Narrative:

On takeoff at V1 we struck a bird with the left windscreen. Pm didn't call 'positive rate;' nor did the PF call 'gear up.' PF called for 'after takeoff check' and pm said 'after takeoff check complete.' the gear remained down without PF noticing. I was the pilot flying. Upon reaching 15;000 ft I realized the gear was down and I slowed to 220 kts and called for gear up. Having exceeded the 200 kts gear retraction speed limitation the EICAS warning 'gear disagree' illuminated on the display. We ran the QRH and the EICAS warning gear disagree went away once we reached 210 kts on our way to 200 kts. We continued on to our destination with no further issues. Upon arrival we contacted maintenance and told them of both the bird strike and the gear disagree and its cause. Maintenance determined that a visual inspection of the aircraft would suffice if no damage was observed. As far as the gear disagree maintenance determined that it didn't require further inspection.cause of this event was pilot distraction. The bird we struck at V1 and its remains were distracting. Due to the distraction we didn't make the proper callouts then didn't execute our after takeoff checklist properly. After that is was a matter of misdiagnosing the reason for the ambient noise in the cockpit and not scanning our EICAS system. Had the proper callout been made and the after takeoff checklist been executed properly this wouldn't have occurred. We had two opportunities to grab the gear handle and put it in the up position and did not. Personally I will no longer assume the gear handle has been put in the up position after I call for the after takeoff check.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: CRJ200 First Officer reported a bird strike on takeoff on the Captain's windscreen. The Captain did not call positive rate and the First Officer did not call gear up. The gear was discovered to still be down at 15000 feet and was then retracted.

Narrative: On takeoff at V1 we struck a bird with the left windscreen. PM didn't call 'positive rate;' nor did the PF call 'gear up.' PF called for 'after takeoff check' and PM said 'after takeoff check complete.' The gear remained down without PF noticing. I was the pilot flying. Upon reaching 15;000 ft I realized the gear was down and I slowed to 220 kts and called for gear up. Having exceeded the 200 kts gear retraction speed limitation the EICAS Warning 'gear disagree' illuminated on the display. We ran the QRH and the EICAS warning gear disagree went away once we reached 210 kts on our way to 200 kts. We continued on to our destination with no further issues. Upon arrival we contacted maintenance and told them of both the bird strike and the gear disagree and its cause. Maintenance determined that a visual inspection of the aircraft would suffice if no damage was observed. As far as the gear disagree maintenance determined that it didn't require further inspection.Cause of this event was pilot distraction. The bird we struck at V1 and its remains were distracting. Due to the distraction we didn't make the proper callouts then didn't execute our after takeoff checklist properly. After that is was a matter of misdiagnosing the reason for the ambient noise in the cockpit and not scanning our EICAS system. Had the proper callout been made and the after takeoff checklist been executed properly this wouldn't have occurred. We had two opportunities to grab the gear handle and put it in the up position and did not. Personally I will no longer assume the gear handle has been put in the up position after I call for the after takeoff check.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site 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.