Flap slat indicator malfunction upon positioning flap control to up.

Attributes
ACN	92152
Time
Date	198808
Day	Thu
Local Time Of Day	0601 To 1200
Place
Locale Reference	atc facility : ord
State Reference	IL
Altitude	msl bound lower : 5000 msl bound upper : 5000
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	tracon : ord
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	Large Transport, Low Wing, 3 Turbojet Eng
Flight Phase	climbout : intermediate altitude climbout : initial
Route In Use	departure sid : sid enroute : on vectors
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : first officer
Qualification	pilot : atp
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 86 flight time total : 4500 flight time type : 86
ASRS Report	92152
Person 2
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : captain oversight : pic
Qualification	pilot : atp
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 100 flight time total : 9100 flight time type : 100
ASRS Report	92146
Events
Anomaly	aircraft equipment problem : less severe
Independent Detector	aircraft equipment other aircraft equipment : unspecified other flight crewa
Resolutory Action	none taken : anomaly accepted
Consequence	faa : investigated faa : reviewed incident with flight crew
Supplementary
Primary Problem	Aircraft
Air Traffic Incident	other

Narrative:

Problem with leading edge flap indication on clean up after takeoff. While performing checklist to determine whether to continue with clean up or return to departure airport, the captain thought we had a flap indicator problem, while the F/east thought we had a flap malfunction problem. Although the F/east was correct in his diagnosis of problem, the captain's diagnosis of an indicator malfunction was confirmed by maintenance on arrival at destination. There was an FAA inspector in cockpit and this report is filed in case he changes his mind and decides the crew was wrong to continue the flight with the misunderstanding between the problem diagnosis of captain and F/east. This would have required additional reports (returning to point of departure) in addition to logbook writeup. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following: misunderstanding between captain and second officer had to do with repositioning the flap control to the original position. Procedure also called for visually checking the position of the flaps with the handle in the up position and it was determined everything was normal. Reporter is very concerned with the attitude of the air carrier reference to the incident. He has heard nothing to date but was advised by the company when taking initial captain training that should an incident be filed with the FAA, no action taken, the incident would still remain in his file. The only way he can determine if a report was put in his file is to query FAA and ask for a readout. When no action is taken, he feels the incident should not be put in your file and dropped period.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: FLAP SLAT INDICATOR MALFUNCTION UPON POSITIONING FLAP CONTROL TO UP.

Narrative: PROB WITH LEADING EDGE FLAP INDICATION ON CLEAN UP AFTER TKOF. WHILE PERFORMING CHKLIST TO DETERMINE WHETHER TO CONTINUE WITH CLEAN UP OR RETURN TO DEP ARPT, THE CAPT THOUGHT WE HAD A FLAP INDICATOR PROB, WHILE THE F/E THOUGHT WE HAD A FLAP MALFUNCTION PROB. ALTHOUGH THE F/E WAS CORRECT IN HIS DIAGNOSIS OF PROB, THE CAPT'S DIAGNOSIS OF AN INDICATOR MALFUNCTION WAS CONFIRMED BY MAINT ON ARR AT DEST. THERE WAS AN FAA INSPECTOR IN COCKPIT AND THIS RPT IS FILED IN CASE HE CHANGES HIS MIND AND DECIDES THE CREW WAS WRONG TO CONTINUE THE FLT WITH THE MISUNDERSTANDING BTWN THE PROB DIAGNOSIS OF CAPT AND F/E. THIS WOULD HAVE REQUIRED ADDITIONAL RPTS (RETURNING TO POINT OF DEP) IN ADDITION TO LOGBOOK WRITEUP. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING: MISUNDERSTANDING BTWN CAPT AND S/O HAD TO DO WITH REPOSITIONING THE FLAP CONTROL TO THE ORIGINAL POS. PROC ALSO CALLED FOR VISUALLY CHECKING THE POS OF THE FLAPS WITH THE HANDLE IN THE UP POS AND IT WAS DETERMINED EVERYTHING WAS NORMAL. RPTR IS VERY CONCERNED WITH THE ATTITUDE OF THE ACR REF TO THE INCIDENT. HE HAS HEARD NOTHING TO DATE BUT WAS ADVISED BY THE COMPANY WHEN TAKING INITIAL CAPT TRNING THAT SHOULD AN INCIDENT BE FILED WITH THE FAA, NO ACTION TAKEN, THE INCIDENT WOULD STILL REMAIN IN HIS FILE. THE ONLY WAY HE CAN DETERMINE IF A RPT WAS PUT IN HIS FILE IS TO QUERY FAA AND ASK FOR A READOUT. WHEN NO ACTION IS TAKEN, HE FEELS THE INCIDENT SHOULD NOT BE PUT IN YOUR FILE AND DROPPED PERIOD.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of August 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.