Narrative:

We started our duty day at champagne, il. When we picked the aircraft up, we (myself) did a complete and detailed preflight using the written checklist as per our general operations manual and SOP. We flew our first leg to st louis with no incident. At st louis we noticed a nosewheel shimmy on landing so we had maintenance take a look. On inspection they decided the nosewheel tires needed replacing (which they did.) they also did a maintenance line check which was due this day. The aircraft was signed off by maintenance. We then, both the captain and I, completed a general walk-around of the aircraft to inspect the general condition of the aircraft. Everything appeared normal to both of us. We boarded and completed our flight as normal to decatur, il. After landing, between de-boarding and boarding the aircraft for the flight back to st louis, one of our ground agents noticed that the hydraulic service panel was not secure and had been bent back during flight with a one inch tear in the door (hydraulic service panel door.) this was brought to our attention prior to myself performing the required general walk-around inspection. This whole incident led us to believe the door was not secured by the mechanic performing the two-day maintenance line check. Even though we, the crew, performed all our required checks according to our gom and SOP, we will have to submit an irregularity report as we are uncertain of whether we are to blame or not, and uncertain of any further action against us. Even though we have checked that we complied with all of our regulations, it bothers me that the worry over this kind incident and its outcome could lead to a distraction in our normal tasks, possibly leading to a worse incident in the future, whilst we await the outcome.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: BA-3200 ACFT DEPARTED WITH HYDRAULIC SVC PANEL DOOR LEFT OPEN CAUSING DAMAGE IN FLT.

Narrative: WE STARTED OUR DUTY DAY AT CHAMPAGNE, IL. WHEN WE PICKED THE ACFT UP, WE (MYSELF) DID A COMPLETE AND DETAILED PREFLT USING THE WRITTEN CHECKLIST AS PER OUR GENERAL OPERATIONS MANUAL AND SOP. WE FLEW OUR FIRST LEG TO ST LOUIS WITH NO INCIDENT. AT ST LOUIS WE NOTICED A NOSEWHEEL SHIMMY ON LNDG SO WE HAD MAINT TAKE A LOOK. ON INSPECTION THEY DECIDED THE NOSEWHEEL TIRES NEEDED REPLACING (WHICH THEY DID.) THEY ALSO DID A MAINT LINE CHECK WHICH WAS DUE THIS DAY. THE ACFT WAS SIGNED OFF BY MAINT. WE THEN, BOTH THE CAPT AND I, COMPLETED A GENERAL WALK-AROUND OF THE ACFT TO INSPECT THE GENERAL CONDITION OF THE ACFT. EVERYTHING APPEARED NORMAL TO BOTH OF US. WE BOARDED AND COMPLETED OUR FLT AS NORMAL TO DECATUR, IL. AFTER LNDG, BETWEEN DE-BOARDING AND BOARDING THE ACFT FOR THE FLT BACK TO ST LOUIS, ONE OF OUR GND AGENTS NOTICED THAT THE HYDRAULIC SVC PANEL WAS NOT SECURE AND HAD BEEN BENT BACK DURING FLT WITH A ONE INCH TEAR IN THE DOOR (HYDRAULIC SVC PANEL DOOR.) THIS WAS BROUGHT TO OUR ATTENTION PRIOR TO MYSELF PERFORMING THE REQUIRED GENERAL WALK-AROUND INSPECTION. THIS WHOLE INCIDENT LED US TO BELIEVE THE DOOR WAS NOT SECURED BY THE MECHANIC PERFORMING THE TWO-DAY MAINT LINE CHECK. EVEN THOUGH WE, THE CREW, PERFORMED ALL OUR REQUIRED CHECKS ACCORDING TO OUR GOM AND SOP, WE WILL HAVE TO SUBMIT AN IRREGULARITY REPORT AS WE ARE UNCERTAIN OF WHETHER WE ARE TO BLAME OR NOT, AND UNCERTAIN OF ANY FURTHER ACTION AGAINST US. EVEN THOUGH WE HAVE CHECKED THAT WE COMPLIED WITH ALL OF OUR REGULATIONS, IT BOTHERS ME THAT THE WORRY OVER THIS KIND INCIDENT AND ITS OUTCOME COULD LEAD TO A DISTRACTION IN OUR NORMAL TASKS, POSSIBLY LEADING TO A WORSE INCIDENT IN THE FUTURE, WHILST WE AWAIT THE OUTCOME.

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.