Narrative:

I refused aircraft due to chronic flight control issue. I originally wrote this up several days ago. At rotation excessive back pressure required to rotate aircraft. First officer later stated I had put total of 6 units of trim nose up. Further in-flight we confirmed with load planning our 3.5 anu setting was correct. Entered appropriate maintenance write-up. Maintenance did operations check and sent aircraft on. Today; I pulled up briefing to find I was assigned the same aircraft for my flight. At XA19 I contacted 757 maintenance. He advised he had conversations with others in his department; and felt this was pilot error; taking off with incorrect trim setting. I advised him we confirmed our setting after takeoff. He said aircraft was signed off. I refused aircraft approximately XC00; also sent confirmation at the same time. Neither made it into the system. Arrived at XG00; still assigned same aircraft; called dispatch at XG19; refused aircraft again. There have been three write-ups since my initial write-up; plus I have spoken to a first officer who recently flew aircraft who also confirms 'definitely more force than normal required' to rotate aircraft. In my opinion this problem requires serious attention and is not due to incorrect trim settings.callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: reporter stated that after his initial write-up; the same anomaly had been experienced by two other crews and the discrepancy logged by those crews. Apparently no maintenance action had been taken and the events were assumed to have been incorrect takeoff trim settings. The reporter stated that after his refusal of the aircraft; maintenance action was performed. Reporter contends that the problem still has not been corrected; because another flight crew has recently entered a similar write-up on this aircraft.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: EXCESSIVE BACK PRESSURE WAS REQUIRED TO ROTATE B757-200 ON TKOF. THE SAME ACFT HAS BEEN WRITTEN-UP REPEATEDLY; BUT THE MALFUNCTION APPARENTLY STILL EXISTS.

Narrative: I REFUSED ACFT DUE TO CHRONIC FLT CTL ISSUE. I ORIGINALLY WROTE THIS UP SEVERAL DAYS AGO. AT ROTATION EXCESSIVE BACK PRESSURE REQUIRED TO ROTATE ACFT. FO LATER STATED I HAD PUT TOTAL OF 6 UNITS OF TRIM NOSE UP. FURTHER INFLT WE CONFIRMED WITH LOAD PLANNING OUR 3.5 ANU SETTING WAS CORRECT. ENTERED APPROPRIATE MAINT WRITE-UP. MAINT DID OPS CHECK AND SENT ACFT ON. TODAY; I PULLED UP BRIEFING TO FIND I WAS ASSIGNED THE SAME ACFT FOR MY FLT. AT XA19 I CONTACTED 757 MAINT. HE ADVISED HE HAD CONVERSATIONS WITH OTHERS IN HIS DEPT; AND FELT THIS WAS PLT ERROR; TAKING OFF WITH INCORRECT TRIM SETTING. I ADVISED HIM WE CONFIRMED OUR SETTING AFTER TAKEOFF. HE SAID ACFT WAS SIGNED OFF. I REFUSED ACFT APPROX XC00; ALSO SENT CONFIRMATION AT THE SAME TIME. NEITHER MADE IT INTO THE SYSTEM. ARRIVED AT XG00; STILL ASSIGNED SAME ACFT; CALLED DISPATCH AT XG19; REFUSED ACFT AGAIN. THERE HAVE BEEN THREE WRITE-UPS SINCE MY INITIAL WRITE-UP; PLUS I HAVE SPOKEN TO A FO WHO RECENTLY FLEW ACFT WHO ALSO CONFIRMS 'DEFINITELY MORE FORCE THAN NORMAL REQUIRED' TO ROTATE ACFT. IN MY OPINION THIS PROBLEM REQUIRES SERIOUS ATTENTION AND IS NOT DUE TO INCORRECT TRIM SETTINGS.CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR STATED THAT AFTER HIS INITIAL WRITE-UP; THE SAME ANOMALY HAD BEEN EXPERIENCED BY TWO OTHER CREWS AND THE DISCREPANCY LOGGED BY THOSE CREWS. APPARENTLY NO MAINT ACTION HAD BEEN TAKEN AND THE EVENTS WERE ASSUMED TO HAVE BEEN INCORRECT TKOF TRIM SETTINGS. THE RPTR STATED THAT AFTER HIS REFUSAL OF THE ACFT; MAINT ACTION WAS PERFORMED. RPTR CONTENDS THAT THE PROBLEM STILL HAS NOT BEEN CORRECTED; BECAUSE ANOTHER FLT CREW HAS RECENTLY ENTERED A SIMILAR WRITE-UP ON THIS 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.