Narrative:

During climbout and transitioning through 250 KTS; a buzzing sound resonated through the airframe. We assumed it was probably a door latch in the air stream. A review of the systems pages revealed no irregularities. After a brief conference with maintenance control we were advised that they had no objections to the continuation of the flight and maintenance would be standing by in ZZZ. Shortly after parking the aircraft; maintenance personnel advised us that the gpu access door was in the unlatched and open position. They noted that no damage had occurred from the abnormality and signed the aircraft off for continued service. The sound and vibration called our attention to the fact that something was amiss. We discovered that at speeds less than 250 KTS; the condition ceased. We queried maintenance control; advised ATC; and requested the slower speed for the remainder of the flight. We then recalculated the fuel burn and continued without further complications. I improperly assumed that all doors in the nose area opened forward; thus providing a very small chance of inflight detachment; i.e.; the air stream would hold them close to the closed position. This particular door opens with an arc in the vertical plane and thus posed a greater chance of departure; presenting a FOD hazard. In retrospect; I feel that it may have been more appropriate to have discontinued the flight. It appears that the ground crew failed to properly latch the access door after pushback. A review of ground operation procedures may reveal less than adequate safeguards in this area. I could have better communicated my thought process with maintenance control. This might have offered them a chance to correct my assumption of the swing of the forward doors.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: EMB145 Captain reports buzzing vibration accelerating above 250 knots. Access door is suspected and after consultation and speed reduction; flight continues to destination. GPU access door is found open with no damage.

Narrative: During climbout and transitioning through 250 KTS; a buzzing sound resonated through the airframe. We assumed it was probably a door latch in the air stream. A review of the systems pages revealed no irregularities. After a brief conference with Maintenance Control we were advised that they had no objections to the continuation of the flight and maintenance would be standing by in ZZZ. Shortly after parking the aircraft; maintenance personnel advised us that the GPU access door was in the unlatched and open position. They noted that no damage had occurred from the abnormality and signed the aircraft off for continued service. The sound and vibration called our attention to the fact that something was amiss. We discovered that at speeds less than 250 KTS; the condition ceased. We queried Maintenance Control; advised ATC; and requested the slower speed for the remainder of the flight. We then recalculated the fuel burn and continued without further complications. I improperly assumed that all doors in the nose area opened forward; thus providing a very small chance of inflight detachment; i.e.; the air stream would hold them close to the closed position. This particular door opens with an arc in the vertical plane and thus posed a greater chance of departure; presenting a FOD hazard. In retrospect; I feel that it may have been more appropriate to have discontinued the flight. It appears that the Ground Crew failed to properly latch the access door after pushback. A review of ground operation procedures may reveal less than adequate safeguards in this area. I could have better communicated my thought process with Maintenance Control. This might have offered them a chance to correct my assumption of the swing of the forward doors.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of April 2012 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.