|37000 Feet||Browse and search NASA's
Aviation Safety Reporting System
|Local Time Of Day||0601 To 1200|
|Locale Reference||airport : fll.airport|
|Altitude||agl single value : 0|
|Controlling Facilities||tower : sea.tower|
|Operator||common carrier : air carrier|
|Make Model Name||MD-80 Super 80|
|Operating Under FAR Part||Part 121|
|Flight Phase||ground : preflight|
|Affiliation||company : air carrier|
|Function||flight crew : captain|
oversight : pic
|Qualification||pilot : atp|
|Affiliation||company : air carrier|
|Function||flight crew : first officer|
|Anomaly||aircraft equipment problem : critical|
maintenance problem : non compliance with mel
non adherence : far
non adherence : company policies
non adherence : published procedure
other anomaly other
|Independent Detector||other flight crewa|
other flight crewb
|Resolutory Action||none taken : detected after the fact|
|Maintenance||contributing factor : schedule pressure|
performance deficiency : non compliance with legal requirements
While pulling up the paperwork for my flight, I noticed an MEL item on the flight plan saying the mid cargo compartment was inoperative. The takeoff performance setting then had 800 pounds of cargo planned to be loaded in there. When I got to the airplane I talked to the first officer and he went down to check. The cargo compartment was indeed loaded. I informed the station personnel of the discrepancy and went down to see if there was an inoperative sticker on the door as required by the MEL. There was, however, the sticker was not over the handle -- it was off to the side. Also, it seemed most of the loading crew's first language wasn't english. I then informed load planning of the problem. She said she was not aware of the MEL and said she would confer with the station, which took a few mins. I called her back. She said they would offload the cargo and she told me where they could put it which I passed along. I then asked her to send me a new takeoff performance setting reflecting the new load and we then went on our way. Now that was to be the third leg that that aircraft was to fly in that condition. Why it hadn't been passed on to load planning is a question, and perhaps the MEL should be changed to require that the inoperative sticker be put over the handle so that it would be more visible and apt to prompt a question. All of this is the reason for our delayed departure.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: MD80 CREW FOUND CARGO LOADED IN A CARGO PIT THAT WAS MEL'ED INOP.
Narrative: WHILE PULLING UP THE PAPERWORK FOR MY FLT, I NOTICED AN MEL ITEM ON THE FLT PLAN SAYING THE MID CARGO COMPARTMENT WAS INOP. THE TKOF PERFORMANCE SETTING THEN HAD 800 LBS OF CARGO PLANNED TO BE LOADED IN THERE. WHEN I GOT TO THE AIRPLANE I TALKED TO THE FO AND HE WENT DOWN TO CHK. THE CARGO COMPARTMENT WAS INDEED LOADED. I INFORMED THE STATION PERSONNEL OF THE DISCREPANCY AND WENT DOWN TO SEE IF THERE WAS AN INOP STICKER ON THE DOOR AS REQUIRED BY THE MEL. THERE WAS, HOWEVER, THE STICKER WAS NOT OVER THE HANDLE -- IT WAS OFF TO THE SIDE. ALSO, IT SEEMED MOST OF THE LOADING CREW'S FIRST LANGUAGE WASN'T ENGLISH. I THEN INFORMED LOAD PLANNING OF THE PROB. SHE SAID SHE WAS NOT AWARE OF THE MEL AND SAID SHE WOULD CONFER WITH THE STATION, WHICH TOOK A FEW MINS. I CALLED HER BACK. SHE SAID THEY WOULD OFFLOAD THE CARGO AND SHE TOLD ME WHERE THEY COULD PUT IT WHICH I PASSED ALONG. I THEN ASKED HER TO SEND ME A NEW TKOF PERFORMANCE SETTING REFLECTING THE NEW LOAD AND WE THEN WENT ON OUR WAY. NOW THAT WAS TO BE THE THIRD LEG THAT THAT ACFT WAS TO FLY IN THAT CONDITION. WHY IT HADN'T BEEN PASSED ON TO LOAD PLANNING IS A QUESTION, AND PERHAPS THE MEL SHOULD BE CHANGED TO REQUIRE THAT THE INOP STICKER BE PUT OVER THE HANDLE SO THAT IT WOULD BE MORE VISIBLE AND APT TO PROMPT A QUESTION. ALL OF THIS IS THE REASON FOR OUR DELAYED DEP.
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.