Narrative:

During the postflight walkaround; I noticed a 12 inch cut in the tread of the #1 main tire. It included an 8 inch section that was deeper than the rest of the cut with cord showing in this portion. I called maintenance control who instructed me to make an entry in the maintenance log. They also said that there is a mechanic on the field that could inspect the tire but was not checked out to work on the 400. After about 1 hour; the mechanic arrived. He inspected the tire and after approximately 20 minutes talking to maintenance they determined the tire needed to be changed. I inquired with the contract mechanic if he was able to do the work and he indicated he was. Per the fom we had now been on the ground 90 minutes and needed to clear canadian customs and united states customs. As we were leaving the aircraft; the contract mechanic informed us that the tire was within limits and would not be changed. I called maintenance to confer about the sudden reversal of the condition of the tire. Maintenance said that there was confusion when he had to deal with another aircraft. This is apparently when the decision was made to change the tire. But after maintenance was able to review the serviceable limits determined a tire change was not necessary. He told me the cut would need to be deeper than through 2 layers of cord before it was a problem. I expressed concern about the change of the course of action and was not sure how good I felt about not changing the tire. After consulting with the first officer; we decided that with the contract mechanic agreeing with maintenance control we would have a weaker case to refuse the aircraft. A company mechanic met us at the gate upon arrival to get the log page of the inspection done in ZZZZ. I asked if he was going to look at the tire. He was not aware what the situation had been in ZZZZ but looked at the tire and immediately said the tire was not serviceable and needed replacing. He said the cut was too deep and too long. The tire was changed prior to our departure. I feel that the level of safety required by our company was compromised in this situation. I had accepted the final determination that the tire was acceptable for flight. However; I felt uncomfortable with the sequence of events that first had the tire being changed and then having it determined acceptable for the flight. It is not my intention to try and say what the motivation was for anyone else involved. I do think that there may have been pressure to delay changing the tire until at a more convenient location. My suspicions seem to be reinforced by the conclusions of the mechanic that inspected the tire upon our arrival.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: Q400 flight crew at a Canadian outstation noticed a 12 inch cut in the tread of a main tire. Contract maintenance initially states the tire must be replaced; after conferring with company maintenance the decision is reversed to the flight crew's dismay.

Narrative: During the postflight walkaround; I noticed a 12 inch cut in the tread of the #1 main tire. It included an 8 inch section that was deeper than the rest of the cut with cord showing in this portion. I called Maintenance Control who instructed me to make an entry in the maintenance log. They also said that there is a Mechanic on the field that could inspect the tire but was not checked out to work on the 400. After about 1 hour; the Mechanic arrived. He inspected the tire and after approximately 20 minutes talking to maintenance they determined the tire needed to be changed. I inquired with the Contract Mechanic if he was able to do the work and he indicated he was. Per the FOM we had now been on the ground 90 minutes and needed to clear Canadian customs and United States customs. As we were leaving the aircraft; the contract mechanic informed us that the tire was within limits and would not be changed. I called maintenance to confer about the sudden reversal of the condition of the tire. Maintenance said that there was confusion when he had to deal with another aircraft. This is apparently when the decision was made to change the tire. But after maintenance was able to review the serviceable limits determined a tire change was not necessary. He told me the cut would need to be deeper than through 2 layers of cord before it was a problem. I expressed concern about the change of the course of action and was not sure how good I felt about not changing the tire. After consulting with the First Officer; we decided that with the Contract Mechanic agreeing with Maintenance Control we would have a weaker case to refuse the aircraft. A company Mechanic met us at the gate upon arrival to get the log page of the inspection done in ZZZZ. I asked if he was going to look at the tire. He was not aware what the situation had been in ZZZZ but looked at the tire and immediately said the tire was not serviceable and needed replacing. He said the cut was too deep and too long. The tire was changed prior to our departure. I feel that the level of safety required by our company was compromised in this situation. I had accepted the final determination that the tire was acceptable for flight. However; I felt uncomfortable with the sequence of events that first had the tire being changed and then having it determined acceptable for the flight. It is not my intention to try and say what the motivation was for anyone else involved. I do think that there may have been pressure to delay changing the tire until at a more convenient location. My suspicions seem to be reinforced by the conclusions of the Mechanic that inspected the tire upon our arrival.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of April 2012 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.