Airbus A320 MEL
Thread Starter
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
From: international
Airbus A320 MEL
Hello
I was reading an airbus document called 'Getting to Grips with MMEL and MEL'
This extensive document was published in 2005 and has not been updated since . The examples listed in this document depict an MEL format which is not used anymore .
One particular thing i wanted to clarify though :
the meaning of the dash symbol ( '-' ) in the rectification interval . according to the ' Getting to Grips with MMEL and MEL' document the '-' means : 'As required by regulations '
when looking at a few examples in a newer format of the MEL it just doesn't make any sense . Sometimes it makes more sense to be read as 'not applicable' .
one example from the new MEL format is the attached screenshot . How should the dash symbol be interpreted under the repair interval ?
In general if you happened to have read the 'Getting to Grips with MMEL and MEL' is there something you definitely know that is by now outdated information ?
I was reading an airbus document called 'Getting to Grips with MMEL and MEL'
This extensive document was published in 2005 and has not been updated since . The examples listed in this document depict an MEL format which is not used anymore .
One particular thing i wanted to clarify though :
the meaning of the dash symbol ( '-' ) in the rectification interval . according to the ' Getting to Grips with MMEL and MEL' document the '-' means : 'As required by regulations '
when looking at a few examples in a newer format of the MEL it just doesn't make any sense . Sometimes it makes more sense to be read as 'not applicable' .
one example from the new MEL format is the attached screenshot . How should the dash symbol be interpreted under the repair interval ?
In general if you happened to have read the 'Getting to Grips with MMEL and MEL' is there something you definitely know that is by now outdated information ?
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 368
Likes: 0
From: brisbane, Australia
This is where it gets "Complicated"...Manual as opposed to Electrical operation in this case..Also certain "operators" have a Larger list of Mels' then others..so MMels as opposed to Mel's depends on operator costings.
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 64
Likes: 0
From: England
If no rectification interval (A,B,C,D) is stated then the item must be serviceable. As required by the authorities comes about due to the MMEL being provided for operators to create there own MEL from which could be in any country where the jurisdiction may vary slightly. i.e EU Ops v FAA regs and potentially small differences between the part 25 requirements between the US and EU (if any) the dash is always applicable it just depends on the operator. This is for both old style MELs (since rectification intervals) and New.
The dash in other columns is also applicable for qty installed & required when the qty varies amongst the fleet.
The preamble in the front section of the MEL should explain also.
The dash in other columns is also applicable for qty installed & required when the qty varies amongst the fleet.
The preamble in the front section of the MEL should explain also.
Joined: Oct 2016
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
From: Chiba
Hi Guys,
I have question for the case when we could not identify the cause.
Even though we could not identify the detail of the cause and/or in the situation we have system failure without message, can we apply MEL which is for one higher assembly/system?
Example:
Ex.1) If we have trouble in APU, but could not find the troubled parts, can we apply MEL itself for entire EPU?
Ex. 2) If we have trouble in AIR PACK, but without associated message, can we deactivate the PACK, and apply MEL for entire pack itself?
If you have some published guide line (aircraft manufacturer and/or your authority) for such cases, please give me the link for my understanding.
I have question for the case when we could not identify the cause.
Even though we could not identify the detail of the cause and/or in the situation we have system failure without message, can we apply MEL which is for one higher assembly/system?
Example:
Ex.1) If we have trouble in APU, but could not find the troubled parts, can we apply MEL itself for entire EPU?
Ex. 2) If we have trouble in AIR PACK, but without associated message, can we deactivate the PACK, and apply MEL for entire pack itself?
If you have some published guide line (aircraft manufacturer and/or your authority) for such cases, please give me the link for my understanding.
Joined: Oct 2016
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
From: Chiba
Quetsion - MEL when failt is not identified
Hi,
I have question in addition to your query. If we have fault but could not identify its detail and/or without associated message, can we apply MEL which is for one higher assembly/unit?
For example:
ex. 1) If we have fault in detail parts in APU, but could not identify which part was failed, can we deactivate entire APU and apply MEL for entire APU itself?
ex. 2) If we have failure in AIR PACK 1 FAULT without associated fault message (so we could not indentify which detail part was failed, temp sensor or valve etc..), can we apply MEL for entire AIR PACK 1 itself?
If you know some published buide line from authority or aircraft manufacturer, it is very happy for us if you would send the link for my understandings.
Thank you
I have question in addition to your query. If we have fault but could not identify its detail and/or without associated message, can we apply MEL which is for one higher assembly/unit?
For example:
ex. 1) If we have fault in detail parts in APU, but could not identify which part was failed, can we deactivate entire APU and apply MEL for entire APU itself?
ex. 2) If we have failure in AIR PACK 1 FAULT without associated fault message (so we could not indentify which detail part was failed, temp sensor or valve etc..), can we apply MEL for entire AIR PACK 1 itself?
If you know some published buide line from authority or aircraft manufacturer, it is very happy for us if you would send the link for my understandings.
Thank you
