B737-300
Dispatch Dispatcher
Dispatch Dispatch 31.5; Flight Crew Last 90 Days 0; Flight Crew Total 20; Flight Crew Type 0
Communication Breakdown; Time Pressure; Troubleshooting
Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Release Refused / Aircraft Not Accepted; General Maintenance Action
Aircraft; Company Policy; Human Factors; MEL; Procedure
When the aircraft involved arrived the Captain called me and advised the jet had a stab trim problem; that it was making a grinding noise and appeared to have bound up as the stab trim wheel could no longer be moved. I patched us into a 3-way conversation with Maintenance Control. The Controller asked the Captain a couple of questions to verify what he had said; and then asked the Captain 'How would you feel bringing it to the maintenance base?' The Captain and I both said 'No' within about a second of each other; and the Controller said they'd start making arrangements to get our maintenance folks down there to work on the jet. I then advised the Captain to download the aircraft; and that we'd start looking for a replacement aircraft. After multiple aircraft swaps due to another aircraft having gone out of service the flight operated just under three hours late. The jet was out of service for about a day and a half. The cause of the problem was later determined to be failed bearings in the stab trim wheels themselves.The Maintenance Controller's blatant attempt to get the obviously un-airworthy jet back to the base is a matter of great concern on a number of levels. First and foremost is that it's a safety-of-flight issue. No one knew the cause of the stab trim problem at the time; but it's pretty clear that the Controller wanted to deal with the problem at the maintenance base rather than a non maintenance line station. In a perfect world aircraft would only break down at maintenance bases or line maintenance stations; but we all know it's not a perfect world. If an aircraft breaks we all need to deal with the problem where it occurs; and not try to wishful think the aircraft back to a more convenient maintenance facility by asking the Captain and Dispatcher to blatantly defy common sense as well as FARs and an airline's policies and procedures.On a global level; this incident is of a more serious concern to me since it's not a rare aberration by a single Controller; but a problem common to many of them. This is not the first time that I've personally encountered the problem and submitted reports in response; as have some other dispatchers. Despite all our efforts there doesn't seem to be any corrective actions that 'stick' and the behavior remains unchanged. Sure; there is some corporate culture aspects (the ones from The Dark Side) involved here; but situational ethics and a philosophy of the ends justifying the means isn't conducive to safety. I would like to think we're collectively capable of coming to this conclusion without such aberrant behavior possibly contributing to a future accident or incident; but this controller's behavior demonstrates that nothing can be assumed.
An air carrier dispatcher related his concerns about what he believes to be an example of willing efforts on the part of Maintenance Controllers to coerce flight crews and Dispatchers to agree to fly unairworthy aircraft to locations where necessary maintenance can be performed at lower cost to the company.