Narrative:

I had an overtemp during engine start. I aborted the start per company trainers. After reporting problem to maintenance control, after a short research of the books and my quoting of the afm, we checked several items and performed an engine power run. After more discussion maintenance control assured me that it was not an overtemp, that there were deviations from the afm for maintenance purposes. Since he assured me that we indeed did not have an overtemp, then it was not written up in the adl. After a test flight for another problem, we were released for service. I was assured again that it was not an overtemp under these circumstances. We flew back to st louis with revenue but no passenger. After arriving in stl the head of maintenance planning called. After our talk he told me that it was a gray area and that the aircraft would situation just to be safe until they knew for sure. I then asked that since no one seemed to know, if I should write it up in the adl. The head of maintenance control said no. After checking and a call from the chief pilot, I had been suckered. It seems like I bought the bait hook, line and sinker. There was a major problem with the aircraft found after inspection. Now how am I to trust maintenance if a check (inspection) was done even though it was signed off. The only trust I can have is to believe that they do know their job from their end. In closing, I was lied to.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACR SMT AFTER OVERTEMPERATURE ON START FLOWN ILLEGAL AFTER MAINTENANCE ASSURANCE IT WAS LEGAL.

Narrative: I HAD AN OVERTEMP DURING ENG START. I ABORTED THE START PER COMPANY TRAINERS. AFTER RPTING PROB TO MAINT CTL, AFTER A SHORT RESEARCH OF THE BOOKS AND MY QUOTING OF THE AFM, WE CHKED SEVERAL ITEMS AND PERFORMED AN ENG PWR RUN. AFTER MORE DISCUSSION MAINT CTL ASSURED ME THAT IT WAS NOT AN OVERTEMP, THAT THERE WERE DEVIATIONS FROM THE AFM FOR MAINT PURPOSES. SINCE HE ASSURED ME THAT WE INDEED DID NOT HAVE AN OVERTEMP, THEN IT WAS NOT WRITTEN UP IN THE ADL. AFTER A TEST FLT FOR ANOTHER PROB, WE WERE RELEASED FOR SVC. I WAS ASSURED AGAIN THAT IT WAS NOT AN OVERTEMP UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES. WE FLEW BACK TO ST LOUIS WITH REVENUE BUT NO PAX. AFTER ARRIVING IN STL THE HEAD OF MAINT PLANNING CALLED. AFTER OUR TALK HE TOLD ME THAT IT WAS A GRAY AREA AND THAT THE ACFT WOULD SIT JUST TO BE SAFE UNTIL THEY KNEW FOR SURE. I THEN ASKED THAT SINCE NO ONE SEEMED TO KNOW, IF I SHOULD WRITE IT UP IN THE ADL. THE HEAD OF MAINT CTL SAID NO. AFTER CHKING AND A CALL FROM THE CHIEF PLT, I HAD BEEN SUCKERED. IT SEEMS LIKE I BOUGHT THE BAIT HOOK, LINE AND SINKER. THERE WAS A MAJOR PROB WITH THE ACFT FOUND AFTER INSPECTION. NOW HOW AM I TO TRUST MAINT IF A CHK (INSPECTION) WAS DONE EVEN THOUGH IT WAS SIGNED OFF. THE ONLY TRUST I CAN HAVE IS TO BELIEVE THAT THEY DO KNOW THEIR JOB FROM THEIR END. IN CLOSING, I WAS LIED TO.

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.