 |
37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
An MD80 failed an autoland. Technician ground tested the system and no fault was found. Technician would not return the aircraft to autoland until engineering checked the fdr.
| Attributes | |
| ACN | 681916 |
| Time | |
| Date | 200512 |
| Place | |
| Locale Reference | airport : zzz.airport |
| State Reference | US |
| Altitude | agl single value : 0 |
| Aircraft 1 | |
| Operator | common carrier : air carrier |
| Make Model Name | MD-80 Series (DC-9-80) Undifferentiated or Other Model |
| Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
| Flight Phase | ground : parked |
| Person 1 | |
| Affiliation | company : air carrier |
| Function | maintenance : technician |
| ASRS Report | 681916 |
| Person 2 | |
| Affiliation | company : air carrier |
| Function | flight crew : captain oversight : pic |
| Events | |
| Anomaly | aircraft equipment problem : critical |
| Independent Detector | aircraft equipment other aircraft equipment : autoplt disconnect other flight crewa other flight crewb |
| Resolutory Action | other |
| Consequence | other |
| Factors | |
| Maintenance | contributing factor : engineering procedure contributing factor : manuals contributing factor : schedule pressure performance deficiency : testing |
| Supplementary | |
| Problem Areas | Aircraft Chart Or Publication Flight Crew Human Performance Maintenance Human Performance |
| Primary Problem | Aircraft |
Narrative:
Aircraft failed an autoland. The autoland modes were placarded and the CAT III autoland was downgraded. As per the action needed; I did the flight recorder download; and listed faults from the dfgcs flight fault review. I also did ground confidence check which passed both sides. Night shift maintenance controller advised me to clear the items and upgrade the CAT III autoland to the highest level; if the ground confidence check passed. I signed off both items; I reviewed the gpm; then I called the day shift maintenance controller to see if I could have left these items open until engineering had reviewed the flight data. He advised me to re-open both placards. I re-opened both placards before the aircraft left; so engineering could review the flight data to search a cause for the failed autoland. I did not fid a fault with the system that directly caused the failed autoland. I think that the action should have communicated that the items could absolutely not be factored out until engineering had reviewed the flight data to find a cause for the failed autoland.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: AN MD80 FAILED AN AUTOLAND. TECHNICIAN GND TESTED THE SYS AND NO FAULT WAS FOUND. TECHNICIAN WOULD NOT RETURN THE ACFT TO AUTOLAND UNTIL ENGINEERING CHKED THE FDR.
Narrative: ACFT FAILED AN AUTOLAND. THE AUTOLAND MODES WERE PLACARDED AND THE CAT III AUTOLAND WAS DOWNGRADED. AS PER THE ACTION NEEDED; I DID THE FLT RECORDER DOWNLOAD; AND LISTED FAULTS FROM THE DFGCS FLT FAULT REVIEW. I ALSO DID GND CONFIDENCE CHK WHICH PASSED BOTH SIDES. NIGHT SHIFT MAINT CTLR ADVISED ME TO CLR THE ITEMS AND UPGRADE THE CAT III AUTOLAND TO THE HIGHEST LEVEL; IF THE GND CONFIDENCE CHK PASSED. I SIGNED OFF BOTH ITEMS; I REVIEWED THE GPM; THEN I CALLED THE DAY SHIFT MAINT CTLR TO SEE IF I COULD HAVE LEFT THESE ITEMS OPEN UNTIL ENGINEERING HAD REVIEWED THE FLT DATA. HE ADVISED ME TO RE-OPEN BOTH PLACARDS. I RE-OPENED BOTH PLACARDS BEFORE THE ACFT LEFT; SO ENGINEERING COULD REVIEW THE FLT DATA TO SEARCH A CAUSE FOR THE FAILED AUTOLAND. I DID NOT FID A FAULT WITH THE SYS THAT DIRECTLY CAUSED THE FAILED AUTOLAND. I THINK THAT THE ACTION SHOULD HAVE COMMUNICATED THAT THE ITEMS COULD ABSOLUTELY NOT BE FACTORED OUT UNTIL ENGINEERING HAD REVIEWED THE FLT DATA TO FIND A CAUSE FOR THE FAILED AUTOLAND.
Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of January 2009 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.