Narrative:

Status message (no pilot action required) on EICAS 'proximity system fail.' after selecting flaps 20 degrees gear indicator showed red dashed boxes. When gear was selected down, the boxes did not change and the approach was discontinued. Emergency gear procedures were followed resulting in a nose gear extension. Both main gear did not deploy. During a fly- by, ATC and company personnel confirmed no main gear. Company maintenance suggested first officer getting out of his seat so he could pull harder on the emergency gear extension handle. After putting a great deal of pressure upwards on handle, both mains deployed. I firmly believe that if the first officer was not in good physical condition the gear would not have come down. I would suggest a fleet inspection of this system and talking with manufacturer/air carrier so this problem does not recur. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: the airline's chief of maintenance told this reporter that the cables between the handle and the uplock on this CL65 were out of adjustment and that the sequence of extension during the flight check was nose first and then the mains -- opposite of standard extension. Reporter is convinced that the emergency gear extension system would not be usable to all pilots. The first officer's hands were beet red from the strain and he was afraid that he was going to break the pin that retains the handle. As a sidenote, 'proximity system fail' indicates that proximity sensors for the gear are not comparative to normal position. Reporter also states that the seat belt and no smoking sign switches would not function either.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: WHILE ON APCH TO CVG, THE CREW OF A CL65 WAS UNABLE TO EXTEND THE GEAR. THE EMER EXTENSION WOULD NOT WORK, ALSO. THE CREW MADE A FINAL ATTEMPT AND MUSCLED THE EMER HANDLE (ALMOST TO THE POINT OF BREAKING THE PIN), AND GOT THE GEAR EXTENSION. MAINT FOLLOW-UP REVEALED AN UPLOCK CABLE OUT OF ADJUSTMENT, AND GEAR THAT WAS NOT FREE FALLING ACCORDING TO THE STANDARD FOR EMER GEAR EXTENSION.

Narrative: STATUS MESSAGE (NO PLT ACTION REQUIRED) ON EICAS 'PROX SYS FAIL.' AFTER SELECTING FLAPS 20 DEGS GEAR INDICATOR SHOWED RED DASHED BOXES. WHEN GEAR WAS SELECTED DOWN, THE BOXES DID NOT CHANGE AND THE APCH WAS DISCONTINUED. EMER GEAR PROCS WERE FOLLOWED RESULTING IN A NOSE GEAR EXTENSION. BOTH MAIN GEAR DID NOT DEPLOY. DURING A FLY- BY, ATC AND COMPANY PERSONNEL CONFIRMED NO MAIN GEAR. COMPANY MAINT SUGGESTED FO GETTING OUT OF HIS SEAT SO HE COULD PULL HARDER ON THE EMER GEAR EXTENSION HANDLE. AFTER PUTTING A GREAT DEAL OF PRESSURE UPWARDS ON HANDLE, BOTH MAINS DEPLOYED. I FIRMLY BELIEVE THAT IF THE FO WAS NOT IN GOOD PHYSICAL CONDITION THE GEAR WOULD NOT HAVE COME DOWN. I WOULD SUGGEST A FLEET INSPECTION OF THIS SYS AND TALKING WITH MANUFACTURER/ACR SO THIS PROB DOES NOT RECUR. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: THE AIRLINE'S CHIEF OF MAINT TOLD THIS RPTR THAT THE CABLES BTWN THE HANDLE AND THE UPLOCK ON THIS CL65 WERE OUT OF ADJUSTMENT AND THAT THE SEQUENCE OF EXTENSION DURING THE FLT CHK WAS NOSE FIRST AND THEN THE MAINS -- OPPOSITE OF STANDARD EXTENSION. RPTR IS CONVINCED THAT THE EMER GEAR EXTENSION SYS WOULD NOT BE USABLE TO ALL PLTS. THE FO'S HANDS WERE BEET RED FROM THE STRAIN AND HE WAS AFRAID THAT HE WAS GOING TO BREAK THE PIN THAT RETAINS THE HANDLE. AS A SIDENOTE, 'PROX SYS FAIL' INDICATES THAT PROX SENSORS FOR THE GEAR ARE NOT COMPARATIVE TO NORMAL POS. RPTR ALSO STATES THAT THE SEAT BELT AND NO SMOKING SIGN SWITCHES WOULD NOT FUNCTION EITHER.

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.