A320
Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Confusion; Time Pressure; Communication Breakdown
Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Bird / Animal
Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; General Maintenance Action; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Company Policy; Human Factors; Procedure; Logbook Entry
First Officer during pre flight noticed possible bird strike indications on #2 engine cowl and a large mark on one of the fan blades. I entered this into the logbook and notified Maintenance as well as Operations. The cowl had streaks of material and the fan blade showed a large white mark about four inches in diameter near the tip. Maintenance took the log book with about 10 minutes to go before scheduled departure. They returned the log book to me 12 minutes later with a signoff saying no damage noted ok for flight. We were about to close the door when maintenance returned to get the log book back from me. They took it from the flight deck and returned with another notation saying in the Discrepancy block 'landing gear safety devices installed' and in the Corrective block 'landing gear safety devices removed'.  At no time were these devices removed from the flight deck. I also understand the only safety devices for landing gear must be used from each individual airplane. In other words a Mechanic cannot have a set they keep in their tool box.  This appeared to be an afterthought just to make the previous entry for 'ok for flight' legal. How would I know; since pilots have no idea what is required to be completed.With the removal of the requirement of an Airworthiness Release after a bird strike inspection it leaves open any manner of inspections. We; as pilots; can only accept the log book from maintenance in hope that the entire procedure was accomplished by maintenance personnel. This obviously was a 'quick' inspection due to our close departure time and the fact that maintenance had missed this on their post flight inspection after the planes arrival from ZZZ1 into ZZZ2. Who knows what was ingested into that engine. I know for a fact there is no bug in this world that can leave that size mark on a cowl and fan blade. Currently any Mechanic can sign this [Bird Strike Inspection] off; but it [company] should return to the requirement of an Airworthiness Release and a more thorough inspection be accomplished; no matter how long it takes. I just hope any subtle damage will not later manifest itself in a failure at a later date.
The reporter stated the A320 flight was on a 'quick turn' and everyone was rushing to get the aircraft pushed for an 'on-time' departure. His Air Carrier has removed the requirement to have an Airworthiness Release signed after a Bird Strike Inspection and even states that on their Maintenance Release. Given the quickness that Maintenance had signed off the Bird Strike Inspection in their Logbook without any reference to any document of items to check for when performing that type of inspection; made him wonder just what was inspected. He's not sure if Maintenance requires a certain qualification for technicians to be allowed to do a Bird Strike Inspection. He still believes a more detailed inspection should have been done. He still doesn't know why the 'Landing Gear safety devices' were even entered in the Logbook; because they should not have any bearing on the issue of inspecting the engine for damage.
A Captain expresses his concerns about the 'quickness' that Maintenance had performed on a Bird Strike Inspection on # 2 Engine for an A320 aircraft; without any reference procedure noted in the Logbook sign-off. Adding to his concerns; was his Air Carrier's removal of a previous requirement that an Airworthiness Release also be issued after a Bird Strike Inspection.