elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201404
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: BAe 125 Series 800
Operator: Fractional
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Reporter organization: Fractional
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Training / Qualification; Time Pressure; Workload
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Bird / Animal
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Inflight Shutdown; General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Chart Or Publication; Environment - Non Weather Related; Manuals
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: On departure climbing through approximately 3;000 FT we encountered a flock of large birds. We were not able to avoid hitting some of them. I was the pilot not flying. We took a strike to the radome and we took one through the left engine rendering it inoperative. We immediately declared an emergency and returned to the field. It happened very quickly so I ran through the checklists while the pilot flying quickly got us on the ground. There was a lot of vibration and that combined with the impacts was quite startling. While we accomplished everything required; I think it may have been more 'textbook' if we had more time and the situation wasn't as alarming. We landed uneventfully; cleared the runway and shut down the remaining engine. While the large flock may not have been avoidable; I learned something that will help me in the future. We train exclusively on the 900XPC. I am very familiar with the 900 Emergency Checklist; but I realized that the different layout of the 800XPC Checklist was disorientating for a minute. I went to the pages where I was certain the appropriate checklists were located but they were not there. While this normally would not be a big deal; under the stress of this situation it added a little further stress. I am planning on spending some time to become more familiar with 800 Emergency Checklist as well as Abnormal Single Engine Checklist layout. The new QRC checklists should help.




Synopsis: After takeoff an HS-125-800 struck a flock of large birds shutting down the left engine; so an emergency was declared and the flight returned to the departure airport. The crew trained on the XP900 QRH which required some adjustment because of formatting differences from the XP800 QRH onboard.
Date: 201909
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Technician
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Airframe; Maintenance Powerplant
Human factors: Time Pressure; Workload
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Inflight Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Maintenance
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Company Policy

Narrative: After completion of a heavy Maintenance visit; the aircraft should have had a functional check flight completed per the [General Procedures]. Multiple Rudder Hinge fittings were replaced; left and right elevators removed; two elevator servos replaced; and aileron servo replaced. The adjustment of these primary flight controls can affect flight characteristics. [Company] management released the aircraft for revenue service.The Supervision in ZZZ Maintenance are under pressure to meet ETR (Estimated Time of Repair) times and misinterpret items in our manuals in order to meet those times. After 3 [Reports]; no training or results have happened when I file them. This aircraft left with revenue passengers aboard and had multiple issues after takeoff. There was a bad Flap/Slat Control computer; a bad hydraulic pump; and two air conditioning pack issues. These problems could have been found on a Functional Check flight and repaired without the endangering paying passengers. Training on our [General Procedures] would help.




Synopsis: Maintenance Technician reported air carrier released aircraft after replacement of critical flight control items without a pre-revenue check flight.
Date: 201809
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: AGS.Airport, GA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Medium Large Transport
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class D AGS
ATC / advisory: Tower AGS
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action

Narrative: Approaching visual to [Runway] 35 in AGS on right base to final; terrain warning went off at 2000 feet. Sink rate was not excessive and plane was leveling off at 1700 [feet]. Warning went off again and [pilot] disengaged autopilot. Flight conditions were visual; no terrain; [and no] towers or buildings were in sight or close. [We] landed with no issues.




Synopsis: CRJ First Officer reported  a terrain warning at 2000 feet during visual approach.
Date: 202110
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Light Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turboprop Eng
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Indicating and Warning - Flight & Navigation Systems
Component problem: Design
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Single Pilot; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness; Time Pressure; Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; No Specific Anomaly Occurred Unwanted Situation
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: This is a general report on an anomaly that may occur in all WAAS GPS units that; I believe; should be addressed. After some 35 years flying the 'Steam gauges' in GA aircraft and airliners I have transitioned to state of the art GPS based navigation with the new equipment in Aircraft X. When flying satellite based approaches with WAAS augmented vertical nav there is no warning should the vertical nav feature fail or if the parameters; whatever they may be; are not met. There is no 'flag'. Sometime during the approach a 'NO GP' may appear but with the equipment that we have; dual GTN 750 txi's; it appears much too late in the approach. To be safe the 'NO GP' warning should appear when the approach is selected and the equipment cannot provide vertical path guidance. I have one unit that presents glidepath information as soon as the approach is selected. On the second unit there is no glide path information at all. Good or bad. Both units have the same current data bases. But again; the unsafe situation is the failure of the unit to produce a 'flag' or warning that vertical guidance; for whatever reason; is not available.




Synopsis: Twin Engine Corporate Captain reported there is no Warning' flag or indication; in this particular model navigation system; if the Glide Path or Glide Slope do not capture during the approach.
Date: 201912
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: B737 Next Generation Undifferentiated
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: During climbout from ZZZ; we had an electrical irregularity resulting in loss of VHF1; Yaw Damper; four of our six CDS display screens; as well as other less important observed failures. During troubleshooting we discovered that a safety pin attached to a piece of luggage had somehow hooked around the Standby Power CB (Circuit Breaker) and pulled it out. We consulted with [Maintenance Control]; but they could not advise us to reset CB as this conflicted with Flight Manual Guidance; and that resetting the CB could only be done using Captains Emergency Authority. After assessing our situation and available options; I decided the safest course of action was to reset the CB.Had we not reset the breaker:We would lose all the electrical system functionality and redundancies that the Standby Bus provides.We would be down to 2 of 6 cockpit displays (1 was deferred inop prior to flight).We would be down to one VHF radio + ACARS.I only made this decision because I was confident there was no underlying electrical problem; this CB is not on the list of reset-prohibited CBs; and resetting it was a much safer course of action than simply diverting with multiple degraded systems. To be clear; I would not have reset it if there was any doubt of the reason why it was out. After resetting the CB; we observed all affected systems return to normal operation.




Synopsis: B737 pilot reported a loss of VHF1; Yaw Damper; four of our six CDS display screens and found it was a CB that was pulled out due to luggage moving it.  Pilot reset CB and everything went back on line.
Date: 201606
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 145 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Fuel Issue
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: I was the Pilot-in-Command and; shortly after departing; we were told by ATC to expect 8000 feet as a final altitude for the duration of the flight. Our dispatch flight release planned cruise altitude was 20;000 feet; so we were concerned 8000 feet would be problematic. We contacted dispatch to obtain new performance information; including updated fuel burn data for cruise flight at 8000 feet. While waiting for this information; ATC then instructed our flight to descend to 6000 feet. We notified ATC that we were still calculating our new performance numbers but did not believe the lower altitude would help our situation. ATC was insistent on the descent to a lower altitude. Still waiting for our dispatcher to finish the calculations and without having appropriate performance data readily available in the cockpit; we declared 'minimum fuel' with ATC. As a result; ATC was able to give us 16;000 feet as a final altitude and an enroute short-cut; two factors that significantly improved our fuel burn performance. We also notified our dispatcher of our 'minimum fuel' declaration. The flight continued normally and landed safely. Our arrival fuel at touchdown was 3160lbs.[Company] EMB145 pilots do not have appropriate performance data; as it pertains to low-level fuel burn; readily available to them in the cockpit. Because of the time it can take [Operations Control] to calculate this performance data; it would increase situational awareness and improve pilot knowledge if appropriate performance data was made readily available to pilots in the cockpit.


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


Synopsis: EMB-145 flight crew reported ATC cleared them for a final altitude that was lower than planned and revised performance information was not readily available.
Date: 201807
Location: ZLC.ARTCC, UT
Aircraft: PA-28 Cherokee/Archer/Dakota/Pillan/Warrior
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class E ZLC
ATC / advisory: Center ZLC
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Distraction
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; 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; Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Aircraft X was IAFDOF (Inappropriate Altitude for Direction of Flight) at 120 eastbound and there was traffic opposite direction at 120. I had addressed the situation with the R-side who had just sat down. The MIA (Minimum IFR Altitude) in the area was 110. The decision was made to descend Aircraft X to 110. I am not sure if I was on the line coordinating or working on another situation but I did not hear the clearance to descend nor the read back but Aircraft X descended below 110 and was through 106 when the R-side verified the altitude restriction. Aircraft X was issued a clearance to climb and maintain 110 which he stated he thought the original clearance was to 100.




Synopsis: ZLC Controller reported a PA28 descended below Minimum Vectoring Altitude.
Date: 201303
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 50
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Learjet 25
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Turbine Engine
Component problem: Design; Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Training / Qualification; Situational Awareness; Workload
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Equipment Problem Dissipated; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; Flight Crew Exited Penetrated Airspace
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Shortly after leveling off at FL410; and while still accelerating to cruise speed; I turned off the nacelle heat switches that had been used on the initial climb. This caused an increase in EPR; which resulted in an immediate right engine flameout due to the internal pressure change in the engine. We requested descent to FL200 for the engine re-start procedure. Center granted this request. We descended to below FL250; restarted the engine in accordance with the checklist procedure. We then requested climb to cruise altitude and completed the flight normally from that point. The aircraft remained in full control at all times.




Synopsis: When a Lear 25 pilot turned the right engine nacelle heat OFF after leveling and accelerating at FL410 it flamed out so during descent toward FL200 he restarted the engine and returned to FL410.
Date: 201507
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: IAD.Airport, DC
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: 4
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: HS 125 Series
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class B IAD
ATC / advisory: TRACON PCT
Aircraft component: FMS/FMC
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Confusion; Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Equipment / Tooling; Human Factors
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: During a SID departure (BULRN1 RNAV) we lost FMS/GPS Navigation capability. We were unable to navigate VIA FMS/GPS immediately after departure. ATC was notified. Unable to find information in the QRH to resolve the issue. ATC issued radar vectors to the next intersection on the RNAV departure. ATC then issued radar vectors to a VOR along the course of flight. Due to the distance from SOT VOR we were unable to navigate to the VOR. ATC was advised and we continued to with radar vectors to the VOR. After about 30 minutes the non-pilot flying was able to reset the GPS and reinitialize our position. We had no further issues with GPS navigation for the duration of the flight.




Synopsis: HS125 Captain experiences loss of FMS/GPS navigation capability shortly after takeoff from IAD. Radar vectors are requested from PCT. Thirty minutes after takeoff full navigation capability is regained.
Date: 202202
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Aircraft: B737 Next Generation Undifferentiated
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Second aircraft: Fighter
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Workload; Situational Awareness; Human-Machine Interface; Distraction; Confusion; Troubleshooting
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Separated Traffic; Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors; Procedure; ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I was working the radar position at Sector XX without a D-side. Traffic volume was high and increasing throughout my time at [Sector] XX. At the time; I had numerous aircraft transitioning my airspace southwest bound requiring a point out or hand off to sector(s) XX; XY; and YY. In addition to the high traffic volume we had flow restrictions going into ZZZ that added to my workload. When I saw the PVD indicator in the data blocks of the aircraft transitioning my airspace southwest bound I assumed that Sector YX had a data block. I was correct on all but Aircraft Y; who was not PVD'd to YX for reasons unknown to me. Maybe I mistyped the sector number? I don't know. But I did not catch it because I was busy and did not verify that YX had accepted the Point Out by clicking on the PVD indicator or checking the URET (User Request Evaluation Tool).Ultimately; the data block popped at Sector XX's boundary and began flashing with Aircraft X who had been issued FL290. Aircraft X was climbing through FL240 at the time and the radar controller issued an amended altitude clearance of FL270. A traffic call was issued to both aircraft.Our staffing is not adequate to provide the support we need on position in the form of D-sides or trackers. We are not afforded enough break time in between being on position. We do not have enough CPC's to properly staff the area.Management and TMU (Traffic Management Unit) are not doing their jobs by slowing traffic down to manageable levels for the amount of staffing in the area.Our low staffing has also resulted in excessive overtime assignments in the area leading to burnout and/or work fatigue.




Synopsis: Center Controller reported an airspace violation associated with presumed equipment issues.
Date: 201302
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: IMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: A300
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: AHRS/ND
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Weather
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: On climbout the aircraft was struck by lightning. The First Officer immediately lost all airspeed and attitude information and it returned in approximately 60 seconds. Additionally the autopilot number 1 temporarily disconnected. The number 2 yaw damper also failed at the time of the strike. The First Officer lost the instruments again about 3 minutes later; and they did not return. We followed ECAM procedures and immediately contacted Dispatch about proceeding to [the nearest airport] (non maintenance) or [a second airport] which was nearly equidistant at this point. Dispatch relayed they wanted aircraft in [the first airport]. I then asked my Dispatcher to remind Planning that a very heavy winter storm was just outside of the [divert] area and would arrive before any Maintenance Contract or other could arrive. I want to mention at this point that the weather and aircraft status for both fields were compatible and there was no safety of flight issues driving us in picking one over the other. Unfortunately Planning did not seem to use any of the inputs the crew had offered in their decision matrix. They unwisely choose to send us to [the first airport].




Synopsis: A300 Captain reports a lightning strike that knocks out several aircraft systems; including the First Officer's airspeed and attitude information. Dispatch is contacted and a diversion is suggested for the required maintenance but the planners do not agree and the flight continues to destination.