37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 784459 |
Time | |
Date | 200804 |
Local Time Of Day | 1201 To 1800 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | airport : zzz.airport |
State Reference | US |
Altitude | agl single value : 0 |
Environment | |
Flight Conditions | IMC |
Light | Daylight |
Aircraft 1 | |
Operator | common carrier : air carrier |
Make Model Name | MD-88 |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
Flight Phase | climbout : takeoff |
Flight Plan | IFR |
Person 1 | |
Affiliation | company : air carrier |
Function | flight crew : captain oversight : pic |
Qualification | pilot : atp |
Experience | flight time last 90 days : 340 flight time total : 17745 flight time type : 7300 |
ASRS Report | 784459 |
Person 2 | |
Affiliation | company : air carrier |
Function | flight crew : first officer |
Qualification | pilot : atp |
Experience | flight time last 90 days : 250 flight time total : 4500 flight time type : 250 |
ASRS Report | 785365 |
Events | |
Anomaly | aircraft equipment problem : critical |
Independent Detector | other flight crewa other flight crewb |
Resolutory Action | flight crew : rejected takeoff |
Consequence | other |
Supplementary | |
Problem Areas | Aircraft |
Primary Problem | Aircraft |
Narrative:
We were flying from ZZZ to ZZZ1. We were assigned an aircraft that had both the autothrottles and autospoilers inoperative. We reviewed the MEL and procedures to be used with these items not available to us. The thrust rating panel was not affected and would be used to set takeoff power. We elected to use the lowest flex power rating given to us on our aircraft weight and balance sheet. This provided a huge cushion between our weight and the runway allowable takeoff weight on the aircraft weight and balance sheet. We taxied out to runway 27; the first officer was to fly this leg of the flight. We were cleared for takeoff; brought up the thrust levers to about 1.30 EPR's and called for me to set takeoff power. Before takeoff power had been reached; we got a slat overspeed warning. The airspeed is believed to be less than 80 KTS. Almost simultaneously; the EPR arrows on both engines appeared to extinguish and roll back even though no apparent loss of power was sensed. The thrust rating panel showed a no-mode indication and the EPR target window showed dashes which is consistent with the no mode (abnormal bleed) indication. I discontinued the takeoff. I believe the airspeed to be less than 80 KTS. We returned to the gate for maintenance. We logged the slat overspeed warning in the aircraft logbook. I was not sure how to log the faulty engine indications. I had 2 phone calls with our maintenance supervisor; and he said he had a course of action on the problem. Callback conversation with reporter acn 784459 revealed the following information: the captain stated that he does not have any definitive information from maintenance about this event. The aircraft was put back into service but within a day or two had a second similar event and was maintenance ferried to a major overhaul facility. The reporter personally suspects that because of recent heavy rains in the area; there is a possibility that water got into various components. One way some crews deal with the EPR issue is to turn on engine heat prior to takeoff for a short period of time. Callback conversation with reporter acn 785365 revealed the following information: reporter stated that the only information he had about this event was what he had heard from the captain.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: AN MD88 CAPT REJECTED A TKOF AT ABOUT 80 KTS AFTER A SLAT OVERSPEED AURAL ANNUNCIATION OCCURRED AND EPR ARROWS ROLLED BACK WITH NO PWR LOSS.
Narrative: WE WERE FLYING FROM ZZZ TO ZZZ1. WE WERE ASSIGNED AN ACFT THAT HAD BOTH THE AUTOTHROTTLES AND AUTOSPOILERS INOP. WE REVIEWED THE MEL AND PROCS TO BE USED WITH THESE ITEMS NOT AVAILABLE TO US. THE THRUST RATING PANEL WAS NOT AFFECTED AND WOULD BE USED TO SET TKOF PWR. WE ELECTED TO USE THE LOWEST FLEX PWR RATING GIVEN TO US ON OUR ACFT WT AND BAL SHEET. THIS PROVIDED A HUGE CUSHION BTWN OUR WT AND THE RWY ALLOWABLE TKOF WT ON THE ACFT WT AND BAL SHEET. WE TAXIED OUT TO RWY 27; THE FO WAS TO FLY THIS LEG OF THE FLT. WE WERE CLRED FOR TKOF; BROUGHT UP THE THRUST LEVERS TO ABOUT 1.30 EPR'S AND CALLED FOR ME TO SET TKOF PWR. BEFORE TKOF PWR HAD BEEN REACHED; WE GOT A SLAT OVERSPEED WARNING. THE AIRSPD IS BELIEVED TO BE LESS THAN 80 KTS. ALMOST SIMULTANEOUSLY; THE EPR ARROWS ON BOTH ENGS APPEARED TO EXTINGUISH AND ROLL BACK EVEN THOUGH NO APPARENT LOSS OF PWR WAS SENSED. THE THRUST RATING PANEL SHOWED A NO-MODE INDICATION AND THE EPR TARGET WINDOW SHOWED DASHES WHICH IS CONSISTENT WITH THE NO MODE (ABNORMAL BLEED) INDICATION. I DISCONTINUED THE TKOF. I BELIEVE THE AIRSPD TO BE LESS THAN 80 KTS. WE RETURNED TO THE GATE FOR MAINT. WE LOGGED THE SLAT OVERSPEED WARNING IN THE ACFT LOGBOOK. I WAS NOT SURE HOW TO LOG THE FAULTY ENG INDICATIONS. I HAD 2 PHONE CALLS WITH OUR MAINT SUPVR; AND HE SAID HE HAD A COURSE OF ACTION ON THE PROB. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR ACN 784459 REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: THE CAPT STATED THAT HE DOES NOT HAVE ANY DEFINITIVE INFO FROM MAINT ABOUT THIS EVENT. THE ACFT WAS PUT BACK INTO SVC BUT WITHIN A DAY OR TWO HAD A SECOND SIMILAR EVENT AND WAS MAINT FERRIED TO A MAJOR OVERHAUL FACILITY. THE RPTR PERSONALLY SUSPECTS THAT BECAUSE OF RECENT HVY RAINS IN THE AREA; THERE IS A POSSIBILITY THAT WATER GOT INTO VARIOUS COMPONENTS. ONE WAY SOME CREWS DEAL WITH THE EPR ISSUE IS TO TURN ON ENG HEAT PRIOR TO TKOF FOR A SHORT PERIOD OF TIME. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR ACN 785365 REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR STATED THAT THE ONLY INFO HE HAD ABOUT THIS EVENT WAS WHAT HE HAD HEARD FROM THE CAPT.
Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of May 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.