MD88 flight crew has engine malfunction and diverts for landing.

Attributes
ACN	702241
Time
Date	200606
Local Time Of Day	1801 To 2400
Place
Locale Reference	atc facility : zny.artcc
State Reference	NY
Altitude	msl single value : 32000
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Light	Night
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	artcc : zny.artcc
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	MD-88
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Flight Phase	cruise : level
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : captain oversight : pic
Qualification	pilot : flight engineer pilot : commercial pilot : atp
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 175 flight time total : 11225 flight time type : 815
ASRS Report	702241
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
Independent Detector	aircraft equipment other aircraft equipment : eng oil strainer indicator other flight crewa other flight crewb
Resolutory Action	flight crew : diverted to another airport
Consequence	other
Supplementary
Problem Areas	Company Flight Crew Human Performance Aircraft
Primary Problem	Aircraft

Narrative:

We were cruising at FL320 en route to atl when we received a message indicating a left oil strainer clog. The non-normal procedure had us reduce power on the left engine to extinguish the message. Unfortunately; the message continued even at idle power. The procedure allowed us to continue operating the engine as long as there were no other abnormal engine indications. Once the procedure was complete; I directed the first officer (who was the PF) to coordinate a descent with ATC while I contacted the company to coordination a diversion. Upon contacting the company; I was put in touch with the maintenance coordinator and the dispatcher. They wanted me to divert to lga because they had maintenance available there and could accommodate the passenger. I told them I would not go to lga because of the short runways (we were overweight and would be using less than full flaps due to 1 engine at idle). I offered some other possibilities such as jfk; ewr; they said none of those would work well and instead wanted me to go back to bos. I reluctantly agreed as I could think of no operational reason that this would not work. We then coordination a divert back to bos and received excellent handling from ATC. The descent; approach; and landing were uneventful. Later; after receiving some much needed crew rest; I filed an operations report with my company. I also researched our operational guidance concerning diverts caused by maintenance irregularities. I understood that by FARS; requires a divert if I have an engine failure (or shut down and engine on a 2 engine aircraft) to the nearest suitable airport. It is also our company policy to treat an engine operating at idle power in the same manner. With that in mind; I feel that I should have been more forceful in insisting on a diversion to a closer airport. While taking care of our passenger is important; it should not have been an overriding concern. If confronted with this situation again; I will insist on diverting to a closer airport.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: MD88 FLT CREW HAS ENG MALFUNCTION AND DIVERTS FOR LNDG.

Narrative: WE WERE CRUISING AT FL320 ENRTE TO ATL WHEN WE RECEIVED A MESSAGE INDICATING A L OIL STRAINER CLOG. THE NON-NORMAL PROC HAD US REDUCE PWR ON THE L ENG TO EXTINGUISH THE MESSAGE. UNFORTUNATELY; THE MESSAGE CONTINUED EVEN AT IDLE PWR. THE PROC ALLOWED US TO CONTINUE OPERATING THE ENG AS LONG AS THERE WERE NO OTHER ABNORMAL ENG INDICATIONS. ONCE THE PROC WAS COMPLETE; I DIRECTED THE FO (WHO WAS THE PF) TO COORDINATE A DSCNT WITH ATC WHILE I CONTACTED THE COMPANY TO COORD A DIVERSION. UPON CONTACTING THE COMPANY; I WAS PUT IN TOUCH WITH THE MAINT COORDINATOR AND THE DISPATCHER. THEY WANTED ME TO DIVERT TO LGA BECAUSE THEY HAD MAINT AVAILABLE THERE AND COULD ACCOMMODATE THE PAX. I TOLD THEM I WOULD NOT GO TO LGA BECAUSE OF THE SHORT RWYS (WE WERE OVERWT AND WOULD BE USING LESS THAN FULL FLAPS DUE TO 1 ENG AT IDLE). I OFFERED SOME OTHER POSSIBILITIES SUCH AS JFK; EWR; THEY SAID NONE OF THOSE WOULD WORK WELL AND INSTEAD WANTED ME TO GO BACK TO BOS. I RELUCTANTLY AGREED AS I COULD THINK OF NO OPERATIONAL REASON THAT THIS WOULD NOT WORK. WE THEN COORD A DIVERT BACK TO BOS AND RECEIVED EXCELLENT HANDLING FROM ATC. THE DSCNT; APCH; AND LNDG WERE UNEVENTFUL. LATER; AFTER RECEIVING SOME MUCH NEEDED CREW REST; I FILED AN OPS RPT WITH MY COMPANY. I ALSO RESEARCHED OUR OPERATIONAL GUIDANCE CONCERNING DIVERTS CAUSED BY MAINT IRREGULARITIES. I UNDERSTOOD THAT BY FARS; REQUIRES A DIVERT IF I HAVE AN ENG FAILURE (OR SHUT DOWN AND ENG ON A 2 ENG ACFT) TO THE NEAREST SUITABLE ARPT. IT IS ALSO OUR COMPANY POLICY TO TREAT AN ENG OPERATING AT IDLE PWR IN THE SAME MANNER. WITH THAT IN MIND; I FEEL THAT I SHOULD HAVE BEEN MORE FORCEFUL IN INSISTING ON A DIVERSION TO A CLOSER ARPT. WHILE TAKING CARE OF OUR PAX IS IMPORTANT; IT SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN AN OVERRIDING CONCERN. IF CONFRONTED WITH THIS SITUATION AGAIN; I WILL INSIST ON DIVERTING TO A CLOSER ARPT.

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.