![]() |
37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
| Attributes | |
| ACN | 893311 |
| Time | |
| Date | 201006 |
| Local Time Of Day | 1201-1800 |
| Place | |
| Locale Reference | ZZZ.Airport |
| State Reference | US |
| Environment | |
| Flight Conditions | VMC |
| Light | Daylight |
| Aircraft 1 | |
| Make Model Name | MD-80 Series (DC-9-80) Undifferentiated or Other Model |
| Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
| Flight Phase | Parked |
| Component | |
| Aircraft Component | Air Conditioning Distribution System |
| Person 1 | |
| Function | Captain |
| Qualification | Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP) |
| Events | |
| Anomaly | Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical Deviation - Procedural Published Material / Policy Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Other / Unknown |
Narrative:
Logbook indicates single pack placarded. Cabin temperature with conditioned air indicated 92 degrees fahrenheit; OAT 36 degrees celsius (97 F); cockpit temperature measured by thermometer 95F. Conditioned airflow weak - clearly; as soon as ground air was disconnected for pushback; with one air conditioning pack operational the aircraft temperature would soar quickly during our takeoff. Also; the altitude limitation plus short flight time would ensure that the interior would never sufficiently cool and the destination temperature was also 36 degrees celsius. This clearly is a danger to crew and passengers; particularly the very young; very old and those with underlying medical concerns. Flight operations are aware of the aging MD80 fleet and single-pack ops risks and predictable results. It is unsafe to plan and dispatch aircraft this way. I put an entry into the logbook: 'unable to cool cabin and cockpit below 92 degrees with single pack and ground air - unsafe for crew or passengers.' maintenance evaluated the situation and took the aircraft out of service. Clearly; it should have never been in service; according to maintenance; which confirms my experience and my assessment as well. Why are the operations managers and fleet staff still allowing this single-pack risk under these conditions? Do not dispatch MD80's with a single-pack when the OAT is over 80. We know the risk created when we so; so why do the operations and fleet staff continue this dangerous practice?
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: A MD80 Captain refused a single pack aircraft during a high outside air temperature cycle because the aircraft's interior temperature would reach an unsafe level for the passengers and crew. The aircraft was removed from service.
Narrative: Logbook indicates single pack placarded. Cabin temperature with conditioned air indicated 92 degrees Fahrenheit; OAT 36 degrees Celsius (97 F); cockpit temperature measured by thermometer 95F. Conditioned airflow weak - clearly; as soon as ground air was disconnected for pushback; with one air conditioning pack operational the aircraft temperature would soar quickly during our takeoff. Also; the altitude limitation plus short flight time would ensure that the interior would never sufficiently cool and the destination temperature was also 36 degrees Celsius. This clearly is a danger to crew and passengers; particularly the very young; very old and those with underlying medical concerns. Flight Operations are aware of the aging MD80 fleet and single-pack ops risks and predictable results. It is unsafe to plan and dispatch aircraft this way. I put an entry into the logbook: 'Unable to cool cabin and cockpit below 92 degrees with single pack and ground air - unsafe for crew or passengers.' Maintenance evaluated the situation and took the aircraft out of service. Clearly; it should have never been IN SERVICE; according to maintenance; which confirms my experience and my assessment as well. Why are the Operations Managers and Fleet Staff still allowing this single-pack risk under these conditions? Do not dispatch MD80's with a single-pack when the OAT is over 80. We know the risk created when we so; so why do the Operations and Fleet Staff continue this dangerous practice?
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.