elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201202
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 15
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: J3 Cub
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Instructor; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Human factors: Confusion; Training / Qualification; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Practicing emergency landings at the airport and had so informed Tower. To facilitate; they agreed to work with us to clear landing on any one of the four runways available; traffic permitting. After doing about 4 of these on different runways; and calling Tower to ask for clearance to turn back; I quipped that I appreciated them letting us land on all these different runways given all the trouble we were having with our pesky engine that day (referring to all the emergency landings we were simulating). They inquired; are you having engine trouble? And we immediately said no; we were making a quip given the repeated practice emergency landings we had discussed with them. They said OK; but be careful with that; we're all on tape. So the lesson is; even if you think Tower knows what is going on (here; practice emergency landings); there is zero room to make a quip about an emergency unless it's the real thing. Stick to business in transmissions; nothing else. Lesson learned.




Synopsis: J-3 Cub instructor providing training in emergency landings was admonished by the Local Controller for making a remark in jest about having engine problems.
Date: 201710
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Thunderstorm; Turbulence
Light: Night
Aircraft: Regional Jet 900 (CRJ900)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
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: Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Weather
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: We were cruising at FL350 and had just turned North around some convective activity. About 50 miles later we saw some build ups ahead around our altitude so we got clearance to climb to FL370. Truthfully they didn't look menacing at all. They were barely painting green on the radar at all angles; and there was no lightning or anything worrying visible. Either way I called the FAs and told them to be seated as it might get bumpy for a bit. Once we started the climb we noticed a larger build up in front of us so I requested a turn to the right to avoid the worst of it. When we entered it we encountered some moderate turbulence. We got airspeed fluctuations and the FO clicked off the autopilot and went to max power to maintain airspeed; but he didn't make the callout. Believing the autopilot and auto throttles had turned off on their own; I attempted to reselect them but they were clicked off again without a callout. As we were approaching level off; we encountered a large updraft that increased our climb. Due to this we went through our altitude by around 300 feet. As soon as I was able I advised ATC of the situation and they said not to worry and to return down as soon as we could. After the fact there were no injuries or any issues in the cabin or found on the walk around. I wrote the aircraft up for a turbulence inspection upon arrival.Even though the FO did an excellent job at keeping the aircraft under control; I advised him to let the autopilot handle situations such as this especially in the flight levels unless it gets really bad. I also advised him that if he is going to turn off the automation he must make the other pilot aware by at least some means. As for the weather; avoiding it is always the obvious solution; however due to ATC constraints it is sometimes easier said than done. In the future both of us will be more diligent at getting clearance to avoid weather earlier and be more cautious with build ups.


Second narrative: [Report narrative contained no additional information.]


Synopsis: CRJ-900 flight crew reported encountering convective activity with an altitude gain of 300 feet at level off and communication issues between the crew members.
Date: 201511
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZZ.Airport, FO
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Turbulence
Light: Night
Aircraft: A300
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Cruise
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZZ
Aircraft component: Pressurization System
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Deice and anti-ice in blocks. Push back and engine start then called for 'after engine start check list'. FO asked for engine anti ice 'on'; and I called for it to be 'on'. ATC happened to call us for a runway change at that very same time. FO answered ATC and we proceeded to reconfigure the FCP and FMS flight plan. Taxi; take off; and climb were normal. Just as we leveled at FL310; we received an ECAM alert; 'Pack #1 and Pack #2 fault'; which requires us to turn both packs off. Followed ECAM and realized we would depressurize; asked ATC for lower altitude of 10;000 ft and to return to ZZZZ. Started our descent and a turn back to ZZZZ. Passing around FL220; I scanned the overhead panel; while the FO worked the FMS; and noticed the APU and APU bleed air valve were still 'on'. I turned the APU bleed air valve off and the aircraft pressurized back to normal. Requested ATC to level off at FL200; checked fuel status; and we decided to continue to [destination]. ATC granted us clearance back on route and a climb back up to altitude. No emergency was declared and ATC was very helpful. As I described the event above; our normal flow pattern was interrupted and we missed some key items on the 'after start check list'.This was a situation with an easy fix. It could have turned out much different. Checklists are important; not only for normal operation of aircraft systems; but for safety itself. I am just as much to blame for not scanning the overhead panel before takeoff and assuming check lists [and] switches are complied with and not confirming that they are. I will have to make an effort make sure I scan the ECAM MEMO page and overhead panels before each take off. I wouldn't be surprised if this scenario showed up in one of our [training] events.


Second narrative: [Report narrative contained no additional information.]


Synopsis: A300 flight crew reported experiencing a pressurization anomaly just after reaching cruise as a result of not fully configuring the system because of distractions during preflight.
Date: 201605
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: JKA.Airport, AL
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; High Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: CTAF JKA
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: FBO Personnel
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Ground Personnel
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: There was a runway encroachment incident involving a ground vehicle and an aircraft. The aircraft had lined up on Runway 17 for takeoff and announced that he was taking the runway for takeoff. The aircraft was on the roll when the announcement was made that the vehicle was crossing the approach end of runway 35; however the vehicle had yet to even reach the end of the runway when the crossing call was made then the vehicle did not stop at the hold short line and wait for the aircraft to pass. The vehicle passed under the aircraft while the aircraft still had use of the runway. The aircraft passed over the ground vehicle at roughly 100 to 150 feet.




Synopsis: Ramp Specialist reported a vehicle crossed the departure end of Runway 17 at JKA while a general aviation aircraft was taking off.
Date: 202105
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Wind
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Parked
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Hazardous Material Violation; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR
Detector: Person Flight Crew; Person Dispatch
When detected: Taxi; In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Flight ready early. Pushed back 15 mins early with OPS Controller approval. Also notified controller of 2;000 lb extra fuel. Preflight push back and taxi went smoothly. After accepting takeoff clearance we received a ACARS message from OPS asking if we had received DG (Dangerous Goods) paperwork. First Officer and I agreed we thought we did. Uneventful flight and landing.  After level at cruise we inspected DG envelope and found it to be empty. We did have DG manifest signed with employee numbers and DG position summary showing Lithium Ion [Battery] at 12L. ACARS this info to Operations Center and he asked us to complete an ASAP. In summary everything was running super smoothly. Inaccessible DG seems to be every flight and we just assumed ULD DG manifest was in envelope we were given. Will check from now on! The cause of the event Assumed required paperwork was in DG envelope we were handed [was empty.]


Second narrative: Uneventful and smooth preflight; startup; and taxi to Runway XX at ZZZ. After receiving takeoff clearance and approaching the runway threshold we received an ACARS message asking if we had received the DG (Dangerous Goods) paperwork. We both agreed we had and continued to take off. At cruise we discovered that the DG envelope was empty and did not have the Aircraft ULD DG Manifest. We did have the signed Aircraft DG Manifest and the Aircraft DG Position Summary showing lithium battery in position 12L. The ramp agent had placed the DG envelope in the yellow pouch. Poor coordination between flight crew and ramp agent with DG paperwork. [Going forward have] all eyes; flight crew and ramp agent or DG Specialist; must see and account for all DG paperwork.


Synopsis: Flight crew reported a communications breakdown between flight crew and ground personnel resulted in transporting Dangerous Goods [DG] cargo without required DG documents on board.
Date: 202011
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: C90.TRACON, 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 Approach
Airspace: Class B C90
ATC / advisory: TRACON C90
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Distraction
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Conflict Airborne Conflict
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: While on approach to Runway 28C; ORD about 1 mile to SEIKA (FAF); noticed object move rapidly through my field of vision from the front to the left as we went past it. Object appeared to be a quadcopter UAV and was at our altitude (approximately 2;500 ft MSL). It happened very rapidly and I did not have time to react to the object until it was past the left wing.


Second narrative: On approach to ORD Runway 28C just outside SEIKA; I noticed what appeared to be a party balloon at our altitude. The Captain looked out left to the rear and said he saw a quadcopter drone. I reported it to tower. After we landed we gave ground a description of the drone; the altitude; and the location. On the post-flight walk-around I looked carefully for evidence of impact; and found none.


Synopsis: Flight crew reported an uneventful airborne conflict with a drone during initial approach.
Date: 202111
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: B737-900
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Emergency Floor Lighting
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Technician
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Powerplant; Maintenance Airframe
Human factors: Troubleshooting; Workload; Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness; Time Pressure
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR
Detector: Person Flight Attendant; Person Maintenance
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Incorrect / Not Installed / Unavailable Part; Procedure; Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Avionics Technician Y; [and I]; were sent to ZZZ to work Aircraft X. Midnight Shift had written up the emergency lights inoperative at seat row 22ABC to 26ABC. When we arrived; we powered up the aircraft and turned on the emergency lights. Technician Y noticed that first class emergency lights were also inoperative and the aft cabin emergency lights were inoperative from row 32ABC to the aft cabin. At the same time I noticed the seat row 20ABC and 21ABC red emergency light lens were broken. The representative from ZZZ was right next to me. He found one of the lens; but it was broken in two pieces and unusable. I initiated log items to document what we found. Technician Y was troubleshooting the aft cabin as I documented the defects. all of a sudden; Technician Y's phone rings and over the speaker says we just arrived and we must return back to ZZZ because we are writing too many things up. Maintenance Control spoke to us on the vendors phone and told us the same thing. This is outrageous that we should be punished for doing our job. Had we looked the other way it would have be OK and we would have gotten the overtime required to finish the log item written up by Midnight Shift. Later; Technician Y called Maintenance Control and now he denied that we were being sent home for the write ups; but said ZZZ was not a maintenance station where we change parts. That is what he said. You can speak with Technician Y. This is harassment and punishment for doing our job.




Synopsis: While on a road trip to an out station; Technician reported being ordered to return to home station because they were writing too many things up.
Date: 201706
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: DEN.Airport, CO
Flight conditions: IMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: A319
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class B DEN
ATC / advisory: TRACON D01
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: On the extended ILS 34R approach into DEN during an unusual amount of controller changes; accompanied by excessive airspeed changes and awkward clearances; the First Officer did not arm the localizer when cleared the approach. I failed; as pilot monitoring and Captain; to rectify the situation in a timely manner.I believe; on downwind we were slowed to 210 knots and then accelerated to 220 knots which required a configuration change to comply; followed by a slow to 190 knots. We were then handed off to the next controller who vectored us to intercept the localizer with the clearance to accelerate back to 210 knots to BOENG and then 170 knots to CORDE. It was then; that I realized I had missed that the LOC had not been armed by the pilot flying. I intervened; and armed the LOC prior localizer intercept. We overshot the localizer and the pilot flying opted to go to heading select mode to rejoin. We overshot the localizer by maybe one dot and corrected back. We were then handed off to the next controller; who I queried to clarify our clearance; and who responded that he knew nothing of the airspeed clearances we had received previously. Then; and I'm not sure; but another controller may have broke in. Regardless; we were then instructed to just slow to 170 knots until CORDE. We continued the approach and landed without further indecent.


Second narrative: [Report narrative contained no additional information.]


Synopsis: A319 crew reported they flew through the localizer on approach to DEN with multiple speed and controller changes.
Date: 201303
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: MTH.Airport, FL
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Beechjet 400
Operator: Fractional
Operating under: Part 135
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class E ZMA
ATC / advisory: CTAF MTH
Reporter organization: Fractional
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings
Primary problem: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings

Narrative: On final approach to Runway 25 at MTH the PAPI was unreliable.  It went from four white to white red white red (which it should never show)  and skipped white red red red.  We noticed the improper guidance and adjusted our descent angle accordingly and landed without incident.  Evaluate the PAPI for correct information.




Synopsis: BE400 Captain reports a misaligned PAPI for Runway 25 at MTH.
Date: 201911
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: EMB-505 / Phenom 300
Operator: Fractional
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Electrical Distribution
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Fractional
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Distraction; Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: During approach to ZZZ; experienced numerous warning messages: SHED BUS OFF 1 & 2; BLEED 1 FX; AMS Control FX; A/P FX; YD FX; SWPS FX; probably a few more. Landing performance per checklist increased 1.20 and did not have the numbers for ZZZ. PFD (Primary Flight Display) and MFDs (Multi-Function Flight Displays) we're beginning to flicker. ZZZ1 had adequate length; elected to divert there. Partner wanted to go to ZZZ2 because ZZZ1 did not have a vertical guidance approach. I did not want to risk over flying a suitable landing field with multiple electronic and instrument issues to fly 65 miles to another airport and risk losing all PFD and MFD.Once the decision was made to divert to ZZZ1; we should have concentrated on diverting to that field instead of wasting precious resources and time on 'feeling' for better options. I think it became inherent that when you crew two PICs together you get two different ways of thought. We had multiple failures occurring and I believed the more time we spent on ZZZ2 interfered with our approach into ZZZ1. It is nice to have long runways and vertical and lateral guidance but sometimes you just have to fly the plane and get it on the ground. Thoughts of that aircraft that went into the Everglades because the crew fixated on a burnt out landing gear indicator came to mind. Over reliance on the gadgets is a bad thing. When in doubt; get it on the ground now and you can armchair quarterback it afterward.




Synopsis: EMB-505 Captain reported a lack of consensus during a diversion due to multiple electrical and instrument issues.