EMB-170 flight crew reported that during the initial approach the landing gear would not extend. They cycled the gear lever a second time and then on the third attempt the gear extended normally.
Synopsis
EMB-170 flight crew reported that during the initial approach the landing gear would not extend. They cycled the gear lever a second time and then on the third attempt the gear extended normally.
Narrative
Everything on the flight and beginning of the ZZZ RNAV-X XX was normal. I briefed the FOQA Caution in the company pages earlier in the flight and followed the recommended procedure. Upon reaching ZZZZZ; as pilot flying; I called for gear down. When the CA moved the landing gear lever down; nothing happened. There were 3 UP indications on the EICAS and there was no audible sound nor rumbling from the normal extension of the gear. The CA moved the lever back up; and back down again to cycle it; and still nothing happened. The CA then moved the lever up; and kept it there for the time being. We did not receive any EICAS message or audible warning about the landing gear. He advised ATC of the issue and requested to discontinue the approach and get delayed vectors. We were instructed to climb initially to 2000; then 3000 feet. We cleaned up the plane and maintained 210 kts. The CA used the QRH to troubleshoot; and it instructed him to cycle the gear lever. On this 3rd attempt; the landing gear came down normally and indicated 3 green DN. Again; there were no abnormal indications in the flight deck this whole time. We decided to keep the landing gear down for the remainder of the flight.We advised ATC that we were ready to join the approach again; and they vectored us back in. We also realized that there was a possibility of burning into the 1500 lbs of ballast fuel; so we decided to request priority handling. We did so out of caution and to get priority to the airport just in case there were further issues. The CA informed the FAs (flight attendants) first and then passengers of why we discontinued the approach and that we are expecting a normal landing; with emergency vehicles on the ground just as a precaution. I flew the approach with autopilot; then disconnected the AP (Autopilot) once lined up with the runway. We touched down and slowed with no issues. The CA took controls to taxi and I informed ATC the we would like the emergency vehicles to follow us to the ramp. We parked and completed all the checklists. We informed Dispatch and Maintenance; and the CA wrote it up in the Maintenance log.Suggestions: Continue to practice a culture of safety by maintaining situational awareness and vigilance in all phases of flight; maintaining proficiency with checklists and scenario-based training; and working as a flight crew team to conduct the flight safety.
Second reporter narrative
While operating Aircraft X ZZZ1-ZZZ the aircraft experienced a landing gear lever disagreement which then led to a request for priority handling. During the RNAV-X XX approach to ZZZ while configuring the aircraft for landing the landing gear did not extend when the gear lever was placed in the down position. After executing a go-around the crew ran the LG Lever Disagree QRH procedure. The gear extended and indicated in the down and locked position after the QRH procedure. The crew requested to return to ZZZ.On this flight 1;500 lbs of ballast fuel was planned for weight and balance. Reserve fuel was planned at 2;409 lbs. While being vectored for the approach I noticed the increased fuel burn from keeping the gear extended would potentially cause us to land with under 4;000 lbs of fuel remaining. Out of an abundance of caution; and to receive priority to ZZZ to reduce our fuel consumption; I made the decision to advise ATC.We were recleared for the RNAV-X approach to Runway XX and landed without further incident. Fuel at touchdown was approximately 3;900 lbs.
Source: NASA Aviation Safety Reporting System (public domain). Reports are voluntary submissions and are not verified by NASA.