A320 Maintenance Supervisor and two technicians reported signing off a log page and learning that the incorrect and ineffective part was used after the aircraft was released.
Synopsis
A320 Maintenance Supervisor and two technicians reported signing off a log page and learning that the incorrect and ineffective part was used after the aircraft was released.
Narrative
A FCDC (Flight Control Data Concentrator) was robbed from Aircraft Y for out of service Aircraft X at the gate; which had a non-deferrable unserviceable FCDC in Position #1. We attempted to determine configuration through the company parts hotline who were confused. Then; ZZZ Engineering stepped in to determine effectivity as the IPC (Illustrated Parts Catalog) was extremely complex and convoluted for this part. I; Supervisor; was provided IPC references; and an Airbus FCDC interchangeability logic table; then provided clear pathway to prove effectivity for a Pre-Mod XXXXX A319 aircraft. We were assured it was effective via these references and guiding us through them; Avionics and I. The avionics technicians were fine with that and installed the deemed effective FCDC into aircraft and it tested fine with no faults. I signed off the log page and the aircraft was released and flew away to ZZZ1. Engineering came back and said they had dug through induction paperwork and found that Aircraft X; that we just signed off on; was actually a Post-Mod XXXXX aircraft; and the new logic table showed the part to be not effective and we would now have an inspection situation on our hands. I immediately contacted Maintenance Control and let them know the aircraft was flying with a non-effective part and they took it from there.I signed off and cleared the log page as a Supervisor with the wrong IPC and logic data provided to me by Engineering and wanted it on the record. The technicians were notified as they did the installation and parts rob. While the part functioned correctly; it was only for a pre-mod aircraft; not a post-mod aircraft like Aircraft X. I feel the extremely complex and convoluted IPC confused the technicians; myself; and ZZZ Engineering; and would need to be simplified for components like these. Aircraft will be required to replace inspection with correct; effective part as researched by Engineering; and shipped to assigned station. Engineering is following up with Maintenance Control to figure out best course of action.
Second reporter narrative
Aircraft X came in with a Flight Control Data Concentrator (FCDC) # 1 Fail Message. I looked at the Illustrated Parts Catalog (IPC) and could not verify that the part number that was going to be robbed was the correct part number. Called the Company parts support line number; and after a half hour without finding anything out with the part number; I turned it over to my Supervisor. They were on the phone for 1 hour with parts and they came to agreement that it was the correct part number and told us to install it. We installed the part and tested per the Maintenance Manual (MM). All tests passed.
More incidents for this aircraft family →
Source: NASA Aviation Safety Reporting System (public domain). Reports are voluntary submissions and are not verified by NASA.