elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201912
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Night
Aircraft: Citation III; VI; VII (C650)
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Air Data Computer
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: After takeoff climbing out of ZZZ at 1;500 fee we noticed our airspeed went erratic plus or minus 30 kts. Climbing through 6;000 feet to 10;000 feet; the airspeed went to 0 and the altimeter went erratic 1;000 feet to 2;000 feet up and down. Pilot side FMS displayed a message that the air data computer had failed. The co-pilot side was used for reference of flight we advised ATC and they also verified that are altimeter was displaying erratic altitudes when we were level at 17;000 feet. ATC was very helpful. Landed in ZZZ1 safely.


Second narrative: We departed off Runway XX from ZZZ. On the climbout we started to notice airspeed fluctuation indication's on the pilot flying side. Midway on our climb to 17;000 feet; we also started to get more airspeed related indication problems and warning horns. We had contacted ATC about the time we started to level off at 17;000 feet and made them aware of our current situation. They acknowledged and also noticed our transponder was displaying erratic indications on their screen. At this time we were level at 17;000 feet (with local altimeter setting) and asked ATC what they showed for our altitude and they said we were about 400 feet low. We asked if we could stay at our current altitude until we could further diagnose the problem. ATC said; yes that is no problem.Next we ran the checklist and figured out we had a problem with our Air Data Computer #1. I ended up pulling the ADC#1 circuit breaker to eliminate the audio warning horn distractions and switched the transponder to #2 ADC. Soon after we started our decent in ZZZ1 our destination and less than 30 minutes from ZZZ. The remainder of the flight was on ADC#2; Copilot airspeed and Altimeter information followed by a safe landing and no further issues.ADC#1 needs repairs.


Synopsis: CE650 flight crew reported Air Data Computer issues which resulted in erroneous altitude readouts and airspeed issues.
Date: 201301
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: LFT.Airport, LA
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Medium Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
Airspace: Class C LFT
ATC / advisory: Tower LFT
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown; Confusion
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: Taxi
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: After pushback at Lafayette Airport; we contacted Ground Control for taxi clearance. The clearance consisted of 'Taxi to Runway 4R' via Bravo and Juliette. After receiving the clearance; and prior to taxi; I confirmed with the First Officer and verified the taxi clearance with the airport diagram. We started moving straight ahead via Bravo and momentarily stopped on 4L to do our normal safety visual clearance (Left and Right) and then; continued taxi toward Juliette. After reaching Juliette; and turning right; we stopped before crossing Runway 11. When we stopped; we received a call from Ground Control with a possible Pilot deviation; and they also gave us a phone number to contact them. After the call; we received clearance to cross Runway 11 and continue Taxi to 4R. At the end of the runway; on the holding short area; I called the Tower. They informed me that we crossed 4L without clearance.We never had the intention to cross any active runway. However; with the clearance that we received (and verified with the airport diagram); we understood that we were clear to taxi all the way to 4R; including crossing the Runways (4L and 11). Apparently; my First Officer misunderstood the taxi clearance because; usually the normal taxi clearance instructions are 'Taxi Runway 4R via Bravo and hold short Runway 4L.' After that; we usually receive further clearance.  In my opinion; since Juliette Taxiway is at the end of Bravo; and prior to Juliette is Runway 4L; when we received the clearance instructions the way we got them; it became confusing and created an involuntary error. Again; we understood; we were cleared to taxi to Runway 4R; via Bravo and Juliette.




Synopsis: An air carrier crew cleared to LFT Runway 4R taxied all the way to the Runway crossing Runway 4L but stopping prior to Runway 11 because they thought the taxi clearance included crossing intervening runways.
Date: 201604
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Dawn
Aircraft: B737-700
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Turbine Engine
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Inflight Shutdown
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: It was day three of the trip. I was the pilot flying. Preflight and boarding were uneventful. There were two MELs for the autothrottles inoperative and the MCP First Officer course window inoperative. The push; start and taxi were uneventful and just prior to reaching the runway; Tower opened and cleared us for takeoff.During engine run-up; we noticed that the number one engine spooled up slower than number two; but both engines achieved takeoff thrust and no anomalies were noted. Shortly after raising the gear (I don't recall the exact altitude; but had not yet called for heading select.) We heard a loud 'boom' and the aircraft yawed severely to the left. We determined that the number one engine had failed; but had no indications of a fire. We continued to 1;000 feet AGL and cleaned up. We [advised ATC of] the engine failure and asked to climb straight ahead to 3;000 feet. Upon reviewing the engine instruments we noted that the engine had indeed failed and was 'wind-milling' at approximately seven percent N1. This seemed low; and our assessment was severe engine damage.I called for the QRC for severe engine damage and accomplished the QRC thru pulling the engine fire switch. Departure asked our intentions and we informed them we requested direct to [nearest suitable airport]. They gave us a heading and a climb to 4;000 feet. We accomplished the QRC and the appropriate QRH checklists. The First Officer made a call to the flight attendants and informed them of our situation and intentions. I made a PA to the passengers about the same. We notified Dispatch (thru ACARS) of our situation and intentions. They responded with weather and a release amendment. During the flight; we accomplished all appropriate QRH and normal checklists; including the divert checklist. We briefed a flaps 15 landing. Visual approach was uneventful. After landing; we taxied clear of the runway and had emergency personnel visually inspect the number one engine. They said there were no hot spots on the engine.


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


Synopsis: B737-700 flight crew reported diverting to the nearest suitable airport after the left engine failed shortly after takeoff.
Date: 201707
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: TFFR.Airport, FO
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Large Transport
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
ATC / advisory: Center TTZP
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Human-Machine Interface
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: On approach into TFFR we received clearance direct AVSET. Captain entered it manually and flew direct. We were then cleared to altitude 3600 and also cleared for the RNAV 12 approach. The aircraft leveled at 3600 feet until the Flight Mode Annunciator displayed FINAL APP at which time the aircraft began to descend on its calculated profile which did not honor the altitude restriction at AVSET. ATC advised that we check our altitude and we climbed back up to 3600 and rearmed the approach.This event occurred due to the fact that when the AVSET direct was manually entered it did not include the restriction. The profile computed by the aircraft in FINAL APP was below this restriction. That fact that we were in VMC conditions possibly drew our attention to locating the field and reduced our verification process.Insuring that when a direct is received that if it contains an altitude restrict that it is entered and to ensure that in FINAL APP that the aircraft respects all restrictions. Better balance of attention between inside and outside the aircraft.


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


Synopsis: Air carrier flight crew reported leaving cleared altitude earlier than ATC clearance allowed.
Date: 201910
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Cessna Stationair/Turbo Stationair 6
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Ferry / Re-Positioning
Flight phase: Taxi
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Distraction
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Object
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Ground Personnel
When detected: Taxi
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We were late picking up this aircraft to be flown back to its operating base. The aircraft was pulled from the hanger with a tow bar out to the taxi aisle in front of the hanger and the tow bar was removed and stowed. While performing the pre-flight inspection; another aircraft taxied into our area and waited. We checked with the other aircraft pilot if they needed to get into the same hanger area that we were occupying. Indeed the other aircraft needed to taxi into the same hanger area that we were blocking. We were not ready to start the engine yet; so we reattached the tow bar to the aircraft and manually towed the aircraft about 200 ft. to unblock the hanger area for the other aircraft. Even with three people helping; the movement of our aircraft was physically exhausting. Once the aircraft was secured in the new location distractions caused us to miss the fact that the tow bar had not been removed and stowed after the movement of the aircraft. The external portion of the checklist had already been completed before the aircraft had to be relocated. The pre-flight checklist was resumed where it had been interrupted by the aircraft relocation. The engine was started per the checklist; taxi instructions were received; and the taxi commenced. About half-way through the taxi route; the Ground Controller contacted me stating that a ground operations crew had notified them that what looked like a tow bar was still attached to the front gear. The Controller instructed me to a pull-off area next to the taxiway. I shut down the engine; exited the aircraft; and found that the tow bar was still attached as reported. The tow bar was removed and stowed. Once back in the aircraft; the engine was restarted; and contact with the Ground Controller was reestablished to complete taxi to the active runway. With exception of the damage to the tow bar from dragging on the taxiway; no other damage was incurred; and the flight was completed normally. Lesson learned: if the pre-flight checklist is interrupted and distractions introduced; it is best to restart the checklist from the top so that all steps can be verified.




Synopsis: Pilot reported that distraction during preflight checks resulted in the aircraft taxiing with the tow bar still attached.
Date: 201501
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Regional Jet 200 ER/LR (CRJ200)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: Taxi
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: During final taxi while running taxi check on Taxiway M; ground control inquired whether we would be 'ready at the end'? We stated affirmative and proceeded with the before takeoff check. Prior to making the turn to be in front of the hold short line; ATC cleared us to line-up and wait; interrupting the very last couple of items on the before takeoff check. We then proceeded to taxi onto [the] runway and line-up and wait. As we were lined-up; ATC queried us; '[Air Carrier XXX?]' We responded; 'go ahead; [Air Carrier XXX]'. They responded; '[Air Carrier XXX]; now line-up and wait; [Air Carrier XXY]; you will be next'. [Air Carrier XXY] was across the runway opposite us prior to us taxiing to the runway [planning on] holding short. Prior to this point in time; we did not hear anything transmitted involving [Air Carrier XXY]. The reason for this ASAP report is; there seems to have been confusion regarding who the 'line-up and wait' instruction was for and the possibility that we may have assumed the instruction to be for us without positively hearing our call sign with the instruction (after the trigger from ground control previously; inquiring if we would be ready at the end).My thought on this is; we have to be more vigilant listening to our call sign when given instructions from ATC and query them if there is any doubt.




Synopsis: The flight crew of a CRJ200 taxiing for takeoff mistook a line up and wait clearance intended for another flight coming from the opposite side of the runway as being for them and entered the runway without a clearance. A prior query from ATC asking if they would be 'ready at the end' was cited as a contributing factor to their assumption of the clearance.
Date: 201411
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Dawn
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 170/175 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Aircraft component: Pneumatic Ducting
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Diverted
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Company Policy; Weather
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: We received a L COWL A/I warning message.  This is a repeat write up on this plane (reported to be 6 priors by the mechanic).  We had to divert due to ZZZ1 not being a suitable destination.  We were trying to find our best option.  Flight Ops wanted us to land as close to ZZZ1 as possibly.  Every option they gave us would have had us descending through ice.  After an extensive time of the FO and I doing our own research on the plane we realized that our only option was ZZZ. We diverted. In order to do this research I had to connect to the aircraft internet and go to the NOAA webpage.  I had no real support from flight ops. Not fixing the plane.  There was a rather large hole in a duct. Flight Ops should be finding a good place to divert.  We actually waited a long time to contact them because often they will mislead you.




Synopsis: Captain experiences a L COWL A/I warning message during descent for landing and elects to divert to a suitable airport without icing in the forecast. The aircraft had a history of six previous similar writeups and Dispatch was not helpful in finding an alternate.
Date: 201704
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: A320
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Electronic Flt Bag (EFB)
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Since the [latest] upgrade to Jeppesen FD-Pro; the iPad battery consumption has increased significantly. For example; I just flew [an hour and a half flight]; the first flight of the day; my iPad battery was at 100% on the way to the airport. By the time I arrived; my iPad battery was at 62%. After flight planning for the next flight; and just prior to pushback; my iPad battery was down to 52%. The other issue since this upgrade is that Jepp FD-Pro is significantly slower. The 'Resuming FlightDeck...' message; which was rare before; now displays every time one returns to FD-Pro. These issues are not unique to my iPad; it is also happening to the iPads of everyone I've flown with since the upgrade.




Synopsis: A320 Captain reported unusually rapid battery drain since the installation of a Jeppesen FD-Pro program update.
Date: 202101
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Reporter qualification: Flight Attendant Current
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: The hand sanitizer holder is right in the way of evacuating passengers at door on the aircraft.




Synopsis: Flight Attendant reported the hand sanitizer holder is in the way of evacuating passengers on the aircraft.
Date: 201704
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: PHX.Airport, AZ
Weather elements / visibility: 20
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: UAV - Unpiloted Aerial Vehicle
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Other 107
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Climb; Cruise; Descent
Airspace: Class B PHX
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Routine Inspection
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I may have flown within a five mile radius of PHX while using a drone to look at damage to a friend's roof. I made certain; before flying; that the flight was not going to enter Class B airspace (and it did not come near Class B airspace). It wasn't until after the flight that I realized I may have flown; close to; or even within; the five mile radius of an airport with an operating control tower. The maximum altitude reached was 60 ft AGL.




Synopsis: UAV operator reported he may have operated within 5 miles of PHX airport at an altitude of 60 feet AGL.
Date: 201904
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: JYO.Airport, VA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Haze / Smoke; 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class E PCT; Special Use PCT
ATC / advisory: Tower JYO
Second aircraft: Piper Single Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Instructor
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Departing JYO a Piper single engine aircraft came within 50 feet of our aircraft on initial climb towards practice area.




Synopsis: C172 flight instructor reported an NMAC on climbout from JYO.