Narrative:

My crew and I flew into phl on a regular run from richmond. We were to switch aircraft with a richmond based crew and take the last leg to reading. The aircraft had been flown by 2 other crews with a signed off write up in the log: 'right RPM indicates 15500 RPM on takeoff.' redline for RPM is 15000. The first crew talked to maintenance and they decided since all other gauges indicated normal that the RPM gauge was reading incorrectly and a mechanic on location signed off the write up as 'ok for flight.' I had some doubts about this but accepted the airplane and called dispatch and maintenance to get some more details. Even though the aircraft carried passenger all day, a decision was made to cancel the trip and ferry to rdg. My first officer was still not satisfied with plans to ferry so the aircraft was left at phl for maintenance. Mechanics were flown in the RPM gauge changed a run up made and the aircraft flown part 91 back to rdg. A number of things caused these problems. First, 2 crews flew the airplane with passenger with a somewhat shaky sign off. I agree with maintenance that the gauge was the problem and the engine was operating within limits but it should have been fixed right away. Secondly, the reluctance of my copilot to even ferry the aircraft caused some problems for us both. This is still being questioned. I believe some shaky judgement calls were made and I hope our flight and maintenance departures can work a little closer on this type of situation.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: FLT CREW REFUSED PART 91 FLT AND FERRY FLT BECAUSE OF A FAUTLY TACHOMETER.

Narrative: MY CREW AND I FLEW INTO PHL ON A REGULAR RUN FROM RICHMOND. WE WERE TO SWITCH ACFT WITH A RICHMOND BASED CREW AND TAKE THE LAST LEG TO READING. THE ACFT HAD BEEN FLOWN BY 2 OTHER CREWS WITH A SIGNED OFF WRITE UP IN THE LOG: 'RIGHT RPM INDICATES 15500 RPM ON TKOF.' REDLINE FOR RPM IS 15000. THE FIRST CREW TALKED TO MAINT AND THEY DECIDED SINCE ALL OTHER GAUGES INDICATED NORMAL THAT THE RPM GAUGE WAS READING INCORRECTLY AND A MECH ON LOCATION SIGNED OFF THE WRITE UP AS 'OK FOR FLT.' I HAD SOME DOUBTS ABOUT THIS BUT ACCEPTED THE AIRPLANE AND CALLED DISPATCH AND MAINT TO GET SOME MORE DETAILS. EVEN THOUGH THE ACFT CARRIED PAX ALL DAY, A DECISION WAS MADE TO CANCEL THE TRIP AND FERRY TO RDG. MY F/O WAS STILL NOT SATISFIED WITH PLANS TO FERRY SO THE ACFT WAS LEFT AT PHL FOR MAINT. MECHS WERE FLOWN IN THE RPM GAUGE CHANGED A RUN UP MADE AND THE ACFT FLOWN PART 91 BACK TO RDG. A NUMBER OF THINGS CAUSED THESE PROBS. FIRST, 2 CREWS FLEW THE AIRPLANE WITH PAX WITH A SOMEWHAT SHAKY SIGN OFF. I AGREE WITH MAINT THAT THE GAUGE WAS THE PROB AND THE ENG WAS OPERATING WITHIN LIMITS BUT IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN FIXED RIGHT AWAY. SECONDLY, THE RELUCTANCE OF MY COPLT TO EVEN FERRY THE ACFT CAUSED SOME PROBS FOR US BOTH. THIS IS STILL BEING QUESTIONED. I BELIEVE SOME SHAKY JUDGEMENT CALLS WERE MADE AND I HOPE OUR FLT AND MAINT DEPS CAN WORK A LITTLE CLOSER ON THIS TYPE OF SITUATION.

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.