MD-11
Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Situational Awareness
Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural MEL / CDL
General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
MEL; Procedure
Upon arrival at the aircraft for the flight we were met by the ground crew and advised that ENAC (Italian FAA) was at the aircraft and they were doing an unscheduled check and had been there a while. We proceeded to board the aircraft and perform our preflight operations. Shortly after we boarded the aircraft one of the 3 members of ENAC came up to the flight deck and explained what they were doing and that they were conducting training for a new inspector. She proceeded to check paperwork for the aircraft while the other two members continued with extremely detailed physical inspection of the aircraft. The lead member briefly stepped away and returned some time later; approximately 10-12 mins before pushback; and asked to see the 'maximum damage listing' for the aircraft. We weren't sure what she meant and asked the maintenance guy to help with the language barrier. We offered her the current Aircraft Release as well as showed her the MEL and Configuration Listings (CL) on the iPad and she said that was not what she was looking for. We expressed that the Maintenance Computer in the building should have what she is looking for. At approximately this time the other two inspectors joined the flight deck and presented the discrepancies. Their two main concerns were the damaged acoustics liner on the number 1 engine and the damaged slat seal. The acoustics liner had been previously patched and was delaminating further and the left wing slat seal had an approximate 4-6 inch tear in middle where it was missing. The maintenance guy took pictures of the 2 items on his iPad.After some more brief discussions with the three ENAC folks; the Maintenance guy; and ourselves we surmised that they were looking for the documentation of these 2 items; that the deficiencies have been identified; and what the time frame of the repairs was or what relief was allowed. It was at this time they stated the main cargo liner was minor and that we were free to depart with the finding and that when we produced the required paperwork at the termination of the flight the finding would be deleted. They also mentioned numerous dents on the leading edges from hail and said they would not document them since it is so close to departure. They exited the flight deck about 5 min before scheduled push. Of note they were polite and professional but extremely thorough. At this point the Captain sent an ACARS message to Operations and the FO called the dispatcher. The consensus was to write up the items and have them addressed in documentation before the flight departed using a CL and deferrals for the items. The maintenance guy stated this should take no more than 30 min for the slat seal and defer the acoustics liner and cargo wall. He stated the acoustics liner has a few square feet of allowance and we were only talking about a few square inches of missing material. We waited for the new release; it took over 90 minutes to get it. As soon as we got the required documentation we expeditiously departed.
MD11 Captain reported that prior to departure from a foreign country; the government aviation inspectors were doing an unscheduled physical check of the aircraft and the paperwork.