Narrative:

As first officer on large transport holding short for takeoff, we were advised by another aircraft (airline) that our external power unit door was open. I asked the captain if he wanted me to call the tower and get permission to lower the aft stairs so that our so could go out and secure the door. The captain was not concerned with the door as it would slipstream closed in flight and not be a problem. I reminded him that the other pilot had called us over the tower frequency and that could present a problem for him. He was not concerned and said that it was not a safety problem, and at that point, the tower called us and said we were cleared for takeoff and asked about the open door. Captain told the tower it was not a problem, and accepted takeoff clearance. I was still concerned with his decision, but I felt he had the authority to make this call, and I made the takeoff and flew to ewr airport with no problems. I believe the captain to be a very professional and competent pilot, but I still think I should have perhaps made more input into this decision, although I really didn't consider it a safety of flight issue, but rather a procedure problem that my result in others questioning his decision. I didn't feel that this was one of those rare situations where a first officer should attempt to override a captain's decision! We shall see! Supplemental information from acn 205372: the first officer asked the captain if he wanted to return to the gate to have the door closed. The captain said no, that it was not necessary due to the design of the door, that it would close on its own by the airflow and would not cause a problem. I suggested for myself to exit the aircraft out the aft airstairs to close the door. The captain said it was not necessary because it would not be a problem. Supplemental information from acn 204972: factors upon which the decision was based was my experience with similar events in the past, and my desire to not unduly delay the flight (a return to the gate would have taken at least 20 mins). Apparently, the FAA was informed by someone of the event, and has indicated that a formal investigation will occur. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: reporter states the pilot behind was same company, but he had an FAA jump seat rider. Thought sure there would be follow up. Has heard nothing. Door was still on at destination. He will not allow anyone to do that to him again. He has been very upset.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACR TOLD BY PLT BEHIND, THAT EXTERNAL PWR UNIT DOOR WAS OPEN. DID NOTHING.

Narrative: AS FO ON LGT HOLDING SHORT FOR TKOF, WE WERE ADVISED BY ANOTHER ACFT (AIRLINE) THAT OUR EXTERNAL PWR UNIT DOOR WAS OPEN. I ASKED THE CAPT IF HE WANTED ME TO CALL THE TWR AND GET PERMISSION TO LOWER THE AFT STAIRS SO THAT OUR SO COULD GO OUT AND SECURE THE DOOR. THE CAPT WAS NOT CONCERNED WITH THE DOOR AS IT WOULD SLIPSTREAM CLOSED IN FLT AND NOT BE A PROBLEM. I REMINDED HIM THAT THE OTHER PLT HAD CALLED US OVER THE TWR FREQ AND THAT COULD PRESENT A PROBLEM FOR HIM. HE WAS NOT CONCERNED AND SAID THAT IT WAS NOT A SAFETY PROBLEM, AND AT THAT POINT, THE TWR CALLED US AND SAID WE WERE CLRED FOR TKOF AND ASKED ABOUT THE OPEN DOOR. CAPT TOLD THE TWR IT WAS NOT A PROBLEM, AND ACCEPTED TKOF CLRNC. I WAS STILL CONCERNED WITH HIS DECISION, BUT I FELT HE HAD THE AUTHORITY TO MAKE THIS CALL, AND I MADE THE TKOF AND FLEW TO EWR ARPT WITH NO PROBLEMS. I BELIEVE THE CAPT TO BE A VERY PROFESSIONAL AND COMPETENT PLT, BUT I STILL THINK I SHOULD HAVE PERHAPS MADE MORE INPUT INTO THIS DECISION, ALTHOUGH I REALLY DIDN'T CONSIDER IT A SAFETY OF FLT ISSUE, BUT RATHER A PROC PROBLEM THAT MY RESULT IN OTHERS QUESTIONING HIS DECISION. I DIDN'T FEEL THAT THIS WAS ONE OF THOSE RARE SITUATIONS WHERE A FO SHOULD ATTEMPT TO OVERRIDE A CAPT'S DECISION! WE SHALL SEE! SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 205372: THE FO ASKED THE CAPT IF HE WANTED TO RETURN TO THE GATE TO HAVE THE DOOR CLOSED. THE CAPT SAID NO, THAT IT WAS NOT NECESSARY DUE TO THE DESIGN OF THE DOOR, THAT IT WOULD CLOSE ON ITS OWN BY THE AIRFLOW AND WOULD NOT CAUSE A PROBLEM. I SUGGESTED FOR MYSELF TO EXIT THE ACFT OUT THE AFT AIRSTAIRS TO CLOSE THE DOOR. THE CAPT SAID IT WAS NOT NECESSARY BECAUSE IT WOULD NOT BE A PROBLEM. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 204972: FACTORS UPON WHICH THE DECISION WAS BASED WAS MY EXPERIENCE WITH SIMILAR EVENTS IN THE PAST, AND MY DESIRE TO NOT UNDULY DELAY THE FLT (A RETURN TO THE GATE WOULD HAVE TAKEN AT LEAST 20 MINS). APPARENTLY, THE FAA WAS INFORMED BY SOMEONE OF THE EVENT, AND HAS INDICATED THAT A FORMAL INVESTIGATION WILL OCCUR. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR STATES THE PLT BEHIND WAS SAME COMPANY, BUT HE HAD AN FAA JUMP SEAT RIDER. THOUGHT SURE THERE WOULD BE FOLLOW UP. HAS HEARD NOTHING. DOOR WAS STILL ON AT DEST. HE WILL NOT ALLOW ANYONE TO DO THAT TO HIM AGAIN. HE HAS BEEN VERY UPSET.

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.