2010-07 · NASA ASRS report 898488
A CRJ200 flight crew returned to the departure airport following multiple system failures associated with the failure of the landing gear to retract normally. The flight's dispatcher took exception to their failure to confer with dispatch prior to making their diversion decisions.
Pushed off the gate and got a 'ground prox fault message.' Called Maintenance and was told to return to the gate. It took about 4 min to get to this point after push and another 10 to get a word in with ramp and rampers to park us. Maintenance fixed the plane and we pushed again. A few seconds after takeoff we received a Antiskid Inboard; Gear disagree; park break SOV; and Gnd Prox Fault messages. The Main Gear was down and the nose gear was up. I was pilot flying. At 3000 ft. I called ATC to tell them that we had an issue and needed vectors. We were given 5000 and were vectored over [the airport] for the duration of the situation. The Captain ran the QRH. He got to a point of 'no return' and and called Maintenance to let them know about the issue. Maintenance Control put a specialist on the radio. After confirming the steps necessary he continued with the QRH which directed pulling the manual gear handle and the gear handle. When the gear came down; all faults were cleared. While talking to Maintenance Control they said they would notify Flight Control for him. We also informed Flight Control directly of our situation and the need to burn off fuel. The dispatcher said 'do you have the gear and flaps down to help burn off fuel?' We responded 'yes.' We also sent an ACARS divert message and another ACARS message directly to the dispatcher that the burn off was taking longer than planned and our ETA at the gate. No emergency was declared as it was not necessary. After the gear went down; all faults/issues were gone and normal flight was resumed. We landed and taxied to the gate. The Captain made several PA's to the passengers and calls to the Flight Attendant's updating them as to our situation.
[The Dispatch] Duty Manager reported to me that [one of my flights] was talking with Maintenance Control about a landing gear problem. I had overheard at least five minutes prior to this that a flight was requesting the subject matter expert with MCC. At no time prior to the duty manager walking over had the PIC or Maintenance Control informed dispatch [me] that they had encountered a problem. Maintenance Control and the subject matter expert unilaterally decided with the PIC to have [the flight] return to ZZZ. [Maintenance] told the flight that he would let his dispatcher know. I was informed that he was to return with absolutely no input at all. [Later; the Captain] called and informed me that he was returning to ZZZ but that he would be holding for at least 10 minutes to burn off fuel to be below max structural landing weight. I evaluated the wx conditions aloft and felt that it was safe to do this with the landing gear down but at no time did the PIC; Maintenance Control; the Operations duty manager or the subject matter expert ask if this would be a safe course of action. This very same flight had returned to the gate in ZZZ without any notification from the PIC or Maintenance Control to either the dispatcher with operational responsibility or the Operations sector team or duty manager. At anytime during the discussion between the PIC; Maintenance Control; and the subject matter expert was it considered if the weather on the decent into ZZZ was appropriate and safe? At any time during the discussion between the PIC; Maintenance Control; and the subject matter expert was it considered if ZZZ was in fact the closest suitable airport to divert to. Does/Should the company wish to change its standard procedure that flights call dispatch before Maintenance Control for matters considered more safety related? Should the company add into its respective QRH's some relief for the PIC and Dispatcher to select a 'most' suitable alternate so that these questions don't have to be asked?
More incidents for this aircraft family
Source: NASA Aviation Safety Reporting System (public domain). Reports are voluntary submissions and are not verified by NASA.
Loading the flight search…
Pick an aircraft model — Boeing 737, Airbus A320, A380, Boeing 787 Dreamliner and more — enter your origin airport, and FlightFinder shows every route that plane flies from there with live fares.
We support Boeing 737/747/757/767/777/787, the full Airbus A220/A319/A320/A321/A330/A340/A350/A380 family, Embraer E170/E175/E190/E195, Bombardier CRJ and Dash 8, and the ATR 42/72 turboprops.
Search and schedules are free. Pro ($4.99/month, $39/year, or $99 one-time lifetime) unlocks the enriched flight card — on-time stats, CO₂ per passenger, amenities, live gate & weather — plus My Trips with push alerts.
Live schedules come from Amadeus, AeroDataBox and Travelpayouts. Observed routes (which aircraft actually flew a given city pair) are crowdsourced from adsb.lol ADS-B data under the Open Database License.