elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201205
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: PAE.Airport, WA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Ferry / Re-Positioning
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Tower PAE
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Engineer
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: Taxi
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Airport; Human Factors
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: After deplaning passengers; we called Ground Control for taxi clearance for our IFR return flight to home base. The following clearance was received; 'Taxi to Runway 34L via Bravo; Alpha; Runway 11. Hold short of Runway 34L at Runway 11.' While taxiing southbound on Alpha; approaching Runway 11; I switched to Tower frequency (as directed by Ground Control) and the pilot flying initiated a right turn onto Runway 11. While looking for the standard runway-hold signage that would be expected at the termination of the runway; we overheard Tower say; 'takeoff clearance canceled; there is a jet that Ground isn't talking to that just entered (past the hold short line).' We immediately stopped the aircraft (still about 50 FT from the Runway 34L edge paint); called Tower and was instructed to 'just make a 180 and get back behind the hold-line.' Remarkably; the hold line at that position on the airport is unlike the other (expected) hold lines. It merely stretches across just the runway position; and in-line with the right edge of Taxiway Alpha. The line itself is difficult to see when approaching from the north since the runway is slightly higher than the taxiway. Also; one would expect to see the red signage associated with hold-short instructions for a runway. See the diagram of the runway; depicting the hold line on the runway and how easily an aircraft can make the turn onto Runway 11; and be immediately beyond the hold line. There is no signage for holding at Runway 34L from Runway 11 (29).




Synopsis: A pilot reported that the PAE Runway 34 hold short line on Runway 11 is not clearly presented when approaching from Taxiway D because the hold line only extends the width of Runway 11 and may not be seen when entering from Taxiway D.
Date: 201310
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Aircraft: B767-300 and 300 ER
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Technician
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Airport; Company Policy; Procedure
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: When I came in to work this morning; a 767-300 was parked in [the hangar] on an angle and not on approved lines in the bay. This aircraft was parked here for a jack job due to the back of the bay not being level enough for use of the tail jack. While I understand why the company is parking the aircraft on this angle; it is not an approved parking area in the bay; and it is not marked as such. I have brought this concern up before; and asked for the hangar to be lined for this specifically; but to no avail. With the advent of the [compliance] class; and the video of the jacking incident being prominently displayed in the class; one would think that the company would adhere to strict jacking rules. I have [submitted] pictures to the [company]; and believe that this should be corrected; prior to a mishap on a jacking job.  Either mark the bay properly; or stop jacking aircraft in this position.




Synopsis: A Maintenance Technician is concerned that non-standard procedures are being used when jacking aircraft in a hangar.
Date: 201911
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ORD.Airport, IL
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Climb; Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class B ORD
ATC / advisory: Tower ORD
Second aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict NMAC
Detector: Automation Aircraft RA
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was PM (Pilot Monitoring) on flight. It was daylight VMC. We were cleared to takeoff from Runway 10L and fly runway heading to 5;000 feet. At 1;000 feet we got an RA. The TCAS showed a yellow circle with -02 next to it. The aircraft was almost right below us. First Officer increased our climb rate. ATC told us to turn right to a 180 heading. The RA went away and we continued the flight. ATC later said Aircraft Y took off on Runway 9R and was instructed to turn to a heading of 330; but turned into us on a 230 heading. The rest of the flight was uneventful. Aircraft Y turned the wrong direction on their initial climb.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported an NMAC during departure from ORD airport.
Date: 201212
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: BOS.Airport, US
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: 2.5
Light: Dawn
Aircraft: B737-700
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class B BOS
ATC / advisory: TRACON A90
Aircraft component: FMS/FMC
Component problem: Design
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Confusion; Distraction; Human-Machine Interface; Troubleshooting
Second reporter function: First Officer
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Chart Or Publication; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Shortly after takeoff on Runway 4R at BOS on the BLZZR 1 RNAV Departure; we received a route discontinuity between BUOYY and BSQUE. Three attempts were made to close the discontinuity before it closed. We remained on the LNAV course throughout departure. Preflight route/departure briefing verified all correct points for procedure; and no discontinuities existed. There is a Safety Alert in our chart manuals; along with a note on the cover page of the trip weather package; drawing attention to route discontinuities occurring from Runways 15R and 22L/R between points BRRRO and CHWDH and a warning to not accept these procedures with a discontinuity. The purpose of this report is to alert Flight Operations that this anomaly is occurring on other runways not included in the Safety Alert or weather package cover note. Dispatch was contacted once we got to cruise altitude to pass this information along to flight crews departing BOS. My Chief Pilot and Union Safety Representative were also given a courtesy call to inform them of the issue.I believe the company should suspend RNAV departures out of BOS until the cause for these discontinuities is discovered.


Second narrative: This problem is not runway specific; as it happened to us as well on Runway 4R. We attempted to close the discontinuity three times to no avail. The aircraft would no longer fly the route and eventually entered bypass on the fix in question.


Synopsis: The flight crew of a B737-700 encountered an unexpected route discontinuity between BUOYY and BSQUE on the line selected BLZZR RNAV SID off Runway 4R at BOS.
Date: 201911
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: UHMM.ARTCC, FO
Aircraft: Heavy Transport
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
ATC / advisory: Center UHMM
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: While I was sleeping during my break an altitude deviation occurred. The relief pilots were in Russian airspace. They were assigned a cruise altitude in Meters. They misread the feet to meters chart and set an incorrect altitude. As they descended a thousand feet below their actual cruise altitude assignment ATC intervened. They then climbed back to the correct altitude.




Synopsis: B787 Captain reported that a conversion error between meters and feet resulted in an altitude deviation.
Date: 201202
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZZ.Airport, FO
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Dawn
Aircraft: B767-200
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Initial Approach
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZZ
Aircraft component: Flap Control (Trailing & Leading Edge)
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Check Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; General Declared Emergency; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: On approach; joining final and pilot flying called for Flaps 5. Got TE Flaps disagree; put flaps back to one and reselected Flaps 5. Got TE Flaps disagree again. Ran QRH for Trailing Edge Flaps Disagree; declared emergency with ATC and landed Flaps 1. Trailing edge flaps would not extend.




Synopsis: A B767 TE Flap Disagree occurred during approach when flaps are selected from one to fove. QRH procedures are complied with; an emergency declared and a trailing edge flaps up landing was made.
Date: 201810
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: Embraer Legacy 450/500
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Turbine Engine
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Inflight Shutdown; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Right engine FAIL warning and N1 RPM rollback on descent through 10;000 feet. Crew acknowledged; PF (SIC) continued to fly. Crew accomplished emergency checklist E-1(2) Fail. No auto-relight in Region 1 (best chance of inflight start). N2 and oil pressure decreased to zero with N1 windmilling. Crew discussed briefly and elected not to attempt restart due to time required and available. The engine had failed for an unknown reason and system would not auto-restart--something in the #2 powerplant system appeared to have failed. Also; aircraft was light (~8800 lbs) and in a good position for a normal approach path and landing. Therefore rather than complicating the situation; crew judged as the best course of action continuing the approach single-engine. PF executed a smooth approach and landing; and exited as instructed. Fire services inspected the aircraft and reported no fires or leaks. We shut down the #1 engine and were towed in to the FBO.


Second narrative: Total one engine time 8 minutes.


Synopsis: EMB-500 flight crew reported a normal landing followed the failure of the right engine during descent.
Date: 201603
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 5
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Citationjet (C525/C526) - CJ I / II / III / IV
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor; Ground Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; Flight Crew Rejected Takeoff
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: We received takeoff clearance; proceeded onto the runway and applied power smoothly. The First Officer made all required callouts to indicate gauges green; takeoff power set; airspeed alive; 70 KTS cross check; V1; Rotate.Upon rotation the airplane experienced a loss of directional control and pulled to the right. The airspeed dropped below V1. The Captain called for the abort; started to brake; pulled power to idle and called for ground flaps. Captain advised 'no brakes.' At this point Tower advised there was smoke coming from the aircraft. The aircraft continued to the right of center line and the Captain advanced the right power lever to maintain directional control. Differential thrust was implemented to keep aircraft on the runway. The First Officer announced the aborted takeoff on Tower frequency and the end of the runway was nearing fast. The Captain intentionally pulled the emergency brake lever to try and gain symmetrical control of the aircraft. The aircraft started slowing quickly and the aircraft came to rest approximately 800 feet short of the runway end.The First Officer then advised Tower that the aircraft was unable to move under its own power and required assistance. The engines were shut down and all occupants evacuated. Fire rescue extinguished the two fires on the main landing gear.Corrective actions:Runway abort procedures prescribed by manufacturer.Recognized directional control loss and improvised by intentionally blowing the left tire. The slow brake pulls were exacerbating the directional control issue and the PIC intentionally pulled the brake handle to blow the left tire.Evacuation procedure was executed and the passengers and crew moved a safe distance.Fire rescue extinguished fires on main landing gear.




Synopsis: CE-525B Captain reported rejecting the takeoff following loss of directional control on takeoff roll.
Date: 201810
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: HIO.Tower, OR
Aircraft: Small Aircraft
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Flight phase: Other VFR Traffic Pattern
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Local
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight; Taxi
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert
Contributing factors: Equipment / Tooling; ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Equipment / Tooling

Narrative: A runway change was initiated to switch from a RWY31L to a RWY2 configuration due to winds. Training was in progress at the FD/GC (Ground Control) position. Coordination was initiated with P80 as the afternoon departure phase from the based flight school started. Multiple aircraft were already taxied with information to RWY 31L as the new ATIS was being recorded for a RWY 2 Configuration. The recording of the ATIS took longer than expected causing both ground and airborne aircraft to check in with no ATIS information. The combination of chronic equipment error (partial/incomplete recordings) and excessive phraseology on the ATIS recording further delayed the ATIS broadcast which led to aircraft taxing and entering the airspace without the proper information. The new interpretation of 7110.65 2-9-2 requires the issue of the complete ATIS broadcast if the ATIS was unable to be received. Adherence to the new standard created an excessive burden on the controller and an unsafe situation. The design of the tower cab prevents or hinders access to the ATIS terminal during normal staffing conditions limiting assistance from other controllers. An Automated ATIS would greatly reduce controller workload and reduce the time required to disseminate new information.




Synopsis: HIO Tower Controller reported a problem with the ATIS recording equipment and the new requirement to transmit the full ATIS information when the recording is not available.
Date: 201908
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: EMB-505 / Phenom 300
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Landing
ATC / advisory: UNICOM ZZZ
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Person / Animal / Bird
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Airport
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: VMC conditions; winds basically calm. Cleared by ATC for RNAV GPS approach and announced on CTAF. Runway clear and no obstacles visible during final. Right at touch down; I suddenly saw a deer emerging from the dark and crossing from the left under the aircraft. Initially unclear if or where the deer hit the aircraft. Pilot Flying brought aircraft to a controlled stop and taxi to ramp with no issues. Warned other aircraft on CTAF about the incident and possibility of a deer on the runway. After engine shut down identified multiple damage areas to the fuselage below the aircraft. Incident was unavoidable and Pilot Flying handled situation calmly and professionally. It was important to warn other aircraft on CTAF. Critical for [the airport] to upgrade their deer fencing and protection.


Second narrative: The flight itself went as planned and there were no issues. I was flying a visual approach and tracking the GPS approach for guidance only. Upon landing and right before touchdown a deer ran out of the woods on to the runway causing a deer strike. I maintained the center line directional control of the aircraft to a full stop. There was no further damage to aircraft from the deer strike except what was caused from the impact of the deer.


Synopsis: Phenom 300 flight crew reported deer strike on landing; resulting in damage to the aircraft.
Date: 201710
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Other / Unknown
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I have worked many 737 flights where the aircraft is getting 'shut down' for an overnight in the arrival station. When the flight deck shuts down the aircraft while we are still deplaning passengers and leaves for their layover; it leaves the cabin crew in an unsafe position due to the inability for us to use the cabin inter phone or PA in the event of any type of emergency in the aft section of the aircraft. In essence; we have no way to communicate with the front of the aircraft other than use of the megaphone. In addition; the cabin temperature rises rapidly once the air flow is discontinued making it a health/safety issue for the 100 or more passengers still waiting to deplane.




Synopsis: B737 Flight Attendant reported that the aircraft was shut down; on multiple occasions; prior to deplaning all the passengers.
Date: 202003
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: LGA.Tower, NY
Flight conditions: Marginal
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 140 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface
Second reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT; Inflight Event / Encounter Unstabilized Approach
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We were on the approach to LGA ILS04. We got vectored onto the loc and began our descent. I began a quick descent so I wouldn't be too high and stayed below the glide slope on the approach; which is the reason it never captured. After descending through the FAF we broke out of the clouds but got a 'glide slope' warning twice. The autopilot was disconnected and the plane leveled off. Shortly after ATC gave us a 'low altitude alert'. The approach was continued visually and we landed. Cause: When we got vectored we were at 7000' and needed to descend to 2700 per the approach. I felt as though I was being brought in high so I began a quick descent and stayed below the glide slope; which is the reason it never captured and initially caused confusion. Because of this I stayed in vertical mode during the descent which was too high for the approach and caused us to get a 'glide slope' warning. We were clear of the clouds and had the runway in site and decided to land. Suggestions: We should have been more aware of our altitude and descent rate on the approach. We should have completed a go around upon getting the glide slope warning as well as the low altitude alert from ATC.


Second narrative: We were on an ILS approach in LGA; and we were low on the approach which is why the glide slope never captured. We then got the runway in sight; and then heard 'glide slope' 'glide slope'. We disconnected the autopilot and leveled off. ATC then advised us that we were low when we had already correctedCause: We didn't want to be high on the approach which is why the glide slope never captured. The plane then would have just stayed in vertical mode instead of following the glide path downSuggestions: When we initially realized that we were unstable; we should have gone around and tried the approach again.


Synopsis: EMB-140 fight crew reported flying an unstable approach which resulted an EGPWS and ATC low altitude alert.