During preflight; pilot of a B737-800 notices the cargo loading system had not been disabled per a r...

Attributes
ACN	799578
Time
Date	200808
Local Time Of Day	1801 To 2400
Place
Locale Reference	airport : zzz.airport
State Reference	US
Altitude	agl single value : 0
Aircraft 1
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	B737-800
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Flight Phase	ground : preflight ground : parked ground : maintenance
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : captain oversight : pic
ASRS Report	799578
Events
Anomaly	aircraft equipment problem : critical maintenance problem : non compliance with mel non adherence : far non adherence : published procedure
Independent Detector	other flight crewa
Resolutory Action	none taken : detected after the fact
Consequence	other
Factors
Maintenance	contributing factor : briefing performance deficiency : non compliance with legal requirements performance deficiency : logbook entry
Supplementary
Problem Areas	Aircraft Flight Crew Human Performance Maintenance Human Performance
Primary Problem	Maintenance Human Performance

Narrative:

I count on our air carrier to accomplish maintenance work on an aircraft. That level of trust should never be broken. I am not a certified a&P therefore when a statement is placed in a logbook that work has been accomplished; one that is not easily verified such as a tire change; that level of trust is even higher. A vip was on board as well as every equally important other passenger and 5 crew members. The logbook stated that we were flying under MEL and that procedures manual had been accomplished. This was on placard to disable the cargo loading system due to it turning on by itself in the cargo hold compartment. My preflight investigation revealed that this had not been done at all and the paperwork had been made to look like it had. This aircraft had flown for several days and approximately 24 flts like this. When I went back moments ago to the air carrier computer my very detailed write-up of this incident had been 'condensed' and in my opinion shortened so that a computer review of logbook entries for aircraft maintenance history would not show my statements showing how many times the aircraft had flown without this placard being accomplished. I would like to say that this is an isolated incident but I have seen this becoming an issue more often that you would think. MEL's are extremely important. They are regulations that allow an aircraft to fly with less than perfect maintenance but they also contain restrs and requirements attached. The very next day on a different aircraft I would see failure to comply with MEL and the problems that caused. This practice must cease!

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: DURING PREFLIGHT; PILOT OF A B737-800 NOTICES THE CARGO LOADING SYSTEM HAD NOT BEEN DISABLED PER A REQUIRED MEL PROCEDURE. PLACARD ISSUED BUT NOT FOLLOWED. ACFT HAD FLOWN APPROX 24 FLTS SINCE MEL ISSUED.

Narrative: I COUNT ON OUR ACR TO ACCOMPLISH MAINT WORK ON AN ACFT. THAT LEVEL OF TRUST SHOULD NEVER BE BROKEN. I AM NOT A CERTIFIED A&P THEREFORE WHEN A STATEMENT IS PLACED IN A LOGBOOK THAT WORK HAS BEEN ACCOMPLISHED; ONE THAT IS NOT EASILY VERIFIED SUCH AS A TIRE CHANGE; THAT LEVEL OF TRUST IS EVEN HIGHER. A VIP WAS ON BOARD AS WELL AS EVERY EQUALLY IMPORTANT OTHER PAX AND 5 CREW MEMBERS. THE LOGBOOK STATED THAT WE WERE FLYING UNDER MEL AND THAT PROCS MANUAL HAD BEEN ACCOMPLISHED. THIS WAS ON PLACARD TO DISABLE THE CARGO LOADING SYS DUE TO IT TURNING ON BY ITSELF IN THE CARGO HOLD COMPARTMENT. MY PREFLT INVESTIGATION REVEALED THAT THIS HAD NOT BEEN DONE AT ALL AND THE PAPERWORK HAD BEEN MADE TO LOOK LIKE IT HAD. THIS ACFT HAD FLOWN FOR SEVERAL DAYS AND APPROX 24 FLTS LIKE THIS. WHEN I WENT BACK MOMENTS AGO TO THE ACR COMPUTER MY VERY DETAILED WRITE-UP OF THIS INCIDENT HAD BEEN 'CONDENSED' AND IN MY OPINION SHORTENED SO THAT A COMPUTER REVIEW OF LOGBOOK ENTRIES FOR ACFT MAINT HISTORY WOULD NOT SHOW MY STATEMENTS SHOWING HOW MANY TIMES THE ACFT HAD FLOWN WITHOUT THIS PLACARD BEING ACCOMPLISHED. I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THAT THIS IS AN ISOLATED INCIDENT BUT I HAVE SEEN THIS BECOMING AN ISSUE MORE OFTEN THAT YOU WOULD THINK. MEL'S ARE EXTREMELY IMPORTANT. THEY ARE REGS THAT ALLOW AN ACFT TO FLY WITH LESS THAN PERFECT MAINT BUT THEY ALSO CONTAIN RESTRS AND REQUIREMENTS ATTACHED. THE VERY NEXT DAY ON A DIFFERENT ACFT I WOULD SEE FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH MEL AND THE PROBS THAT CAUSED. THIS PRACTICE MUST CEASE!

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.

During preflight; pilot of a B737-800 notices the cargo loading system had not been disabled per a required MEL procedure. Placard issued but not followed. Aircraft had flown approximately 24 flts since MEL issued.