Narrative:

Following normal aom and fom procedures; aircraft X was preflted and made ready for flight. The checklist was performed to the before start line. Maintenance was contacted prior to engine start and the checklist was called for below the line items. At this point; during the control surface check; a serious flight control defect was discovered. The control column was found to be excessively heavy in stick force required to operate the elevators during the control check. The force was noted to require more than twice of the effort to move the stick full aft as compared to the previous aircraft flown. Furthermore; the initial pull force required to displace the control column was heavier than normal. I commented to the first officer that this did not seem right and asked him to try the control check. He commented that it felt stiff. Maintenance was called to the flight deck and tried the control check and commented that; 'it feels heavier than normal.' the item was entered in the logbook for corrective action. After about 2 hours of troubleshooting by maintenance; we were advised by a van driver to go in to the operations center. Crew scheduling advised us to wait until the DC8 ad hoc flight (our replacement) to sat was off the ground and that we would be released at that time. Crew scheduling released us to crew rest as advertised. Later that evening; I received a call from crew scheduling that I was withheld from service and to call the duty chief pilot. They further stated that withheld from service means that I would be taken off of my flying schedule. The duty chief pilot advised me that I would be taken off of flight status pending a hearing. The tone in his voice indicated that this would undoubtedly be a disciplinary hearing. His voice was clearly very stressed out. The fact that the company is questioning my decision to write up a serious flight control discrepancy has a very chilling effect on my ability to ensure that an aircraft is airworthy and safe to fly. A similar event occurred about 2 yrs ago when the company attempted to intimidate me about the failure of standby instrument lighting on a night flight. This pattern of continued harassment is intolerable and creates an unsafe environment in a very dangerous line of work. Other capts may also be intimidated by hearing that another pilot was removed from flight status due to a mechanical problem; which is beyond one's control. Rather than writing up a perceived problem; a crew may not write up a mechanical issue if they are afraid of disciplinary consequences; thus compromising safety.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A B757 CAPT WAS REMOVED FROM FLT STATUS AFTER ENTERING A FLT CTL DISCREPANCY IN THE ACFT'S LOGBOOK.

Narrative: FOLLOWING NORMAL AOM AND FOM PROCS; ACFT X WAS PREFLTED AND MADE READY FOR FLT. THE CHKLIST WAS PERFORMED TO THE BEFORE START LINE. MAINT WAS CONTACTED PRIOR TO ENG START AND THE CHKLIST WAS CALLED FOR BELOW THE LINE ITEMS. AT THIS POINT; DURING THE CTL SURFACE CHK; A SERIOUS FLT CTL DEFECT WAS DISCOVERED. THE CTL COLUMN WAS FOUND TO BE EXCESSIVELY HVY IN STICK FORCE REQUIRED TO OPERATE THE ELEVATORS DURING THE CTL CHK. THE FORCE WAS NOTED TO REQUIRE MORE THAN TWICE OF THE EFFORT TO MOVE THE STICK FULL AFT AS COMPARED TO THE PREVIOUS ACFT FLOWN. FURTHERMORE; THE INITIAL PULL FORCE REQUIRED TO DISPLACE THE CTL COLUMN WAS HEAVIER THAN NORMAL. I COMMENTED TO THE FO THAT THIS DID NOT SEEM RIGHT AND ASKED HIM TO TRY THE CTL CHK. HE COMMENTED THAT IT FELT STIFF. MAINT WAS CALLED TO THE FLT DECK AND TRIED THE CTL CHK AND COMMENTED THAT; 'IT FEELS HEAVIER THAN NORMAL.' THE ITEM WAS ENTERED IN THE LOGBOOK FOR CORRECTIVE ACTION. AFTER ABOUT 2 HRS OF TROUBLESHOOTING BY MAINT; WE WERE ADVISED BY A VAN DRIVER TO GO IN TO THE OPS CTR. CREW SCHEDULING ADVISED US TO WAIT UNTIL THE DC8 AD HOC FLT (OUR REPLACEMENT) TO SAT WAS OFF THE GND AND THAT WE WOULD BE RELEASED AT THAT TIME. CREW SCHEDULING RELEASED US TO CREW REST AS ADVERTISED. LATER THAT EVENING; I RECEIVED A CALL FROM CREW SCHEDULING THAT I WAS WITHHELD FROM SVC AND TO CALL THE DUTY CHIEF PLT. THEY FURTHER STATED THAT WITHHELD FROM SVC MEANS THAT I WOULD BE TAKEN OFF OF MY FLYING SCHEDULE. THE DUTY CHIEF PLT ADVISED ME THAT I WOULD BE TAKEN OFF OF FLT STATUS PENDING A HEARING. THE TONE IN HIS VOICE INDICATED THAT THIS WOULD UNDOUBTEDLY BE A DISCIPLINARY HEARING. HIS VOICE WAS CLRLY VERY STRESSED OUT. THE FACT THAT THE COMPANY IS QUESTIONING MY DECISION TO WRITE UP A SERIOUS FLT CTL DISCREPANCY HAS A VERY CHILLING EFFECT ON MY ABILITY TO ENSURE THAT AN ACFT IS AIRWORTHY AND SAFE TO FLY. A SIMILAR EVENT OCCURRED ABOUT 2 YRS AGO WHEN THE COMPANY ATTEMPTED TO INTIMIDATE ME ABOUT THE FAILURE OF STANDBY INST LIGHTING ON A NIGHT FLT. THIS PATTERN OF CONTINUED HARASSMENT IS INTOLERABLE AND CREATES AN UNSAFE ENVIRONMENT IN A VERY DANGEROUS LINE OF WORK. OTHER CAPTS MAY ALSO BE INTIMIDATED BY HEARING THAT ANOTHER PLT WAS REMOVED FROM FLT STATUS DUE TO A MECHANICAL PROB; WHICH IS BEYOND ONE'S CTL. RATHER THAN WRITING UP A PERCEIVED PROB; A CREW MAY NOT WRITE UP A MECHANICAL ISSUE IF THEY ARE AFRAID OF DISCIPLINARY CONSEQUENCES; THUS COMPROMISING SAFETY.

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.