Narrative:

#1 engine bleed was written up for ECAM on inbound flight. Again (how often is this going to continue to happen?) maintenance control did not contact destination station maintenance to sign off issue. So we show up to the plane in the am with open write up. Send ACARS; wait; wait; wait; maintenance never shows up (again; how hard can it be for maintenance control to call maintenance out?). Captain calls dispatcher and they decide to MEL issue with restr of no icing conditions. I made it clear when I heard this I was uncomfortable and did not agree with this course of action. It's summer; humid; and to fly 1800 mi; at 30000 ft and not go in the clouds is not realistic. I could not imagine there wouldn't be moisture or thunderstorms over denver; az; midwest. Captain and dispatch said all clear. My common sense said no way; don't go and I told captain but he overruled. My strong preferences was to wait for maintenance to show up and fix problem but he seemed in a hurry to want to go so we did. Sure enough; moisture along the entire route of flight. We were directly in icing conditions; limited to FL300 and simply flew in icing conditions for I bet at least 1 hour because we simply could not deviate enough to stay out of it. I also suggested we descend to below icing conditions and if need to stop for gas in say denver then so be it. He refused. Bottom line we violated the MEL by flying in icing conditions. Note: why can't engine ice be used? It's not single pack; it's single bleed inoperative. Looking at the system seems like engine ice could still be used but not positive on this. Simply looking at MEL we did not comply. This MEL should be outlawed. It's almost impossible to fly across the country VFR. FL300 is prime icing altitude. It just sets you up to fail. I firmly believe the dispatcher and captain were technically legal. There is no reasonable way for any pilot or dispatcher to guarantee VFR and no icing conditions that far. I mean you're forecasting cloud layers still hours in the future! A cross country flight should not be allowed like this. A short trip in real time is fine; but in this scenario WX acted up like it always did and bit us. Don't allow this MEL cross country any more. Note; I'd like a detailed answer; specifically; why our maintenance controllers are not calling out station maintenance after a write-up. This whole issue would have been avoided had maintenance control done their job. Day after day after day they continue to not do their job and it's causing delay after delay. How hard can this be to fix? Have maintenance control do their darn job. The pilots; flight attendants and passenger are paying the price for their crappy job performance. Is anybody overseeing those people to get this problem fixed? Should take about 1 min to solve the problem and all we keep hearing is management is looking into it. That's baloney. Get maintenance control to start doing their stinking jobs! Supplemental information from acn 794953: just prior to departure; I was advised by the crew that there was an open item in their logbook for a #1 bleed fault. Maintenance control had not been advised; so contract maintenance had never been called out. It was determined that MEL could be applied. The MEL requires a flight level restr of 31000 ft and no known or forecast icing can exist on the route. There were scattered thunderstorms on the original flight plan and the flight had been filed at FL360. I canceled the flight plan with ATC and chose another route that showed no known or forecast icing and filed the flight at FL310. I checked all available information available to me such as freezing level charts/forecast precipitation/PIREPS; etc; and determined the route I chose was in compliance with the MEL. Upon arrival; the first officer called me and advised the aircraft had experienced icing conditions. The captain did not agree and I researched and found no icing PIREPS. However; I saw nothing to warrant that as I was watching the flight. After I was informed; I checked PIREPS to see if icing had been reported and found no PIREPS existed on the filed route. From the WX information I have available to me as a dispatcher I thought the flight planned route was free of icing conditions. One crew member thought they were exposed to icing conditions during the flight. This could be true as I was not in the aircraft to observe. He advised me he was going to fill out a report; so I thought it best that I do the same.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A319 FO REPORTS BEING DISPATCHED ON LONG FLIGHT WITH MEL ON ENGINE ANTI-ICE REQUIRING NO ICING CONDITIONS; WHICH COULD NOT BE MAINTAINED.

Narrative: #1 ENG BLEED WAS WRITTEN UP FOR ECAM ON INBOUND FLT. AGAIN (HOW OFTEN IS THIS GOING TO CONTINUE TO HAPPEN?) MAINT CTL DID NOT CONTACT DEST STATION MAINT TO SIGN OFF ISSUE. SO WE SHOW UP TO THE PLANE IN THE AM WITH OPEN WRITE UP. SEND ACARS; WAIT; WAIT; WAIT; MAINT NEVER SHOWS UP (AGAIN; HOW HARD CAN IT BE FOR MAINT CTL TO CALL MAINT OUT?). CAPT CALLS DISPATCHER AND THEY DECIDE TO MEL ISSUE WITH RESTR OF NO ICING CONDITIONS. I MADE IT CLR WHEN I HEARD THIS I WAS UNCOMFORTABLE AND DID NOT AGREE WITH THIS COURSE OF ACTION. IT'S SUMMER; HUMID; AND TO FLY 1800 MI; AT 30000 FT AND NOT GO IN THE CLOUDS IS NOT REALISTIC. I COULD NOT IMAGINE THERE WOULDN'T BE MOISTURE OR TSTMS OVER DENVER; AZ; MIDWEST. CAPT AND DISPATCH SAID ALL CLR. MY COMMON SENSE SAID NO WAY; DON'T GO AND I TOLD CAPT BUT HE OVERRULED. MY STRONG PREFERENCES WAS TO WAIT FOR MAINT TO SHOW UP AND FIX PROB BUT HE SEEMED IN A HURRY TO WANT TO GO SO WE DID. SURE ENOUGH; MOISTURE ALONG THE ENTIRE RTE OF FLT. WE WERE DIRECTLY IN ICING CONDITIONS; LIMITED TO FL300 AND SIMPLY FLEW IN ICING CONDITIONS FOR I BET AT LEAST 1 HR BECAUSE WE SIMPLY COULD NOT DEVIATE ENOUGH TO STAY OUT OF IT. I ALSO SUGGESTED WE DSND TO BELOW ICING CONDITIONS AND IF NEED TO STOP FOR GAS IN SAY DENVER THEN SO BE IT. HE REFUSED. BOTTOM LINE WE VIOLATED THE MEL BY FLYING IN ICING CONDITIONS. NOTE: WHY CAN'T ENG ICE BE USED? IT'S NOT SINGLE PACK; IT'S SINGLE BLEED INOP. LOOKING AT THE SYS SEEMS LIKE ENG ICE COULD STILL BE USED BUT NOT POSITIVE ON THIS. SIMPLY LOOKING AT MEL WE DID NOT COMPLY. THIS MEL SHOULD BE OUTLAWED. IT'S ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE TO FLY ACROSS THE COUNTRY VFR. FL300 IS PRIME ICING ALT. IT JUST SETS YOU UP TO FAIL. I FIRMLY BELIEVE THE DISPATCHER AND CAPT WERE TECHNICALLY LEGAL. THERE IS NO REASONABLE WAY FOR ANY PLT OR DISPATCHER TO GUARANTEE VFR AND NO ICING CONDITIONS THAT FAR. I MEAN YOU'RE FORECASTING CLOUD LAYERS STILL HRS IN THE FUTURE! A XCOUNTRY FLT SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED LIKE THIS. A SHORT TRIP IN REAL TIME IS FINE; BUT IN THIS SCENARIO WX ACTED UP LIKE IT ALWAYS DID AND BIT US. DON'T ALLOW THIS MEL XCOUNTRY ANY MORE. NOTE; I'D LIKE A DETAILED ANSWER; SPECIFICALLY; WHY OUR MAINT CTLRS ARE NOT CALLING OUT STATION MAINT AFTER A WRITE-UP. THIS WHOLE ISSUE WOULD HAVE BEEN AVOIDED HAD MAINT CTL DONE THEIR JOB. DAY AFTER DAY AFTER DAY THEY CONTINUE TO NOT DO THEIR JOB AND IT'S CAUSING DELAY AFTER DELAY. HOW HARD CAN THIS BE TO FIX? HAVE MAINT CTL DO THEIR DARN JOB. THE PLTS; FLT ATTENDANTS AND PAX ARE PAYING THE PRICE FOR THEIR CRAPPY JOB PERFORMANCE. IS ANYBODY OVERSEEING THOSE PEOPLE TO GET THIS PROB FIXED? SHOULD TAKE ABOUT 1 MIN TO SOLVE THE PROB AND ALL WE KEEP HEARING IS MGMNT IS LOOKING INTO IT. THAT'S BALONEY. GET MAINT CTL TO START DOING THEIR STINKING JOBS! SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 794953: JUST PRIOR TO DEP; I WAS ADVISED BY THE CREW THAT THERE WAS AN OPEN ITEM IN THEIR LOGBOOK FOR A #1 BLEED FAULT. MAINT CTL HAD NOT BEEN ADVISED; SO CONTRACT MAINT HAD NEVER BEEN CALLED OUT. IT WAS DETERMINED THAT MEL COULD BE APPLIED. THE MEL REQUIRES A FLT LEVEL RESTR OF 31000 FT AND NO KNOWN OR FORECAST ICING CAN EXIST ON THE RTE. THERE WERE SCATTERED TSTMS ON THE ORIGINAL FLT PLAN AND THE FLT HAD BEEN FILED AT FL360. I CANCELED THE FLT PLAN WITH ATC AND CHOSE ANOTHER RTE THAT SHOWED NO KNOWN OR FORECAST ICING AND FILED THE FLT AT FL310. I CHKED ALL AVAILABLE INFO AVAILABLE TO ME SUCH AS FREEZING LEVEL CHARTS/FORECAST PRECIP/PIREPS; ETC; AND DETERMINED THE RTE I CHOSE WAS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE MEL. UPON ARR; THE FO CALLED ME AND ADVISED THE ACFT HAD EXPERIENCED ICING CONDITIONS. THE CAPT DID NOT AGREE AND I RESEARCHED AND FOUND NO ICING PIREPS. HOWEVER; I SAW NOTHING TO WARRANT THAT AS I WAS WATCHING THE FLT. AFTER I WAS INFORMED; I CHKED PIREPS TO SEE IF ICING HAD BEEN RPTED AND FOUND NO PIREPS EXISTED ON THE FILED RTE. FROM THE WX INFO I HAVE AVAILABLE TO ME AS A DISPATCHER I THOUGHT THE FLT PLANNED RTE WAS FREE OF ICING CONDITIONS. ONE CREW MEMBER THOUGHT THEY WERE EXPOSED TO ICING CONDITIONS DURING THE FLT. THIS COULD BE TRUE AS I WAS NOT IN THE ACFT TO OBSERVE. HE ADVISED ME HE WAS GOING TO FILL OUT A REPORT; SO I THOUGHT IT BEST THAT I DO THE SAME.

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.