Narrative:

I'm submitting this event for 2 reasons: 1) to provide data on imminent gear box seal failure for trend tracking analysis. 2) to highlight the attention to safety displayed by the pushback csr; which prevented a possible in-flight engine shutdown or engine seizure. During normal pushback; we were cleared for engine start. We were planning a 2 engine taxi due to the anticipated short taxi time. While starting the #2 engine; the pushback crew reported fluid dripping from the #1 engine nacelle. We shut down both engines; and were pulled back in to the gate. Contract maintenance requested we start the engine to determine the source of the leak. As soon as the engine stabilized; we were told to shut it down. The mechanic estimated we would lose 1 quart of engine oil in 1-2 mins. The pushback crew commented on the great increase in leak rate between the 2 engine starts. The seal between the gear box and accessory case had failed; and an engine change was scheduled. The mechanic estimated the engine may have been able to run for 30 mins prior to seizure. The vigilance of our pushback crew prevented what could have been a serious incident. It also allowed the detection of impending engine failure prior to the point of any equipment damage. We are always told it is difficult to qualify safety or measure the 'accident that did not occur.' this incident provides an opportunity to do just that.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: AN A320 CAPT COMMENDS A GND PUSH CREW FOR NOTICING A LARGE OIL QUANTITY LOSS DURING ENG START THAT PREVENTED AN INFLT ENG SHUTDOWN.

Narrative: I'M SUBMITTING THIS EVENT FOR 2 REASONS: 1) TO PROVIDE DATA ON IMMINENT GEAR BOX SEAL FAILURE FOR TREND TRACKING ANALYSIS. 2) TO HIGHLIGHT THE ATTN TO SAFETY DISPLAYED BY THE PUSHBACK CSR; WHICH PREVENTED A POSSIBLE INFLT ENG SHUTDOWN OR ENG SEIZURE. DURING NORMAL PUSHBACK; WE WERE CLRED FOR ENG START. WE WERE PLANNING A 2 ENG TAXI DUE TO THE ANTICIPATED SHORT TAXI TIME. WHILE STARTING THE #2 ENG; THE PUSHBACK CREW RPTED FLUID DRIPPING FROM THE #1 ENG NACELLE. WE SHUT DOWN BOTH ENGS; AND WERE PULLED BACK IN TO THE GATE. CONTRACT MAINT REQUESTED WE START THE ENG TO DETERMINE THE SOURCE OF THE LEAK. AS SOON AS THE ENG STABILIZED; WE WERE TOLD TO SHUT IT DOWN. THE MECH ESTIMATED WE WOULD LOSE 1 QUART OF ENG OIL IN 1-2 MINS. THE PUSHBACK CREW COMMENTED ON THE GREAT INCREASE IN LEAK RATE BTWN THE 2 ENG STARTS. THE SEAL BTWN THE GEAR BOX AND ACCESSORY CASE HAD FAILED; AND AN ENG CHANGE WAS SCHEDULED. THE MECH ESTIMATED THE ENG MAY HAVE BEEN ABLE TO RUN FOR 30 MINS PRIOR TO SEIZURE. THE VIGILANCE OF OUR PUSHBACK CREW PREVENTED WHAT COULD HAVE BEEN A SERIOUS INCIDENT. IT ALSO ALLOWED THE DETECTION OF IMPENDING ENG FAILURE PRIOR TO THE POINT OF ANY EQUIP DAMAGE. WE ARE ALWAYS TOLD IT IS DIFFICULT TO QUALIFY SAFETY OR MEASURE THE 'ACCIDENT THAT DID NOT OCCUR.' THIS INCIDENT PROVIDES AN OPPORTUNITY TO DO JUST THAT.

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.