Date: 201207
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: IAH.Airport, TX
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: A320
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class B IAH
ATC / advisory: Tower IAH
Aircraft component: Aircraft Cooling System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: When flight planning for flight; log history showed two previous write-ups for sudden excessive heat surging into flight during descent below 10;000 FT. When aircraft arrived at gate; Inbound Captain debriefed us that on both the flight to and the return; they suffered the same problem and tried to control temperature by turning off hot air. This did not work and they went to APU for air conditioning and it seemed to work. Also had REV deployed ECAM in flight on the leg to IAH. The local mechanics had never performed the required reverser test and had difficulty getting through the procedure. Eventually; they found someone who had a little experience with that procedure and he came to assist. While mechanics were going through the test required for the reverser; I talked with Maintenance Control about the plan to defer the hot air to address the excessive cockpit temperature problem. Maintenance Controller said the previous crew did not give the hot air off a chance to correct problem. Since this was different than my understanding from my conversation with the crew; I gave the [Maintenance] Controller the benefit of the doubt and accepted the aircraft with the deferral. I asked what we could do if it recurred and he brought the Environmental Control System (ECS) report to my attention and provided the Flight Manual (FM) reference for this additional procedure. He explained that they had difficulty troubleshooting this kind of problem and having a print out of exactly where all the valves were positioned during an event would help. We departed and when we were only a few hundred feet in the air; a rush of hot air flooded the cockpit that was as severe a change as walking into a sauna. Unfortunately; the cabin temperatures also ran very hot this time - that had not been reported as occurring during the previous events. If we were not able to control the dramatic and severe rise of temperature; we would be forced to return to the field. I attempted to control the swing by turning down all three temp zone controllers and grabbed for the FM for the ECS procedure. I believe I was able to capture the event with this first report. With much attention and changes; the cabin temperatures stayed about 74 degrees for a while at cruise. However; after a short period of time; we watched the zone duct temperatures in the fwd and aft cabin shoot up to 90 plus degrees. I attempted small changes to catch the up swing with little effect. Only large knob turns seemed to affect the zone temps. A Flight Attendant called and alerted that a passenger in row 10 was put on O2 and believed it was a result of the stuffiness of the cabin. Also; she said the gaspers were not putting out cold air (later said it was just row 10). Throughout the flight; I provided engineering reports and corresponded with Maintenance Control about the problems. Also; we used the ECS report two more times and noted the circumstances on each print out. During descent into our destination; the aircraft got suddenly very humid and the zone and cabin temperatures again began to rise without any input to the controllers. I moved the forward and aft cabin temperature controllers full cold with little effect. Then; when I selected full cold on the cockpit temperature controller; the forward and aft cabin zone temperatures dropped dramatically. I discussed all our experiences with the outbound crew and the local mechanics upon arrival. I am now concerned about my decision to accept the airplane with a deferral that I felt was wrong because the result was a very work intensive flight that dis-serviced our passengers with a very uncomfortable flight.




Synopsis: A320 Captain believes that he erred in accepting an aircraft with ECS (Environmental Control System) anomalies. The cabin temperature cannot be controlled and much of the time is excessively hot.