 |
37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
A B757 with #2 engine missing 4 fan stator vanes was given an engineering order for a one-time non revenue flight to a maintenance facility. Flight was rescheduled to fly 2 revenue flts; both allowed per 2 separate one-time engineering orders.
| Attributes | |
| ACN | 689886 |
| Time | |
| Date | 200603 |
| Local Time Of Day | 0601 To 1200 |
| Place | |
| Locale Reference | airport : zzz.airport |
| State Reference | US |
| Environment | |
| Flight Conditions | VMC |
| Light | Night |
| Aircraft 1 | |
| Operator | common carrier : air carrier |
| Make Model Name | B757-200 |
| 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 |
| Experience | flight time last 90 days : 50 flight time total : 8000 flight time type : 500 |
| ASRS Report | 689886 |
| Person 2 | |
| Affiliation | company : air carrier |
| Function | flight crew : first officer |
| Experience | flight time last 90 days : 80 flight time total : 6000 flight time type : 250 |
| ASRS Report | 690350 |
| Events | |
| Anomaly | aircraft equipment problem : critical maintenance problem : improper maintenance maintenance problem : improper documentation non adherence : far non adherence : published procedure |
| Independent Detector | other flight crewa other flight crewb |
| Resolutory Action | none taken : anomaly accepted |
| Consequence | other other other |
| Factors | |
| Maintenance | contributing factor : engineering procedure contributing factor : schedule pressure performance deficiency : logbook entry performance deficiency : non compliance with legal requirements |
| Supplementary | |
| Problem Areas | Environmental Factor Maintenance Human Performance Aircraft Chart Or Publication Company |
| Primary Problem | Company |
Narrative:
B757 number X was previously grounded for 4 fan stator blades missing on #2 engine. After 12 hours; an engineering order was issued for a one-time flight. We were assigned the flight and were to fly the empty aircraft to ZZZ2. This was not a ferry flight. During this time; a B727 flying ZZZ1-ZZZ-ZZZ1 experienced a mechanical problem and returned to the gate. Air carrier decided to reschedule us to fly the revenue from the B727 to its destination ZZZ. I reminded scheduling that the engineering order was for a one-time flight and that the best engine repair facility was ZZZ2 not ZZZ. Nevertheless; we were issued a new flight release and we proceeded to ZZZ. We expected that the aircraft would remain there for repair but were informed that yet another 'one-time' flight was in the works and we would fly more revenue to ZZZ2. Several hours later; a new engineering order was issued and we were rescheduled to fly to ZZZ2. I understand the need for the engineering order to allow the aircraft to be moved to a repair facility; but multiple engineering orders for the apparent purpose of continuing normal commerce seems to be an abuse of the system. This should not happen again.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: A B757 WITH #2 ENG MISSING 4 FAN STATOR VANES WAS GIVEN AN ENGINEERING ORDER FOR A ONE-TIME NON REVENUE FLT TO A MAINT FACILITY. FLT WAS RESCHEDULED TO FLY 2 REVENUE FLTS; BOTH ALLOWED PER 2 SEPARATE ONE-TIME ENGINEERING ORDERS.
Narrative: B757 NUMBER X WAS PREVIOUSLY GNDED FOR 4 FAN STATOR BLADES MISSING ON #2 ENG. AFTER 12 HRS; AN ENGINEERING ORDER WAS ISSUED FOR A ONE-TIME FLT. WE WERE ASSIGNED THE FLT AND WERE TO FLY THE EMPTY ACFT TO ZZZ2. THIS WAS NOT A FERRY FLT. DURING THIS TIME; A B727 FLYING ZZZ1-ZZZ-ZZZ1 EXPERIENCED A MECHANICAL PROB AND RETURNED TO THE GATE. ACR DECIDED TO RESCHEDULE US TO FLY THE REVENUE FROM THE B727 TO ITS DEST ZZZ. I REMINDED SCHEDULING THAT THE ENGINEERING ORDER WAS FOR A ONE-TIME FLT AND THAT THE BEST ENG REPAIR FACILITY WAS ZZZ2 NOT ZZZ. NEVERTHELESS; WE WERE ISSUED A NEW FLT RELEASE AND WE PROCEEDED TO ZZZ. WE EXPECTED THAT THE ACFT WOULD REMAIN THERE FOR REPAIR BUT WERE INFORMED THAT YET ANOTHER 'ONE-TIME' FLT WAS IN THE WORKS AND WE WOULD FLY MORE REVENUE TO ZZZ2. SEVERAL HRS LATER; A NEW ENGINEERING ORDER WAS ISSUED AND WE WERE RESCHEDULED TO FLY TO ZZZ2. I UNDERSTAND THE NEED FOR THE ENGINEERING ORDER TO ALLOW THE ACFT TO BE MOVED TO A REPAIR FACILITY; BUT MULTIPLE ENGINEERING ORDERS FOR THE APPARENT PURPOSE OF CONTINUING NORMAL COMMERCE SEEMS TO BE AN ABUSE OF THE SYS. THIS SHOULD NOT HAPPEN AGAIN.
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.