Narrative:

We were ready to go for an on-time. I realized we had an FMS 1 legacy FMGC installed and asked dispatch to provide guidance on dispatch legality. Fom revision summary stated that all airbuses had been converted to FMS2 and we found ourselves with a now obsolete piece of equipment. The duty chief pilot responded quickly stating 'aircraft is legal for dispatch.' we were assigned an on-gate delay. I confirmed that it was a crew-based delay. I contacted dispatch because I was concerned about a possible violation for accepting an aircraft that wasn't legal. We were somewhat rushed because the aircraft was late in arriving and we were full. It was a 'quick-turn' and I wanted to be certain we did not miss anything before dispatching. Many thanks to the duty chief pilot and fleet technical manager; for their quick response and clarification of this publication discrepancy. Details like this are probably 'no big deal' but since our fom is now basically an electronic-based document online and the only contact we have with the paper-based volume is on the flight deck; we are reliant on the fom summary. We are required to review the most current revision summary when it comes out; and I called the duty chief pilot a week prior to let the crew desk know about the publication discrepancy. A bigger concern is that in the operations area; casual conversation suggests that some pilots are not in compliance with the requirement to review the document online. This will become one of our biggest challenges in the future. It is imperative that everyone at a minimum log on and document their compliance; since the online system captures log-ons and website navigation. If we want to remain paperless and 'virtual flight bag' then we have to maintain our currency. If we don't provide proof of compliance we may be asked to drag those flight bags around again. I'm certainly glad we are carrying less paper. I would hope everyone is logging on and checking their revision summaries like we are supposed to.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: An A320 Captain discovered that his aircraft's FMS had not been updated to the latest FMS as indicated by Company manuals only to be told the aircraft was legal. The issue was pilot accountability in an all electronic and online technical distribution system.

Narrative: We were ready to go for an on-time. I realized we had an FMS 1 Legacy FMGC installed and asked Dispatch to provide guidance on dispatch legality. FOM revision summary stated that all Airbuses had been converted to FMS2 and we found ourselves with a now obsolete piece of equipment. The Duty Chief Pilot responded quickly stating 'aircraft is legal for dispatch.' We were assigned an on-gate delay. I confirmed that it was a crew-based delay. I contacted Dispatch because I was concerned about a possible violation for accepting an aircraft that wasn't legal. We were somewhat rushed because the aircraft was late in arriving and we were full. It was a 'quick-turn' and I wanted to be certain we did not miss anything before dispatching. Many thanks to the Duty Chief Pilot and Fleet Technical Manager; for their quick response and clarification of this publication discrepancy. Details like this are probably 'no big deal' but since our FOM is now basically an electronic-based document online and the only contact we have with the paper-based volume is on the flight deck; we are reliant on the FOM summary. We are required to review the most current revision summary when it comes out; and I called the Duty Chief Pilot a week prior to let the crew desk know about the publication discrepancy. A bigger concern is that in the operations area; casual conversation suggests that some pilots are not in compliance with the requirement to review the document online. This will become one of our biggest challenges in the future. It is imperative that everyone at a minimum log on and document their compliance; since the online system captures log-ons and website navigation. If we want to remain paperless and 'virtual flight bag' then we have to maintain our currency. If we don't provide proof of compliance we may be asked to drag those flight bags around again. I'm certainly glad we are carrying less paper. I would hope everyone is logging on and checking their revision summaries like we are supposed to.

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.