Narrative:

Please see the attached statement given to my employer. At the end of my shift, I generated an open non-routine write-up against the aircraft, which stated 'performed check of nose gear extension and retraction per maintenance manual 32-31-00,' page 578. Test fails portion that states 'do the procedure again. This is to make sure that the 2 landing gear control interface units operate correctly.' test passes first gear swing, but fails second gear swing with landing gear control interface units in control. Nose gear fails to retract. Tried now landing gear control interface unit -- no help.' when I left for the day, the nose gear could not be retracted and extended normally 2 consecutive times as required, and I documented this fact. The aircraft flew from ZZZ to ZZZ1, and the pilot had to cycle the gear handle twice to get the gear to retract. This was the same condition the aircraft was in when I left work. The landing in ZZZ1 was normal, and the aircraft was ferried to ZZZ2 gear down to find the cause. Mechanics in ZZZ2 found the nose gear proximity sensors and targets out of limits. I believe that if the proximity sensor gaps were out of limits, the aircraft arrived in ZZZ with this condition. Mechanics prior to my shift documented the fact that they found proximity sensor clrncs within specified limits. The fixed link I replaced could not have changed those clrncs. Therefore, I didn't measure the clrncs again, since that had already been accomplished. When I left work, I documented the fact that the nose gear retraction/extension test had failed. That was the end of my involvement.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: AN AIRBUS 320 WAS RELEASED FOR SVC IN NON COMPLIANCE WITH A WRITE-UP ON THE NOSE LNDG GEAR FAILING TO RETRACT ON THE SECOND ATTEMPT.

Narrative: PLEASE SEE THE ATTACHED STATEMENT GIVEN TO MY EMPLOYER. AT THE END OF MY SHIFT, I GENERATED AN OPEN NON-ROUTINE WRITE-UP AGAINST THE ACFT, WHICH STATED 'PERFORMED CHK OF NOSE GEAR EXTENSION AND RETRACTION PER MAINT MANUAL 32-31-00,' PAGE 578. TEST FAILS PORTION THAT STATES 'DO THE PROC AGAIN. THIS IS TO MAKE SURE THAT THE 2 LNDG GEAR CTL INTERFACE UNITS OPERATE CORRECTLY.' TEST PASSES FIRST GEAR SWING, BUT FAILS SECOND GEAR SWING WITH LNDG GEAR CTL INTERFACE UNITS IN CTL. NOSE GEAR FAILS TO RETRACT. TRIED NOW LNDG GEAR CTL INTERFACE UNIT -- NO HELP.' WHEN I LEFT FOR THE DAY, THE NOSE GEAR COULD NOT BE RETRACTED AND EXTENDED NORMALLY 2 CONSECUTIVE TIMES AS REQUIRED, AND I DOCUMENTED THIS FACT. THE ACFT FLEW FROM ZZZ TO ZZZ1, AND THE PLT HAD TO CYCLE THE GEAR HANDLE TWICE TO GET THE GEAR TO RETRACT. THIS WAS THE SAME CONDITION THE ACFT WAS IN WHEN I LEFT WORK. THE LNDG IN ZZZ1 WAS NORMAL, AND THE ACFT WAS FERRIED TO ZZZ2 GEAR DOWN TO FIND THE CAUSE. MECHS IN ZZZ2 FOUND THE NOSE GEAR PROX SENSORS AND TARGETS OUT OF LIMITS. I BELIEVE THAT IF THE PROX SENSOR GAPS WERE OUT OF LIMITS, THE ACFT ARRIVED IN ZZZ WITH THIS CONDITION. MECHS PRIOR TO MY SHIFT DOCUMENTED THE FACT THAT THEY FOUND PROX SENSOR CLRNCS WITHIN SPECIFIED LIMITS. THE FIXED LINK I REPLACED COULD NOT HAVE CHANGED THOSE CLRNCS. THEREFORE, I DIDN'T MEASURE THE CLRNCS AGAIN, SINCE THAT HAD ALREADY BEEN ACCOMPLISHED. WHEN I LEFT WORK, I DOCUMENTED THE FACT THAT THE NOSE GEAR RETRACTION/EXTENSION TEST HAD FAILED. THAT WAS THE END OF MY INVOLVEMENT.

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.