Narrative:

Flight from atl to bos, mar/xa/01, takeoff XA59, VFR conditions. Soon as airborne, we got continuous stick shaker, then rudder ratio and mach trim lights on EICAS and overhead. We raised the gear and began to raise flaps on schedule. Copilot noticed my airspeed indication was 50-70 KTS slower than his indicator and the standby airspeed indicator. With flap handle in the 'up' position, the aircraft started to shudder and vibrate and yaw to the left. EICAS then indicated a leading edge flap asymmetry. We then noticed our altimeters differed by about 1500 ft -- the standby altimeter agreeing with my altimeter. We declared an emergency for a flight control problem and requested radar vectors to return to atl. We had 2 problems: 1) a pitot static, and 2) a leading edge flap asymmetry. We were able to eliminate the stick shaker and airspeed and altimeter differences by going to alternate on my air data instrument source selector switch. We made an uneventful landing using flaps 20 degrees per our emergency leading edge flap asymmetry checklist. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: the reporter stated that maintenance reported one part of the problem was one or both of the stall warning angle of attack sensors were not calibrated. The reporter said boeing was brought into the problem and nothing was disclosed other than the uncalibrated stall warning angle of attack. The reporter stated the airplane was and may still be OTS.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A B757-200 IMMEDIATELY AFTER TKOF HAD CONTINUOUS STALL WARNING STICK SHAKER AND EICAS WARNING ON MACH TRIM AND RUDDER RATIO SYS. DISCOVERED AIRSPD AND ALTIMETER ERRORS BTWN CAPT'S AND FO'S INSTS. WITH FLAP HANDLE UP, ACFT SHUDDERED AND VIBRATED. EMER DECLARED AND DIVERTED.

Narrative: FLT FROM ATL TO BOS, MAR/XA/01, TKOF XA59, VFR CONDITIONS. SOON AS AIRBORNE, WE GOT CONTINUOUS STICK SHAKER, THEN RUDDER RATIO AND MACH TRIM LIGHTS ON EICAS AND OVERHEAD. WE RAISED THE GEAR AND BEGAN TO RAISE FLAPS ON SCHEDULE. COPLT NOTICED MY AIRSPD INDICATION WAS 50-70 KTS SLOWER THAN HIS INDICATOR AND THE STANDBY AIRSPD INDICATOR. WITH FLAP HANDLE IN THE 'UP' POS, THE ACFT STARTED TO SHUDDER AND VIBRATE AND YAW TO THE L. EICAS THEN INDICATED A LEADING EDGE FLAP ASYMMETRY. WE THEN NOTICED OUR ALTIMETERS DIFFERED BY ABOUT 1500 FT -- THE STANDBY ALTIMETER AGREEING WITH MY ALTIMETER. WE DECLARED AN EMER FOR A FLT CTL PROB AND REQUESTED RADAR VECTORS TO RETURN TO ATL. WE HAD 2 PROBS: 1) A PITOT STATIC, AND 2) A LEADING EDGE FLAP ASYMMETRY. WE WERE ABLE TO ELIMINATE THE STICK SHAKER AND AIRSPD AND ALTIMETER DIFFERENCES BY GOING TO ALTERNATE ON MY AIR DATA INST SOURCE SELECTOR SWITCH. WE MADE AN UNEVENTFUL LNDG USING FLAPS 20 DEGS PER OUR EMER LEADING EDGE FLAP ASYMMETRY CHKLIST. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: THE RPTR STATED THAT MAINT RPTED ONE PART OF THE PROB WAS ONE OR BOTH OF THE STALL WARNING ANGLE OF ATTACK SENSORS WERE NOT CALIBRATED. THE RPTR SAID BOEING WAS BROUGHT INTO THE PROB AND NOTHING WAS DISCLOSED OTHER THAN THE UNCALIBRATED STALL WARNING ANGLE OF ATTACK. THE RPTR STATED THE AIRPLANE WAS AND MAY STILL BE OTS.

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.