Narrative:

Boarded aircraft approximately 20 mins prior to departure. FAA aviation safety inspector (who had boarded prior) met me at cockpit and informed me he had found 3 passenger seats (at least 1 of which was an aisle seat) whose seatbacks failed a 'breakover force' test. We, as cockpit crewmembers, have absolutely no reference or information pertaining to 'seatback breakover force' in any manuals available to us, including MEL. He informed me the affected seats had to be blocked off (which we did), then proceeded to quiz me on the company's procedures for identifying an aisle seat failing this 'breakover' test so that passenger would not use that seatback as a handhold while walking up the aisle. I informed him I was not aware of any such procedure, but took his card and promised to get him an answer. This seemed to satisfy him, and we departed on schedule. In discussions today with company flight department personnel (manager-flying technical and manager-MEL), I learned it is a violation of far 25 and 121 to fly an aircraft with any aisle seatback failing the 'breakover force' test (aircraft is non airworthy). I informed the company (via these individuals) that flight crews must be made aware of this requirement--if the company fails to do so, our union's safety committee will publicize the information. (Apparently sufficient seatback 'breakover force,' 30# in our company, satisfies the far requirement that suitable handholds be provided along each aisle to provide support for passenger who might be standing in the aisle during unexpected turbulence.) how many air carrier pilots are aware of this??! Also, company personnel said the inspector was incorrect in stating the seats had to be unoccupied (blocked)--this is not a requirement.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: LGT ACR PIC INFORMED BY FAA INSPECTOR PRIOR TO DEP THAT 3 PASSENGER SEATBACKS FAILED THE 'REQUIRED BREAKOVER FORCE' TEST. FLT CREW UNFAMILIAR WITH FAA REQUIREMENT.

Narrative: BOARDED ACFT APPROX 20 MINS PRIOR TO DEP. FAA AVIATION SAFETY INSPECTOR (WHO HAD BOARDED PRIOR) MET ME AT COCKPIT AND INFORMED ME HE HAD FOUND 3 PAX SEATS (AT LEAST 1 OF WHICH WAS AN AISLE SEAT) WHOSE SEATBACKS FAILED A 'BREAKOVER FORCE' TEST. WE, AS COCKPIT CREWMEMBERS, HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO REF OR INFO PERTAINING TO 'SEATBACK BREAKOVER FORCE' IN ANY MANUALS AVAILABLE TO US, INCLUDING MEL. HE INFORMED ME THE AFFECTED SEATS HAD TO BE BLOCKED OFF (WHICH WE DID), THEN PROCEEDED TO QUIZ ME ON THE COMPANY'S PROCS FOR IDENTIFYING AN AISLE SEAT FAILING THIS 'BREAKOVER' TEST SO THAT PAX WOULD NOT USE THAT SEATBACK AS A HANDHOLD WHILE WALKING UP THE AISLE. I INFORMED HIM I WAS NOT AWARE OF ANY SUCH PROC, BUT TOOK HIS CARD AND PROMISED TO GET HIM AN ANSWER. THIS SEEMED TO SATISFY HIM, AND WE DEPARTED ON SCHEDULE. IN DISCUSSIONS TODAY WITH COMPANY FLT DEPT PERSONNEL (MGR-FLYING TECHNICAL AND MGR-MEL), I LEARNED IT IS A VIOLATION OF FAR 25 AND 121 TO FLY AN ACFT WITH ANY AISLE SEATBACK FAILING THE 'BREAKOVER FORCE' TEST (ACFT IS NON AIRWORTHY). I INFORMED THE COMPANY (VIA THESE INDIVIDUALS) THAT FLT CREWS MUST BE MADE AWARE OF THIS REQUIREMENT--IF THE COMPANY FAILS TO DO SO, OUR UNION'S SAFETY COMMITTEE WILL PUBLICIZE THE INFO. (APPARENTLY SUFFICIENT SEATBACK 'BREAKOVER FORCE,' 30# IN OUR COMPANY, SATISFIES THE FAR REQUIREMENT THAT SUITABLE HANDHOLDS BE PROVIDED ALONG EACH AISLE TO PROVIDE SUPPORT FOR PAX WHO MIGHT BE STANDING IN THE AISLE DURING UNEXPECTED TURB.) HOW MANY ACR PLTS ARE AWARE OF THIS??! ALSO, COMPANY PERSONNEL SAID THE INSPECTOR WAS INCORRECT IN STATING THE SEATS HAD TO BE UNOCCUPIED (BLOCKED)--THIS IS NOT A REQUIREMENT.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of August 2007 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.