 |
37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
An A320 pilot comments that CRT readability is greatly decreased during bright ambient light conditions. The air carrier maintenance did not replace the unreadable CRT.
| Attributes | |
| ACN | 827171 |
| Time | |
| Date | 200903 |
| Local Time Of Day | 1801-2400 |
| Place | |
| Locale Reference | ZZZ.Airport |
| State Reference | US |
| Aircraft 1 | |
| Make Model Name | A320 |
| Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
| Flight Phase | Parked |
| Flight Plan | IFR |
| Component | |
| Aircraft Component | PFD |
| Person 1 | |
| Function | Captain Pilot Not Flying |
| Experience | Flight Crew Last 90 Days 200 Flight Crew Total 11500 Flight Crew Type 3300 |
| Events | |
| Anomaly | Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe Deviation - Procedural Published Material / Policy |
Narrative:
Another in the long line of dim crts signed off using the calibrated eyeball of a mechanic in the dark versus the machine prescribed by airbus. I wrote up this CRT going from ZZZ-ZZZ1 once it became a problem with ambient light conditions enroute. We consulted and agreed to defer. Contract mechanic agreed with flight crew -- he could see the brightness difference in screens so he went through MEL and deferred the screen. ZZZ2 maintenance reset the screen and sent it on its way. I'm not sure what the parts status was in ZZZ2. As you've read in my reports before; this fleet has been conditioned to accept this instead of being trained that it is a substandard condition (for bright ambient light). It will probably drone around this way until someone else concerned with safety or operational integrity gripes it with the opportunity to refuse the plane. Will someone give me a reply on why we don't use the thales as outlined in airbus sil 31-030. It describes this issue perfectly.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: An A320 pilot comments that CRT readability is greatly decreased during bright ambient light conditions. The air carrier maintenance did not replace the unreadable CRT.
Narrative: Another in the long line of dim CRTs signed off using the calibrated eyeball of a Mechanic in the dark versus the machine prescribed by Airbus. I wrote up this CRT going from ZZZ-ZZZ1 once it became a problem with ambient light conditions enroute. We consulted and agreed to defer. Contract Mechanic agreed with flight crew -- he could see the brightness difference in screens so he went through MEL and deferred the screen. ZZZ2 maintenance reset the screen and sent it on its way. I'm not sure what the parts status was in ZZZ2. As you've read in my reports before; this fleet has been conditioned to accept this instead of being trained that it is a substandard condition (for bright ambient light). It will probably drone around this way until someone else concerned with safety or operational integrity gripes it with the opportunity to refuse the plane. Will someone give me a reply on why we don't use the THALES as outlined in Airbus SIL 31-030. It describes this issue perfectly.
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.