Narrative:

On a visual approach we were told to maintain 180 KTS or better to FAF. A few mi short of the FAF; I called for flaps 8 degrees and the first officer selected 8 degrees. Immediately a 'flaps fail' caution message was displayed and we advised ATC; who had just switched us to tower. Tower advised us to maintain 3000 ft and track the localizer. We were then given vectors in a box pattern where myself; my first officer and a check captain jumpseater went over the QRH procedures for the flaps fail at 0 degrees. We contacted the flight attendant and informed him of the situation. After discussing it with him; we then moved onto figuring actual landing distance. Jumpseater was a fantastic resource in that respect and helped lessen the workload while getting the numbers. After a number was agreed upon; we contacted dispatch to have them concur with our numbers. They did so; so we declared an emergency as a precaution; and advised the passenger of the situation and tried to calm them by telling them that we are trained for just such an eventuality. After everyone was briefed; we attempted a landing -- it was uneventful. The cockpit crew worked well together; and I was impressed with how a low-time first officer handled himself in the emergency. Jumpseater was fantastic as well. I was happy to have had all the help; and besides not having a 'flaps fail' I have no idea how this could be avoided in the future. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: the numerous flap failures experienced by CRJ200 flight crews are caused by over sensitive and malfunctioning flap asymmetry detectors. Flap limit speeds were adjusted downwards to reduce the failures and had some effect. New flap skew detectors are being installed in some aircraft but it is not known if this aircraft had been retrofitted.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: CRJ200 FLT CREW REPORT FLAP FAIL MSG DURING APPROACH; AND AFTER COMPLYING WITH QRH PROCEDURES A NO FLAP LANDING IS ACCOMPLISHED.

Narrative: ON A VISUAL APCH WE WERE TOLD TO MAINTAIN 180 KTS OR BETTER TO FAF. A FEW MI SHORT OF THE FAF; I CALLED FOR FLAPS 8 DEGS AND THE FO SELECTED 8 DEGS. IMMEDIATELY A 'FLAPS FAIL' CAUTION MESSAGE WAS DISPLAYED AND WE ADVISED ATC; WHO HAD JUST SWITCHED US TO TWR. TWR ADVISED US TO MAINTAIN 3000 FT AND TRACK THE LOC. WE WERE THEN GIVEN VECTORS IN A BOX PATTERN WHERE MYSELF; MY FO AND A CHK CAPT JUMPSEATER WENT OVER THE QRH PROCS FOR THE FLAPS FAIL AT 0 DEGS. WE CONTACTED THE FLT ATTENDANT AND INFORMED HIM OF THE SITUATION. AFTER DISCUSSING IT WITH HIM; WE THEN MOVED ONTO FIGURING ACTUAL LNDG DISTANCE. JUMPSEATER WAS A FANTASTIC RESOURCE IN THAT RESPECT AND HELPED LESSEN THE WORKLOAD WHILE GETTING THE NUMBERS. AFTER A NUMBER WAS AGREED UPON; WE CONTACTED DISPATCH TO HAVE THEM CONCUR WITH OUR NUMBERS. THEY DID SO; SO WE DECLARED AN EMER AS A PRECAUTION; AND ADVISED THE PAX OF THE SITUATION AND TRIED TO CALM THEM BY TELLING THEM THAT WE ARE TRAINED FOR JUST SUCH AN EVENTUALITY. AFTER EVERYONE WAS BRIEFED; WE ATTEMPTED A LNDG -- IT WAS UNEVENTFUL. THE COCKPIT CREW WORKED WELL TOGETHER; AND I WAS IMPRESSED WITH HOW A LOW-TIME FO HANDLED HIMSELF IN THE EMER. JUMPSEATER WAS FANTASTIC AS WELL. I WAS HAPPY TO HAVE HAD ALL THE HELP; AND BESIDES NOT HAVING A 'FLAPS FAIL' I HAVE NO IDEA HOW THIS COULD BE AVOIDED IN THE FUTURE. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: THE NUMEROUS FLAP FAILURES EXPERIENCED BY CRJ200 FLT CREWS ARE CAUSED BY OVER SENSITIVE AND MALFUNCTIONING FLAP ASYMMETRY DETECTORS. FLAP LIMIT SPEEDS WERE ADJUSTED DOWNWARDS TO REDUCE THE FAILURES AND HAD SOME EFFECT. NEW FLAP SKEW DETECTORS ARE BEING INSTALLED IN SOME ACFT BUT IT IS NOT KNOWN IF THIS ACFT HAD BEEN RETROFITTED.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of May 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.