B777 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Communication Breakdown; Workload
Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; General Maintenance Action; General Release Refused / Aircraft Not Accepted
Company Policy; Procedure; Aircraft
We pushed back from the gate and started the first engine. During the start we got an APU fault light. We notified Maintenance and went back to that gate. I expressed my concerns about taking an aircraft in this degraded state on a 12 hour oceanic flight. Both of the IRO first officers agreed with me and stated that they also did not want to take an airplane without an APU on the filed route. The Captain; who was new on the aircraft deferred to my judgment on the basis of my 14 years on the B777 and 30 years oceanic flying. Maintenance came onto the cockpit and stated that he wanted to defer the APU; sign it off and send us on our way. I stated that we wanted the APU fixed and that I did not want to take it without one. He asked me why and I briefly explained that I felt it was unsafe and that my concern was for the safety of the flight. He said OK; took the log book and departed the flight deck. It took over an hour for Maintenance to inspect the APU because the first 3 lifts that they tried were broken. Finally after getting someone up to the APU it was determined that the APU was inoperative and needed to be changed. This would take all night. Approximately 2 hours later the Captain received a phone call from the Assistant Chief Pilot. She spoke with the Captain for some time and when I arrived onto the flight deck the Captain handed me the phone. I explained that I felt it was a poor plan to take this aircraft on the route. She asked me if I would take this aircraft on a domestic route. I said; of course I would. She said that she wanted to refile us using 60 minute ETOPS instead of the current 180 filed route. I explained that this change in ETOPS rules did not satisfy my many concerns. I explained that diverting to a foreign airport is not the same as diverting to a domestic airport. Especially under the current political climate with some countries; I feel that taking an American air carrier into a foreign airport without an APU is an egregious decision. She assured me that the odds were in our favor and asked me how many times I have had to start the APU in flight other than an in flight test. I told her that I was not gambling with the lives of my passengers. Certainly the odds are in our favor to operate without incident. However; I was trained to plan on the worst case scenario. I have never had to do an actual V1 cut in the aircraft; but I plan on losing an engine for every take off. She continued to pressure me to change my mind about taking the aircraft. Finally she said that she could not support my decision. She then threatened to remove me from the trip without pay. I told her that if that is what she had to do then go ahead; but that I was not going to change my mind about the safety of the flight. I am curious how the Chief Pilot's office was notified about our maintenance issue. I was shocked to have an assistant chief pilot pressure the crew to take an air plane that they felt was not adequately equipped for the flight. The Operating Manual states that APU is highly desirable for Pacific flights. In our judgment; on this day; on this flight; with this crew; the APU was not only highly desirable but required.
A B777 APU failed during engine start after pushback so the aircraft returned to the gate where the crew failed to accept that operating the aircraft on a long oceanic flight was safe. Management was quite forceful.