37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 685594 |
Time | |
Date | 200601 |
Local Time Of Day | 1801 To 2400 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | airport : zzz.airport |
State Reference | US |
Altitude | agl single value : 0 |
Aircraft 1 | |
Operator | common carrier : air carrier |
Make Model Name | MD-80 Series (DC-9-80) Undifferentiated or Other Model |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
Flight Phase | landing : roll |
Flight Plan | IFR |
Person 1 | |
Affiliation | company : air carrier |
Function | flight crew : captain oversight : pic |
ASRS Report | 685594 |
Person 2 | |
Affiliation | company : air carrier |
Function | flight crew : first officer |
Events | |
Anomaly | aircraft equipment problem : critical |
Independent Detector | other flight crewa other flight crewb |
Resolutory Action | other |
Consequence | other |
Supplementary | |
Problem Areas | Chart Or Publication Environmental Factor Aircraft |
Primary Problem | Aircraft |
Narrative:
On landing rollout; the 'fuel level low' light came on. The fuel gauge indicated 6600 pounds at the time. The light went out as we were clearing the runway; then came back on as we taxied to the gate and stayed on until we reached the gate and shut down; at which time the light went out. We called maintenance out to look at it and his immediate response was; if the light came on with that qty indicating on the fuel gauge; the light is inoperative and would be placarded. No further checks; no nothing. Just placard the fuel low level light and continue on. The captain and I both thought this was one of the most insane things we'd ever heard of; especially in light of the recent fuel problems on the MD80 fleet and told him we wanted the tanks dipped to be sure the fuel gauge was accurate and to confirm that the fuel level low light really was giving a false indication. To his credit the maintenance guy was happy to do it but let us know that all his manual required was to placard the light. If this is true; which I believe it to be; tell me there is a change in the works. That has to be one of the dumbest things I've ever heard; especially in today's environment.callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: the reporter said that it was shocking to find out the MEL does not require sticking the tanks when deferring the fuel low level warning light. The captain thought it would be a good idea to stick the tanks in light of all the fuel qty indication reports on the MD80 fleet indicating the fuel qty problems are mainly caused by microorganisms living in the fuel and shorting out or damaging the fuel level sensing probes. The reporter indicated that when the company initiated a program to change out all the sensing probes; the manufacturer shipped out a bunch of probes that were not properly coated and that created problems.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: AN MD80 ON LNDG ROLL HAD THE FUEL LOW LEVEL LIGHT ILLUMINATE. AT THE GATE; THE LIGHT WENT OUT. MAINT DEFERRED THE LIGHT PER THE MEL. FUEL QTY INDICATOR READ 6600 LBS. FLT CREW REQUESTED TANK TO BE STUCK DUE TO FUEL INDICATION PROBLEMS.
Narrative: ON LNDG ROLLOUT; THE 'FUEL LEVEL LOW' LIGHT CAME ON. THE FUEL GAUGE INDICATED 6600 LBS AT THE TIME. THE LIGHT WENT OUT AS WE WERE CLEARING THE RWY; THEN CAME BACK ON AS WE TAXIED TO THE GATE AND STAYED ON UNTIL WE REACHED THE GATE AND SHUT DOWN; AT WHICH TIME THE LIGHT WENT OUT. WE CALLED MAINT OUT TO LOOK AT IT AND HIS IMMEDIATE RESPONSE WAS; IF THE LIGHT CAME ON WITH THAT QTY INDICATING ON THE FUEL GAUGE; THE LIGHT IS INOP AND WOULD BE PLACARDED. NO FURTHER CHKS; NO NOTHING. JUST PLACARD THE FUEL LOW LEVEL LIGHT AND CONTINUE ON. THE CAPT AND I BOTH THOUGHT THIS WAS ONE OF THE MOST INSANE THINGS WE'D EVER HEARD OF; ESPECIALLY IN LIGHT OF THE RECENT FUEL PROBLEMS ON THE MD80 FLEET AND TOLD HIM WE WANTED THE TANKS DIPPED TO BE SURE THE FUEL GAUGE WAS ACCURATE AND TO CONFIRM THAT THE FUEL LEVEL LOW LIGHT REALLY WAS GIVING A FALSE INDICATION. TO HIS CREDIT THE MAINT GUY WAS HAPPY TO DO IT BUT LET US KNOW THAT ALL HIS MANUAL REQUIRED WAS TO PLACARD THE LIGHT. IF THIS IS TRUE; WHICH I BELIEVE IT TO BE; TELL ME THERE IS A CHANGE IN THE WORKS. THAT HAS TO BE ONE OF THE DUMBEST THINGS I'VE EVER HEARD; ESPECIALLY IN TODAY'S ENVIRONMENT.CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: THE RPTR SAID THAT IT WAS SHOCKING TO FIND OUT THE MEL DOES NOT REQUIRE STICKING THE TANKS WHEN DEFERRING THE FUEL LOW LEVEL WARNING LIGHT. THE CAPT THOUGHT IT WOULD BE A GOOD IDEA TO STICK THE TANKS IN LIGHT OF ALL THE FUEL QTY INDICATION RPTS ON THE MD80 FLEET INDICATING THE FUEL QTY PROBLEMS ARE MAINLY CAUSED BY MICROORGANISMS LIVING IN THE FUEL AND SHORTING OUT OR DAMAGING THE FUEL LEVEL SENSING PROBES. THE RPTR INDICATED THAT WHEN THE COMPANY INITIATED A PROGRAM TO CHANGE OUT ALL THE SENSING PROBES; THE MANUFACTURER SHIPPED OUT A BUNCH OF PROBES THAT WERE NOT PROPERLY COATED AND THAT CREATED PROBLEMS.
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.