 |
37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
A B757-200 after pushback had the window heat deferred and the first officer questions if a new maintenance release should have been issued.
| Attributes | |
| ACN | 373343 |
| Time | |
| Date | 199707 |
| Day | Sat |
| Local Time Of Day | 0601 To 1200 |
| Place | |
| Locale Reference | airport : bos |
| State Reference | MA |
| Altitude | agl bound lower : 0 agl bound upper : 0 |
| Environment | |
| Flight Conditions | VMC |
| Light | Daylight |
| Aircraft 1 | |
| Operator | common carrier : air carrier |
| Make Model Name | B757-200 |
| Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
| Navigation In Use | Other Other |
| Flight Phase | ground : preflight |
| Flight Plan | IFR |
| Person 1 | |
| Affiliation | company : air carrier |
| Function | flight crew : first officer |
| Qualification | pilot : flight engineer pilot : instrument pilot : commercial pilot : cfi pilot : atp |
| Experience | flight time last 90 days : 120 flight time total : 4500 flight time type : 820 |
| ASRS Report | 373343 |
| Person 2 | |
| Affiliation | company : air carrier |
| Function | flight crew : captain oversight : pic |
| Qualification | pilot : atp |
| Events | |
| Anomaly | aircraft equipment problem : less severe other anomaly other |
| Independent Detector | other flight crewa other other : unspecified cockpit |
| Resolutory Action | none taken : anomaly accepted |
| Consequence | Other |
| Supplementary | |
| Primary Problem | Chart Or Publication |
| Air Traffic Incident | other |
Narrative:
After pushback from gate at bos, a window heat inoperative light illuminated, light/window heat would not reset. As per standard procedure, we contacted air carrier maintenance in ZZZ via commercial radio. Maintenance was advised of the situation. Maintenance asked if the flight was planned into 'known icing' on this day. The answer was 'no.' the items were then deferred per standard procedure and put in the aircraft logbook along with the MEL number. Maintenance advised us that he would advise dispatch of the situation. I then asked the captain if we then needed to contact dispatch for a re-release. His answer was no. His reason being that since we were now restricted from 'known icing' and since our flight plan was not originally planned into known icing no re-release was required. I indicated that I still thought a re-release was required -- he assured me one was not required. Further study into our air carrier flight operations manual/operations specifications again led me to believe a re-release was required. I later called our flight operations duty manager for his understanding of the situation. His understanding was the same as the captain's, in that no re-release required. The more I read our flight operations manual, the more I believe a re-release was required. Due to the different interpretations that have occurred, I believe our flight operations manual is not clear on this situation.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: A B757-200 AFTER PUSHBACK HAD THE WINDOW HEAT DEFERRED AND THE FO QUESTIONS IF A NEW MAINT RELEASE SHOULD HAVE BEEN ISSUED.
Narrative: AFTER PUSHBACK FROM GATE AT BOS, A WINDOW HEAT INOP LIGHT ILLUMINATED, LIGHT/WINDOW HEAT WOULD NOT RESET. AS PER STANDARD PROC, WE CONTACTED ACR MAINT IN ZZZ VIA COMMERCIAL RADIO. MAINT WAS ADVISED OF THE SIT. MAINT ASKED IF THE FLT WAS PLANNED INTO 'KNOWN ICING' ON THIS DAY. THE ANSWER WAS 'NO.' THE ITEMS WERE THEN DEFERRED PER STANDARD PROC AND PUT IN THE ACFT LOGBOOK ALONG WITH THE MEL NUMBER. MAINT ADVISED US THAT HE WOULD ADVISE DISPATCH OF THE SIT. I THEN ASKED THE CAPT IF WE THEN NEEDED TO CONTACT DISPATCH FOR A RE-RELEASE. HIS ANSWER WAS NO. HIS REASON BEING THAT SINCE WE WERE NOW RESTRICTED FROM 'KNOWN ICING' AND SINCE OUR FLT PLAN WAS NOT ORIGINALLY PLANNED INTO KNOWN ICING NO RE-RELEASE WAS REQUIRED. I INDICATED THAT I STILL THOUGHT A RE-RELEASE WAS REQUIRED -- HE ASSURED ME ONE WAS NOT REQUIRED. FURTHER STUDY INTO OUR ACR FLT OPS MANUAL/OPS SPECS AGAIN LED ME TO BELIEVE A RE-RELEASE WAS REQUIRED. I LATER CALLED OUR FLT OPS DUTY MGR FOR HIS UNDERSTANDING OF THE SIT. HIS UNDERSTANDING WAS THE SAME AS THE CAPT'S, IN THAT NO RE-RELEASE REQUIRED. THE MORE I READ OUR FLT OPS MANUAL, THE MORE I BELIEVE A RE-RELEASE WAS REQUIRED. DUE TO THE DIFFERENT INTERPRETATIONS THAT HAVE OCCURRED, I BELIEVE OUR FLT OPS MANUAL IS NOT CLEAR ON THIS SIT.
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.