AN AIRBUS 300 WAS DISPATCHED WITH THE KRUGER FLAPS DEFERRED PER THE MEL. IN CRUISE; THE ACFT REQUIRED SOME TRIM; BUT NOT EXTREME. CREW BELIEVES TRIM WAS INDICATION PROB.

Narrative

WHEN I PULLED UP THE FLT PLAN; THERE WAS AN MEL REF TO THE KRUGER FLAP SYS. I BELIEVE IT WAS MEL 27-10. THE TPS WAS LOCKED OUT; AND UPON CALLING DISPATCH; HE INDICATED HE WANTED TO ADVISE ME OF THE V SPD AND WT ADJUSTMENTS REQUIRED BY THE MEL. UPON ARR AT THE ACFT; A LOGBOOK REVIEW INDICATED A KRUGER PROB; AND IT WAS SIGNED OFF DEFERRED IN ACCORD WITH MEL 27-10 STATING THE KRUGER FLAPS WERE DEACTIVATED PER MPM 27-10. THE PLACARD NEAR THE KRUGER LIGHT INDICATED THE KRUGER SYS WAS INOP AND THAT THE KRUGER LIGHT WOULD BE ON. DEPARTED ZZZ; AND THE ACFT NEEDED AN UNUSUAL; BUT NOT EXTREME; AMOUNT OF AILERON TRIM TO HOLD LEVEL FLT. DURING CRUISE; THE ECAM ANNUNCIATED A KRUGER FAULT. THE ECAM INDICATED MAX SPD 300/.65 KRUGER NOT RETRACTED/OR WORDS TO THAT EFFECT. FUEL CONSUMPTION INCREASED. AT THIS TIME; THERE WAS NO NOTICEABLE CHANGE IN FLT CHARACTERISTIC THAT WOULD LEAD ONE TO BELIEVE A KRUGER HAD EXTENDED. THE ACFT WAS DISPATCHED WITH THE KRUGER SYS PLACARDED INOP AND WITH THE KRUGER LIGHT ON. THE QUESTION BECAME -- IS THE ECAM MESSAGE A VALID INDICATION OF A CHANGE IN THE KRUGER FLAP STATUS OR SOMETHING NORMALLY EXPECTED WITH THE MAINT PROC THAT TOOK THE KRUGER OTS? THE AILERON TRIM CONDITION MIGHT HAVE BEEN DUE TO AN EXTENDED KRUGER OR IT MIGHT BE DUE TO AN OUT OF RIG AILERON TRIM. NOW; THE ACFT IS IN CRUISE FLYING 'NORMALLY.' CAN'T SEE THE KRUGERS AND FUEL CONSUMPTION IS NORMAL. ELECTED TO ASK THE QUESTION -- VIA HF PHONE PATCH TO DISPATCH AND TECH -- IS THE ECAM INDICATION TO BE EXPECTED WITH A PLACARDED KRUGER SYS. SEEMS WE COULD NOT ANSWER THAT QUESTION FOR CERTAIN. VOLUME II; PAGE 22; FLT CTLS; PARAGRAPH 5 'KRUGER LIGHT; AMBER' INDICATES THAT AN ECAM MESSAGE WILL BE DISPLAYED ASSOCIATED WITH THE AMBER KRUGER LIGHT. THAT SAME LIGHT THE MEL TELLS ME WILL BE ON. AFTER SOME DISCUSSION WITH MAINT CTL; DISPATCH AND MY FO; I ELECTED TO CONTINUE AND EVALUATE FUEL AND OPTIONS AT EACH WAYPOINT. CONTINUING ALLOWED FOR LOWER LNDG WT AND; HENCE; LOWER APCH SPD IN THE EVENT THE TRIM CONDITION WAS A FACTOR. THE FLT PROCEEDED UNEVENTFULLY THEREAFTER TO ZZZZ; WHERE I WROTE UP THE OUT-OF-TRIM CONDITION AND THE ECAM INFO. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: THE RPTR STATED THE TRIM RPT WAS WRITTEN IN THE LOGBOOK AT THE FLT TERMINATION AND THE MAINT ACTION IS UNKNOWN. THE RPTR SAID IT WAS BELIEVED THE TRIM ACTUALLY WAS AN INDICATION PROB.