EMB ERJ 170/175 ER/LR
Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Workload; Time Pressure; Troubleshooting
Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Aircraft
It was a routine flight. On approach; the First Officer called for 'Gear Down'. The gear was lowered and showed '3 Green'. Several seconds later; the message 'Steer Fail' appeared. Because of the proximity to the runway and time constraints; a go-around was initiated. Once the gear had been retracted; the message cleared. However; the Quick Reference Handbook (QRH) procedure for 'Steer Fail'; was accomplished. While this procedure was being completed; ATC asked for the nature of the go-around; fuel on board; and souls on board. The Captain provided this information to ATC and also stated that we are not declaring [an urgent situation] as of yet because we were still troubleshooting the problem. It was later discovered that ATC elected to declare [this situation] for our aircraft (ATC informed us that Airport Fire Dept. is standing by). We informed ATC that our procedure had been completed and that there was a possibility that the problem would reappear when the gear was lowered. We further explained that the procedure indicated that the runway centerline would be maintained but we may have an issue turning off the runway. A second approach was performed (the message returned with the lowering of the gear) and a normal landing was the result. Centerline was maintained via the rudder pedals and differential braking. As tiller steering was attempted; there was no response. The aircraft was brought to a stop on the runway. At this point; the flight crew attempted one ground reset per the Ground Reset Guide. This reset was not successful. Because we are unsure of the ability to negotiate turns (verifying smooth radius turns) the decision was made to have the aircraft towed into the gate by high-speed tug. This was proactively put into work by Dispatch prior to our landing. We were in constant contact with the Fire Crew Chief who relayed pertinent information to the tug crew. The APU was started and the engines were shut down. The gear pins were put into place. Maintenance was on scene as well to verify the aircraft was safe to be towed; and the tow to the gate was started. Communication was maintained with the tug crew and they informed us that all tower communication would be handled by them at this point. The aircraft was successfully towed and parked. Appropriate notifications were made; passengers deplaned via jet bridge; and the aircraft was handed over to Maintenance. During the entire approach; go-around; second approach; landing; and tow to the gate; the passengers were kept informed as much as possible. Both flight attendants were updated throughout the incident and were told that this should be a normal landing with a possible tow to the gate. The flight attendants stated that the passengers remained calm and patient throughout the event.There needs to be a clearer definition of 'Smooth Radius Turns.'  Trying to decide what qualifies a 'smooth radius turn' in the midst of this event is somewhat difficult.I was informed well after this incident that the CodeShare Company had asked Dispatch why we had issued a 'Brace' command. I stated that at no such time was a Brace Command issued and I further confirmed with my flight attendants that no Brace Command was heard in the cabin of the aircraft by either Flight Attendant. Passengers were calm and patient throughout the event. Information was presented and updated to the passengers as much as possible.
Air Carrier pilot reported a loss of nose wheel steering caused the aircraft to be towed to the gate after landing.