Narrative:

In sum: the aircraft arrived on my gate with the following write-up: right main landing gear downlock warning light came on during climb out at 2000 ft. I accomplished the following: no fault message on the maintenance flight data unit when we checked, cycled the main landing gear doors several times, all indications were normal. Item was deferred for further evaluate and troubleshooting on maintenance overnight layover, ok for service. This aircraft had a problem that was not showing upon arrival at the gate in ZZZ. We tried to duplicate the write-up but could not. The maintenance people in XXX and YYY thought the airplane should have been signed off as ground checks ok. I programmed the aircraft to be troubleshot and the company failed to follow through. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: the right main gear warning system was not deferred. What was deferred was further troubleshooting that would be required for a problem that could not be duplicated on the ground. Reporter could have cleared the item but the airplane already had 2 reports that could not be duplicated. Reporter believes the company planning department is at fault for allowing this airplane to go through 2 maintenance stations without reporter stated he has 28 yrs line maintenance experience. The airplane involved was a fokker 100. The FAA has not contacted the reporter.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A FOKKER 100 WAS DISPATCHED WITH A DEFERRED ITEM TO TROUBLESHOOT AND REPAIR A R MAIN LNDG GEAR DOWNLOCK SWITCH. SEVERAL PREVIOUS RPTS ALL CLRED WITH GND CHKS OK.

Narrative: IN SUM: THE ACFT ARRIVED ON MY GATE WITH THE FOLLOWING WRITE-UP: R MAIN LNDG GEAR DOWNLOCK WARNING LIGHT CAME ON DURING CLB OUT AT 2000 FT. I ACCOMPLISHED THE FOLLOWING: NO FAULT MESSAGE ON THE MAINT FLT DATA UNIT WHEN WE CHKED, CYCLED THE MAIN LNDG GEAR DOORS SEVERAL TIMES, ALL INDICATIONS WERE NORMAL. ITEM WAS DEFERRED FOR FURTHER EVAL AND TROUBLESHOOTING ON MAINT OVERNIGHT LAYOVER, OK FOR SVC. THIS ACFT HAD A PROB THAT WAS NOT SHOWING UPON ARR AT THE GATE IN ZZZ. WE TRIED TO DUPLICATE THE WRITE-UP BUT COULD NOT. THE MAINT PEOPLE IN XXX AND YYY THOUGHT THE AIRPLANE SHOULD HAVE BEEN SIGNED OFF AS GND CHKS OK. I PROGRAMMED THE ACFT TO BE TROUBLESHOT AND THE COMPANY FAILED TO FOLLOW THROUGH. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: THE R MAIN GEAR WARNING SYS WAS NOT DEFERRED. WHAT WAS DEFERRED WAS FURTHER TROUBLESHOOTING THAT WOULD BE REQUIRED FOR A PROB THAT COULD NOT BE DUPLICATED ON THE GND. RPTR COULD HAVE CLRED THE ITEM BUT THE AIRPLANE ALREADY HAD 2 RPTS THAT COULD NOT BE DUPLICATED. RPTR BELIEVES THE COMPANY PLANNING DEPT IS AT FAULT FOR ALLOWING THIS AIRPLANE TO GO THROUGH 2 MAINT STATIONS WITHOUT RPTR STATED HE HAS 28 YRS LINE MAINT EXPERIENCE. THE AIRPLANE INVOLVED WAS A FOKKER 100. THE FAA HAS NOT CONTACTED THE RPTR.

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.