Narrative:

On sep/mon/05; myself and another mechanic were dispatched to ZZZ for aircraft with the logbook write up 'excessive play in ailerons; flight attendants noticed significant vibration in cabin floor overwing on first officer's side.' we had approximately 1 hour before our flight left so we gathered as much tooling as we could. Knowing we would be checking out the aileron rig; we brought tensiometer; protractor; fish scales; and other related tooling. In ZZZ we began checking the aileron system. We spent all night performing the checks per maintenance manual 27-11-00-5. We performed all the checks and found the aileron system to be rigged correctly. No turnbuckles or control cables were broken into for the checks. Due to the nature of the write-up; the lack of any discrepancy found; and a conference with the captain who wrote it up the next morning; I requested a functional check flight in the morning. The functional check flight was uneventful; so I signed off the log item and the airworthiness release for the functional check flight. The aircraft was returned to service. Note: during the functional check flight I went to the overwing area of the cabin and did not observe any abnormal vibration or noise. As it turns out; this aircraft was my ride back. I sat in the right overwing exit area and found the flight to be smooth and uneventful. After returning; I called maintenance control and learned that the aircraft was routed for routine overnight maintenance. I asked maintenance control if they would have the mechanics take another look at it overnight as an added assurance that all was normal. To my understanding; they found nothing and signed the aircraft off as such; and the aircraft has not had any other discrepancies against it involving flight controls since then. As an alternate rii; I am aware of the requirement of rii of flight control rigs per mpm. However; we did not actually rig the ailerons of the aircraft. Our work only involved checking the rig; which can be done without actually breaking into the system. I signed for the rig check as a mechanic and did not rii the work. The airworthiness release was signed off due to the functional check flight; not due to any rig of the ailerons. I believe that we accomplished the check out of the system properly and per the amm and that said check does not requires an rii signoff. Supplemental information from acn 672441: removed and replaced aileron trim actuator in accordance with maintenance manual.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A B737-700 WAS RPTED WITH EXCESSIVE AILERON PLAY AND MID CABIN VIBRATION. TECHNICIANS CHKED AILERON RIG; CHANGED AILERON TRIM ACTUATOR. FUNCTIONAL FLT TEST NORMAL. NO RII ACCOMPLISHED.

Narrative: ON SEP/MON/05; MYSELF AND ANOTHER MECH WERE DISPATCHED TO ZZZ FOR ACFT WITH THE LOGBOOK WRITE UP 'EXCESSIVE PLAY IN AILERONS; FLT ATTENDANTS NOTICED SIGNIFICANT VIBRATION IN CABIN FLOOR OVERWING ON FO'S SIDE.' WE HAD APPROX 1 HR BEFORE OUR FLT LEFT SO WE GATHERED AS MUCH TOOLING AS WE COULD. KNOWING WE WOULD BE CHKING OUT THE AILERON RIG; WE BROUGHT TENSIOMETER; PROTRACTOR; FISH SCALES; AND OTHER RELATED TOOLING. IN ZZZ WE BEGAN CHKING THE AILERON SYS. WE SPENT ALL NIGHT PERFORMING THE CHKS PER MAINT MANUAL 27-11-00-5. WE PERFORMED ALL THE CHKS AND FOUND THE AILERON SYS TO BE RIGGED CORRECTLY. NO TURNBUCKLES OR CTL CABLES WERE BROKEN INTO FOR THE CHKS. DUE TO THE NATURE OF THE WRITE-UP; THE LACK OF ANY DISCREPANCY FOUND; AND A CONFERENCE WITH THE CAPT WHO WROTE IT UP THE NEXT MORNING; I REQUESTED A FUNCTIONAL CHK FLT IN THE MORNING. THE FUNCTIONAL CHK FLT WAS UNEVENTFUL; SO I SIGNED OFF THE LOG ITEM AND THE AIRWORTHINESS RELEASE FOR THE FUNCTIONAL CHK FLT. THE ACFT WAS RETURNED TO SVC. NOTE: DURING THE FUNCTIONAL CHK FLT I WENT TO THE OVERWING AREA OF THE CABIN AND DID NOT OBSERVE ANY ABNORMAL VIBRATION OR NOISE. AS IT TURNS OUT; THIS ACFT WAS MY RIDE BACK. I SAT IN THE R OVERWING EXIT AREA AND FOUND THE FLT TO BE SMOOTH AND UNEVENTFUL. AFTER RETURNING; I CALLED MAINT CTL AND LEARNED THAT THE ACFT WAS ROUTED FOR ROUTINE OVERNIGHT MAINT. I ASKED MAINT CTL IF THEY WOULD HAVE THE MECHS TAKE ANOTHER LOOK AT IT OVERNIGHT AS AN ADDED ASSURANCE THAT ALL WAS NORMAL. TO MY UNDERSTANDING; THEY FOUND NOTHING AND SIGNED THE ACFT OFF AS SUCH; AND THE ACFT HAS NOT HAD ANY OTHER DISCREPANCIES AGAINST IT INVOLVING FLT CTLS SINCE THEN. AS AN ALTERNATE RII; I AM AWARE OF THE REQUIREMENT OF RII OF FLT CTL RIGS PER MPM. HOWEVER; WE DID NOT ACTUALLY RIG THE AILERONS OF THE ACFT. OUR WORK ONLY INVOLVED CHKING THE RIG; WHICH CAN BE DONE WITHOUT ACTUALLY BREAKING INTO THE SYS. I SIGNED FOR THE RIG CHK AS A MECH AND DID NOT RII THE WORK. THE AIRWORTHINESS RELEASE WAS SIGNED OFF DUE TO THE FUNCTIONAL CHK FLT; NOT DUE TO ANY RIG OF THE AILERONS. I BELIEVE THAT WE ACCOMPLISHED THE CHK OUT OF THE SYS PROPERLY AND PER THE AMM AND THAT SAID CHK DOES NOT REQUIRES AN RII SIGNOFF. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 672441: REMOVED AND REPLACED AILERON TRIM ACTUATOR IN ACCORDANCE WITH MAINT MANUAL.

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.