Narrative:

After takeoff 8L phx -- gear and flaps retracted normally approximately 15 seconds after flap retraction -- ECAM message appeared 'flight control flap fault' and flap indicator changed from green to amber. The abnormal checklist called for a flap lever 'recycle' in an attempt to solve the problem. An attempt was made by placing the flap lever to 'one' and returning to up. This has no effect on the flap fault warning. The checklist was most probably written with the idea in mind that this problem would have come about after a move of the flaps and not for the situation we encountered which was that the flaps had long since stopped moving prior to the fault message appearing. Another ambiguity in the checklist command 'recycle flap lever' stemmed from the fact that, in this aircraft, the trailing edge flaps do not move until flaps 2 have been selected (in the air). Was the intent of 'recycle the flap lever' to attempt to move the affected flap? This too was unclr. We used our system knowledge of the trailing edge flap movement and felt that the intent of 'recycle the flap lever' to mean that it should be moved so as to effect the set of flaps (leading edge or trailing edge) that has faulted. In moving the flap lever to the 2 position, the leading edge slats extended to 2. Normally, the flaps (trailing edge) did not move. Continuing with the 'recycle' we moved the flap handle to up. At this time, the slats faulted and stuck at the 2 position. A no flap slats 2 approach and landing was made. Once we had our slat and flap problem we contacted dispatch and maintenance control -- I believe that at the moment, a question arose concerning the abnormal procedure. We should have asked for help in clarifying the issue before proceeding. Although in our situation, our action really had no effect on the outcome of the situation -- either way we would have had a no flap landing at our departure airport. In another situation, we might have made worse the situation by going forward with an unclr checklist instruction. I do not mean to fault our checklist in all of this since the abnormal procedures are written for all foreseeable situations. We encountered an unforeseeable one. One last item. As we drove around the sky talking with dispatch, maintenance, the aircraft manufacturer, training, sale coordination, flight attendants, passenger via PA, etc -- we were given various holding patterns here and there as we tried to avoid the cumulus buildups in the area. It may have been a better idea to just ask for vectors so we didn't have to add holding pattern constrictions and entries to our list of things to do in our 2 man cockpit.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: PIC RPTR PHILOSOPHIZES ON CHKLIST DESIGN USE, ACFT EQUIP PROBLEM AND ATC FLC COORD.

Narrative: AFTER TKOF 8L PHX -- GEAR AND FLAPS RETRACTED NORMALLY APPROX 15 SECONDS AFTER FLAP RETRACTION -- ECAM MESSAGE APPEARED 'FLT CTL FLAP FAULT' AND FLAP INDICATOR CHANGED FROM GREEN TO AMBER. THE ABNORMAL CHKLIST CALLED FOR A FLAP LEVER 'RECYCLE' IN AN ATTEMPT TO SOLVE THE PROBLEM. AN ATTEMPT WAS MADE BY PLACING THE FLAP LEVER TO 'ONE' AND RETURNING TO UP. THIS HAS NO EFFECT ON THE FLAP FAULT WARNING. THE CHKLIST WAS MOST PROBABLY WRITTEN WITH THE IDEA IN MIND THAT THIS PROBLEM WOULD HAVE COME ABOUT AFTER A MOVE OF THE FLAPS AND NOT FOR THE SITUATION WE ENCOUNTERED WHICH WAS THAT THE FLAPS HAD LONG SINCE STOPPED MOVING PRIOR TO THE FAULT MESSAGE APPEARING. ANOTHER AMBIGUITY IN THE CHKLIST COMMAND 'RECYCLE FLAP LEVER' STEMMED FROM THE FACT THAT, IN THIS ACFT, THE TRAILING EDGE FLAPS DO NOT MOVE UNTIL FLAPS 2 HAVE BEEN SELECTED (IN THE AIR). WAS THE INTENT OF 'RECYCLE THE FLAP LEVER' TO ATTEMPT TO MOVE THE AFFECTED FLAP? THIS TOO WAS UNCLR. WE USED OUR SYS KNOWLEDGE OF THE TRAILING EDGE FLAP MOVEMENT AND FELT THAT THE INTENT OF 'RECYCLE THE FLAP LEVER' TO MEAN THAT IT SHOULD BE MOVED SO AS TO EFFECT THE SET OF FLAPS (LEADING EDGE OR TRAILING EDGE) THAT HAS FAULTED. IN MOVING THE FLAP LEVER TO THE 2 POS, THE LEADING EDGE SLATS EXTENDED TO 2. NORMALLY, THE FLAPS (TRAILING EDGE) DID NOT MOVE. CONTINUING WITH THE 'RECYCLE' WE MOVED THE FLAP HANDLE TO UP. AT THIS TIME, THE SLATS FAULTED AND STUCK AT THE 2 POS. A NO FLAP SLATS 2 APCH AND LNDG WAS MADE. ONCE WE HAD OUR SLAT AND FLAP PROBLEM WE CONTACTED DISPATCH AND MAINT CTL -- I BELIEVE THAT AT THE MOMENT, A QUESTION AROSE CONCERNING THE ABNORMAL PROC. WE SHOULD HAVE ASKED FOR HELP IN CLARIFYING THE ISSUE BEFORE PROCEEDING. ALTHOUGH IN OUR SITUATION, OUR ACTION REALLY HAD NO EFFECT ON THE OUTCOME OF THE SITUATION -- EITHER WAY WE WOULD HAVE HAD A NO FLAP LNDG AT OUR DEP ARPT. IN ANOTHER SITUATION, WE MIGHT HAVE MADE WORSE THE SITUATION BY GOING FORWARD WITH AN UNCLR CHKLIST INSTRUCTION. I DO NOT MEAN TO FAULT OUR CHKLIST IN ALL OF THIS SINCE THE ABNORMAL PROCS ARE WRITTEN FOR ALL FORESEEABLE SITUATIONS. WE ENCOUNTERED AN UNFORESEEABLE ONE. ONE LAST ITEM. AS WE DROVE AROUND THE SKY TALKING WITH DISPATCH, MAINT, THE ACFT MANUFACTURER, TRAINING, SALE COORD, FLT ATTENDANTS, PAX VIA PA, ETC -- WE WERE GIVEN VARIOUS HOLDING PATTERNS HERE AND THERE AS WE TRIED TO AVOID THE CUMULUS BUILDUPS IN THE AREA. IT MAY HAVE BEEN A BETTER IDEA TO JUST ASK FOR VECTORS SO WE DIDN'T HAVE TO ADD HOLDING PATTERN CONSTRICTIONS AND ENTRIES TO OUR LIST OF THINGS TO DO IN OUR 2 MAN COCKPIT.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 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.