A B737-700 CAPT DEPARTS FOLLOWING A REJECTED TKOF FOR A SLOW SPOOLING ENG WITHOUT MAINT EXAMINING THE ENG'S SLOW RESPONSE CAUSE.

Date: 2006-11 · Aircraft: B737-700 · Phase: takeoff

Anomalies: aircraft-equipment-problem-less-severe|ground-event-encounter-loss-of-aircraft-control

Synopsis

A B737-700 CAPT DEPARTS FOLLOWING A REJECTED TKOF FOR A SLOW SPOOLING ENG WITHOUT MAINT EXAMINING THE ENG'S SLOW RESPONSE CAUSE.

Narrative

FLT WAS ATTEMPTING TO DEPART ON RWY 6 AT BHM. WITH THE CAPT FLYING; THE THRUST LEVERS WERE BEING ADVANCED TO A TKOF THRUST SETTING WHEN THE ACFT BEGAN VEERING SHARPLY TO THE R. IMMEDIATELY AND SIMULTANEOUSLY; REACTIONARY RUDDER AND TILLER NOSEWHEEL STEERING INPUTS WERE MADE TO MAINTAIN DIRECTIONAL CTL. IT WAS SIMULTANEOUSLY OBSERVED THAT THE #2 ENG'S INSTRUMENTATION (SPECIFICALLY N1) WAS NOT SHOWING THE #2 ENG TO BE SPOOLING UP CORRESPONDINGLY WITH THE THRUST LEVER ADVANCEMENT. THE RESULT WAS A SIGNIFICANT ASYMMETRIC THRUST CONDITION THAT WARRANTED THE EXECUTION OF A REJECTED TKOF. PROPER NOTIFICATIONS WERE MADE TO ATC (TWR) AND THE FLT ATTENDANT CREW. AFTER CLRING THE RWY; THE QRH WAS ACCOMPLISHED. THE FLT ATTENDANTS WERE BRIEFED AS WERE THE PAX; AND BOTH WERE CONTINUOUSLY UPDATED. A SUBSEQUENT EVAL OF ALL FLT CTLS; STEERING AND BRAKING SYS; AND INDEPENDENT AND SIMULTANEOUS SHORT ENG RUN-UPS VERIFYING PROPER ENG PARAMETERS AND THRUST LEVER TRAVEL PROVED NOMINAL. UNABLE TO DUPLICATE OR EXPLAIN THE MOMENTARY ABNORMALITY; THE DECISION WAS MADE TO CONTINUE WITH THE FLT; WHICH WAS SATISFACTORILY ACCOMPLISHED AND PROVED UNEVENTFUL. WHILE ENRTE; AN ACARS MESSAGE WAS SENT TO DISPATCH TO INFORM THEM OF THE INCIDENT AND TO REQUEST MAINT TO MEET THE ACFT ON ARR FOR A LOGBOOK ENTRY REGARDING THE RTO. AS A RESULT OF THE LOGBOOK ENTRY; AND A PERCEIVED AMBIGUITY IN THE INTERP OF THE REQUIREMENTS PERTAINING TO ENTRIES OF THIS NATURE; AND THE PROCEDURAL STEPS TO RESOLVE THE ENTRY; MAINT TOOK OVER THE ACFT TO CONDUCT A MAINT ENG RUN-UP PRIOR TO RETURNING THE ACFT BACK TO SVC. THIS WAS ACCOMPLISHED WITHOUT ISSUE. TO ADDRESS THE AFOREMENTIONED AMBIGUITY; THERE IS SOME VAGUENESS ABOUT HOW THIS TYPE OF INCIDENT SHOULD BE RPTED/DOCUMENTED BEYOND THE FOM. IT IS NOT INCLUDED IN THE 'INFO ONLY' PROVISION FOR CONFIGN OR CIRCUIT BREAKERS; AND IT WAS NOT AN EXPLAINABLE; REPETITIVE; OR PERSISTENT MALFUNCTION REQUIRING IMMEDIATE MAINT. THE FOM AND QRH SEEM TO LEAVE THE DECISION MAKING UP TO THE CAPT WITH VERY LITTLE GUIDANCE.

More incidents for this aircraft family →

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