Narrative:

While parked at gate we experienced an APU bleed leak. Maintenance; upon arrival at the airplane; pulled the APU bleed circuit breaker; took the logbook and left. He returned a few minutes later with the logbook with the maintenance action written on the wrong page. (A page filled out three days ago with a different crew; etc). The captain asked the mechanic if he was going to actually investigate the bleed system to ascertain where the leak came from; or if it was a significant problem. The mechanic's response was 'no; if we did that it would take...like... Two hours... That's too long.' he then complained that the mechanic that 'usually does these things' was sent on a road trip and he was called over from the hangar and didn't know 'how to do this stuff'. At this point we asked him if the MEL procedure to secure the APU bleed valve closed had been accomplished. He said he didn't know and walked away. A third mechanic eventually appeared and said that he was 'pretty sure' that the procedure was accomplished. We told him to make sure; and he left again. At this point the cabin/cockpit temperature was over 90 degrees. We requested ground air conditioning from the ramp crew and were told that it was inoperative. (This took about 20 minutes as various rampers attempted to start the equipment and attach the hose). They eventually gave up without providing any air conditioning to the aircraft. Right as we were about to deplane the passengers due to the heat; the mechanic came back and assured us that the valve had been secured and we were ok to go. He transferred the write-up to the correct page and assured us that the plane was ready to go. We then started an engine with the airstart cart and departed the gate. Shortly after takeoff from runway 30 the cockpit quickly filled with smoke. We immediately donned the oxygen masks and ran the memory items for smoke in the cockpit. The captain declared an emergency and got us vectors to return to the field. Right about this time; the flight attendant called to tell us the cabin was also full of smoke. We told her we had the same problem and were returning to the field. We obtained clearance to land. Less than nine minutes after takeoff we landed and exited the runway. We came to a stop on the exit taxiway and were surrounded by emergency vehicles. They verified that there was no fire/smoke on the outside of the airplane. We then deplaned the passengers due to the heat and residual smoke remaining in the cabin. The passengers were offered water/medical attention by the emergency personnel. The airport brought over a mobile lounge to bring the passengers back to the terminal. We then taxied the airplane back to a gate and turned it over to the maintenance people. The same group of mechanics met the plane at the gate and appeared completely disinterested in what had happened. None of them asked us about the emergency. The extent of their consultation with us was to ask what our rate of descent was at touchdown; and to tell the flight attendant that the smoke was 'probably cabin fog' and dismiss any comment she tried to make. After leaving the airplane; we called scheduling and were told they 'had no idea' what they were going to do with us. It was more than two hours before dispatch told us that we were going to take a new airplane to our original destination. Scheduling; after a bunch of arguing and confusion; agreed. They told us they had no idea what we were going to do afterwards; but that we had to fly the flight. After landing; scheduling told us that we were then to reposition the flight directly to a midwest airport. This would have been a ~2.5 hour flight through significant weather. I told scheduling that I would be too fatigued to complete a flight of that nature. Scheduling then attempted to get us hotel rooms. That process took ~45 more minutes and we were given the hotel information around 11pm. I believe that this event occurred due to the attitude prevalentamongst the maintenance department of 'do the absolute minimum'. The attitude of the mechanic was appalling. His response to 'are you going to check the bleed system to make sure the leak isn't serious?' was entirely inappropriate. The response to that should not be 'no; that will take too long'. Just because it's legal to defer the whole thing without an inspection doesn't mean it's a good idea. But the attitude of the maintenance personnel seems to be just that. They appear to always want to do the minimum required to legally get the airplane back in service. This was further demonstrated by the attitude of the maintenance people after we returned to the gate. None of them asked us the circumstances of the smoke event. No one said anything except 'what was your rate of descent during landing?' one mechanic even went so far as to suggest to the flight attendant that it was 'just cabin fog'. In fact; the only thing the mechanics made any effort to do was to get us to tell them our rate of descent was low enough that the overweight landing didn't require another inspection. They got extremely irritated after being told that we didn't know. While the actions of the maintenance team were legal in a 'by the book' sense; I believe this entire incident could have been avoided if they had had a better attitude about the original write-up. An extra few minutes spent inspecting/fixing the bleed system could have prevented a dangerous smoke event and emergency landing.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: An EMB 145 flight crew reported that following an APU Bleed Air leak during preflight; maintenance technician performance was poor and may have contributed to an air return after takeoff when the aircraft filled with smoke. The crew later called in fatigued after additional flights extended their duty day.

Narrative: While parked at gate we experienced an APU Bleed Leak. Maintenance; upon arrival at the airplane; pulled the APU bleed circuit breaker; took the logbook and left. He returned a few minutes later with the logbook with the maintenance action written on the wrong page. (A page filled out three days ago with a different crew; etc). The Captain asked the Mechanic if he was going to actually investigate the bleed system to ascertain where the leak came from; or if it was a significant problem. The Mechanic's response was 'No; if we did that it would take...like... two hours... that's too long.' He then complained that the mechanic that 'usually does these things' was sent on a road trip and he was called over from the hangar and didn't know 'how to do this stuff'. At this point we asked him if the MEL procedure to secure the APU bleed valve closed had been accomplished. He said he didn't know and walked away. A third Mechanic eventually appeared and said that he was 'pretty sure' that the procedure was accomplished. We told him to make sure; and he left again. At this point the cabin/cockpit temperature was over 90 degrees. We requested ground air conditioning from the ramp crew and were told that it was inoperative. (This took about 20 minutes as various rampers attempted to start the equipment and attach the hose). They eventually gave up without providing any air conditioning to the aircraft. Right as we were about to deplane the passengers due to the heat; the mechanic came back and assured us that the valve had been secured and we were OK to go. He transferred the write-up to the correct page and assured us that the plane was ready to go. We then started an engine with the airstart cart and departed the gate. Shortly after takeoff from Runway 30 the cockpit quickly filled with smoke. We immediately donned the oxygen masks and ran the memory items for smoke in the cockpit. The Captain declared an emergency and got us vectors to return to the field. Right about this time; the Flight attendant called to tell us the cabin was also full of smoke. We told her we had the same problem and were returning to the field. We obtained clearance to land. Less than nine minutes after takeoff we landed and exited the runway. We came to a stop on the exit taxiway and were surrounded by emergency vehicles. They verified that there was no fire/smoke on the outside of the airplane. We then deplaned the passengers due to the heat and residual smoke remaining in the cabin. The passengers were offered water/medical attention by the emergency personnel. The airport brought over a mobile lounge to bring the passengers back to the terminal. We then taxied the airplane back to a gate and turned it over to the maintenance people. The same group of mechanics met the plane at the gate and appeared completely disinterested in what had happened. None of them asked us about the emergency. The extent of their consultation with us was to ask what our rate of descent was at touchdown; and to tell the flight attendant that the smoke was 'probably cabin fog' and dismiss any comment she tried to make. After leaving the airplane; we called scheduling and were told they 'had no idea' what they were going to do with us. It was more than two hours before dispatch told us that we were going to take a new airplane to our original destination. Scheduling; after a bunch of arguing and confusion; agreed. They told us they had no idea what we were going to do afterwards; but that we had to fly the flight. After landing; scheduling told us that we were then to reposition the flight directly to a midwest airport. This would have been a ~2.5 hour flight through significant weather. I told scheduling that I would be too fatigued to complete a flight of that nature. Scheduling then attempted to get us hotel rooms. That process took ~45 more minutes and we were given the hotel information around 11pm. I believe that this event occurred due to the attitude prevalentamongst the maintenance department of 'Do the absolute minimum'. The attitude of the Mechanic was appalling. His response to 'Are you going to check the bleed system to make sure the leak isn't serious?' was entirely inappropriate. The response to that should not be 'No; that will take too long'. Just because it's LEGAL to defer the whole thing without an inspection doesn't mean it's a good idea. But the attitude of the maintenance personnel seems to be just that. They appear to always want to do the minimum required to legally get the airplane back in service. This was further demonstrated by the attitude of the maintenance people after we returned to the gate. None of them asked us the circumstances of the smoke event. No one said anything except 'What was your rate of descent during landing?' One mechanic even went so far as to suggest to the flight attendant that it was 'just cabin fog'. In fact; the only thing the mechanics made any effort to do was to get us to tell them our rate of descent was low enough that the overweight landing didn't require another inspection. They got extremely irritated after being told that we didn't know. While the actions of the maintenance team were legal in a 'by the book' sense; I believe this entire incident could have been avoided if they had had a better attitude about the original write-up. An extra few minutes spent inspecting/fixing the bleed system could have prevented a dangerous smoke event and emergency landing.

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.