Narrative:

We noticed on climbout and initial cruise at FL300 that the #3 engine was running approx 50 degrees C hotter than #1 and 100 degrees C hotter than #2 with N2 indicating approx 5% higher than #1 and #2. This was accompanied by an increase in throttle split to approx 4 knobs greater on the #3 relative to the #2 and #1 engines. No vibrations were noticed and the engine produced full power on takeoff and as well the oil pressure; quantity and oil temperature were normal. Made contact with company who referred me to maintenance control and relayed the information about the #3 engine parameters. Made normal landing at ZZZ1 and telephoned the flight operations and maintenance control in regards to this situation. After speaking with them; and due as well to a new policy in out flight operations handbook which requires that the captain must directly consult with maintenance control prior to making any write-up in the aircraft logbook; I was informed that there is nothing in our manual that states any limits about throttle splits and since the engine was making normal power on takeoff; I had no write-up. The next flight was scheduled after a short turn around where the aircraft would be looked at by the on board mechanic. Since the chain of command to the PIC is through maintenance control; flight operations and the chief pilot; an on board mechanic can intercede in the chain of command only if they decide to make a write up in the aircraft log book. Since this was not the case and maintenance; flight operations and the chief pilot all recommended that we make the flight and our input was strictly informative in regards to the change in engine parameters on engine #3; we proceeded to make the flght. The flight proceeded normally and landed normally without incident and the bleeds were swapped off the #3 engine to the #2 for the purposes of evaluating the parameters on engine #3 for maintenance control and entered into the aircraft logbook. After the flight; the onboard mechanic proceeded to investigate the causative factors involved with higher N2; egt and fuel flow for the #3 engine and I was told that after completely uncowling the #3 engine that a 50 cent diameter hole was found in the casing of the #3 engine in the top portion of the case.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: Airline policy regarding PIC authority to write-up equipment discrepancies results in a commercial aircraft flying two legs with a hole in one engine. Flight crew and onboard Mechanic assessment is considered subordinate to the determination of a Maintenance Manager far removed from the situation.

Narrative: We noticed on climbout and initial cruise at FL300 that the #3 engine was running approx 50 degrees C hotter than #1 and 100 degrees C hotter than #2 with N2 indicating approx 5% higher than #1 and #2. This was accompanied by an increase in throttle split to approx 4 knobs greater on the #3 relative to the #2 and #1 engines. No vibrations were noticed and the engine produced full power on takeoff and as well the oil pressure; quantity and oil temperature were normal. Made contact with company who referred me to Maintenance Control and relayed the information about the #3 engine parameters. Made normal landing at ZZZ1 and telephoned the Flight Operations and Maintenance Control in regards to this situation. After speaking with them; and due as well to a new policy in out flight operations handbook which requires that the Captain must directly consult with Maintenance Control prior to making any write-up in the aircraft logbook; I was informed that there is nothing in our manual that states any limits about throttle splits and since the engine was making normal power on takeoff; I had no write-up. The next flight was scheduled after a short turn around where the aircraft would be looked at by the on board Mechanic. Since the chain of command to the PIC is through Maintenance Control; Flight Operations and the Chief Pilot; an on board Mechanic can intercede in the chain of command only if they decide to make a write up in the aircraft log book. Since this was not the case and Maintenance; Flight Operations and the Chief Pilot all recommended that we make the flight and our input was strictly informative in regards to the change in engine parameters on engine #3; we proceeded to make the flght. The flight proceeded normally and landed normally without incident and the bleeds were swapped off the #3 engine to the #2 for the purposes of evaluating the parameters on engine #3 for Maintenance Control and entered into the aircraft logbook. After the flight; the onboard mechanic proceeded to investigate the causative factors involved with higher N2; EGT and fuel flow for the #3 engine and I was told that after completely uncowling the #3 engine that a 50 cent diameter hole was found in the casing of the #3 engine in the top portion of the case.

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.