elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201709
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Turbulence; Thunderstorm
Aircraft: B737-800
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: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport
Contributing factors: Weather
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: After departure ATC provided vectors to facilitate a departure climb providing for aircraft separation and weather avoidance South and West of the field. Subsequently being vectored Northbound a climb clearance was issued. As our aircraft approached 18;000 ft the windscreen was rapidly enveloped in a blanket of St. Elmo's fire; followed by an immediate blinding white flash-over accompanied by an explosive concussion. The First Officer was PF (Pilot Flying) and continued in that capacity. We briefly discussed the nature of the event then requested a lower top end altitude from ATC. During this time we assessed aircraft systems status; completed the Lightning Strike QRH checklist; communicated the nature of the incident to the Cabin Crew and conferred briefly with Maintenance. Uncertain as to the full impact the strike may have had on the aircraft and the specter of a flight into mountainous terrain; FO (First Officer) and I agreed that the safest course of action was to return so that the airworthiness of the aircraft could be determined. [Notified] ATC of our intention of returning to [the departure airport]. The Overweight Landing QRH Checklist was completed; Dispatch notified via ACARS; Landing QRH Checklist completed; and passengers notified as to the nature of the situation and pending return. At this juncture; I assumed PF duties while FO transitioned to PM (Pilot Monitoring) duties. A successful landing was accomplished. After clearing the runway no defects were indicated. After coordinating with Operations taxi to gate was accomplished.




Synopsis: B737 Captain reported a lightning strike at FL180. The crew elected to return to the departure airport.
Date: 201209
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
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Oil Filter
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Technician
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Airframe; Maintenance Powerplant
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Time Pressure; Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Manuals; MEL; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: When myself and another Mechanic arrived at the aircraft; we were made aware of an Engine #2 (E2) Oil Impeller Bypass message happening during flight; from the logbook. The other Mechanic spoke with the pilot(s) and checked the cockpit indications; while I waited outside because the passengers were beginning the boarding process. We were in contact with Maintenance Control about the message. I spoke with Maintenance Control in regards to the differential indication on the oil filter. I verified with them that once we opened up the E2 Cowl; the red indicator did not appear to be popped and we were advised that the E2 Oil Impeller Bypass message could be MEL'd. From there; the other Mechanic communicated that the Central Maintenance Computer (CMC) showed no oil debris message of any sort; while I placed the E2 oil impeller bypass message on deferral. Based on the message and the Maintenance actions; MEL 79-35-01-1 was used as the reference. The Fault Isolation Manual (FIM) was not used. The FIM would have been a better reference; without regard to time. Despite working well in a team manner and communicating well throughout the task; I could have reviewed the other mechanics work.




Synopsis: A Line Mechanic reports he deferred a #2 Engine Oil Impeller Bypass message on an EMB-145 aircraft after referencing  maintenance actions that he and another Mechanic had performed. He was later notified the Fault Isolation Manual (FIM); which he did not use; would have been a better reference souce for the deferral.
Date: 201208
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B757-200
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Turbine Engine
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: During climb out; passing 13;500 FT; felt airframe vibration and noticed #2 engine vibration indicator had jumped from .3 to 3.0. [We] contacted Dispatch and Maintenance Control. With their concurrence; decided that the safest course of action was to return; which resulted in an overweight landing.


Second narrative: On climb out; #2 engine experienced high vibration. With concurrence of Dispatch and Maintenance Control; we returned uneventfully.


Synopsis: B757 flight crew experienced high vibration on the number two engine during climb and elected to return to the departure airport for an uneventful landing.
Date: 201407
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 5
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: B767-300 and 300 ER
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: FMS/FMC
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying; Pilot Not Flying
Human factors: Distraction; Confusion; Troubleshooting; Workload
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Tower cleared us for immediate takeoff from Runway 26R with company traffic on a 5 mile final to same runway. The Captain set the thrust to approximately 70 percent N1 and selected thrust on the mode control panel (MCP) but autothrottles would not engage. I set thrust manually and called 'thrust set' and we continued the takeoff roll. Immediately after takeoff the Captain noticed as he transitioned inside the aircraft that he did not have command bars and at about 200 to 300 feet gave the aircraft to me as I appeared to have normal modes displayed on my ADI. I called for heading select at about 500 feet and turned to our assigned heading. At 1;000 feet I called for VNAV and noticed the airspeed bug was at the barber pole not at the appropriate flap setting. VNAV armed but never became active. At 2;000 feet I called for center autopilot to command; the Captain selected the C mode switch but it would not engage. He then selected the right autopilot and it became active. We continued the climb via FLCH and remained in ALT HOLD at all cleared altitudes as VNAV would still not engage. We never received any EICAS warning; caution or advisory messages as well as no status messages. There were no overhead lights associated with inoperative equipment or systems. The only indication was a 'NO AUTOLAND' on the ASA [Autoland Status Annunciator]. The Captain selected R on the instrument source select panel as well as FMC R on the NAV select and redirected the right side instrument data to his displays. We then contacted Dispatch and Maintenance Control and explained what had occurred. They elected to have us continue and we concurred as the weather was good both enroute as well as our destination. The Captain resumed pilot flying duties and I resumed pilot monitoring duties. We completed the flight and everything else was uneventful.




Synopsis: A B767-300 appeared to have suffered the loss of the left FMS during the takeoff roll when the autothrottles failed to engage and the Captain lost his command bars. Control was passed to the First Officer who was pilot flying until alternate power was provided to the Captain's flight instruments. After consultation with Dispatch and Maintenance Control they continued the flight to destination.
Date: 201306
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Flight conditions: IMC
Aircraft: SF 340B
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Second aircraft: B747-400
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach; Departure
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Developmental
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict NMAC; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: [City] was IFR and Final West was split off and busy. Center called and APREQ'ed Air Carrier Y stopped at an altitude above Air Carrier X while continuing to fly the ground track of the arrival. The aircraft were an exact tie at the entry fix to my airspace. To split the aircraft up; so both could descend; I turned Air Carrier X; the slower aircraft; to heading 060 with a descent to 4;000 FT and slowed them to 220 KTS. I then turned Air Carrier Y to heading 040 and used altitude separation until they were established on diverging courses; then descended him to 4;000 FT. I switched the heavy to final West who turned Air Carrier Y to heading 030 and slowed them to 210 knots. I observed this and when I had more than 5 miles separation I turned Air Carrier X to heading 340 to pass well behind the heavy. I observed Air Carrier X pass behind Air Carrier Y's wake turbulence with more than 5 miles separation. I was later informed Air Carrier X called to complain and ask why they had been vectored in the wake of a heavy. [I] recommend Center review the LOA between Center and TRACON and comply with the LOA; especially during peak traffic times.




Synopsis: TRACON Controller described a pilot filed NMAC event while vectoring successive departure aircraft; one aircraft vectored behind a heavy B747; reporter claiming appropriate separation existed.
Date: 201306
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: D10.TRACON, TX
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 135 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class B DFW
ATC / advisory: TRACON D10
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings
Primary problem: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings

Narrative: An E135 was on a vector toward the ILS approach for Runway 36L. He was descending from about 3;500 FT to 3;000 FT approximately 5 south of GKY within the Bravo. He went into Conflict Alert with a VFR at approximately 2;000 FT. I watched him climb to about 2;200 FT and he was climbing slowly as many do since they are below the Bravo. The E135 was in a normal descent already slowing his descent to level at 3;000 FT. The aircraft were not climbing or descending at any rate which should have caused the Conflict Alert to go off and were about 5 miles apart still. Since the VFR was not a factor; not climbing at a high rate or anything like that and they were still altitude wise 1;200-1;400 FT apart; traffic was not issued; just another false alert as has been the case with this new system. I issued instructions to a couple other aircraft and when I looked back at the E135 the VFR traffic had now climbed to 2;700 FT and they were about 1 mile apart. I issued traffic at 10 o'clock and the E135 said he was responding to an RA. The Conflict Alert and Low Altitude Alert were going off much more since we changed to the STARS system. Yesterday approximately 60% of the arrivals at DAL on a north flow during one session went into Low Altitude Alert. So much that I just stopped issuing them to the Tower. I talked to our National TAMR (STARS Representative) and explained what happened with the E135 and he said 'I know we are getting a lot of those'. This is a problem as when you get so many false CAs or LAs. After you have so many or observe that it is false; you tend to look the other way as it was not a factor. Then when it is needed and is actually for real; you can't tell that it is real. This has been ongoing since we changed to the new system. This needs to be immediately corrected.




Synopsis: D10 Controller voiced concern regarding the continuous; and sometimes false; Conflict/Low Altitude Alerts that are occurring with the new STARS system.
Date: 201201
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Aircraft: Challenger CL600
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Descent
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Coordinator
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Automation Air Traffic Control; Person Air Traffic Control
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: While working the Coordinator position; I was coordinating a local IFR clearance and a radar hand-off with ZZZ1 Approach.  I do not recall hearing the initial contact with Aircraft X; as I was off-line from monitoring the H position on voice lines. The last radar scan I completed with the aircraft was when it was descending from approx 9;600 to what I believed was SOP; 8;000. After completing my coordination functions; I scanned the radar again and observed the Low Altitude Alert activated on the aircraft. I immediately advised the Controller of my observation and she took corrective action. The aircraft climbed without further incident.  The pilots are aware of the terrain in the vicinity as depicted on the approach plates and could have questioned  the lower altitude. Controller advised pilot of an assigned altitude of 8;000; he advised he read back 3;000.  I was not able to confirm or deny without listening to audio tapes.  Therefore; it is difficult to make a plausible explanation for this section.




Synopsis: Tracon Coordinator reported a Flight Check aircraft received a low altitude alert while descending to 3;000' when the intended assigned altitude was 8;000'.
Date: 201601
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
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: Cockpit Window
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: While cruising at FL310; we both were heads down and observed a bright white flash. Neither of us recognized what had caused it. About 30 seconds later; we both witnessed another bright flash which we confirmed was arcing on the R1 window. 10 seconds later the R1 window shattered with numerous spider cracks encompassing the entire window. The First Officer (FO) put on his 02 mask and I put mine on at that time as well. We were unable to confirm if the cracks were on the inner or outer pane; due to the darkness in the cockpit and the extensive amount of cracks.I [advised] ATC and requested priority handling into [destination]. I took control of the aircraft and requested the FO to pull out the QRH. By the time we had gotten through the checklist; we had descended to 10;000 feet. The pressurization was maintained in the cabin and no abnormal condition existed in the aircraft. The checklist called for continued normal operation for our condition. I [advised ATC] based on not having confidence in the structural integrity of the window.Not having any experience with a shattered window at night; donning the O2 masks may have been premature; however; it was done to err on the side of safety.


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


Synopsis: B737 flight crew reported descending to a safe altitude after the First Officer's cockpit window shattered at FL310.
Date: 201905
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: LAS.Airport, NV
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Windshear
Aircraft: A321
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class E L30
ATC / advisory: TRACON LAS
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Time Pressure; Confusion
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation - Altitude Crossing Restriction Not Met; Deviation - Altitude Undershoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight; Taxi
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Airspace Structure; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: The Controller told us to file a report because 'the FAA was looking into 321s not making the climb restriction.' Controller also mentioned something about 'using Runway 01R with this SID and having other options.' And also said they are looking into us knowingly accepting a clearance we cannot make. The fix in question is RIOOS on the Trailer 9 SID at or above 13;000 MSL without a speed requirement. Once airborne if the Controller needed the altitude and was unable to offer a delay vector then I could slow down (i.e. climb faster) or add power to make the restriction. As far as takeoff options were concerned; the wind was 330/20G27KT; so a takeoff on 26R at our weight would not be a safe option. We were heavy and the FMC did predict we would be lower than required at RIOOS; at 320 KTS. The cost index was set to 55 and I had programmed the current temperature; which would give the FMC a better prediction; but it is still just a prediction to use for information on the ground. A NOTAM for LAS stating that ATC will not offer vectors or reduced speed to make the climb restrictions; and making RIOOS a mandatory altitude with a speed requirement.




Synopsis: A321 Captain reported being unable to meet crossing restrictions while on the Trailer 9 SID.
Date: 201206
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZAU.ARTCC, IL
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Stratolifter (C-135 / 717)
Operator: Military
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Refueling
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZAU
ATC / advisory: Center ZAU
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Several military aircraft were flying within the designated refueling track. Two of the aircraft were tankers; one of which requested to depart back to base and requested a climb to 39;000 FT. That aircraft was given the requested clearance. Shortly after the other tanker reported he was responding to an RA and would be back within the assigned block altitude shortly. No other aircraft were involved and both aircraft continued on without further incident. Working military aircraft is an uncommon event in our airspace and there has always been some sort of confusion as to how to properly clear military aircraft apart and out of the active airspace. In this event it involved much more than just two aircraft that were flying inside of this airspace. The only recommendation is that controllers need a definitive answer and training on what exactly to do in these instances; especially when it is uncommon in our specific airspace.




Synopsis: ZAU Controller described a TCAS RA event involving a military tanker operation break up maneuver. The reporter suggested increased training for facility personnel covering these types of procedures.
Date: 201906
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: DA42 Twin Star
Operator: FBO
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Landing
ATC / advisory: CTAF ZZZ
Aircraft component: Landing Gear
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Instructor; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Ground Event / Encounter Ground Strike - Aircraft
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: After a 2 landings; we came in for another landing. We had 3 green gear down confirmed. When we touched down the gear collapsed.




Synopsis: DA-42 pilot reported the landing gear collapsed after landing with three green lights.