elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201203
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: MD-83
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: INS / IRS / IRU
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Training / Qualification; Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Aircraft
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was informed of an airplane swap just after I had gotten the flight plan and release. The rest of the flight crew had to gather their things switch terminals A to C. We were now hurried to get out on schedule. I get to the airplane and maintenance is on board finishing the de-fueling procedure. I get in the cockpit to review several MEL items. The right A/C pack; both FMS units; GPWS; and a fueling valve are deferred. The flight is boarded and we do the normal before start checklist. I check to make sure the headings are matched up and the IRS switch is in ATT mode. The First Officer tells me that due to the FMS units being out; we used ATT mode to get a display on attitude and heading indicators. I agreed that we were not using the IRS's anyway and it made sense. We pushed out; taxied and started takeoff roll normally. Just before 80 KTS First Officer notices the heading indicators are not correct (215 instead of 176). I decided to continue with the takeoff and just visually turned to an approximate heading. Once airborne; I quickly realized that slewing the heading indicators was not an easy task. We requested a return to the airport and I visually flew the aircraft around the pattern and landed. We returned to the gate without any problem. I believe I missed the heading check when taking position on the runway because we needed to turn off the operating pack per MEL. I also thought we could correct the headings once airborne. There is no MEL FMS out guidance and we did not get any malfunction warnings to lead us to the QRH.




Synopsis: MD83 Captain reports being dispatched with both FMS units inoperative and discovers during the before start checklist that the IRS's have been aligned in the ATT mode; which seemed reasonable. During takeoff heading errors are discovered but the Captain elects to continue. Once airborne; correcting the heading errors is found to be difficult and the flight returns to the departure airport.
Date: 202104
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: A321
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical; Ground Event / Encounter Vehicle; Ground Incursion Taxiway
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; General Physical Injury / Incapacitation
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: On taxi out ground traffic failed to give way to taxiing aircraft. First Officer saw this and applied brakes heavily. Ground traffic was right to left. Flight attendant was injured with the sudden stop. Returned to gate. First Officer applied brakes without saying a word. We discussed the issue. I relayed that a verbal warning should have been given [to me].


Second narrative: Normal pushback and engine start. Ramp cleared us to contact Ground Control. I noticed a white van was driving eastbound on the service road between taxiways. The van was not yielding to us and that caught me off guard. Collision looked imminent and I reacted by applying brakes. The van continued eastbound and I reported the incident to Ground Control. As I was talking to Ground Control; the Captain stopped the airplane and was talking to the cabin. I learned the #4 Flight Attendant was injured; so I got on radio #2 to tell [Operations] that we needed to return to the gate for a injured Flight Attendant. We taxied back to the gate and awaited ramp crew to park us. Once parked; paramedics attended to the injured #4 Flight Attendant and took her off the airplane.


Synopsis: A321 flight and cabin crews reported a flight attendant was injured during taxi out when the First Officer abruptly applied brakes to avoid a collision with a vehicle.
Date: 201204
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: LGA.Airport, NY
Flight conditions: Mixed
Weather elements / visibility: Haze / Smoke
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Citation X (C750)
Operator: Fractional
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class B LGA
ATC / advisory: Center ZNY
Aircraft component: AHRS/ND
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Fractional
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Human-Machine Interface; Confusion; Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Air Traffic Control Separated Traffic; Aircraft Equipment Problem Dissipated; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: During the SID climb departure it became immediately apparent that AHRS headings had both malfunctioned and were 30-45 degrees off from each other. NAV information was extremely unreliable. DG Fast Slave did not work on either AHRS and autopilot could not be used. Mag Compass was only immediate heading source. When ATC cleared us on a heading it was way off due to MFD map error. Down track VOR's were given but again displayed info was erroneous and direct course could not be flown precisely even with raw data green needles. It was during an attempted direct to a VOR that we began to deviate toward another aircraft in the vicinity of 34;000 FT. ATC Controller put us back on a divergent heading so conflict would not occur. We got no TCAS warning or loss of min separation indication from the Controller. Finally at higher altitudes and in smooth air; mag compass settled down enough to steer a reasonably accurate heading. Right AHRS also settled down enough at cruise to use in conjunction with autopilot.

Callback: The Reporter stated that the at no time during this event was a system warning or error displayed. Also; even though the left and right FMS information was divergent the two systems did not transition to independent operation. The C750 wingtips are only about 4 1/2 to 5 feet off the ground and so a magnetic anomaly near the end of LGA Runway 13 may affect the compass systems. At cruise altitude the navigation systems were not usable but after the reporter noticed the 240 kt crosswind in the left FMS he realized that was the offending system and put the two systems in independent operations. At that time the right FMS displayed correctly and was utilized for navigation. Eventually the left FMS also became usable.



Synopsis: Both of a CE750's AHRS malfunctioned after a LGA Runway 13 takeoff and required ATC vectors referencing the magnetic compass until the compass systems returned to normal at cruise operating independently.
Date: 201711
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZFW.ARTCC, TX
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class A ZFW
ATC / advisory: Center ZFW
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Confusion; Distraction; Human-Machine Interface; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Automation Air Traffic Control; Person Air Traffic Control
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Human Factors
Primary problem: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings

Narrative: Aircraft X was climbing out of around 24000 ft on the RNAV departure to his filed altitude of 28000 ft. When he checked on; I cleared him direct. The pilot requested to remain on their flight plan route and to stop climb at 26000 ft to burn gas. I hit previous route and after coordination entered his new final altitude of 26000 ft. When I hit previous route I received a UTM (Failed Transfer) message to the next Center sector. Several minutes later when the next sector took the handoff the route changed back to direct and the altitude reverted to 28000 ft. I coordinated with them to make sure the correct information was passed; but it was unnerving to have the aircraft's flight info change with no warning when the handoff was accepted.Whatever bug that is causing the UTM needs to get fixed. This happens fairly frequently; and while usually just an annoyance; this could be a real problem if the controller were busy and did not notice the UTM. Usually it is just the flight plan that is a little off; but in this case both route and altitude were passed inaccurately.




Synopsis: ZFW Center Controller reported that after handing off an aircraft to the next sector the aircraft's amended altitude and route reverted back to the original information.
Date: 201902
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: NCT.TRACON, US
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class C SJC
ATC / advisory: TRACON NCT
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach; Instructor
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Aircraft X was on the SILCN 4 arrival landing RWY 12R. He was instructed; 'After EDMND maintain 030.' After Aircraft X reached that fix he started to descend rapidly. The developmental; without observing the rapid descent told the aircraft to descend to 020. The aircraft was at the 040 ft MVA when he issued this instruction. I told the developmental to tell Aircraft X to maintain 030. The aircraft was at 032 when he was instructed to maintain 030 but he continued descending to 023 before he climbed back up again. This was an unusually fast descent. The aircraft hit the 030 ft MVA at 023. I'm going to override his transmissions whenever he does or says something that I don't like instead of telling him to fix it. I'm also going to ask for a training team meeting whenever I see my supervisor and discuss possibly SET (Special Enhanced Training) training for MVAs.




Synopsis: TRACON Instructor reported a developmental issued an altitude below the MVA; and the aircraft descended rapidly below the MVA.
Date: 201403
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: B737-700
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Human factors: Time Pressure
Anomaly: No Specific Anomaly Occurred All Types
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Company Policy
Primary problem: Company Policy

Narrative: With the new program of pushing early; I feel the agents are under undue pressure to push early and this pressure is passed on to the flight crews. Today I had two open maintenance write-ups and needed to amend the release; but Operations just kept trying to hurry me; so we could push early. Under these conditions; I feel it would be really easy to rush and make a mistake. I feel that top Leadership has put too much emphasis on pushing early at the expense of safety. I feel the next incident at our Company will be caused by rushing the crews to push early. Quit putting so much pressure on employees to push early; slow down; and make safety a priority.




Synopsis: Air Carrier Captain laments his company's policy to pushback early whenever possible; believing that it puts too much pressure on all of the employees involved and will lead to mistakes.
Date: 201205
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: A319
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Fuel Drain
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Technician
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Airframe; Maintenance Powerplant
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Maintenance
When detected: Other During Maintenance
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Chart Or Publication; Human Factors; Manuals; Procedure; Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: I was replacing the Fuel Sump Water Drain Valve because it was leaking. Than; during replacement; the retainer clip failed; allowing fuel to exit the wing; leading up to a minor fuel spill that we were able to contained.




Synopsis: A Mechanic reports that during replacement of a Fuel Sump Drain Valve on an A319 aircraft; the valve retainer clip failed; and allowing fuel to exit the wing. A minor fuel spill occurred in their hangar.
Date: 201201
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Dawn
Aircraft: B737-400
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Pressurization System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Approximately 5 minutes after level off at FL330; an intermittent [cabin altitude] warning horn sounded. QRC items were accomplished; but unable to control cabin altitude in standby. Cabin altitude [was] at approximately 11;000 FT.Informed ATC of problem and requested descent to 10;000 FT and were told to stand by. We were able to see the mountain visually in the sunrise and on our terrain display well to the south; so we requested and were denied descent again.Since we could observe no traffic below us on TCAS we declared an emergency and commenced emergency descent to 10;000 FT. We regained control of the cabin after leveling at 10;000 FT in manual AC mode. Flight attendants notified and reported feeling light headed. We decided to return to our departure airport where we made a normal landing.


Second narrative: [Narrative #2 had no additional information.]


Synopsis: When ATC failed to clear them for their requested descent to 10;000 FT; the flight crew of a B737-400; unable to control their pressurization; declared an emergency and initiated their descent.
Date: 201202
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-300
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Fan Reverser
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Technician
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Airframe; Maintenance Powerplant
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Maintenance
When detected: Routine Inspection
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Procedure; Aircraft; Company Policy; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: While working dayshift C-Check overtime; I was assigned wheel wells/struts. One of the non-routines [(write-ups)] was that the #3 brake was worn. After viewing the indication pin on the brake; there was obviously well over the allowed pin length remaining before a brake change would be needed. The only way to accurately measure this length is to turn hydraulics on and set the brakes. After clearing (notifying) the mechanics working on the trailing edge right wing; I cleared the mechanics working on the tail. Then walked around the left wing where no one was working and after yelling 'HYDRAULICS;' proceeded up to the flight deck.I checked the flap handle position to ensure it was at 40-units; and turned flight controls off. I removed the guard on the hydraulic switches; which I assumed were locked out from the mechanics working on the trailing edge wings and turned on the 'B' System Hydraulic power. I immediately heard a loud noise and turned off hydraulic power. The leading edge Krueger flaps had been retracted and the #2 Engine inboard thrust reverser was open and when hydraulic power was applied; the Krueger flaps extended which caught the thrust reverser sleeve causing damage to the sleeve and the hold open rod. I realized that I had cleared the mechanics working the wings; but had not looked at the position of the leading edge and #2 inboard thrust reverser.




Synopsis: A Mechanic reports that he heard a loud noise when he turned on the the 'B' System Hydraulic pressure on a B737-300 aircraft to check brake wear on the right main gear; during a dayshift C-Check overtime. The leading edge Krueger flaps had extended; damaging the opened #2 Engine inboard thrust reverser sleeve and hold-open rod.
Date: 202108
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Fuel Quantity-Pressure Indication
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Weight And Balance; Inflight Event / Encounter Fuel Issue
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; Flight Crew Inflight Shutdown; General Maintenance Action; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Enroute from ZZZ to ZZZ1; shortly after leveling off at cruise altitude; we received an IMBAL (imbalance) message and saw that our right fuel tank had 1;000 lbs less than the left tank. We had just turned off our center fuel pumps a few minutes prior. We performed the IMBAL checklist which then led us to the Fuel Leak Engine checklist. By this point it was decided that the safest course of action was to return to ZZZ. We requested priority handling and were cleared direct to ZZZ and were given a descent clearance. We shut down the #2 engine per the Fuel Leak Engine checklist. We also performed the One Engine Inoperative Landing checklist; the Non-Routine Landing Considerations checklist; and the Overweight Landing checklist. I was the Pilot Flying until downwind; at which time the Captain took the controls and landed the aircraft. We stopped on the runway and had the firefighters check out the aircraft. Everything looked ok to them and we were cleared to taxi to the gate. The Captain made an AML (Aircraft Maintenance Logbook) entry for the suspected fuel leak and overweight landing.The only causal factor was the mechanical irregularity of the right fuel tank showing 1;000 lbs less than the left; which gave us the IMBAL message.




Synopsis: B737-800 First Officer reported a fuel imbalance message in flight; causing an in-flight shut down of the #2 engine and a return to the departure airport.
Date: 201302
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Dawn
Aircraft: Cessna Stationair/Turbo Stationair 6
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Ferry / Re-Positioning
Flight phase: Landing
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Distraction; Confusion
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Ground Event / Encounter Ground Strike - Aircraft
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged
Contributing factors: Airport
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: I descended to my pattern altitude and flew a modified downwind to base leg when I had determined the airstrip was in sight. As I was turning my final approach; around a 150 heading; the sun was coming up on the horizon at this time. I had been to this airstrip prior to this trip so; I was familiar with the direction; approximate length and width of the runway. Unknown to me; the owner of the ranch and aircraft had tilled a field parallel and butting up with the airstrip the exact same width and length as the runway. This discoloration of the freshly moved dirt stuck out as the runway in relation to the rest of the pasture which was predominately dead grass and shrub. I slowed the aircraft to my final approach speed 65-70 KTS for a short; soft field landing. As I neared my flaring altitude; with the sun still in my eyes; I reduced the power and softly set the main wheels down. I then noticed that the strip seemed much softer than I recalled and I maintained the nose wheel off the ground as best as I could. As my airspeed continued to bleed off and [with] the extra drag from the soft dirt; the nose wheels set down and dug into the soft dirt. The aircraft flipped over on its back. I immediately turned off the fuel; pulled the mixture to cut-off; turned off the avionics; the master; and the ignition. I then removed my seat-belt and exited the aircraft out of the side door. The owner of the aircraft and one of his workers had witnessed this happen and were pulling up in a truck as I was climbing out. The first thing that the owner said to me after asking if I was alright was; I should have told you that I had plowed that field. That is my fault. I sustained no injuries of any kind. I then realized that the strip I had intended to land on; had vegetation and growth on it and was not clearly marked so I had mistaken it for part of the pasture. The aircraft fuselage and landing gear did not sustain any noticeable damage. The right wing; propeller and vertical stabilizer did sustain damage.




Synopsis: The pilot of a Cessna 206 mistook a freshly plowed field adjacent to a private airstrip as the runway. His landing was successful but the nose wheel dug into the soft ground and caused the aircraft to flip over. The pilot was uninjured but the aircraft received some damage.