A first officer reports that an HF antenna; found previously broken on their CJ3 (cessna 525B) aircr...

Narrative:

On previous flight; HF antenna was found broken. Maintenance removed the antenna and MEL'd [(deferred)] the HF system inoperative. The next day after much consideration; I felt that to MEL the HF system inoperative; because the antenna was missing; was not the proper MEL. An MEL for the antenna missing or removed would be appropriate and it would also address the fact that the HF radio was affected; except there is no such MEL or cdl item. Several authorities both inside and outside the company agreed that the MEL was acceptable as written; so I continued to fly the aircraft; however I still feel that the MEL was not appropriate. The MEL addresses only one resulting problem caused by the actual problem; rather than addressing the problem itself. It would be similar to MEL'ing the window heat inoperative because the windshield was missing. I would like to see an MEL or cdl addressing a missing or removed antenna (HF or any other) rather than using the MEL for an inoperative radio to cover a missing antenna. Maintenance entered an MEL that I don't consider appropriate. Had discussions with maintenance personnel; the flight duty officer (fdo); the union steward on duty and a cessna service customer service representative.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A First Officer reports that an HF antenna; found previously broken on their CJ3 (Cessna 525B) aircraft; had been improperly deferred as HF System radio inoperative instead of antenna being missing. Adding to pilot's concern was the lack of any MEL or CDL language available for a missing antenna.

Narrative: On previous flight; HF antenna was found broken. Maintenance removed the antenna and MEL'd [(deferred)] the HF System inoperative. The next day after much consideration; I felt that to MEL the HF System inoperative; because the antenna was missing; was not the proper MEL. An MEL for the antenna missing or removed would be appropriate and it would also address the fact that the HF Radio was affected; except there is no such MEL or CDL item. Several authorities both inside and outside the company agreed that the MEL was acceptable as written; so I continued to fly the aircraft; however I still feel that the MEL was not appropriate. The MEL addresses only one resulting problem CAUSED by the actual problem; rather than addressing the problem itself. It would be similar to MEL'ing the Window Heat inoperative because the windshield was missing. I would like to see an MEL or CDL addressing a missing or removed antenna (HF or any other) rather than using the MEL for an inoperative radio to cover a missing antenna. Maintenance entered an MEL that I don't consider appropriate. Had discussions with Maintenance personnel; the Flight Duty Officer (FDO); the Union Steward on duty and a Cessna Service Customer Service Representative.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2013 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.

Attributes
ACN	1014303
Time
Date	201206
Local Time Of Day	0601-1200
Place
Locale Reference	ZZZ.Airport
State Reference	US
Environment
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Make Model Name	Citationjet (C525/C526) - CJ I / II / III / IV
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 91
Flight Phase	Parked
Component
Aircraft Component	HF SSB
Person 1
Function	First Officer Pilot Flying
Qualification	Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Events
Anomaly	Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe Deviation - Procedural MEL Deviation - Procedural Published Material / Policy

A first officer reports that an HF antenna; found previously broken on their CJ3 (cessna 525B) aircraft; had been improperly deferred as HF system radio inoperative instead of antenna being missing. Adding to pilot's concern was the lack of any MEL or cdl language available for a missing antenna.