37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 1732661 |
Time | |
Date | 202003 |
Local Time Of Day | 0601-1200 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | ZZZ.Airport |
State Reference | US |
Environment | |
Flight Conditions | VMC |
Light | Daylight |
Aircraft 1 | |
Make Model Name | Regional Jet 200 ER/LR (CRJ200) |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
Flight Phase | Taxi |
Flight Plan | IFR |
Component | |
Aircraft Component | Nose Gear |
Person 1 | |
Function | Pilot Flying Captain |
Qualification | Flight Crew Multiengine Flight Crew Instrument Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP) |
Person 2 | |
Function | First Officer Pilot Not Flying |
Qualification | Flight Crew Instrument Flight Crew Multiengine Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP) |
Events | |
Anomaly | Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe Deviation - Procedural Maintenance Deviation - Procedural Published Material / Policy |
Narrative:
While preparing to depart; the ramp agents notified us that they could not attach the tow bar to the airplane. Upon inspection we determined that was indeed the case. Since the airplane had just flown in prior we made the assumption that it wasn't of concern and at the suggestion of the ramp agents; we decided to make a turn out of the parking spot instead of pushing back. The flight continued with no further issues. Upon arrival at our destination; we contacted maintenance to take a look just to be sure. Their assessment of the aircraft alerted us to missing parts on the nose gear leaving the aircraft right nose wheel to be held on by a hand-tight castlated nut instead of being backed up with two bolts and safety wire.after discussion with the mechanics at our arrival station; my belief is that the aircraft left a previous maintenance action with the parts missing and the aircraft was operated for multiple flights in that condition. Due to the prevalence of pushback equipment that doesn't require a tow bar; it would be easy for that to be missed until the next time a tow bar was to be used. Additionally; as pilots; we are trained to trust that an aircraft is airworthy when it leaves maintenance and the purpose of our preflight inspection is to verify the 'big picture' airworthiness of the aircraft. We are not trained to know every nut and bolt on the airplane which would make an issue like this an understandable oversight on the part of any flight crew associated with the aircraft.a more detailed assurance check of aircraft leaving maintenance and/or a more detailed means of tracking parts removed vs. Parts installed would assure that an aircraft is not returned to service in an unairworthy condition.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: CRJ-200 flight crew reported aircraft had flown multiple flights with nose wheel component parts missing.
Narrative: While preparing to depart; the ramp agents notified us that they could not attach the tow bar to the airplane. Upon inspection we determined that was indeed the case. Since the airplane had just flown in prior we made the assumption that it wasn't of concern and at the suggestion of the ramp agents; we decided to make a turn out of the parking spot instead of pushing back. The flight continued with no further issues. Upon arrival at our destination; we contacted Maintenance to take a look just to be sure. Their assessment of the aircraft alerted us to missing parts on the nose gear leaving the aircraft right nose wheel to be held on by a hand-tight castlated nut instead of being backed up with two bolts and safety wire.After discussion with the Mechanics at our arrival station; my belief is that the aircraft left a previous maintenance action with the parts missing and the aircraft was operated for multiple flights in that condition. Due to the prevalence of pushback equipment that doesn't require a tow bar; it would be easy for that to be missed until the next time a tow bar was to be used. Additionally; as pilots; we are trained to trust that an aircraft is airworthy when it leaves Maintenance and the purpose of our preflight inspection is to verify the 'big picture' airworthiness of the aircraft. We are not trained to know every nut and bolt on the airplane which would make an issue like this an understandable oversight on the part of any flight crew associated with the aircraft.A more detailed assurance check of aircraft leaving Maintenance and/or a more detailed means of tracking parts removed vs. parts installed would assure that an aircraft is not returned to service in an unairworthy condition.
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.