Large transport on postflt inspection has 5 inch puncture in baggage compartment door.

Attributes
ACN	232782
Time
Date	199301
Day	Mon
Local Time Of Day	0001 To 0600
Place
Locale Reference	airport : ewr
State Reference	NJ
Altitude	agl bound lower : 0 agl bound upper : 0
Environment
Light	Night
Aircraft 1
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	Large Transport, Low Wing, 3 Turbojet Eng
Navigation In Use	Other
Flight Phase	ground : parked other
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : second officer
Qualification	pilot : atp pilot : flight engineer pilot : instrument pilot : commercial
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 100 flight time total : 4500 flight time type : 1000
ASRS Report	232782
Person 2
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : captain oversight : pic
Qualification	pilot : atp
Events
Anomaly	aircraft equipment problem : critical other anomaly other
Independent Detector	other other : unspecified
Resolutory Action	none taken : detected after the fact
Consequence	other
Supplementary
Primary Problem	Airport
Air Traffic Incident	other

Narrative:

Scheduled trip ewr-buf-ewr. Show time for trip XA45 with XB45 push. Return push time from buf was XC40 scheduled. Upon post-flight of aircraft by maintenance crew in ewr upon return from buf, they discovered an approximately 5 inch puncture in the aft baggage compartment door that they determined could not have occurred in buf. They said it appeared to be caused by a baggage unloading cart of a type that buf did not have. Maintenance believed the puncture to have occurred before the aircraft departed from ewr on the first leg. As the person doing the preflight, I did not see any puncture which could have been for several reasons -- poor ramp lighting, the door being open during the preflight walk-around inspections, looking at other areas on the aircraft thought to be more critical for close inspection. Certainly, improved ramp lighting might have helped, but then ewr has better lighting than many airports. But on big airplanes, it is impossible for a person with limited time to scrutinize every inch of an aircraft when certain areas require closer inspection and appraisal. I guess that is where the backup inspections and closer perusal by maintenance become more important.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: LGT ON POSTFLT INSPECTION HAS 5 INCH PUNCTURE IN BAGGAGE COMPARTMENT DOOR.

Narrative: SCHEDULED TRIP EWR-BUF-EWR. SHOW TIME FOR TRIP XA45 WITH XB45 PUSH. RETURN PUSH TIME FROM BUF WAS XC40 SCHEDULED. UPON POST-FLT OF ACFT BY MAINT CREW IN EWR UPON RETURN FROM BUF, THEY DISCOVERED AN APPROX 5 INCH PUNCTURE IN THE AFT BAGGAGE COMPARTMENT DOOR THAT THEY DETERMINED COULD NOT HAVE OCCURRED IN BUF. THEY SAID IT APPEARED TO BE CAUSED BY A BAGGAGE UNLOADING CART OF A TYPE THAT BUF DID NOT HAVE. MAINT BELIEVED THE PUNCTURE TO HAVE OCCURRED BEFORE THE ACFT DEPARTED FROM EWR ON THE FIRST LEG. AS THE PERSON DOING THE PREFLT, I DID NOT SEE ANY PUNCTURE WHICH COULD HAVE BEEN FOR SEVERAL REASONS -- POOR RAMP LIGHTING, THE DOOR BEING OPEN DURING THE PREFLT WALK-AROUND INSPECTIONS, LOOKING AT OTHER AREAS ON THE ACFT THOUGHT TO BE MORE CRITICAL FOR CLOSE INSPECTION. CERTAINLY, IMPROVED RAMP LIGHTING MIGHT HAVE HELPED, BUT THEN EWR HAS BETTER LIGHTING THAN MANY ARPTS. BUT ON BIG AIRPLANES, IT IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR A PERSON WITH LIMITED TIME TO SCRUTINIZE EVERY INCH OF AN ACFT WHEN CERTAIN AREAS REQUIRE CLOSER INSPECTION AND APPRAISAL. I GUESS THAT IS WHERE THE BACKUP INSPECTIONS AND CLOSER PERUSAL BY MAINT BECOME MORE IMPORTANT.

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.