Narrative:

Upon landing at pbi and after lowering nose gear to runway, there began a strong shimmying in the nose gear. Nose gear did not respond to steering control. Using differential braking and rudder, aircraft tracked centerline of runway and I slowed it to a stop. We correctly assumed that the apex pin that ties nose gear shackle to the nose gear steering had fallen out and we lost the nose gear steering. Because of an aircraft on final behind us, I chose to taxi the aircraft clear of the runway which was done at a slow speed using differential brakes. Passenger were advised to remain seated and no evacuate/evacuation was contemplated. After clearing the runway we notified company and a mechanic and tug were sent. Crash fire rescue equipment responded although no emergency was declared. We advised tower we would not require their assistance. They correctly responded, nevertheless. In hindsight, I believe although an emergency did not exist it is a good idea to have crash fire rescue equipment respond just in case. As pilots, I believe we are too quick to cancel assistance that's readily available and willing. We do not like to be in the spotlight for many reasons. In the future I will welcome and appreciate crash fire rescue equipment response.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACFT EQUIP PROB TEST CAPT'S SKILLS ON LNDG PROC ROLLOUT. CFR EQUIP SENT OUT WITHOUT REQUEST FOR ASSISTANCE.

Narrative: UPON LNDG AT PBI AND AFTER LOWERING NOSE GEAR TO RWY, THERE BEGAN A STRONG SHIMMYING IN THE NOSE GEAR. NOSE GEAR DID NOT RESPOND TO STEERING CTL. USING DIFFERENTIAL BRAKING AND RUDDER, ACFT TRACKED CTRLINE OF RWY AND I SLOWED IT TO A STOP. WE CORRECTLY ASSUMED THAT THE APEX PIN THAT TIES NOSE GEAR SHACKLE TO THE NOSE GEAR STEERING HAD FALLEN OUT AND WE LOST THE NOSE GEAR STEERING. BECAUSE OF AN ACFT ON FINAL BEHIND US, I CHOSE TO TAXI THE ACFT CLR OF THE RWY WHICH WAS DONE AT A SLOW SPD USING DIFFERENTIAL BRAKES. PAX WERE ADVISED TO REMAIN SEATED AND NO EVAC WAS CONTEMPLATED. AFTER CLRING THE RWY WE NOTIFIED COMPANY AND A MECH AND TUG WERE SENT. CFR RESPONDED ALTHOUGH NO EMER WAS DECLARED. WE ADVISED TWR WE WOULD NOT REQUIRE THEIR ASSISTANCE. THEY CORRECTLY RESPONDED, NEVERTHELESS. IN HINDSIGHT, I BELIEVE ALTHOUGH AN EMER DID NOT EXIST IT IS A GOOD IDEA TO HAVE CFR RESPOND JUST IN CASE. AS PLTS, I BELIEVE WE ARE TOO QUICK TO CANCEL ASSISTANCE THAT'S READILY AVAILABLE AND WILLING. WE DO NOT LIKE TO BE IN THE SPOTLIGHT FOR MANY REASONS. IN THE FUTURE I WILL WELCOME AND APPRECIATE CFR RESPONSE.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 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.