AN A320 CREW ARRIVED AT THE ACFT TO FIND A REPEATED HYD SYS ABNORMALITY. THE FLT CREW FELT THAT THE MAINT MEL ASSIGNED WAS INACCURATE. AFTER SEVERAL DISCUSSIONS THE CREW FLEW THE ACFT; BUT LATER FELT IT WAS NOT A LEGAL MAINT MEL ASSIGNMENT.

Date: 2004-09 · Aircraft: A320 · Phase: ground

Anomalies: deviation-discrepancy-procedural-published-material-policy|deviation-discrepancy-procedural-maintenance|deviation-discrepancy-procedural-far

Synopsis

AN A320 CREW ARRIVED AT THE ACFT TO FIND A REPEATED HYD SYS ABNORMALITY. THE FLT CREW FELT THAT THE MAINT MEL ASSIGNED WAS INACCURATE. AFTER SEVERAL DISCUSSIONS THE CREW FLEW THE ACFT; BUT LATER FELT IT WAS NOT A LEGAL MAINT MEL ASSIGNMENT.

Narrative

WE ARRIVED AT THE ACFT FOR AN XA40 DEP AND FOUND A DISCREPANCY ON THE ECAM HYD PAGE INDICATING A LINE WAS PRESSURIZED FROM THE BLUE ELECTRIC PUMP BOX TO ABEAM THE RAT (RAM AIR TURBINE). THE LINE WAS AMBER FROM THAT POINT UP; INDICATING LOW PRESSURE. PREVIOUS EXPERIENCE TOLD ME WE HAD A FAULTY PRESSURE SWITCH OR CANNON PLUG IN THE BLUE HYD LINE. WE OBSERVED A PREVIOUS DAY WRITE-UP OF THE SAME WHICH WAS SIGNED OFF WITH AN MEL. THIS MEL HAD BEEN REMOVED BEFORE OUR FLT. I NOTIFIED MAINT AND GOT 2 TECHNICIANS WORKING THE PROB. THEN WE NOTIFIED MAINT CTLR OF ISSUE. I WAS TOLD THAT WE WOULD BE MEL'ED UNDER THE PREVIOUS NUMBER. I TOLD THEM THE MEL WAS NOT APPROPRIATE AS IT DIDN'T ADDRESS THE SPECIFIC FAULT. THE RESPONSE WAS FINE MAINT CTLR OUT. NOTHING MORE. I RE-ESTABLISHED CONTACT SEVERAL MINS LATER AND GOT A NEW CTLR; APPARENTLY THERE WAS A SHIFT CHANGE IN PROGRESS. I RE-EXPLAINED THE PROB; SAME RESPONSE; SAME MEL. I AGAIN REFUSED RELIEF UNDER THIS MEL AS I CONSIDERED IT INAPPROPRIATE. MAINT CTLR SAID HE'D GET BACK TO ME. INDIRECTLY; I GUESS HE DID; AS 10 MINS LATER; 2 TECHNICIANS RETURNED WITH THE SINGED OFF LOGBOOK AND MEL STICKER ON FRONT. I AGAIN REFUSED AND THEY SIMPLY REPLIED THEY WERE DOING AS TOLD BY MAINT CTLR. NOW 20 MINS AFTER SCHEDULED PUSH WITH A FULL ACFT; I AGAIN CALLED MAINT CTLR TO REFUSE THE MEL. NOW A 3RD CTLR INSISTED THAT SINCE THE MEL ADDRESSED THE INDICATING SYS AND THE SWITCH PROVIDED PRESSURE INDICATIONS; THE MEL WAS CORRECT. I REPLIED THE MEL ADDRESSED THE INDICATOR; NOT THE SOURCE OF THE INFO AND THEREFORE WAS INAPPROPRIATE. HE STRESSED; AGAIN; IT WAS THE CORRECT MEL AND I SHOULD FLY THE ACFT. I ASKED HIM IF HE WOULD BE AS ADAMANT IF AN FAA WAS STANDING OVER MY SHOULDER AND HE ASSURED ME HE WAS ABSOLUTELY POSITIVE; 100% CERTAIN; IT WAS A GOOD MEL. AGAINST MY BETTER JUDGEMENT; I RELENTED; FOR 2 REASONS. ONE; I HATE DELAYING MY PAX FROM THEIR HOMES; FAMILIES; OR MEETINGS. TWO; I DID NOT CONSIDER THIS ONE ISSUE RELATED TO THE CRITICAL SAFETY OF THE FLT. AFTER EXPRESSING MY RESERVATIONS AT LEAST 6 TIMES TO AT LEAST 2 TECHNICIANS AS WELL AS 3 MAINT CTLRS; I YIELDED TO THEIR INTERP AND ACCEPTED THE MEL. ONCE AIRBORNE; I HAD TIME TO FURTHER EXAMINE THE MEL BOOK AND REALIZED THAT EVEN TO ACCEPT MAINT CTLR LOGIC CONNECTING THE INDICATING SYS TO THE PRESSURIZE SWITCH IN QUESTION; WHICH I DON'T; THIS MEL ADDRESSES THE 3 HYD PUMPS INDICATIONS SPECIFICALLY; NOT THE PRESSURE SYS IN GENERAL. IT WAS THE WRONG MEL; NOW FOR EVEN ANOTHER REASON. MAINT CTLR HAD TWISTED THIS MEL TO FIT THIS FAULT BECAUSE THERE IS; IN MY OPINION; NO RELIEF IN THE MEL FOR THIS FAULT; AS WELL AS THE FACT THAT THERE WERE NO SWITCHES AVAILABLE. I SENT A TEXT MESSAGE WHILE ENRTE REQUESTING THE SWITCH BE REPLACED. THEY RESPONDED THERE WAS NOT ENOUGH TIME ON QUICK TURN. I THEN THREATENED TO REVISIT THE VALIDITY OF THIS MEL WHEN WE ARRIVED. LO AND BEHOLD; WE WERE MET WITH A TEAM OF TECHNICIANS TO FIX THE PROB. ALSO; WE WERE MET BY THE ASSISTANT CHIEF PLT AS MAINT CTLR HAD RPTED TO HIM THAT I HAD BEEN UNCOOPERATIVE AND OBSTINATE. HE LISTENED TO MY ACCOUNT OF EVENTS; REVIEWED THE MEL BOOK; AND DETERMINED I WAS RIGHT TO CHALLENGE. THE REASON FOR THIS ASAP ARE 2-FOLD: 1) ADDRESS THIS MAINT ISSUE IN THE MEL. IT IS A FAIRLY COMMON OCCURRENCE. UNTIL IT IS ADDRESSED IN MEL; DO AN IN-HOUSE EVALUATION OF THIS FAULT AND ESTABLISH WHAT; IF ANY; RELIEF IS AVAILABLE. THEN; ADVISE ALL TECHNICIANS AND MAINT CTLR WHAT PROCS SHOULD BE FOLLOWED UNTIL IT GETS ADDRESSED THROUGH THE MEL. (ALSO; HOW ABOUT KEEPING A FEW SWITCHES AT EACH OUT-STATION THAT SVCS OUR BUSSES...) AND 2) ADDRESS THE MINDSET OF A FEW OF OUR CTLRS WHO FEEL THEIR JOB IS TO PUSH AIRPLANES; RATHER THAN ADDRESS THE MAINT NEEDS TO SATISFY THE SAFETY; AS WELL AS THE LEGAL REQUIREMENTS; OF MAINTAINING THE SCHEDULE. IT IS EXTREMELY FRUSTRATING TO HAVE MAINT CTLR DISREGARD MY INPUT; AS A CAPT; THAT DIRECTLY AFFECTS MY LICENSE AND LIVELIHOOD; AS WELL AS MY SAFETY.

More incidents for this aircraft family →

Source: NASA Aviation Safety Reporting System (public domain). Reports are voluntary submissions and are not verified by NASA.