Regional Jet 200 ER/LR (CRJ200)
Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
General Maintenance Action
Aircraft; Human Factors
While preparing to depart; the ramp agents notified us that they could not attach the tow bar to the airplane. Upon inspection we determined that was indeed the case. Since the airplane had just flown in prior we made the assumption that it wasn't of concern and at the suggestion of the ramp agents; we decided to make a turn out of the parking spot instead of pushing back. The flight continued with no further issues. Upon arrival at our destination; we contacted Maintenance to take a look just to be sure. Their assessment of the aircraft alerted us to missing parts on the nose gear leaving the aircraft right nose wheel to be held on by a hand-tight castlated nut instead of being backed up with two bolts and safety wire.After discussion with the Mechanics at our arrival station; my belief is that the aircraft left a previous maintenance action with the parts missing and the aircraft was operated for multiple flights in that condition. Due to the prevalence of pushback equipment that doesn't require a tow bar; it would be easy for that to be missed until the next time a tow bar was to be used. Additionally; as pilots; we are trained to trust that an aircraft is airworthy when it leaves Maintenance and the purpose of our preflight inspection is to verify the 'big picture' airworthiness of the aircraft. We are not trained to know every nut and bolt on the airplane which would make an issue like this an understandable oversight on the part of any flight crew associated with the aircraft.A more detailed assurance check of aircraft leaving Maintenance and/or a more detailed means of tracking parts removed vs. parts installed would assure that an aircraft is not returned to service in an unairworthy condition.
Just prior to departure the ramp crew notified the Captain that the tow bar would not properly attach to the nose wheel. The Captain went outside to inspect the issue himself. Upon return stated that the tow bar in fact wasn't attaching correctly. Since the aircraft had just flown in prior we made the assumption that it wasn't a concern and at the suggestion of the ramp agents we decided to make a turn out of the parking spot instead of a push back. The departure and landing occurred with no further issues or abnormalities. Upon reaching our destination; we contacted Maintenance to let them know about the issue with the push back and that is when we were informed that we were missing not only the bushing but a castled nut and safety wire that holds the retaining nut in place.After discussion with the Mechanics at our destination; my belief is that the aircraft left Maintenance hangar with the parts missing and the aircraft was operated for multiple flights in that condition. Due to the majority of the push backs being accomplished without the need of a tow bar it would be easy for that to be missed until the need for a tow bar is required. Additionally; as pilots; we are trained to look at certain things for preflight of the aircraft; not every single nut and bolt.[I suggest] a more detailed Quality Assurance check prior to an aircraft being released from Maintenance.
CRJ-200 flight crew reported aircraft had flown multiple flights with nose wheel component parts missing.