A B757-200 Captain and a First Officer report not noticing language on a Maintenance Control deferral that stated a Nose Wheel Brake Snubber pad may be an incorrect part.

Date: 2009-11 · Aircraft: B757-200 · Phase: ground

Anomalies: aircraft-equipment-problem-less-severe|deviation-discrepancy-procedural-published-material-policy|deviation-discrepancy-procedural-mel-cdl

Synopsis

A B757-200 Captain and a First Officer report not noticing language on a Maintenance Control deferral that stated a Nose Wheel Brake Snubber pad may be an incorrect part.

Narrative

November 2009; after the ZZZ layover of approximately 13 hours; we were scheduled to fly a B757-200 from ZZZ to ZZZ1 and then ZZZ1-ZZZ2. Both flights were using the same B757. In ZZZ2 the aircraft was suppose to return to ZZZ1 after our arrival. The following morning we noticed the same B757 was still in ZZZ2 and the First Officer (F/O) and I started questioning why. On the flight segment ZZZ1 to ZZZ2; we had a suspected bird strike on Takeoff (T/O) roll and wrote it up. In ZZZ2 the Contract Mechanic inspected the aircraft for the bird strike; and also noted the Snubber deferral from ZZZ. The last line of the deferral states; 'Suspect part on the airplane is wrong part.' I do not consciously recall reading that; or if I did; it did not sink in that I may be accepting an aircraft with a potential illegal deferral. The ZZZ Mechanic apparently added that comment when he had tried to put new Snubbers on the aircraft the night before; but did not have the tools to countersink holes in the new parts. The aircraft MAY have been flying around for months with improper Snubbers. If the Mechanic suspected improper parts on the aircraft; why did he not investigate further? Did Maintenance Control see the deferral; and was it acceptable to him written that way? Did Maintenance Control write the deferral? Ultimately it comes down to me; the Captain. I did not catch the deferral comment. Had that comment been on the first line on the deferral; I am sure I would have noticed it and taken other action. As it was; it was just another Snubber deferral. Read the whole writeup! Understand what you are accepting!

Second reporter narrative

Started the day in ZZZ with a B757-200 after a decent night's rest. We looked over the Log history and Deferred List in Operations and the Maintenance Release in the aircraft. We did not notice anything out of the ordinary. The Snubber Brake for the nose wheel had been deferred and nothing about the deferral stood out. We flew the aircraft to ZZZ1 and after short sit; we flew the same aircraft to ZZZ2 for a layover. The next morning we showed up to fly a different aircraft from ZZZ2 and noticed the same B757 we flew in the day before; was still on the ramp after it was supposed to have turned again for ZZZ1 (after we deplaned); the previous day. We inquired as to why it was still there and found out that there was an issue with the Snubber Brake deferral. It was then we noticed that in the previous day's Snubber Brake deferral; there was a comment from Maintenance that an incorrect part might have been installed as a Snubber Brake pad. We should have inquired Maintenance Control in ZZZ; as to whether the Snubber Brake should have been properly fixed or deferred.

More incidents for this aircraft family →

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