Narrative:

After takeoff the gear handle was put in the up position after a positive rate of climb was accomplished. We then received a gear unsafe indication. As we climbed out and leveled off, a xfer of controls was made from captain to first officer. We then contacted dispatch and coordinated with maintenance and performed the landing gear manual extension checklist. At this point a safe gear indication was received and a normal landing was made back at ewr. The passenger were taken off the aircraft and then we coordinated with maintenance to ferry the aircraft back to plattsburgh, ny. The situation was dealt with in a professional, safe, and efficient manner with good crew resource management. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: the aircraft logbook had been filled out, describing the gear problem. Maintenance then checked the hydraulic system and the gear for any abnormalities. Finding none, they signed off the gear write-up as 'system normal.' after takeoff, the unsafe gear indication was evident. The reporter said that there is no checklist for this type indication for a gear retraction problem. After conferring with maintenance, they referred again to the emergency extension checklist but, again, recycling the gear did place it in the down position. It had not retracted on takeoff. After another ground inspection, the aircraft was ferried to the maintenance base. There, the inspection sponsored a write-up by maintenance of 'unable to duplicate problem.' the aircraft was then released for service.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A BE1900 BE02 FO RPT ON A PROB WITH EXTENDING THE GEAR BY NORMAL MEANS AFTER RECEIVING AN UNSAFE GEAR UP INDICATION ON A DEP FROM EWR. THE GEAR HAD TO BE EXTENDED THROUGH THE USE OF THE ABNORMAL CHKLIST.

Narrative: AFTER TKOF THE GEAR HANDLE WAS PUT IN THE UP POS AFTER A POSITIVE RATE OF CLB WAS ACCOMPLISHED. WE THEN RECEIVED A GEAR UNSAFE INDICATION. AS WE CLBED OUT AND LEVELED OFF, A XFER OF CTLS WAS MADE FROM CAPT TO FO. WE THEN CONTACTED DISPATCH AND COORDINATED WITH MAINT AND PERFORMED THE LNDG GEAR MANUAL EXTENSION CHKLIST. AT THIS POINT A SAFE GEAR INDICATION WAS RECEIVED AND A NORMAL LNDG WAS MADE BACK AT EWR. THE PAX WERE TAKEN OFF THE ACFT AND THEN WE COORDINATED WITH MAINT TO FERRY THE ACFT BACK TO PLATTSBURGH, NY. THE SIT WAS DEALT WITH IN A PROFESSIONAL, SAFE, AND EFFICIENT MANNER WITH GOOD CREW RESOURCE MGMNT. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: THE ACFT LOGBOOK HAD BEEN FILLED OUT, DESCRIBING THE GEAR PROB. MAINT THEN CHKED THE HYD SYS AND THE GEAR FOR ANY ABNORMALITIES. FINDING NONE, THEY SIGNED OFF THE GEAR WRITE-UP AS 'SYS NORMAL.' AFTER TKOF, THE UNSAFE GEAR INDICATION WAS EVIDENT. THE RPTR SAID THAT THERE IS NO CHKLIST FOR THIS TYPE INDICATION FOR A GEAR RETRACTION PROB. AFTER CONFERRING WITH MAINT, THEY REFERRED AGAIN TO THE EMER EXTENSION CHKLIST BUT, AGAIN, RECYCLING THE GEAR DID PLACE IT IN THE DOWN POS. IT HAD NOT RETRACTED ON TKOF. AFTER ANOTHER GND INSPECTION, THE ACFT WAS FERRIED TO THE MAINT BASE. THERE, THE INSPECTION SPONSORED A WRITE-UP BY MAINT OF 'UNABLE TO DUPLICATE PROB.' THE ACFT WAS THEN RELEASED FOR SVC.

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.