ACR LTT HAD ENG CHANGED WHICH REQUIRED TEST FLT. NOT DONE UNTIL AFTER 2 REVENUE FLTS FLOWN AS LOGBOOK IMPROPERLY HANDLED WITH REGARDS TO WRITE-UPS.

Narrative

RECEIVED ACFT FROM HANGAR FOR SCHEDULED REVENUE FLT SUX- MSP. REVIEW OF ACFT FLT DISCREPANCY LOG (AFDL) SHOWED NO OPEN WRITE-UPS; INDICATING TO ME THAT THE ACFT WAS MECHANICALLY AIRWORTHY AND LEGAL. (NOTE: A NEW PAGE IS STARTED IN THE AFDL WITH EVERY NEW DAY; CREW CHANGE; OR MAINT ACTION). PREVIOUS WRITE-UPS INCLUDED L ENG REPLACED THE NIGHT BEFORE (NOT FLOWN SINCE). AFTER LNDG IN MSP; INTERROGATION OF THE L ENG CHIP DETECTOR SHOWED OIL CONTAMINATION; SO I ENTERED THE APPROPRIATE WRITE-UP IN THE AFDL. MAINT CORRECTED THE SITUATION; THEN ANOTHER CREW FLEW THE SAME ACFT ON ANOTHER SCHEDULED REVENUE FLT FROM MSP-SUX. THE NEXT DAY; I SHOWED FOR WORK TO REPOS THE SAME ACFT FROM SUX-MSP. NOTHING HAD BEEN DONE TO THE ACFT OVERNIGHT; HOWEVER; THERE WAS 1 NEW OPEN WRITE-UP ON THE NEWEST PAGE OF THE AFDL: 'TEST FLT REQUIRED FOR L- HAND ENG CHANGE.' THIS INDICATES THAT A TEST FLT WAS; INDEED; REQUIRED AFTER THE ENG CHANGE TO MAKE THE ACFT LEGAL FOR REVENUE FLT. THEREFORE: I UNKNOWINGLY FLEW A LEGALLY UNAIRWORTHY ACFT ON A REVENUE FLT. ANOTHER CREW DID THE SAME; AND MAINT IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ALLOWING THIS TO OCCUR; AS THEY WERE NEGLIGENT IN ENTERING THE TEST FLT REQUIREMENT IMMEDIATELY AFTER THE ENG WAS CHANGED. HAD MAINT FOLLOWED PROPER PROCS; THE 2 FLTS WOULD HAVE BEEN OPERATED LEGALLY; AND THE 'OIL CONTAMINATION' LIGHT WOULD HAVE COME ON DURING THE TEST FLT; NOT ON A REVENUE PAX FLT. I DID NOT INTENTIONALLY BREAK THE FARS -- THE AFDL HAD NO OPEN WRITE-UPS; SO I WAS REASONABLY SURE THAT MAINT HAD DELIVERED US A LEGAL ACFT.