 |
37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
B767-300ER captain is concerned that the air carrier allowed an aircraft to continue flying multiple overwater legs with out of date navigation database.
| Attributes | |
| ACN | 735505 |
| Time | |
| Date | 200704 |
| Local Time Of Day | 1201 To 1800 |
| Place | |
| Locale Reference | airport : zzz.airport |
| State Reference | US |
| Altitude | agl single value : 0 |
| Aircraft 1 | |
| Controlling Facilities | tower : sllp.tower |
| Operator | common carrier : air carrier |
| Make Model Name | B767-300 and 300 ER |
| Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
| Navigation In Use | other |
| Flight Phase | ground : parked |
| Flight Plan | IFR |
| Person 1 | |
| Affiliation | company : air carrier |
| Function | flight crew : captain oversight : pic |
| ASRS Report | 735505 |
| Events | |
| Anomaly | aircraft equipment problem : less severe non adherence : published procedure other anomaly other |
| Independent Detector | other flight crewa |
| Resolutory Action | none taken : anomaly accepted |
| Consequence | other |
| Supplementary | |
| Problem Areas | Flight Crew Human Performance Maintenance Human Performance Aircraft Company |
| Primary Problem | Aircraft |
Narrative:
Upon getting the flight release for this flight; I saw that the release stated 'FMC database xx-yy.' I called the dispatcher to ask about this. He informed me that the database had yet to be updated; but thought that the database had been updated earlier; as the aircraft had been on the ground most of the day. Upon reading the logbook; I verified that the FMC database was indeed out of date; and had been placarded on apr/xa. We complied with the MEL and operated the flight. Four days later; we flew the same aircraft from ZZZZ back to ZZZ; with the same placard. Thus; this aircraft had made 4 ocean xings with an out-of-date database. Is our company so stressed that it cannot accomplish updating the database we navigation with; used for terrain information; etc? This tells me that we are seriously deficient when it cannot accomplish a vital; yet routine action. We are now doing more and more RNAV operations; yet for 4 days this airplane flew multiple international flts in this category. Is this to become the norm? This practice is totally unacceptable.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: B767-300ER CAPTAIN IS CONCERNED THAT THE ACR ALLOWED AN ACFT TO CONTINUE FLYING MULTIPLE OVERWATER LEGS WITH OUT OF DATE NAV DATABASE.
Narrative: UPON GETTING THE FLT RELEASE FOR THIS FLT; I SAW THAT THE RELEASE STATED 'FMC DATABASE XX-YY.' I CALLED THE DISPATCHER TO ASK ABOUT THIS. HE INFORMED ME THAT THE DATABASE HAD YET TO BE UPDATED; BUT THOUGHT THAT THE DATABASE HAD BEEN UPDATED EARLIER; AS THE ACFT HAD BEEN ON THE GND MOST OF THE DAY. UPON READING THE LOGBOOK; I VERIFIED THAT THE FMC DATABASE WAS INDEED OUT OF DATE; AND HAD BEEN PLACARDED ON APR/XA. WE COMPLIED WITH THE MEL AND OPERATED THE FLT. FOUR DAYS LATER; WE FLEW THE SAME ACFT FROM ZZZZ BACK TO ZZZ; WITH THE SAME PLACARD. THUS; THIS ACFT HAD MADE 4 OCEAN XINGS WITH AN OUT-OF-DATE DATABASE. IS OUR COMPANY SO STRESSED THAT IT CANNOT ACCOMPLISH UPDATING THE DATABASE WE NAV WITH; USED FOR TERRAIN INFO; ETC? THIS TELLS ME THAT WE ARE SERIOUSLY DEFICIENT WHEN IT CANNOT ACCOMPLISH A VITAL; YET ROUTINE ACTION. WE ARE NOW DOING MORE AND MORE RNAV OPS; YET FOR 4 DAYS THIS AIRPLANE FLEW MULTIPLE INTL FLTS IN THIS CATEGORY. IS THIS TO BECOME THE NORM? THIS PRACTICE IS TOTALLY UNACCEPTABLE.
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.