elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201811
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ROG.Airport, AR
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Rain; 10
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: Small Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class D ROG
ATC / advisory: TRACON FSM
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Distraction; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Unstabilized Approach; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Weather; Airspace Structure; Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We were at the end of a long trip and were eager to get home. We were cleared direct to HONON IAF with the first Razorback Approach Controller; and were on a very straight path to the fix. We switched frequencies and with our new controller ended up staying at 8;000 MSL for quite some time due to traffic. We could see the traffic on TCAS and the controller cleared one aircraft for approach to nearby XNA and another aircraft for visual approach to ASG. But we were still high. And it didn't seem like ATC had a total grip on where we were. We got a descent...but it still wasn't a good descent for our position. The pilot not flying (PNF) thought we'd be ok if we slowed down and configured with spoilers. We were cleared for the approach in a fairly hurried manner outside HONON; but still had almost 2;000 feet to descend to be on profile; which we did. But because we had to have anti-ice on; our idle was higher and we didn't slow down very quickly. The rest of our approach was very busy with configuration changes to get the aircraft slowed down in the descent. We were switched over to Tower frequency; but because the PNF was so focused on speeds for configuration changes; we ended up getting a clearance to land from Tower without us calling them first. What would have changed this entire situation? If I would have been more assertive and suggested we tell the controller 'unable' when cleared for the approach and asked for box vectors and a more reasonable descent. Instead of thinking; 'yeah; I can do this...' I should have been thinking; 'take this abnormal descent; and make it normal and stable.'




Synopsis: Corporate jet First Officer reported a near unstable approach to ROG airport after ATC gave them instructions that were difficult to execute during the arrival.
Date: 201207
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: SAN.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Gulfstream IV / G350 / G450
Operator: Fractional
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class B SAN
ATC / advisory: TRACON SCT
Reporter organization: Fractional
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: FMS had the PEBLE3 departure for Runway 27 at SAN with the SLI transition. On initial climb; command bars indicated the turns and heading of the PEBLE3 departure and were flown by pilot flying. SAN Departure said aircraft was north of proper track and assigned a heading of 270. Checked and confirmed the PEBLE3 was in the FMS and displayed on the MFD. LNAV was selected and the pilot flying was following the command bars.




Synopsis: GIV-SP Captain reported that his aircraft deviated from the PEBLE3 departure track out of SAN even though the procedure was loaded and LNAV selected.
Date: 201408
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: B777 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Lifevest/Jacket
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Reporter qualification: Flight Attendant Current
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: Pre-flight
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Company Policy; Human Factors
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Prior to departure; I discovered two dual chamber demo life vests (still in sealed pouches) stowed in a plastic bag above the forward closet near door 1L. In addition; two old safety cards were also found inside the plastic bag with the vests.  A couple of days before this event; prior to departure; I discovered a dual chamber demo life vest stowed in the forward closet near door 1L also on a different aircraft. Because this particular aircraft is now equipped with single chamber life vests for both passengers and crew; and the dual chamber demo life vests I found could no longer be used on these nose numbers; I removed them from the aircraft. I am concerned if these vests had gone unidentified as dual chamber demo vests; and a flight attendant was not paying close attention; they may have defaulted to using the dual chamber vest. Thereby inadvertently demonstrating the incorrect life vest to passengers during the live safety demonstration. This is an ongoing problem which has obviously not been resolved. This is at least the fifth time in approximately six months I have personally discovered incorrect demo equipment. I have submitted previous reports about this issue. So; I am confident the Event Review Committee is familiar with this problem. Again; I would like to know what process is in place to assist those responsible for ensuring the correct required equipment is installed; and with determining what type of equipment belongs or does not belong on a particular aircraft. Especially on fleet types were; within the same aircraft type; there may be multiple configurations each with its own unique equipment requirements (e.g. single chamber life vest vs. dual chamber life vest; new demo equipment stowage locations Vs old demo equipment stowage locations etc...).




Synopsis: B777 Flight Attendant reports discovering incorrect demo life vests aboard an aircraft he is preflighting. The fleet uses two types of life vest and it is necessary that only the correct demo vests be placed aboard.
Date: 201809
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: DTW.Airport, MI
Flight conditions: IMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Regional Jet 200 ER/LR (CRJ200)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class B DTW
ATC / advisory: TRACON D21
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
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: We were originally filed for the HHOWE1 Departure with the BROKK transition. The PDC [Pre Departure Clearance] showed a change with the LWEMA transition. The BROKK transition was loaded into the FMS [Flight Management System]. We were made aware of the issue by Detroit Departure once we were headed to BROKK. The PDC showed the new route and the filed route. After looking at the filed route on the release; I had it in my mind that we were to do the BROKK transition. After looking at the PDC; the only change was for us to fly the LWEMA transition; but I still saw the BROKK transition on the PDC and kept that in the FMS. I feel like this could have been avoided if there was less information on the PDC; such as only the cleared route. I will now be taking a closer look at the filed route and the cleared route to avoid having this happen again.




Synopsis: CRJ-200 pilot reported a heading deviation after a change from the filed departure resulted in loading the incorrect transition.
Date: 201211
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: TPA.Airport, FL
Aircraft: B717 (Formerly MD-95)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Landing
Aircraft component: Hydraulic Main System
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Inflight Event / Encounter Bird / Animal
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew; Person Ground Personnel
When detected: Taxi
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: On final to TPA RWY 01L we heard and felt a bump. Touchdown and taxi in nothing unusual; but when turning into the gate I got a RT HYD QTY LOW alert and the ground crew became very animated pointing to the right side of the aircraft. The right engine was shutdown after the engine cool alert and the First Officer opened her window to ask what the problem was. Hydraulic fluid was spraying all over from the right main landing gear. After we got external power I shutdown the left engine and turned off the hydraulic pumps. Upon further inspection a bird was found lodged in the bogey and had ruptured the hydraulic line. We had lost about 3 quarts of fluid from the right system. It was some type of shore bird with a body the size of a football.




Synopsis: B717 Captain reports hearing and feeling a bump during final approach to TPA. Upon taxi in to the gate a RT HYD QTY LOW alert is annunciated and the ground crew indicates something is amiss with the right gear. Post flight inspection reveals a large bird wedged in the right main landing gear.
Date: 202103
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ELP.Airport, TX
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
ATC / advisory: Tower ELP
Aircraft component: ADS-B (Automatic Dependent Surveillance - Broadcast)
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Confusion; Troubleshooting; Workload
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Automation Aircraft Terrain Warning; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Aircraft
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: Our flight ELP to ZZZ. We took off on Runway 4 and were assigned the JCOXX2 Departure. In the turn towards JCOXX above 6;450 ft we got the 'terrain message' followed by the 'pull up' message. We could clearly see that we would clear the terrain with no problem. As we were continuing the climb we noticed that the terrain system failed light was illuminated. ADS-B failed light was also on for awhile; but it went out after 30 minutes or so. I wrote up the terrain system fail light in ZZZ. The ATIS in ELP was warning of heavy military jamming of GPS signals in the area. When we asked ATC if they were receiving our ADS-B signal; they said they do not use it because of the military activities. The First Officer immediately pulled up and increased the climb rate; but since we both could see that terrain was not going to be a factor we did not exceed engine limits.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported possible GPS jamming in this area per aircraft instrument errors; ATIS information and ATC advisory.
Date: 201511
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZFW.ARTCC, TX
Light: Night
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Airspace: Class A ZFW
ATC / advisory: Center ZFW
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Time Pressure; Situational Awareness; Distraction; Confusion; Workload
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Automation Aircraft RA; Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors; Environment - Non Weather Related; Airspace Structure; Aircraft; Staffing; Weather
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I was paged back to be Tracker and when I arrived; it was already too busy for any reasonable controller to work. We were getting every arrival coming from adjacent sectors with no in trail and no plan. Some were direct and some were just on headings. The Radar Assist had just gotten position certified the session prior and was in over their head for this amount of traffic (although they did well; I think a seasoned CPC on the Assist would have been more helpful). At one point; two aircraft got within 5 miles and responded to TCAS. I believe the controller turned the one aircraft right; but the pilot turned left; so it may have been a pilot deviation. The next sector was not taking handoffs and I don't blame them because they were holding. Because of the lack of coordination between Traffic Management Unit (TMU) and the arrival sectors; safety was compromised more than I have ever seen.TMU needs to start coming up with plans earlier and planning on weather situations before every aircraft in the country ends up 50 miles from the airport when it gets shut off. Supervisors need to communicate with all areas impacted when they come up with a plan.




Synopsis: A Controller working the Tracker position at the Center observed an IFR aircraft respond to a TCAS/RA in response to other IFR traffic. The sector was extremely busy due to traffic not being sequenced for the arrival airport from the previous sectors and weather deviations.
Date: 201210
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Twin Beech 18
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Landing
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: After landing on main landing gear and rolling out. Once the tail came down the aircraft tail went to the left. Could not correct by differential power or braking; executed a go-around in order to recover. Landed the second time prepared for the lack of directional control. Both wing tips struck the ground when initially recovering.

Callback: The reporter stated that somehow the tailwheel became unlocked in flight so that during the first landing he was able to execute a go around but during the second landing he was unable to control the aircraft.



Synopsis: A BE-18 tail wheel became unlocked in flight; so that after landing the pilot lost control of the aircraft and both wing tips struck the ground while he recovered.
Date: 201808
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: RFD.Airport, IL
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Dawn
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground RFD
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Ground Incursion Taxiway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Airport; Procedure; Environment - Non Weather Related; Chart Or Publication
Primary problem: Chart Or Publication

Narrative: I was the PF (pilot flying). We landed on Runway 7 in RFD. Taxiway F was NOTAMed closed between 250 feet west of Taxiway A and Taxiway B. I missed the left turn off at Taxiway G. Taxiway A was closed and we were given taxi instructions to back taxi on Runway 19 and turn left on Taxiway F and taxi to parking. It was dawn but a little dark. Numerous lights on the Taxiway F barricades were out. Once I noticed that they were there; I stopped the aircraft. ATC had assumed that we had been there and knew that we were supposed to taxi onto Taxiway B; pass through part of the passenger terminal ramp; then rejoin Taxiway F. Ground Control called ground support crew in RFD and they came over and pushed us back with a tug. We discussed the idea of trying to make a hard right 120 degree turn to head back on to Taxiway B but decided against it because of the threat of running over taxiway lights.Taxiway F was displaced by 125 feet to the north in the NOTAMs. That is not very clear. I should have looked at the NOTAMs more closely and questioned it. ATC should give taxi instructions instead of publishing a vague NOTAM. There were no signs depicting where the temporary Taxiway F was. I have become too reliant on the AMM (Airport Moving Map) taxi view and the taxiway closures that are depicted in our Jepps.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported an anomaly in the NOTAMs depicting an area of taxiway construction.
Date: 201807
Aircraft: B757 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class B SEA
ATC / advisory: Tower SEA
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach
Contributing factors: Procedure; Chart Or Publication
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I'm currently in training. I just experienced my first encounter with being taught to ignore a Master Caution Alert that resulted directly from the recent SOP change to set missed approach altitude on the go-around instead of at 1;000 feet. I know you're tracking this issue; and I wanted to provide another data point.SEA LOC-34R. The DDA is 770. The TDZE set in the MCP 400. In this scenario; as soon as you retract the gear (which removes the altitude alert inhibit) on the go-around you get the Master Caution because you've just deviated more than 300 feet from the altitude in the MCP window. Yes; I know you can solve the problem by resetting the MCP altitude; which is the next step in the profile; but that's not the point. The point is that the current altitude-setting SOP created a nuisance Master Caution alert at a very low altitude on a missed approach; which has a certain startle factor to it; and we're being taught to ignore it. This isn't good.Additionally; determining what value to set and then setting the missed approach altitude on a go-around creates unnecessary distraction for the pilot monitoring; whose only job at that critical point in a maneuver we don't do very often should be actual monitoring to make sure the jet is moving away from the ground. There was nothing wrong with the old procedure of setting the missed approach altitude at 1;000 feet. It was a mistake to change that procedure.




Synopsis: B757 Captain reported being taught to ignore a Master Caution Alert while on a missed approach.
Date: 201502
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Fog; Rain; 5
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: PA-31 Navajo/Chieftan/Mojave/T1040
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Engine
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Workload
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: I reported having airport insight to the frequency; instead they vectored me on 310 heading; and climb 2000 feet; and then a 330 [heading]. In IMC condition; I experienced the failure of both engines at 1500 feet. I; therefore; chose a landing site away from person and properties; on the side of a canal. I tried to trouble shoot the engines; switching tanks; full power; emergency pumps; but nothing. I finally landed safely in the side of the canal.




Synopsis: A PA-31 pilot on a short hop lost power in both engines as he climbed through 1500MSL.  He landed safely alongside a canal with no reported damage or injuries.  As he set up for the approach and landing he attempted to restart the engine/s but was unsuccessful.