37000 Feet | Browse and search NASA's Aviation Safety Reporting System |
|
Attributes | |
ACN | 618017 |
Time | |
Date | 200405 |
Day | Tue |
Local Time Of Day | 0601 To 1200 |
Place | |
Locale Reference | airport : pit.airport |
State Reference | PA |
Altitude | agl single value : 0 |
Environment | |
Flight Conditions | VMC |
Weather Elements | Thunderstorm |
Light | Daylight |
Aircraft 1 | |
Operator | common carrier : air carrier |
Make Model Name | Short Brothers Undifferentiated or Other Model |
Operating Under FAR Part | Part 121 |
Flight Phase | ground : takeoff roll |
Flight Plan | IFR |
Person 1 | |
Affiliation | company : air carrier |
Function | flight crew : captain oversight : pic |
Qualification | pilot : atp |
Experience | flight time last 90 days : 100 flight time total : 12800 flight time type : 9000 |
ASRS Report | 618017 |
Person 2 | |
Affiliation | company : air carrier |
Function | flight crew : first officer |
Qualification | pilot : commercial pilot : cfi pilot : private |
Experience | flight time last 90 days : 100 flight time total : 1400 flight time type : 35 |
ASRS Report | 618018 |
Events | |
Anomaly | aircraft equipment problem : critical inflight encounter : weather maintenance problem : improper documentation non adherence : company policies non adherence : far non adherence : published procedure |
Independent Detector | aircraft equipment other aircraft equipment : gear warning lights other flight crewa other flight crewb |
Resolutory Action | flight crew : rejected takeoff other |
Consequence | faa : investigated faa : reviewed incident with flight crew other |
Factors | |
Maintenance | contributing factor : briefing contributing factor : schedule pressure contributing factor : weather performance deficiency : logbook entry |
Supplementary | |
Problem Areas | Weather Flight Crew Human Performance Company Aircraft |
Primary Problem | Flight Crew Human Performance |
Narrative:
We began our takeoff roll on runway 10C at pittsburg, PA. At 70 KTS, we got a gear warning horn and a red nose gear light. We aborted the takeoff and cleared the runway. The horn stopped and the nose gear light indicated green. Everything was normal, so we tried another takeoff. We aborted the takeoff again because we got the same warning again. We taxied back to the ramp and called our operations. The chief pilot instructed us to pin the landing gear in accordance with the MEL and continue our trip. We performed the required items as stated in the MEL and departed. When we arrived in pittsburgh the next day, we were met by an FAA inspector that night. My write-up for this event is on that day's logsheet. It should be on the day before logsheet. The inspector pointed this out. He made copies of the logsheet and the MEL reference. I was informed there would be an investigation. The corrective action would be to make sure all write-ups are on the correct logsheet and to slow down. Do not depart until everything is in order. Supplemental information from acn 618018: the flight was departing 1 hour 10 mins late due to thunderstorms delaying the loading process of our aircraft. I also believe that the decision to make the second aborted takeoff was hasty as well. In conclusion, the gear indicator problem should not have been rushed by the fact that our cargo was late. The gear should have been properly deferred at pit before we left. A contributing factor was the pressure of thunderstorms in the area causing us to be rushed to our destination. Also contributing was pressure from our company's management and from our customer.
Original NASA ASRS Text
Title: AFTER FAILING TO MAKE A LOGBOOK ENTRY FOR THE GEAR PROB CREATING AN ABORTED TKOF, AN SD3 CREW IS EVALUATED BY AN ACI FOR NOT WRITING UP THE PROB ON THE DAY IT OCCURRED.
Narrative: WE BEGAN OUR TKOF ROLL ON RWY 10C AT PITTSBURG, PA. AT 70 KTS, WE GOT A GEAR WARNING HORN AND A RED NOSE GEAR LIGHT. WE ABORTED THE TKOF AND CLRED THE RWY. THE HORN STOPPED AND THE NOSE GEAR LIGHT INDICATED GREEN. EVERYTHING WAS NORMAL, SO WE TRIED ANOTHER TKOF. WE ABORTED THE TKOF AGAIN BECAUSE WE GOT THE SAME WARNING AGAIN. WE TAXIED BACK TO THE RAMP AND CALLED OUR OPS. THE CHIEF PLT INSTRUCTED US TO PIN THE LNDG GEAR IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE MEL AND CONTINUE OUR TRIP. WE PERFORMED THE REQUIRED ITEMS AS STATED IN THE MEL AND DEPARTED. WHEN WE ARRIVED IN PITTSBURGH THE NEXT DAY, WE WERE MET BY AN FAA INSPECTOR THAT NIGHT. MY WRITE-UP FOR THIS EVENT IS ON THAT DAY'S LOGSHEET. IT SHOULD BE ON THE DAY BEFORE LOGSHEET. THE INSPECTOR POINTED THIS OUT. HE MADE COPIES OF THE LOGSHEET AND THE MEL REF. I WAS INFORMED THERE WOULD BE AN INVESTIGATION. THE CORRECTIVE ACTION WOULD BE TO MAKE SURE ALL WRITE-UPS ARE ON THE CORRECT LOGSHEET AND TO SLOW DOWN. DO NOT DEPART UNTIL EVERYTHING IS IN ORDER. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 618018: THE FLT WAS DEPARTING 1 HR 10 MINS LATE DUE TO TSTMS DELAYING THE LOADING PROCESS OF OUR ACFT. I ALSO BELIEVE THAT THE DECISION TO MAKE THE SECOND ABORTED TKOF WAS HASTY AS WELL. IN CONCLUSION, THE GEAR INDICATOR PROB SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN RUSHED BY THE FACT THAT OUR CARGO WAS LATE. THE GEAR SHOULD HAVE BEEN PROPERLY DEFERRED AT PIT BEFORE WE LEFT. A CONTRIBUTING FACTOR WAS THE PRESSURE OF TSTMS IN THE AREA CAUSING US TO BE RUSHED TO OUR DEST. ALSO CONTRIBUTING WAS PRESSURE FROM OUR COMPANY'S MGMNT AND FROM OUR CUSTOMER.
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.