Captain-Crunch;
PJ2, I presume your source for ATA section codes is the pilot's MEL? If so, did you type that from the onboard MEL?
That's the POI approved version specific to a particular airline, is it not?; an abbreviation of the Airbus Master MEL. If so, it's a legal dispatch reference, and not a maintenance trouble shooting reference. Unless I am mistaken, it only addresses dispatch concerns, such as Air conditioning that your POI permitted you to defer, whereas, the full volume derived from the type certificate data sheets in France may be very different and the same numbered section may include both air conditioning and pressurization (just as an example.)
Your posts are extremely good, but your list starts at section 5, and omits sec 13-19, 33-44, 50, 58-70 etc if those sections exist.
To draw conclusions from your list seems wrong to me. We should be using the specific ATA section and item number from the actual maintenance volume. (As an A&P) this is what I was taught.
Many thanks - yes, you are correct up to a point but the MEL I have always referenced and the different MEL I now reference provides for both pilot and maintenance actions. Perhaps a bit of a disconnect in understanding but to me, the MEL on board the aircraft should differ only in appropriate references for the airline's specific aircraft but should not include information that is only available to Maintenance. Not sure if this is what you meant.
I agree that drawing conclusions from the list is wrong. The comments I include after the PRIM 1 fault are from the AOM. I should have mentioned that and will edit the post to do so. For the others I specify that no conclusions may be drawn and warn against same.
Thanks for your comments. We now have a bit to work with.
PJ2