Exceeded placarded MEL speed for inoperative yaw damper.

Attributes
ACN	308150
Time
Date	199506
Day	Sat
Local Time Of Day	0601 To 1200
Place
Locale Reference	atc facility : zma
State Reference	FL
Altitude	msl bound lower : 28000 msl bound upper : 28000
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	artcc : zma
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	B727 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Flight Phase	cruise other
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : captain oversight : pic
Qualification	pilot : atp pilot : flight engineer
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 180 flight time total : 9000 flight time type : 6500
ASRS Report	308150
Person 2
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : first officer
Qualification	pilot : atp
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 150 flight time total : 8000 flight time type : 2000
ASRS Report	308395
Events
Anomaly	non adherence other other anomaly
Independent Detector	other flight crewa
Resolutory Action	none taken : detected after the fact
Consequence	Other
Supplementary
Primary Problem	Flight Crew Human Performance
Air Traffic Incident	Pilot Deviation

Narrative:

On jun/xx/95 I flew a boeing 727 on 2 segments mco-sju- mco. The aircraft had an MEL for the upper yaw damper. The write up for this was dated 6/xx/95 and stated that 'the upper yaw damper failed to come on line after startup.' I accepted the airplane, reviewed the MEL and restrs. After startup I observed that all yaw damper indications were normal and I tested the autoplt/yaw damper interlock which was normal. I mentioned to the crew that the yaw damper was functional. On the sju-mco leg we apparently exceeded the airspeed limitation for FL280. This was indicated by flight engineer engine data recording in log. I think that the reason for the deviation of airspeed centered around my failure to adequately brief for the situation. In addition, my concern to make schedule prevented me from returning to the gate to have the MEL removed. I don't think safety was compromised on the flight because the yaw dampers were operating properly.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: EXCEEDED PLACARDED MEL SPD FOR INOP YAW DAMPER.

Narrative: ON JUN/XX/95 I FLEW A BOEING 727 ON 2 SEGMENTS MCO-SJU- MCO. THE ACFT HAD AN MEL FOR THE UPPER YAW DAMPER. THE WRITE UP FOR THIS WAS DATED 6/XX/95 AND STATED THAT 'THE UPPER YAW DAMPER FAILED TO COME ON LINE AFTER STARTUP.' I ACCEPTED THE AIRPLANE, REVIEWED THE MEL AND RESTRS. AFTER STARTUP I OBSERVED THAT ALL YAW DAMPER INDICATIONS WERE NORMAL AND I TESTED THE AUTOPLT/YAW DAMPER INTERLOCK WHICH WAS NORMAL. I MENTIONED TO THE CREW THAT THE YAW DAMPER WAS FUNCTIONAL. ON THE SJU-MCO LEG WE APPARENTLY EXCEEDED THE AIRSPD LIMITATION FOR FL280. THIS WAS INDICATED BY FE ENG DATA RECORDING IN LOG. I THINK THAT THE REASON FOR THE DEV OF AIRSPD CTRED AROUND MY FAILURE TO ADEQUATELY BRIEF FOR THE SIT. IN ADDITION, MY CONCERN TO MAKE SCHEDULE PREVENTED ME FROM RETURNING TO THE GATE TO HAVE THE MEL REMOVED. I DON'T THINK SAFETY WAS COMPROMISED ON THE FLT BECAUSE THE YAW DAMPERS WERE OPERATING PROPERLY.

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.