|37000 Feet||Browse and search NASA's
Aviation Safety Reporting System
|Local Time Of Day||0001 To 0600|
|Locale Reference||airport : sdf|
|Altitude||agl bound lower : 0|
agl bound upper : 0
|Operator||common carrier : air carrier|
|Make Model Name||DC-8F|
|Navigation In Use||Other|
|Flight Phase||ground other : taxi|
|Affiliation||company : air carrier|
|Function||flight crew : first officer|
|Experience||flight time last 90 days : 150|
flight time total : 15000
flight time type : 2600
|Affiliation||company : air carrier|
|Function||flight crew : captain|
oversight : pic
|Anomaly||non adherence : published procedure|
non adherence : far
other anomaly other
|Independent Detector||other other : unspecified|
|Resolutory Action||none taken : anomaly accepted|
|Air Traffic Incident||Pilot Deviation|
While beginning taxi out of company owned ramp, ramp control coordinator advised us on company frequency that our left (red) position light was not illuminated. The right (green) and tail (white) lights were on. I asked the captain if he had heard the transmission, to which he acknowledged 'yes.' I then asked what he wanted to do about this mechanical. He replied 'we'll take care of it later.' after receiving taxi clearance from ground control we completed the first stage of our normal taxi checklist. Upon completion, I asked the captain if I should contact maintenance for a deferral, or if we should check the MEL. (Both of these items are company policy). Again he replied, 'we'll take care of it later.' after starting the remaining 2 engines, and upon completion of our entire taxi checklist, the flight engineer queried the captain about checking the MEL or if he should enter the discrepancy in the logbook, again the captain deferred. We took off and flew sdf direct msp at night in violation of far 91 and in non compliance of our own air carrier approved MEL and maintenance procedures. Our MEL does not allow us to fly at night without the position lights working. I was quite surprised that this captain disregarded procedures and the FARS, as my dealings with him in the past have always been very professional. Upon arrival at msp, the discrepancy was entered in the logbook, and the position light relamped by maintenance.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: A DC8-73F WAS DISPATCHED IN NON COMPLIANCE WITH THE L NAV LIGHT INOP IN DARKNESS IN CONFLICT WITH THE MEL.
Narrative: WHILE BEGINNING TAXI OUT OF COMPANY OWNED RAMP, RAMP CTL COORDINATOR ADVISED US ON COMPANY FREQ THAT OUR L (RED) POS LIGHT WAS NOT ILLUMINATED. THE R (GREEN) AND TAIL (WHITE) LIGHTS WERE ON. I ASKED THE CAPT IF HE HAD HEARD THE XMISSION, TO WHICH HE ACKNOWLEDGED 'YES.' I THEN ASKED WHAT HE WANTED TO DO ABOUT THIS MECHANICAL. HE REPLIED 'WE'LL TAKE CARE OF IT LATER.' AFTER RECEIVING TAXI CLRNC FROM GND CTL WE COMPLETED THE FIRST STAGE OF OUR NORMAL TAXI CHKLIST. UPON COMPLETION, I ASKED THE CAPT IF I SHOULD CONTACT MAINT FOR A DEFERRAL, OR IF WE SHOULD CHK THE MEL. (BOTH OF THESE ITEMS ARE COMPANY POLICY). AGAIN HE REPLIED, 'WE'LL TAKE CARE OF IT LATER.' AFTER STARTING THE REMAINING 2 ENGS, AND UPON COMPLETION OF OUR ENTIRE TAXI CHKLIST, THE FE QUERIED THE CAPT ABOUT CHKING THE MEL OR IF HE SHOULD ENTER THE DISCREPANCY IN THE LOGBOOK, AGAIN THE CAPT DEFERRED. WE TOOK OFF AND FLEW SDF DIRECT MSP AT NIGHT IN VIOLATION OF FAR 91 AND IN NON COMPLIANCE OF OUR OWN ACR APPROVED MEL AND MAINT PROCS. OUR MEL DOES NOT ALLOW US TO FLY AT NIGHT WITHOUT THE POS LIGHTS WORKING. I WAS QUITE SURPRISED THAT THIS CAPT DISREGARDED PROCS AND THE FARS, AS MY DEALINGS WITH HIM IN THE PAST HAVE ALWAYS BEEN VERY PROFESSIONAL. UPON ARR AT MSP, THE DISCREPANCY WAS ENTERED IN THE LOGBOOK, AND THE POS LIGHT RELAMPED BY MAINT.
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.