Narrative:

At FL360; approximately 70 mi north of diw; first officer's #1 window started arcing. Immediately removed window heat. Window then cracked. Accessed QRH and requested lower altitude from ATC; descended to FL290 and slowed aircraft. The QRH involved a lengthy page to determine status of procedure. At night; busy with trying to determine extent of damage to window. Flight plan was to go over water to cut the corner to destination. Window cracked again; audible cracking sound. Read through entire page of QRH; all procedures on page one of QRH involved descent and cabin depressurization or reduce cabin psi. Advised ATC we may need lower altitude. Window cracked again; audible cracking sound. Turned page on QRH and 'outer-pane cracked only' continue flight. Determined that outer pane only was cracked; advised ATC that we would stay at FL290. Coordinated with dispatch through ACARS to stay closer to shore and slower and lower altitude to destination; dispatch advised us to continue to destination. ATC was upset with our possible request for lower that we did not do; however; we were trying to give ATC as much lead time for any possible need; since the window damage was not known and changing. The QRH was complicated; and the procedure did not help with a 'quick' answer. In fact; the answer was on the 'next page' and I feel it should have been at the beginning of the procedure to help the crew with a quick determination of the procedure needed. We continued the flight; with maintenance and dispatch approval; for repair on arrival. Pilot observation of window arcing; lower altitude; reduced airspeed; rerte closer to coastline. I would like to see a better QRH procedure; with the 'window damage' options listed at the top of the page; with directions to the procedure for the specific condition; it would have helped us apply the correct procedure faster.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: B737-400 FLT CREW REPORTS CRACKED WINDSHIELD AT FL360 AND DIFFICULTIES USING QRH TO DETERMINE IF A DESCENT OR DIVERSION IS REQUIRED.

Narrative: AT FL360; APPROX 70 MI N OF DIW; FO'S #1 WINDOW STARTED ARCING. IMMEDIATELY REMOVED WINDOW HEAT. WINDOW THEN CRACKED. ACCESSED QRH AND REQUESTED LOWER ALT FROM ATC; DSNDED TO FL290 AND SLOWED ACFT. THE QRH INVOLVED A LENGTHY PAGE TO DETERMINE STATUS OF PROC. AT NIGHT; BUSY WITH TRYING TO DETERMINE EXTENT OF DAMAGE TO WINDOW. FLT PLAN WAS TO GO OVER WATER TO CUT THE CORNER TO DEST. WINDOW CRACKED AGAIN; AUDIBLE CRACKING SOUND. READ THROUGH ENTIRE PAGE OF QRH; ALL PROCS ON PAGE ONE OF QRH INVOLVED DSCNT AND CABIN DEPRESSURIZATION OR REDUCE CABIN PSI. ADVISED ATC WE MAY NEED LOWER ALT. WINDOW CRACKED AGAIN; AUDIBLE CRACKING SOUND. TURNED PAGE ON QRH AND 'OUTER-PANE CRACKED ONLY' CONTINUE FLT. DETERMINED THAT OUTER PANE ONLY WAS CRACKED; ADVISED ATC THAT WE WOULD STAY AT FL290. COORDINATED WITH DISPATCH THROUGH ACARS TO STAY CLOSER TO SHORE AND SLOWER AND LOWER ALT TO DEST; DISPATCH ADVISED US TO CONTINUE TO DEST. ATC WAS UPSET WITH OUR POSSIBLE REQUEST FOR LOWER THAT WE DID NOT DO; HOWEVER; WE WERE TRYING TO GIVE ATC AS MUCH LEAD TIME FOR ANY POSSIBLE NEED; SINCE THE WINDOW DAMAGE WAS NOT KNOWN AND CHANGING. THE QRH WAS COMPLICATED; AND THE PROC DID NOT HELP WITH A 'QUICK' ANSWER. IN FACT; THE ANSWER WAS ON THE 'NEXT PAGE' AND I FEEL IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN AT THE BEGINNING OF THE PROC TO HELP THE CREW WITH A QUICK DETERMINATION OF THE PROC NEEDED. WE CONTINUED THE FLT; WITH MAINT AND DISPATCH APPROVAL; FOR REPAIR ON ARR. PLT OBSERVATION OF WINDOW ARCING; LOWER ALT; REDUCED AIRSPD; RERTE CLOSER TO COASTLINE. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE A BETTER QRH PROC; WITH THE 'WINDOW DAMAGE' OPTIONS LISTED AT THE TOP OF THE PAGE; WITH DIRECTIONS TO THE PROC FOR THE SPECIFIC CONDITION; IT WOULD HAVE HELPED US APPLY THE CORRECT PROC FASTER.

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.