37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 755653 |
Time | |
Date | 200709 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | airport : zzz.airport |
State Reference | US |
Altitude | agl single value : 0 |
Environment | |
Light | Daylight |
Aircraft 1 | |
Controlling Facilities | tower : zzz.tower |
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 | ground : maintenance ground : pushback |
Flight Plan | IFR |
Person 1 | |
Affiliation | company : air carrier |
Function | flight crew : captain oversight : pic |
Experience | flight time last 90 days : 200 flight time type : 10000 |
ASRS Report | 755653 |
Person 2 | |
Affiliation | company : air carrier |
Function | oversight : supervisor |
Events | |
Anomaly | aircraft equipment problem : critical maintenance problem : improper maintenance non adherence : published procedure non adherence : far |
Independent Detector | other flight crewa |
Resolutory Action | none taken : anomaly accepted |
Consequence | other |
Factors | |
Maintenance | contributing factor : schedule pressure performance deficiency : testing performance deficiency : logbook entry performance deficiency : fault isolation |
Supplementary | |
Problem Areas | Aircraft Maintenance Human Performance Company |
Primary Problem | Maintenance Human Performance |
Narrative:
After pushback; before engine start the air conditioning packs were turned off. The left air conditioning pack showed 5 psi of pressure and a small amount of airflow could be felt coming from the cockpit gaspers. We were pulled back into the gate; I put the discrepancy in the maintenance logbook. A maintenance supervisor came out and said the leakage was normal. The logbook needed to be cleared; I told him if he would sign it off we could go; but I expressed my concern about not being able to shut the pack down if we had air conditioning smoke and fumes. The logbook was signed off and the aircraft was put back in service. As stated my main concern was air conditioning smoke and fumes and how we would isolate the left pack if needed. I felt the maintenance supervisor just wanted the aircraft back in service and was not responsive to my concerns. As the logbook had been signed off I took the aircraft. A more thorough investigation should have been done to find out what was wrong with the aircraft.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: WITH BOTH AIR CONDITIONING PACKS OFF; AN MD80 PILOT REPORTS OF CONCERNS ABOUT MAINT SUPERVISOR SIGNING OFF LOG BOOK WITH LEFT AIR CONDITIONING PACK SHOWING PRESSURE AND AIR FLOW STILL FELT AT COCKPIT GASPERS.
Narrative: AFTER PUSHBACK; BEFORE ENG START THE AIR CONDITIONING PACKS WERE TURNED OFF. THE L AIR CONDITIONING PACK SHOWED 5 PSI OF PRESSURE AND A SMALL AMOUNT OF AIRFLOW COULD BE FELT COMING FROM THE COCKPIT GASPERS. WE WERE PULLED BACK INTO THE GATE; I PUT THE DISCREPANCY IN THE MAINT LOGBOOK. A MAINT SUPVR CAME OUT AND SAID THE LEAKAGE WAS NORMAL. THE LOGBOOK NEEDED TO BE CLRED; I TOLD HIM IF HE WOULD SIGN IT OFF WE COULD GO; BUT I EXPRESSED MY CONCERN ABOUT NOT BEING ABLE TO SHUT THE PACK DOWN IF WE HAD AIR CONDITIONING SMOKE AND FUMES. THE LOGBOOK WAS SIGNED OFF AND THE ACFT WAS PUT BACK IN SVC. AS STATED MY MAIN CONCERN WAS AIR CONDITIONING SMOKE AND FUMES AND HOW WE WOULD ISOLATE THE L PACK IF NEEDED. I FELT THE MAINT SUPVR JUST WANTED THE ACFT BACK IN SVC AND WAS NOT RESPONSIVE TO MY CONCERNS. AS THE LOGBOOK HAD BEEN SIGNED OFF I TOOK THE ACFT. A MORE THOROUGH INVESTIGATION SHOULD HAVE BEEN DONE TO FIND OUT WHAT WAS WRONG WITH THE ACFT.
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.