37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 977311 |
Time | |
Date | 201110 |
Local Time Of Day | 1201-1800 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | ZZZ.Airport |
State Reference | US |
Aircraft 1 | |
Make Model Name | A320 |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
Flight Phase | Initial Climb |
Flight Plan | IFR |
Component | |
Aircraft Component | Landing Gear Indicating System |
Person 1 | |
Function | Pilot Flying First Officer |
Experience | Flight Crew Last 90 Days 240 Flight Crew Total 12000 Flight Crew Type 8000 |
Person 2 | |
Function | Pilot Not Flying Captain |
Qualification | Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP) |
Experience | Flight Crew Last 90 Days 180 Flight Crew Total 17000 Flight Crew Type 9000 |
Events | |
Anomaly | Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe |
Narrative:
Just after liftoff we received an ECAM hot brake warning. Brakes 1; 2 and 4 were normal at approximately 150-175 C but number 3 was in the high 400 C range. We decided to leave the landing gear down for cooling; per the ECAM procedure and continue the departure. As the departure progressed the temperature rose slowly but steadily up to about 950 C.along with dispatch and maintenance control; we discussed the options available. Due to fuel considerations and the nature of the problem we elected to hold; burn off gas; and return to ZZZ. By the time we left the holding pattern; the number 3 brake temperature had dropped to about 650 C. The first officer made an uneventful; non-overweight landing. On touchdown the number 3 brake temperature dropped immediately to about 35 C; right in line with the other brake temperatures. We taxied clear of the runway and had the brakes examined by crash fire rescue equipment personnel. There was no smoke or anything else unusual so we taxied to the gate. A mechanic inspected the brakes and found nothing out of the ordinary. The brake temperature indicators were deferred; and the circuit breaker pulled and collared. We then flew an uneventful flight to our destination. Our biggest concern was that the slow and steady rise of the brake temperature seemed to indicate an actual hot brake as opposed to an indicator malfunction.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: Following receipt of an ECAM Hot Brake warning shortly after takeoff the flight crew of an A320 elected to burn fuel to below maximum landing weight and return to their departure station for Maintenance.
Narrative: Just after liftoff we received an ECAM Hot Brake warning. Brakes 1; 2 and 4 were normal at approximately 150-175 C but number 3 was in the high 400 C range. We decided to leave the landing gear down for cooling; per the ECAM procedure and continue the departure. As the departure progressed the temperature rose slowly but steadily up to about 950 C.Along with Dispatch and Maintenance Control; we discussed the options available. Due to fuel considerations and the nature of the problem we elected to hold; burn off gas; and return to ZZZ. By the time we left the holding pattern; the number 3 brake temperature had dropped to about 650 C. The First Officer made an uneventful; NON-overweight landing. On touchdown the number 3 brake temperature dropped immediately to about 35 C; right in line with the other brake temperatures. We taxied clear of the runway and had the brakes examined by CFR personnel. There was no smoke or anything else unusual so we taxied to the gate. A mechanic inspected the brakes and found nothing out of the ordinary. The brake temperature indicators were deferred; and the circuit breaker pulled and collared. We then flew an uneventful flight to our destination. Our biggest concern was that the slow and steady rise of the brake temperature seemed to indicate an actual hot brake as opposed to an indicator malfunction.
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.