 |
37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
An emb-145 first officer takes exception to the interpretation of a flap channel MEL that allows the aircraft to be continually dispatched without respect to go-around performance consideration; particularly in mountainous terrain.
| Attributes | |
| ACN | 876860 |
| Time | |
| Date | 201003 |
| Place | |
| Locale Reference | ZZZ.Airport |
| State Reference | US |
| Aircraft 1 | |
| Make Model Name | EMB ERJ 145 ER&LR |
| Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
| Flight Phase | Parked |
| Component | |
| Aircraft Component | Flap Control (Trailing & Leading Edge) |
| Person 1 | |
| Function | First Officer |
| Events | |
| Anomaly | Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical Deviation - Procedural Other / Unknown |
Narrative:
We were dispatched the other day with a legal deferral: flap channel. Though it was a legal deferral; I bring this up because I feel the deferral isn't restrictive enough. When one flap motor is deferred; we no longer have any backup to retract the flaps; especially in the event of a go-around. After the flap motor was deferred the aircraft was dispatched to two maintenance bases where the flap channel was not repaired and then continued to operate to airports located in mountainous terrain; including den. The MEL only provides guidance; remarks and procedures for a takeoff airport. This would suggest this MEL was designed to get the aircraft to a maintenance base where repairs can be made. Flying around; continuing business as usual; especially into mountainous terrain; with no backup to a critical component that directly affects the performance of the airplane is unsafe and appalling. I do not want to think about flying an approach at full flaps in an airport surrounded by mountains and having the one remaining flap channel fail and needing to go around. I believe this deferral needs to be readdressed.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: An EMB-145 First Officer takes exception to the interpretation of a Flap Channel MEL that allows the aircraft to be continually dispatched without respect to go-around performance consideration; particularly in mountainous terrain.
Narrative: We were dispatched the other day with a legal deferral: Flap Channel. Though it was a legal deferral; I bring this up because I feel the deferral isn't restrictive enough. When one flap motor is deferred; we no longer have any backup to retract the flaps; especially in the event of a go-around. After the flap motor was deferred the aircraft was dispatched to two maintenance bases where the flap channel was not repaired and then continued to operate to airports located in mountainous terrain; including DEN. The MEL only provides guidance; remarks and procedures for a takeoff airport. This would suggest this MEL was designed to get the aircraft to a maintenance base where repairs can be made. Flying around; continuing business as usual; especially into mountainous terrain; with no backup to a critical component that directly affects the performance of the airplane is unsafe and appalling. I do not want to think about flying an approach at full flaps in an airport surrounded by mountains and having the one remaining flap channel fail and needing to go around. I believe this deferral needs to be readdressed.
Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of April 2012 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.