accomplished 45 mins late. Taxi was normal and takeoff started with first officer flying. At 80 KTS, ECAM showed 'navigation discrepancy/check aircraft position.' based on the history of these navigation system, I did not feel comfortable. An abort following company procedures was accomplished. Contacted the dispatcher and advised them we had a rejected takeoff and requested maintenance control. We then realized we still had runway 27L in the FMGC. Advised maintenance what had transpired. They agreed the IRU's were ok. We coordinated with both dispatch and maintenance to insure temperature limitations, aircraft operating procedures, minimum fuel requirements, and company policy were all satisfied. Subsequent takeoff and en route and arrival were all normal. The important thing I got from this is, once again, check the FMGC carefully. As what happens often when there is more than 1 issue going on, it is easy to overlook 1 item when trying to cover maintenance issues.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: TKOF ABORTED BY AN A319 FLT CREW AFTER RECEIVING AN ECAM MESSAGE RELATED TO A NAV DISCREPANCY BECAUSE OF THE WRONG RWY SELECTION IN THEIR FMG'S AT PHL, PA.

Narrative: DURING PREFLT WHEN ALIGNING THE IRU'S, IRU #1 SHOWED FAULT. AFTER TRYING TO SHUT OFF THE IRU'S AND INITIALIZE AGAIN, THE FAULT REMAINED. CONTACTED MAINT WHO DIRECTED US TO TRY AGAIN AND PULL THE APPROPRIATE CIRCUIT BREAKERS. THIS ALSO RESULTED IN A FAULT. OUR MAINT PERSONNEL WERE THEN CONTACTED AND A DISCREPANCY WAS ENTERED IN THE LOGBOOK. THE TECHNICIAN TRIED ANOTHER ALIGNMENT AND THIS ONE WORKED. HOWEVER, MAINT CTL AND THE TECHNICIAN NOTED THIS ACFT HAD A RECENT HISTORY OF PROBS WITH IRU #2. SINCE IRU #1 NOW HAD A PROB, THERE WAS CONCERN ABOUT A SOFTWARE PROB. A SYS TEST WAS PERFORMED ON ALL 3 IRU'S. TEST WAS GOOD. LOGBOOK WAS COMPLETED AND BASED ON THE HISTORY, THE ACFT WAS DOWNGRADED TO CATI AND THE FLT RELEASE WAS AMENDED. FLOWS, BRIEFING, AND CHKLIST WERE ACCOMPLISHED. THE RELEASE SHOWED RWY 27L AND THE ATIS RPTED RWY 9L IN USE. TKOF CARD AND BRIEFING WERE BASED ON RWY 9L. WT AND BAL WERE CORRECTED FOR RWY 9L AND PAX COUNT (REMOVE 1 INFANT). PUSH WAS ACCOMPLISHED 45 MINS LATE. TAXI WAS NORMAL AND TKOF STARTED WITH FO FLYING. AT 80 KTS, ECAM SHOWED 'NAV DISCREPANCY/CHK ACFT POS.' BASED ON THE HISTORY OF THESE NAV SYS, I DID NOT FEEL COMFORTABLE. AN ABORT FOLLOWING COMPANY PROCS WAS ACCOMPLISHED. CONTACTED THE DISPATCHER AND ADVISED THEM WE HAD A REJECTED TKOF AND REQUESTED MAINT CTL. WE THEN REALIZED WE STILL HAD RWY 27L IN THE FMGC. ADVISED MAINT WHAT HAD TRANSPIRED. THEY AGREED THE IRU'S WERE OK. WE COORDINATED WITH BOTH DISPATCH AND MAINT TO INSURE TEMP LIMITATIONS, ACFT OPERATING PROCS, MINIMUM FUEL REQUIREMENTS, AND COMPANY POLICY WERE ALL SATISFIED. SUBSEQUENT TKOF AND ENRTE AND ARR WERE ALL NORMAL. THE IMPORTANT THING I GOT FROM THIS IS, ONCE AGAIN, CHK THE FMGC CAREFULLY. AS WHAT HAPPENS OFTEN WHEN THERE IS MORE THAN 1 ISSUE GOING ON, IT IS EASY TO OVERLOOK 1 ITEM WHEN TRYING TO COVER MAINT ISSUES.

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.

Takeoff aborted by an A319 flight crew after receiving an ECAM message related to a navigation discrepancy because of the wrong runway selection in their fmg's at phl, PA.