Narrative:

Due to unresolved maintenance problems concerning a landing gear door switch, company maintenance requested we ferry the aircraft from oma to den with the gear pinned in the down position. Based on information in our flight operations manual and discussions with dispatch we agreed to take the flight. I had a lengthy discussion with our dispatcher about the flight since we had no specific information about performance, fuel burn, etc, in our manuals. The end result of considering all factors was a mutual agreement on fuel and a decision to fly the aircraft. Both the first officer and myself discussed and agreed that the flight could be conducted safely. Because of other ensuing problems the flight never took place, however, in retrospect I question our agreement to take the flight without more specific instructions and performance information from the company. I believe we were legal but perhaps not prudent. I think I personally slipped into the 'can do' mode. I think sits like this deserve more information and consideration and a more conservative approach by the company and certainly the crew involved. Over the yrs at our company there has been on-going discussion about line pilots performing maintenance flts. The issue never quite seems to get resolved. This event is a good example of why it is important to have more specific guidelines than we currently have.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: AN ACR CAPT DESCRIBES SECOND THOUGHTS REGARDING THE ACCEPTANCE OF A FERRY FLT ON A B757 WITHOUT ACCURATE PERFORMANCE DATA.

Narrative: DUE TO UNRESOLVED MAINT PROBS CONCERNING A LNDG GEAR DOOR SWITCH, COMPANY MAINT REQUESTED WE FERRY THE ACFT FROM OMA TO DEN WITH THE GEAR PINNED IN THE DOWN POS. BASED ON INFO IN OUR FLT OPS MANUAL AND DISCUSSIONS WITH DISPATCH WE AGREED TO TAKE THE FLT. I HAD A LENGTHY DISCUSSION WITH OUR DISPATCHER ABOUT THE FLT SINCE WE HAD NO SPECIFIC INFO ABOUT PERFORMANCE, FUEL BURN, ETC, IN OUR MANUALS. THE END RESULT OF CONSIDERING ALL FACTORS WAS A MUTUAL AGREEMENT ON FUEL AND A DECISION TO FLY THE ACFT. BOTH THE FO AND MYSELF DISCUSSED AND AGREED THAT THE FLT COULD BE CONDUCTED SAFELY. BECAUSE OF OTHER ENSUING PROBS THE FLT NEVER TOOK PLACE, HOWEVER, IN RETROSPECT I QUESTION OUR AGREEMENT TO TAKE THE FLT WITHOUT MORE SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS AND PERFORMANCE INFO FROM THE COMPANY. I BELIEVE WE WERE LEGAL BUT PERHAPS NOT PRUDENT. I THINK I PERSONALLY SLIPPED INTO THE 'CAN DO' MODE. I THINK SITS LIKE THIS DESERVE MORE INFO AND CONSIDERATION AND A MORE CONSERVATIVE APCH BY THE COMPANY AND CERTAINLY THE CREW INVOLVED. OVER THE YRS AT OUR COMPANY THERE HAS BEEN ON-GOING DISCUSSION ABOUT LINE PLTS PERFORMING MAINT FLTS. THE ISSUE NEVER QUITE SEEMS TO GET RESOLVED. THIS EVENT IS A GOOD EXAMPLE OF WHY IT IS IMPORTANT TO HAVE MORE SPECIFIC GUIDELINES THAN WE CURRENTLY HAVE.

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.