 |
37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Technician reported installing a new pbe on an aircraft without informing; nor training the flight crew on how to use it.
| Attributes | |
| ACN | 1750965 |
| Time | |
| Date | 202007 |
| Local Time Of Day | 0001-0600 |
| Place | |
| Locale Reference | ZZZ.Airport |
| State Reference | US |
| Aircraft 1 | |
| Make Model Name | Commercial Fixed Wing |
| Flight Phase | Parked |
| Component | |
| Aircraft Component | Oxygen System/Portable |
| Person 1 | |
| Function | Technician |
| Qualification | Maintenance Apprentice Maintenance Powerplant |
| Events | |
| Anomaly | Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe Deviation - Procedural FAR Deviation - Procedural Published Material / Policy |
Narrative:
I was informed [of] a P/north xx-XXX-xx pbe being installed on aircraft X and inflight [crew] not being trained how to use it.mr. X requested that I look into the pbe's. I activated pbe P/north xx-XXX-xx which was already setup in the system so that purchasing could procure the parts as replacements for the discontinued pbe xx-XXX-yy's that expire late july. Pbe xx-XXX-xx had previously been an alternate part in the ipc. During a routine check; maintenance replaced P/north xx-XXX-yy on wo xxxxxxxxx due to it expiring in less than 45 days. This replacement included ordering the xx-XXX-xx from the ipc with bracket xxxxxxxx and mounting hardware. A system-generated; scheduled wo yyyyyyyyy due for replacement by the end of july had a new P/north xx-XXX-yy pbe request attached. In response to mr. X request and in accordance with the ipc; I activated pbe P/north xx-XXX-xx. The part must be active to purchase and to save any changes to remarks and links in the system. In this instance; there are processes that could have been improved. Had the X form been used; I would have been triggered to get with inflight [crew]. The P/north xx-XXX-xx was already set up in the system as a rotable with the life limit.when we parked the aircraft and moved them to storage; I suggested that the pbe's be removed and returned to stores to get the most yield out of the current xx-XXX-yy pbe's.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: Technician reported installing a new PBE on an aircraft without informing; nor training the flight crew on how to use it.
Narrative: I was informed [of] a P/N XX-XXX-XX PBE being installed on Aircraft X and inflight [crew] not being trained how to use it.Mr. X requested that I look into the PBE's. I activated PBE P/N XX-XXX-XX which was already setup in the system so that purchasing could procure the parts as replacements for the discontinued PBE XX-XXX-YY's that expire late July. PBE XX-XXX-XX had previously been an alternate part in the IPC. During a routine check; maintenance replaced P/N XX-XXX-YY on WO XXXXXXXXX due to it expiring in less than 45 days. This replacement included ordering the XX-XXX-XX from the IPC with bracket XXXXXXXX and mounting hardware. A system-generated; scheduled WO YYYYYYYYY due for replacement by the end of July had a new P/N XX-XXX-YY PBE request attached. In response to Mr. X request and in accordance with the IPC; I activated PBE P/N XX-XXX-XX. The part must be active to purchase and to save any changes to remarks and links in the system. In this instance; there are processes that could have been improved. Had the X form been used; I would have been triggered to get with inflight [crew]. The P/N XX-XXX-XX was already set up in the system as a rotable with the life limit.When we parked the aircraft and moved them to storage; I suggested that the PBE's be removed and returned to stores to get the most yield out of the current XX-XXX-YY PBE's.
Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site 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.