An A320 return land following a 'vent skin valve fault' ECAM annunciation during takeoff.

Attributes
ACN	645140
Time
Date	200501
Local Time Of Day	1801 To 2400
Place
Locale Reference	airport : las.airport
State Reference	NV
Altitude	agl single value : 1000
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	tracon : l30.tracon
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	A320
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Flight Phase	climbout : takeoff cruise : holding
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : captain oversight : pic
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 170 flight time total : 15000 flight time type : 2800
ASRS Report	645140
Person 2
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : first officer
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 270 flight time total : 7800 flight time type : 3100
ASRS Report	645138
Events
Anomaly	aircraft equipment problem : critical other anomaly other
Independent Detector	aircraft equipment other aircraft equipment : ecam
Resolutory Action	flight crew : landed as precaution
Consequence	other
Supplementary
Problem Areas	Aircraft
Primary Problem	Aircraft

Narrative:

Takeoff from runway 1R at las due to area winds. At approximately 80-85 KTS we got a 'vent skin valve fault' ECAM. Since we were already in the 'high speed regime' and could identify the problem; the takeoff was continued. Established on the departure; selected autoplt; took the radio duties; and had the first officer recall and start on the ECAM procedure. First 2 steps did not solve the problem and the decision point says not to climb above 10000 ft. Called ATC and advised we needed to stop the climb at 10000 ft. Asked for area holding; conditions were VFR; and las departure asked if holding on the 066 degree radial of las at 25 DME right turns and 10 NM legs would work. Discovered we were right at that point as I tried to build the fix. ATC assumed we would hold east of the fix; crew assumed we were to hold inbound to the fix (west). Discovered the difference when ATC started having traffic conflicts with our flight. Due to the changes; hold was flown manually with autoplt and headings. First officer sent an ACARS message to maintenance to see if they could help us restore the system to continue the flight to denver. Maintenance had 2 controllers on the line and they were concerned that pulling a set of circuit breakers would cause a full depressurization. First officer told me what was up and suggested I talk to maintenance. First officer took flying duties and ATC communications. I talked to maintenance and they felt that even if the circuit breaker cycle worked they were not confident the system would hold. This was the fifth recent problem with this system. With that; I advised that we would return to las and that we were approximately 5000 pounds over maximum landing weight. Maintenance advised dispatch of our problem and the return to las. We ran the overweight landing checklist and landed las runway 25L. This was a very busy and somewhat confusing scenario. Then ATC gave a clearance that was confused. ATC was busy with the nonstandard airport operation due to the wind. Plus; ATC had another flight inbound with a medical emergency. Did keep dispatch; flight attendants; passenger and ATC advised throughout the operation.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: AN A320 RETURN LAND FOLLOWING A 'VENT SKIN VALVE FAULT' ECAM ANNUNCIATION DURING TKOF.

Narrative: TKOF FROM RWY 1R AT LAS DUE TO AREA WINDS. AT APPROX 80-85 KTS WE GOT A 'VENT SKIN VALVE FAULT' ECAM. SINCE WE WERE ALREADY IN THE 'HIGH SPD REGIME' AND COULD IDENT THE PROB; THE TKOF WAS CONTINUED. ESTABLISHED ON THE DEP; SELECTED AUTOPLT; TOOK THE RADIO DUTIES; AND HAD THE FO RECALL AND START ON THE ECAM PROC. FIRST 2 STEPS DID NOT SOLVE THE PROB AND THE DECISION POINT SAYS NOT TO CLB ABOVE 10000 FT. CALLED ATC AND ADVISED WE NEEDED TO STOP THE CLB AT 10000 FT. ASKED FOR AREA HOLDING; CONDITIONS WERE VFR; AND LAS DEP ASKED IF HOLDING ON THE 066 DEG RADIAL OF LAS AT 25 DME R TURNS AND 10 NM LEGS WOULD WORK. DISCOVERED WE WERE RIGHT AT THAT POINT AS I TRIED TO BUILD THE FIX. ATC ASSUMED WE WOULD HOLD E OF THE FIX; CREW ASSUMED WE WERE TO HOLD INBOUND TO THE FIX (W). DISCOVERED THE DIFFERENCE WHEN ATC STARTED HAVING TFC CONFLICTS WITH OUR FLT. DUE TO THE CHANGES; HOLD WAS FLOWN MANUALLY WITH AUTOPLT AND HDGS. FO SENT AN ACARS MESSAGE TO MAINT TO SEE IF THEY COULD HELP US RESTORE THE SYS TO CONTINUE THE FLT TO DENVER. MAINT HAD 2 CTLRS ON THE LINE AND THEY WERE CONCERNED THAT PULLING A SET OF CIRCUIT BREAKERS WOULD CAUSE A FULL DEPRESSURIZATION. FO TOLD ME WHAT WAS UP AND SUGGESTED I TALK TO MAINT. FO TOOK FLYING DUTIES AND ATC COMS. I TALKED TO MAINT AND THEY FELT THAT EVEN IF THE CIRCUIT BREAKER CYCLE WORKED THEY WERE NOT CONFIDENT THE SYS WOULD HOLD. THIS WAS THE FIFTH RECENT PROB WITH THIS SYS. WITH THAT; I ADVISED THAT WE WOULD RETURN TO LAS AND THAT WE WERE APPROX 5000 LBS OVER MAX LNDG WT. MAINT ADVISED DISPATCH OF OUR PROB AND THE RETURN TO LAS. WE RAN THE OVERWT LNDG CHKLIST AND LANDED LAS RWY 25L. THIS WAS A VERY BUSY AND SOMEWHAT CONFUSING SCENARIO. THEN ATC GAVE A CLRNC THAT WAS CONFUSED. ATC WAS BUSY WITH THE NONSTANDARD ARPT OP DUE TO THE WIND. PLUS; ATC HAD ANOTHER FLT INBOUND WITH A MEDICAL EMER. DID KEEP DISPATCH; FLT ATTENDANTS; PAX AND ATC ADVISED THROUGHOUT THE OP.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of January 2009 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.