A Captain and First Officer reported distractions caused by numerous maintenance discrepancies and MEL deferral procedures not complied with; on-time departure pressures; having to 'tanker' additional fuel on their A320 as well as arrival runway changes resulted in a 300 LB overweight landing.
Synopsis
A Captain and First Officer reported distractions caused by numerous maintenance discrepancies and MEL deferral procedures not complied with; on-time departure pressures; having to 'tanker' additional fuel on their A320 as well as arrival runway changes resulted in a 300 LB overweight landing.
Narrative
A320 Logbook page write-up for hydraulic leak/fluid streaming from under aircraft left stabilizer and elevator. Visible shine of fluid seen on surfaces; no hydraulic fluid found on ramp. Large area of paint lifting; crinkling and peeling off elevator; I believe; due to corrosive Skydrol hydraulic fluid. I was advised that no hydraulic leak history was documented.APU [had been] MEL'd in Logbook. APU Auto Shut-down at gate five days earlier. MEL maintenance placarding procedure done by Maintenance. Under MEL Placarding Procedure; item # 4 was not complied with. Downgrade aircraft status as appropriate for each restriction under ''Operational Restrictions'' and install placard(s). Operational Restriction [was] ''ETOPS Operations Prohibited''. Placard sticker not performed.Aircraft Logbook page read ECAM STATUS: ONE PACK ONLY IF Wing Anti-Ice (WAI) ON. Write-up for First Officer seat electrical motor; full aft cutout sensor inoperative. Motor continues to run resulting in clutch jumping. The First Officer's seat was previously written-up a few days earlier. Standard maintenance action [was] ''unable to duplicate''.I was distracted with hydraulic fluid situation; felt pressure to depart as soon as possible (ASAP) and did not thoroughly read the placarding procedure for the APU MEL. I will try not to let others pressure me.
Second reporter narrative
Our flight release had us tanker fuel to our destination due to cost. During taxi out; we received our Weight and Balance via ACARS which showed our Maximum Takeoff Weight (MTW) was restricted by landing weight and contained a requirement to burn additional taxi fuel. The additional fuel was used during taxi. Our destination's ATIS reported Runway 35R in use and the FMS estimated fuel remaining landing Runway 35R at our destination of 13;200 LBS and landing weight of 142;100 LBS (Maximum Landing Weight 142;198). When we contacted our destination's Approach; they changed our arrival runway to 18R. After the FMS changes were made we did not notice that with the reduced distance and flight time to our destination; the estimated fuel remaining of 13;600 LBS resulted in an overweight landing of 142;500 LBS. The Captain decided not write-up the Overweight Landing since it was minimal.
More incidents for this aircraft family →
Source: NASA Aviation Safety Reporting System (public domain). Reports are voluntary submissions and are not verified by NASA.