A DC9-50 WAS DISPATCHED IN NON COMPLIANCE WITH THE R ENG OIL TANK CAP NOT SECURED. ACFT RPTED LOSS OF R ENG OIL.
Synopsis
A DC9-50 WAS DISPATCHED IN NON COMPLIANCE WITH THE R ENG OIL TANK CAP NOT SECURED. ACFT RPTED LOSS OF R ENG OIL.
Narrative
AT APPROX XA00; RECEIVED A CALL FROM ACFT THAT THEY NEEDED R ENG OIL SVCING. ARRIVED AT ACFT AND FOUND THAT IT WAS LOADED WITH PAX AND THE JETBRIDGE WAS PULLED BACK. THE PLT HANDED ME THE LOGBOOK THROUGH HIS WINDOW. I NOTED THE WRITE-UP AND THEN PROCEEDED TO SVC THE R ENG WITH OIL. UPON COMPLETION I AM SURE IN MY MIND THAT I SECURED THE OIL CAP. INFLT; THE PLT NOTICED HIS OIL SUPPLY FOR THE R ENG WAS DROPPING. UPON ARR AT THEIR DEST; IT WAS DISCOVERED THAT THE R OIL CAP WAS NOT SECURED. UNFORTUNATELY; THIS SIT HAS OCCURRED WITH MORE FREQ SINCE JANUARY OF THIS YR. THIS WAS WHEN MY COMPANY WENT FROM USING CANS OF OIL TO OIL PUMP BOWSERS. IT MIGHT BE POSSIBLE THAT THIS DIFFERENT STYLE OF SVCING WHICH TAKES THE TECHNICIAN'S HEAD AND EYES FURTHER FROM THE OIL TANK ON THE ACFT IS A CONTRIBUTING FACTOR IN THESE MISHAPS. THIS PROB SEEMS TO BE PREDOMINANTLY ASSOCIATED WITH JT-8 EQUIPPED ACFT (B727/DC9). SINCE THIS PROB HAS OCCURRED WITH MORE FREQUENCY IN THE PAST SEVERAL MONTHS; THE FEAR OF SCREWING UP MAY BE PLAYING A ROLE IN THIS SIT. THE CURE FOR THIS; HOWEVER SAD IT MAY SOUND; MIGHT BE TO MAKE IT A 2-SIGNATURE SIGN-OFF. THIS SAME SIT HAPPENED TO ME ON THE SAME DAY AT APPROX XC00 ON A DIFFERENT ACFT.
Source: NASA Aviation Safety Reporting System (public domain). Reports are voluntary submissions and are not verified by NASA.