 |
37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
B757 captain reported a flap malfunction and the subsequent decision to land without reference to the QRH.
| Attributes | |
| ACN | 1561166 |
| Time | |
| Date | 201807 |
| Local Time Of Day | 0001-0600 |
| Place | |
| Locale Reference | SKBO.Airport |
| State Reference | FO |
| Environment | |
| Flight Conditions | Marginal |
| Aircraft 1 | |
| Make Model Name | B757-200 |
| Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
| Flight Phase | Initial Approach |
| Flight Plan | IFR |
| Component | |
| Aircraft Component | Trailing Edge Flap |
| Person 1 | |
| Function | Pilot Flying Captain |
| Events | |
| Anomaly | Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe Deviation - Procedural Published Material / Policy |
Narrative:
On final approach with flaps 20 and gear down I asked for flaps 25 from first officer. He moved handle and flaps did not move. They remained equal at 20 flaps and we got EICAS message 'te flaps disag'. Being very confident that flaps were at 20 and that was ok for landing we checked flaps 20 ref speed and set approach speed accordingly. Completed the checklist and continued approach and landing. I made the decision to land based on altitude (approx 1200 AGL) at the time of event; CFIT risk high in that area and IFR conditions above 2000 feet; heavy traffic in area as well. Landing was the least risk decision. We noted the discrepancy in the aml and told mx and [dispatch]. Landing was uneventful. There was no time to run QRH-simply accept the flight confuguration we currently had and that was sufficient for a safe landing. System malfunction. Repeat write up on this jet for same problem.I think the only other course of action would have been to go-around and run QRH which would have driven us to use altitude flap system. However; in that environment I think the safer course of action was to accept the flaps 20 setting and land. We had a very long runway and data to give us safe outcome. The unknowns in the go-around were higher risk. No way to prevent this-aircraft sysytem malfunction.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: B757 Captain reported a flap malfunction and the subsequent decision to land without reference to the QRH.
Narrative: On final approach with flaps 20 and gear down I asked for flaps 25 from FO. He moved handle and flaps did not move. They remained equal at 20 flaps and we got EICAS message 'TE FLAPS DISAG'. Being very confident that flaps were at 20 and that was ok for landing we checked flaps 20 ref speed and set approach speed accordingly. Completed the checklist and continued approach and landing. I made the decision to land based on altitude (approx 1200 AGL) at the time of event; CFIT risk high in that area and IFR conditions above 2000 feet; heavy traffic in area as well. Landing was the least risk decision. We noted the discrepancy in the AML and told MX and [Dispatch]. Landing was uneventful. There was no time to run QRH-simply accept the flight confuguration we currently had and that was sufficient for a safe landing. System malfunction. Repeat write up on this jet for same problem.I think the only other course of action would have been to go-around and run QRH which would have driven us to use ALT flap system. However; in that environment I think the safer course of action was to accept the flaps 20 setting and land. We had a very long runway and data to give us safe outcome. The unknowns in the go-around were higher risk. No way to prevent this-aircraft sysytem malfunction.
Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.