Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Troubleshooting
Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Aircraft
After takeoff and when gear retraction was initiated on profile; we got a gear disagree warning message. The main gears were up however the nose gear was showing red. After contacting dispatch and patching with Maintenance Control; running the non-normal checklist and upon recycling the gear; it came up as it should and was all green and retracted.  It was determined at that point that continuing to the destination was the best course of action as all systems were normal and running as they should. We landed with no issues and the gear came down just fine.As a suggestion the deicers can start taking a closer look in the wheel well and around the gear area and if they see any significant build up the crew can be notified. The crew can further determine the necessary course of action.
I conducted the preflight first flight of the day and noticed no icing or snow in any wheel well. Each of the wheel wells were clean and no ice was noticed. During the first flight hydraulic tests; we noted lower hydraulic system quantities (~40%-44% ) but acceptable for temperature conditions. We experienced a delay getting deiced due to resourced; however; this was not unusual. In snowy conditions from the runway (wet snow) we departed and climbed. Upon gear retraction we received a Gear Disagree warning. Due to the heavy snow conditions in the initial climb; I suspected a sensor issue potentially exacerbated by the hydraulic quantities.At 180 kts we recycled the gear and the gear retracted normally. ATC was in the loop and they informed us that a previous CRJ-700 experienced the same issue. We ran the non-normal checklist and noted that one of the checklist items noted to land at nearest suitable field. We discussed the issues and due to the field conditions; we elected to initially continue towards our destination while bringing Maintenance and Dispatch into the loop as more suitable fields were downrange. We heard the ice that had formed in the nose area and felt confident this was the culprit. We informed Maintenance and Dispatch of the issues as well and kept them informed during the flight (ACARS messages available). The aircraft landed without incident at our destination. The Gear Disagree was written in the maintenance log and the aircraft was taken out of service. Consult with the mechanics on scene disclosed that all wheel wells were caked in snow/ice with significant coverage over the sensors.My biggest concern as a line check pilot is there may be concern that we did not return to the departure airport as the nearest suitable field. The CRJ variants have had Gear Disagree events over the years; so much so that a memo was published (can't tell you what property it was) directed us to recycle like we did. This in itself may seem innocent; however; upon reflection I do not want to use past practices as a reason for my decision. I was quite confident the gear issue was weather (and somewhat low hydraulic) related. My belief was the air flow would clear the sensor area and the recycle would be successful. I exercised system knowledge and seeing a lot of this in the field. Secondly; I believed we resolved the issue. Diverting would have grounded the plane off-station causing a lengthy out of serviced aircraft due to a gear swing required. We expanded our team and got agreement to continue.
CRJ-900 flight crew reported that possible winter ground debris/ice accumulation may have blocked gear from completely retracting upon takeoff. Crew was able to overcome problem and landed normally.