|37000 Feet||Browse and search NASA's
Aviation Safety Reporting System
|Local Time Of Day||1201 To 1800|
|Locale Reference||airport : mco|
|Altitude||agl bound lower : 0|
agl bound upper : 0
|Operator||common carrier : air carrier|
|Make Model Name||Widebody, Low Wing, 3 Turbojet Eng|
|Navigation In Use||Other|
|Flight Phase||ground : preflight|
|Affiliation||company : air carrier|
|Function||flight crew : second officer|
|Qualification||pilot : private|
pilot : instrument
pilot : commercial
pilot : atp
pilot : flight engineer
|Experience||flight time last 90 days : 195|
flight time total : 4475
flight time type : 2001
|Function||flight crew : captain|
oversight : pic
|Qualification||pilot : atp|
|Anomaly||non adherence : far|
other anomaly other
|Independent Detector||other flight crewa|
|Resolutory Action||none taken : anomaly accepted|
|Air Traffic Incident||other|
A cockpit 2L fuel gauge was intermittently inaccurate in-flight and was written in maintenance logbook. When the aircraft was fueled the fueler stated the fueling panel gauges operated normally and all gauges read accurately. 2L outboard stick was used. Mco maintenance placed the 2L fuel gauge on a control item number as per the MEL. When the mechanic brought the logbook out to the aircraft, I asked him that since the item was 2L, that additional fuel would have to be added so that tank could be visually checked using the 2L inboard stick also. He stated that the fueler had determined the fuel panel gauges were accurate and the MEL procedures were satisfied. The captain agreed, even though I stated that I had never taken an widebody transport with 2L or 2R inoperative west/O sticking both the inboard and outboard tanks as per my understanding and training in the MEL. An ambiguity appears to exist on the need to stick both tanks if the refueling panel gauges are reading accurately at fueling and have no maintenance writeups. The 2L gauge agreed with the fueling panel gauge and outboard stick and did not become erratic on subsequent flts when the fuel onboard and used confirmed the accuracy of the fueling panel gauges and flight station gauges using stick verification and fuel log. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following: normally the aircraft is used on long range flts and this type of problem would not come up. Minimum fuel servicing required for the short segment. Because of the erratic fuel gauge, the MEL requires drip reading for confirmation of fuel boarded. On the back side of the MEL it mentions both drip sticks in the tank must be used which in this case required additional fuel. This was missed by dispatch and the captain. Captain was new on the aircraft and felt they were complying with the MEL. Reporter was comfortable with the fuel, but due to recent inspections wanted to ensure everything was done by the book. Fuel gauge indicated during fueling. Did not discuss with management.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: INACCURATE FUEL GAUGE REQUIRES SPECIAL FUELING PROC NOT COMPLIED WITH.
Narrative: A COCKPIT 2L FUEL GAUGE WAS INTERMITTENTLY INACCURATE INFLT AND WAS WRITTEN IN MAINT LOGBOOK. WHEN THE ACFT WAS FUELED THE FUELER STATED THE FUELING PANEL GAUGES OPERATED NORMALLY AND ALL GAUGES READ ACCURATELY. 2L OUTBOARD STICK WAS USED. MCO MAINT PLACED THE 2L FUEL GAUGE ON A CTL ITEM NUMBER AS PER THE MEL. WHEN THE MECH BROUGHT THE LOGBOOK OUT TO THE ACFT, I ASKED HIM THAT SINCE THE ITEM WAS 2L, THAT ADDITIONAL FUEL WOULD HAVE TO BE ADDED SO THAT TANK COULD BE VISUALLY CHKED USING THE 2L INBOARD STICK ALSO. HE STATED THAT THE FUELER HAD DETERMINED THE FUEL PANEL GAUGES WERE ACCURATE AND THE MEL PROCS WERE SATISFIED. THE CAPT AGREED, EVEN THOUGH I STATED THAT I HAD NEVER TAKEN AN WDB WITH 2L OR 2R INOP W/O STICKING BOTH THE INBOARD AND OUTBOARD TANKS AS PER MY UNDERSTANDING AND TRNING IN THE MEL. AN AMBIGUITY APPEARS TO EXIST ON THE NEED TO STICK BOTH TANKS IF THE REFUELING PANEL GAUGES ARE READING ACCURATELY AT FUELING AND HAVE NO MAINT WRITEUPS. THE 2L GAUGE AGREED WITH THE FUELING PANEL GAUGE AND OUTBOARD STICK AND DID NOT BECOME ERRATIC ON SUBSEQUENT FLTS WHEN THE FUEL ONBOARD AND USED CONFIRMED THE ACCURACY OF THE FUELING PANEL GAUGES AND FLT STATION GAUGES USING STICK VERIFICATION AND FUEL LOG. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING: NORMALLY THE ACFT IS USED ON LONG RANGE FLTS AND THIS TYPE OF PROB WOULD NOT COME UP. MINIMUM FUEL SERVICING REQUIRED FOR THE SHORT SEGMENT. BECAUSE OF THE ERRATIC FUEL GAUGE, THE MEL REQUIRES DRIP READING FOR CONFIRMATION OF FUEL BOARDED. ON THE BACK SIDE OF THE MEL IT MENTIONS BOTH DRIP STICKS IN THE TANK MUST BE USED WHICH IN THIS CASE REQUIRED ADDITIONAL FUEL. THIS WAS MISSED BY DISPATCH AND THE CAPT. CAPT WAS NEW ON THE ACFT AND FELT THEY WERE COMPLYING WITH THE MEL. RPTR WAS COMFORTABLE WITH THE FUEL, BUT DUE TO RECENT INSPECTIONS WANTED TO ENSURE EVERYTHING WAS DONE BY THE BOOK. FUEL GAUGE INDICATED DURING FUELING. DID NOT DISCUSS WITH MGMNT.
Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of August 2007 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.