Flight crew informed of a cut nosewheel tire.

Attributes
ACN	458047
Time
Date	199912
Local Time Of Day	1201 To 1800
Place
Locale Reference	airport : zzz.airport
State Reference	US
Altitude	agl single value : 0
Environment
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Flight Phase	ground : parked
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : captain oversight : pic
Qualification	pilot : atp
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 230 flight time total : 9000 flight time type : 3000
ASRS Report	458047
Person 2
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : first officer
Qualification	pilot : commercial pilot : multi engine pilot : instrument
Events
Anomaly	aircraft equipment problem : critical non adherence : company policies non adherence : far non adherence : published procedure other anomaly other
Independent Detector	other flight crewa other flight crewb other other : 3 other other : 4 other other : 5
Resolutory Action	none taken : anomaly accepted
Consequence	other
Factors
Maintenance	contributing factor : schedule pressure performance deficiency : non compliance with legal requirements performance deficiency : repair
Supplementary
Problem Areas	Company FAA Aircraft
Primary Problem	Company

Narrative:

In preparation for pushback, a ramp agent discovered a cut in the left nose tire approximately 6 inches long, running parallel to the grooves along the tread surface. He brought this to the attention of our first officer who notified maintenance and initiated a write-up in the maintenance log. When I arrived, maintenance was inspecting the tire. They claimed that since no cord was showing the tire was suitable for revenue service. They told me if I had a problem with it they would be glad to call their maintenance supervisor to discuss it with me. I told them I would like to talk to him. The next thing I knew I was told to contact the chief pilot. The maintenance supervisor never showed up, and when I called the chief pilot he told me that I would fly the flight. I thought this was not only unnecessary but also not the safest course of action. The cut in this tire was deep and long. You could put your fingernail into the cut and lift the tread. When we did arrive at destination, the captain taking the flight again wrote this tire up. By chance the next morning the mechanic who prepared and warmed the aircraft up for the first flight of the day was the same one who was called out the day before when the captain receiving our plane wrote up the tire. He told me he refused to sign off the tire even though no cord was showing because the tire was 'delaminating.' I was surprised and perplexed when he told me how fervently our maintenance department tried to persuade him to sign it off. Ultimately the tire was changed. Am I not the final authority/authorized when it comes to the safe operation of a flight for which I am called the PIC? Don't I have to agree with maintenance that the aircraft is safe to fly? And if a tire is legal for dispatch but to my reasonable person could be expected to be out of limits upon the very next landing, is it not prudent to go ahead and change it? This is the first time I have ever been ordered to fly when I felt there was a question about the safety of my plane. Maybe I should have disobeyed a direct order from my boss.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: FLT CREW INFORMED OF A CUT NOSEWHEEL TIRE.

Narrative: IN PREPARATION FOR PUSHBACK, A RAMP AGENT DISCOVERED A CUT IN THE L NOSE TIRE APPROX 6 INCHES LONG, RUNNING PARALLEL TO THE GROOVES ALONG THE TREAD SURFACE. HE BROUGHT THIS TO THE ATTN OF OUR FO WHO NOTIFIED MAINT AND INITIATED A WRITE-UP IN THE MAINT LOG. WHEN I ARRIVED, MAINT WAS INSPECTING THE TIRE. THEY CLAIMED THAT SINCE NO CORD WAS SHOWING THE TIRE WAS SUITABLE FOR REVENUE SVC. THEY TOLD ME IF I HAD A PROB WITH IT THEY WOULD BE GLAD TO CALL THEIR MAINT SUPVR TO DISCUSS IT WITH ME. I TOLD THEM I WOULD LIKE TO TALK TO HIM. THE NEXT THING I KNEW I WAS TOLD TO CONTACT THE CHIEF PLT. THE MAINT SUPVR NEVER SHOWED UP, AND WHEN I CALLED THE CHIEF PLT HE TOLD ME THAT I WOULD FLY THE FLT. I THOUGHT THIS WAS NOT ONLY UNNECESSARY BUT ALSO NOT THE SAFEST COURSE OF ACTION. THE CUT IN THIS TIRE WAS DEEP AND LONG. YOU COULD PUT YOUR FINGERNAIL INTO THE CUT AND LIFT THE TREAD. WHEN WE DID ARRIVE AT DEST, THE CAPT TAKING THE FLT AGAIN WROTE THIS TIRE UP. BY CHANCE THE NEXT MORNING THE MECH WHO PREPARED AND WARMED THE ACFT UP FOR THE FIRST FLT OF THE DAY WAS THE SAME ONE WHO WAS CALLED OUT THE DAY BEFORE WHEN THE CAPT RECEIVING OUR PLANE WROTE UP THE TIRE. HE TOLD ME HE REFUSED TO SIGN OFF THE TIRE EVEN THOUGH NO CORD WAS SHOWING BECAUSE THE TIRE WAS 'DELAMINATING.' I WAS SURPRISED AND PERPLEXED WHEN HE TOLD ME HOW FERVENTLY OUR MAINT DEPT TRIED TO PERSUADE HIM TO SIGN IT OFF. ULTIMATELY THE TIRE WAS CHANGED. AM I NOT THE FINAL AUTH WHEN IT COMES TO THE SAFE OP OF A FLT FOR WHICH I AM CALLED THE PIC? DON'T I HAVE TO AGREE WITH MAINT THAT THE ACFT IS SAFE TO FLY? AND IF A TIRE IS LEGAL FOR DISPATCH BUT TO MY REASONABLE PERSON COULD BE EXPECTED TO BE OUT OF LIMITS UPON THE VERY NEXT LNDG, IS IT NOT PRUDENT TO GO AHEAD AND CHANGE IT? THIS IS THE FIRST TIME I HAVE EVER BEEN ORDERED TO FLY WHEN I FELT THERE WAS A QUESTION ABOUT THE SAFETY OF MY PLANE. MAYBE I SHOULD HAVE DISOBEYED A DIRECT ORDER FROM MY BOSS.

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.