An A320 was nose jacked for nose gear strut servicing and had tail stabilizing jack in place per the...

Attributes
ACN	697083
Time
Date	200605
Local Time Of Day	0601 To 1200
Place
Locale Reference	airport : zzz.airport
State Reference	US
Altitude	agl single value : 0
Aircraft 1
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	A320
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Flight Phase	ground : maintenance
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	maintenance : technician
Qualification	technician : powerplant technician : airframe
Experience	maintenance technician : 10
ASRS Report	697083
Person 2
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	maintenance : lead technician
Events
Anomaly	aircraft equipment problem : critical maintenance problem : improper maintenance
Independent Detector	other other : 2
Resolutory Action	none taken : detected after the fact
Consequence	other other
Factors
Maintenance	contributing factor : work cards contributing factor : tooling contributing factor : manuals
Supplementary
Problem Areas	Environmental Factor Chart Or Publication Aircraft
Primary Problem	Environmental Factor

Narrative:

At approximately XA00 I assisted other mechanics in nose jacking aircraft. When done; a tail jack was placed per the amm; the proper load set; jack disconnected; and the tail jack alarm tested. We left the aircraft in a safe confign. At about XA15 the jack was found to have risen about 8 inches; causing substantial structural damage. I was told that the tail overweight alarm failed to sound; even though it was set to 1500 pounds. I was told the tail was up to 5000 pounds! To the best of my knowledge; all safety procedures were followed and the aircraft maintenance manual as well. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: the reporter stated the installation of the tail jack was routine and the only problem encountered was the jack preload was not in the maintenance manual. 1500 pounds was selected for the preload and the alarm was tested and worked normally. After shift; the jack was found to have raised 8 inches causing major damage to the frames and stringers. The repair was given to the manufacturer and a repair team was brought in to repair the damage.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: AN A320 WAS NOSE JACKED FOR NOSE GEAR STRUT SVCING AND HAD TAIL STABILIZING JACK IN PLACE PER THE MAINT MANUAL WITH ALARM SET. TAIL JACK ROSE 8 INCHES WITH NO ALARM. ACFT SUSTAINED MAJOR STRUCTURAL DAMAGE.

Narrative: AT APPROX XA00 I ASSISTED OTHER MECHS IN NOSE JACKING ACFT. WHEN DONE; A TAIL JACK WAS PLACED PER THE AMM; THE PROPER LOAD SET; JACK DISCONNECTED; AND THE TAIL JACK ALARM TESTED. WE LEFT THE ACFT IN A SAFE CONFIGN. AT ABOUT XA15 THE JACK WAS FOUND TO HAVE RISEN ABOUT 8 INCHES; CAUSING SUBSTANTIAL STRUCTURAL DAMAGE. I WAS TOLD THAT THE TAIL OVERWT ALARM FAILED TO SOUND; EVEN THOUGH IT WAS SET TO 1500 LBS. I WAS TOLD THE TAIL WAS UP TO 5000 LBS! TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE; ALL SAFETY PROCS WERE FOLLOWED AND THE ACFT MAINT MANUAL AS WELL. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: THE RPTR STATED THE INSTALLATION OF THE TAIL JACK WAS ROUTINE AND THE ONLY PROB ENCOUNTERED WAS THE JACK PRELOAD WAS NOT IN THE MAINT MANUAL. 1500 LBS WAS SELECTED FOR THE PRELOAD AND THE ALARM WAS TESTED AND WORKED NORMALLY. AFTER SHIFT; THE JACK WAS FOUND TO HAVE RAISED 8 INCHES CAUSING MAJOR DAMAGE TO THE FRAMES AND STRINGERS. THE REPAIR WAS GIVEN TO THE MANUFACTURER AND A REPAIR TEAM WAS BROUGHT IN TO REPAIR THE DAMAGE.

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.

An A320 was nose jacked for nose gear strut servicing and had tail stabilizing jack in place per the maintenance manual with alarm set. Tail jack rose 8 inches with no alarm. Aircraft sustained major structural damage.