Narrative:

This report is for information only. There were no violations of FARS or company procedures. Flight departed over an hour late due to earlier thunderstorms in the ZZZ area. We departed with 19000 pounds of fuel with ZZZ1 as an alternate. En route we received an ATC re-route to the south due to a line of WX along our route and the arrival. That is when I received a call from the #a flight attendant who was calm but concerned 'that a piece of the wing was falling off.' I asked him to be more specific as he described it as 'the orange thing that tells you it's a 700 looks like it's falling off the wing.' we continued in holding and I asked the first officer to go to the cabin to visually inspect that area that the flight attendant was concerned about. The first officer returned to the cockpit and reported to me that yes indeed the canoe assembly was extended well below the wing and possibly damaged. I decided at that time I wanted a visual inspection of my own to determine the extent of any damage and what concerns I might have regarding configuring the aircraft for landing. It appeared to me that the entire canoe assembly and the track it follows was fully extended as it would be at full flap extension; yet the trailing edge flaps were up. It was difficult for me to determine if any damage had occurred. I also found it difficult to believe that we could have flown over 2 hours at .79 with the entire canoe assembly extended so far below the wing without any sign of vibration; roll; or yaw. The flight attendant felt confident that he had viewed the wing several times during the flight and that the wing was not in that condition. During the time I was in possession of aircraft X; I had not encountered any turbulence or exceeded any airspeed limits. The aircraft was in holding at 22000 ft and 210 KTS in a clean configuration at the time it was reported to me. The first officer and I discussed in detail any concerns we might have regarding the flap extension. I then contacted maintenance control and dispatch for any of their comments or concerns regarding the flap extension. ATC was advised of our intention to land at ZZZ1. We requested a long; slow final which of course prompts them to query as to a possible problem. I advised them that I had no problem at the time; but that I was aware of the possibility of encountering a problem during flap extension. Due to even a remote possibility that we could drop the entire canoe assembly on landing or drag any parts that could cause sparks under the wing; I requested the trucks to be avail at the runway. We extended the flaps one notch at a time and were prepared to act on any abnormal indication. The flap extension was normal and a normal landing was made. At the time we became aware of a possible problem; we had the luxury of over 7000 pounds of fuel; clear WX in ZZZ1; and over 11000 ft of runway available. The first officer and I were able to discuss and plan for any flap extension problem we might incur. We were able to make several PA's; have clear communication with dispatch and maintenance control; and most important; we had excellent communication with our flight attendants to address any of their concerns. The flight attendants were well briefed and assured there was no emergency. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: reporter stated he could not believe this airplane flew smoothly with no vibration or noise with the flap track fairing displaced aft of the retracted trailing edge flaps. Maintenance reported the problem as a failed fairing support rod or arm.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A B737-700; WHILE HOLDING AT FL220; HAD THE L WING OUTBOARD FLAP FAIRING SLIDE BACK AFT ON FLAP TRACK.

Narrative: THIS RPT IS FOR INFO ONLY. THERE WERE NO VIOLATIONS OF FARS OR COMPANY PROCS. FLT DEPARTED OVER AN HOUR LATE DUE TO EARLIER TSTMS IN THE ZZZ AREA. WE DEPARTED WITH 19000 LBS OF FUEL WITH ZZZ1 AS AN ALTERNATE. ENRTE WE RECEIVED AN ATC RE-RTE TO THE S DUE TO A LINE OF WX ALONG OUR RTE AND THE ARR. THAT IS WHEN I RECEIVED A CALL FROM THE #A FLT ATTENDANT WHO WAS CALM BUT CONCERNED 'THAT A PIECE OF THE WING WAS FALLING OFF.' I ASKED HIM TO BE MORE SPECIFIC AS HE DESCRIBED IT AS 'THE ORANGE THING THAT TELLS YOU IT'S A 700 LOOKS LIKE IT'S FALLING OFF THE WING.' WE CONTINUED IN HOLDING AND I ASKED THE FO TO GO TO THE CABIN TO VISUALLY INSPECT THAT AREA THAT THE FLT ATTENDANT WAS CONCERNED ABOUT. THE FO RETURNED TO THE COCKPIT AND RPTED TO ME THAT YES INDEED THE CANOE ASSEMBLY WAS EXTENDED WELL BELOW THE WING AND POSSIBLY DAMAGED. I DECIDED AT THAT TIME I WANTED A VISUAL INSPECTION OF MY OWN TO DETERMINE THE EXTENT OF ANY DAMAGE AND WHAT CONCERNS I MIGHT HAVE REGARDING CONFIGURING THE ACFT FOR LNDG. IT APPEARED TO ME THAT THE ENTIRE CANOE ASSEMBLY AND THE TRACK IT FOLLOWS WAS FULLY EXTENDED AS IT WOULD BE AT FULL FLAP EXTENSION; YET THE TRAILING EDGE FLAPS WERE UP. IT WAS DIFFICULT FOR ME TO DETERMINE IF ANY DAMAGE HAD OCCURRED. I ALSO FOUND IT DIFFICULT TO BELIEVE THAT WE COULD HAVE FLOWN OVER 2 HOURS AT .79 WITH THE ENTIRE CANOE ASSEMBLY EXTENDED SO FAR BELOW THE WING WITHOUT ANY SIGN OF VIBRATION; ROLL; OR YAW. THE FLT ATTENDANT FELT CONFIDENT THAT HE HAD VIEWED THE WING SEVERAL TIMES DURING THE FLT AND THAT THE WING WAS NOT IN THAT CONDITION. DURING THE TIME I WAS IN POSSESSION OF ACFT X; I HAD NOT ENCOUNTERED ANY TURB OR EXCEEDED ANY AIRSPD LIMITS. THE ACFT WAS IN HOLDING AT 22000 FT AND 210 KTS IN A CLEAN CONFIGURATION AT THE TIME IT WAS RPTED TO ME. THE FO AND I DISCUSSED IN DETAIL ANY CONCERNS WE MIGHT HAVE REGARDING THE FLAP EXTENSION. I THEN CONTACTED MAINT CTL AND DISPATCH FOR ANY OF THEIR COMMENTS OR CONCERNS REGARDING THE FLAP EXTENSION. ATC WAS ADVISED OF OUR INTENTION TO LAND AT ZZZ1. WE REQUESTED A LONG; SLOW FINAL WHICH OF COURSE PROMPTS THEM TO QUERY AS TO A POSSIBLE PROB. I ADVISED THEM THAT I HAD NO PROB AT THE TIME; BUT THAT I WAS AWARE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF ENCOUNTERING A PROB DURING FLAP EXTENSION. DUE TO EVEN A REMOTE POSSIBILITY THAT WE COULD DROP THE ENTIRE CANOE ASSEMBLY ON LNDG OR DRAG ANY PARTS THAT COULD CAUSE SPARKS UNDER THE WING; I REQUESTED THE TRUCKS TO BE AVAIL AT THE RWY. WE EXTENDED THE FLAPS ONE NOTCH AT A TIME AND WERE PREPARED TO ACT ON ANY ABNORMAL INDICATION. THE FLAP EXTENSION WAS NORMAL AND A NORMAL LNDG WAS MADE. AT THE TIME WE BECAME AWARE OF A POSSIBLE PROB; WE HAD THE LUXURY OF OVER 7000 LBS OF FUEL; CLR WX IN ZZZ1; AND OVER 11000 FT OF RWY AVAILABLE. THE FO AND I WERE ABLE TO DISCUSS AND PLAN FOR ANY FLAP EXTENSION PROB WE MIGHT INCUR. WE WERE ABLE TO MAKE SEVERAL PA'S; HAVE CLEAR COMMUNICATION WITH DISPATCH AND MAINT CTL; AND MOST IMPORTANT; WE HAD EXCELLENT COMMUNICATION WITH OUR FLT ATTENDANTS TO ADDRESS ANY OF THEIR CONCERNS. THE FLT ATTENDANTS WERE WELL BRIEFED AND ASSURED THERE WAS NO EMER. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR STATED HE COULD NOT BELIEVE THIS AIRPLANE FLEW SMOOTHLY WITH NO VIBRATION OR NOISE WITH THE FLAP TRACK FAIRING DISPLACED AFT OF THE RETRACTED TRAILING EDGE FLAPS. MAINT RPTED THE PROB AS A FAILED FAIRING SUPPORT ROD OR ARM.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of January 2009 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.