Narrative:

Crew came onboard aircraft during crew change of a through flight at dfw airport. First officer performed normal cockpit preflight and found GPWS system would not test from first officer's side. All functions of the system tested normally from the captain's side including the lights on first officer's side. A logbook entry was made and maintenance called. Maintenance put the item on mco and flight was released. Crew operated aircraft one leg and again the next morning for one leg. During the captain's review of the MEL he noticed a printing omission where it did not say how many GPWS systems are on the aircraft and how many are required for flight as it does for every other MEL item. In the sub parts it does show that certain functions of the GPWS are not required. After operating the aircraft the next day the captain advised the company of this omission in the MEL and then the maintenance coordinator, after allowing the aircraft to fly two days, advised the captain that since the MEL did not say whether GPWS is required and since the test function was not one of the subparts addressed the crew was illegally operating the aircraft. Another lesson learned in placing federal bureaucracy ahead of common sense. Crew now lives in fear of being violated for flying an aircraft with an inoperable GPWS.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACR FLIES WITH ONE INOPERABLE GPWS.

Narrative: CREW CAME ONBOARD ACFT DURING CREW CHANGE OF A THROUGH FLT AT DFW ARPT. FO PERFORMED NORMAL COCKPIT PREFLT AND FOUND GPWS SYS WOULD NOT TEST FROM FO'S SIDE. ALL FUNCTIONS OF THE SYS TESTED NORMALLY FROM THE CAPT'S SIDE INCLUDING THE LIGHTS ON FO'S SIDE. A LOGBOOK ENTRY WAS MADE AND MAINT CALLED. MAINT PUT THE ITEM ON MCO AND FLT WAS RELEASED. CREW OPERATED ACFT ONE LEG AND AGAIN THE NEXT MORNING FOR ONE LEG. DURING THE CAPT'S REVIEW OF THE MEL HE NOTICED A PRINTING OMISSION WHERE IT DID NOT SAY HOW MANY GPWS SYSTEMS ARE ON THE ACFT AND HOW MANY ARE REQUIRED FOR FLT AS IT DOES FOR EVERY OTHER MEL ITEM. IN THE SUB PARTS IT DOES SHOW THAT CERTAIN FUNCTIONS OF THE GPWS ARE NOT REQUIRED. AFTER OPERATING THE ACFT THE NEXT DAY THE CAPT ADVISED THE COMPANY OF THIS OMISSION IN THE MEL AND THEN THE MAINT COORDINATOR, AFTER ALLOWING THE ACFT TO FLY TWO DAYS, ADVISED THE CAPT THAT SINCE THE MEL DID NOT SAY WHETHER GPWS IS REQUIRED AND SINCE THE TEST FUNCTION WAS NOT ONE OF THE SUBPARTS ADDRESSED THE CREW WAS ILLEGALLY OPERATING THE ACFT. ANOTHER LESSON LEARNED IN PLACING FEDERAL BUREAUCRACY AHEAD OF COMMON SENSE. CREW NOW LIVES IN FEAR OF BEING VIOLATED FOR FLYING AN ACFT WITH AN INOPERABLE GPWS.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 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.