elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201910
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: LAS.Airport, NV
Weather elements / visibility: Turbulence
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B LAS
ATC / advisory: TRACON L30
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Workload
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation - Speed All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence; Inflight Event / Encounter Unstabilized Approach
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance; Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Procedure; Weather; Airspace Structure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: We were on approach for LAS. We briefed to land on Runway 26L but when we were transferred to approach initially we were not informed that they were planning to bring us to Runway 01L. We only figured it out when we were vectored to right of KEPEC6 approach. Then we inquired which runway were they bringing us. That's the only time we got information about the runway to be used. We briefed the Runway 01L approach and continued on. Then we were assigned to descent 9;000 feet at 250 kts and started our descent. At this time ATIS has 350 at 23 gusting 32 for winds. So we were in moderate turbulence on our way down. Because of this turbulence as we were at around 9;000 feet; we continued to descent below the assigned altitude and from what I saw speed even went up 260 kts. I disconnected the autopilot to do some corrective action in order to get back to 9;000 feet and be on speed. At this time my First Officer was about to change to another approach frequency. He checked in with the new frequency; but never heard anything from approach regarding any speed or altitude deviation. We were then continued for the approach to Runway 01L. We were left too high and too fast; as we got closer to the runway; we couldn't slow down (glide slope was at 3.4 degrees) and approach control just decided to make us go-around for we were getting too close to the aircraft ahead of us. We did go around and were vectored back to Runway 01L and landed without any other incident. On final; airspeed was +/- 15 kts. I should have inquired approach right away for which runway they'll be assigning us. And should be more vigilant especially when wind conditions are moderated. Our approach was just not set up as it should be to be stable and be on speed; I should have queried approach control if I feel like they are giving us something that would make us unstable eventually.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported speed and altitude deviations due to moderate turbulence combined with a late runway assignment resulted in unstabilized approach and a go-around at LAS airport.
Date: 201502
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Night
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 145 ER/LR
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: Flap Control (Trailing & Leading Edge)
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Deviation - Speed All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: On climbout I noticed that the aircraft was climbing unusually slow. I said this to the Captain. We then realized that the after takeoff checklist had not been done properly and the flaps were still set at 9. We were less than 250 knots so we put the flaps up. We had exceeded the 250 knots restriction for flaps 9. We landed and called maintenance for an inspection. Lack of crew communication.  The checklist was called for but not completed.


Second narrative: During climb out; First Officer was wondering why we were slow on speed being 1/4 full. I then checked EICAS and noticed that the flaps were at 9 degrees. Aircraft was below 250 indicated; so I put the flaps back to 0. Under the circumstances I knew we have exceeded the flaps 9 at 250 kt. limitation as well as having the flaps down above 20;000 ft. Upon landing I informed maintenance control of the circumstances. They are in the process of an inspection.Prior to flight we were ramp inspected by the FAA right after having a line check the previous day. During climb out an additional distraction came from ATC not handing us off to Departure control for an extended period of time; then doing so at 10;000 ft. I don't remember the Flying Pilot calling for the checklist as well. We were light so the plane climbed out at a fast rate. The First Officer and I have flown together for the month; our working relationship is difficult due to personality conflicts. Even though we are getting along; issues with communication have developed due to this relationship.


Synopsis: EMB145 flight crew reports not retracting the flaps after takeoff and not properly completing the after takeoff checklist. The omission is detected above FL200.
Date: 201911
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: IMC
Aircraft: A321
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: APU
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Attendant; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Departed ZZZ. On climb out through FL200; First Officer noticed odor. Seconds later; Flight Attendant called and reported odor in the cabin. First Officer and Captain donned O2 masks; [advised ATC]; and returned to ZZZ. Cause [was] APU oil leak.




Synopsis: A321 Captain reported executing an air return due to odor during initial climb. Captain suspected odor caused by APU oil leak.
Date: 201712
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class D SMO
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Engine
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Instructor; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Time Pressure
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Almost immediately after liftoff; the engine experienced a partial loss of power. I declared control of the aircraft 'My airplane'; identified the potential to land on the remaining runway; immediately pulled the power; and lowered the flaps. Subsequently; recognized the aircraft was not descending or slowing sufficiently to make the runway landing; I added power; and raised flaps; expecting the next potential landing spot in the event of complete power loss would be the golf course adjacent the runway. The engine continued to provide just enough power to maintain an airspeed of approximately 75 knots; and very small positive rate of climb; estimated 50-100 fpm. The engine continued to sputter; but the aircraft continued to climb slowly; so landing on the golf course was no longer an option.The next phase of this short flight would be to nurse the aircraft far enough beyond the city to ditch the aircraft into the water close to the beach. While expecting to do just that; I maintained airspeed and climb rate while searching for places to land in case the ocean could not be reached. Fortunately I gained enough altitude to determine that I could make the turn back to the airport. I contacted the tower; [advised them of the situation]; and notified them I would be landing. The landing was uneventful; and there was no damage; no injuries. Cause of the partial loss of power is unknown at this time.




Synopsis: Cessna 172 flight instructor reported a partial loss of power immediately after takeoff resulting in a return to the departure airport.
Date: 201403
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Night
Aircraft: DC-10 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Cargo Compartment Fire/Overheat Warning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors; MEL; Manuals
Primary problem: MEL

Narrative: Aircraft had MEL 26-22-01. The MEL I believe was fully complied with; and the Captain did a Cargo Fire Test as part of his pre-flight. We received a Level One 'Cargo Fire Test Fail' alert. The MEL did not address whether or not this was a proper indication; but intuitively it seemed logical to get the 'Test Fail' with one [Fire] bottle MEL'd. We consulted the QRH; which directed us to contact 'MAINTENANCE'; so we contacted Maintenance who came to the cockpit. They had a similar take on the [Fire Test Fail] alert; as they felt it was a logical occurrence due to the [Cargo] Fire bottle being inoperative. At that point in time we felt we had complied with both the MEL and the QRH; so we flew to ZZZ1 uneventfully. After talking about the problem further in-flight; both the Captain and I felt that the MEL should be written to tell us whether or not the 'Cargo Fire Test Fail' indication with this MEL is a normal indication or not. This would save a lot of time for future crews. Indication not addressed by the MEL. [Recommend to] have the MEL indicate whether a 'Cargo Fire Test Fail' alert is normal with this MEL. Airline Transport Pilot.

Callback: Reporter stated the Cargo Compartment Fire Suppression System in their DC-10 aircraft is an 'after market' installation. He suspects that system has not been fully integrated with the Aircraft's Fire Test System equipment and was the cause of the 'Cargo Fire Test Fail' alert. He realizes there is a grey area whether or not the remaining Fire bottle was actually available; but since they had to stay within 90-minutes of a landing location; they decided to depart.Reporter stated about 95 % (percent) of the time; their MELs will say 'You will see this' in reference to an expected Annunciation or Indication as a result of a specific deferral. In this situation; the MEL and QRH did not address the 'Fail Alert' issue.



Synopsis: First Officer reports a Level One 'Cargo Fire Test Fail' alert appeared during a pre-flight check after one of the two fire bottles in the lower forward cargo compartment of their DC-10 had been deferred under MEL 26-22-01. The MEL did not address whether or not that was a proper indication. First Officer recommends the MEL be revised to indicate the 'Fail Alert' is a normal occurrence. Aircraft departed without additional information.
Date: 201506
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Weather elements / visibility: Turbulence
Light: Night
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 170/175 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Reporter qualification: Flight Attendant Current
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Attendant; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General Physical Injury / Incapacitation
Contributing factors: Weather
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: Descending into [destination] the Captain made announcement over the PA flight attendants prepare the cabin for landing; we will be preparing early due to the expected weather in [destination]. I was doing my compliance check walking through the cabin. At that time I wasn't even experiencing light turbulence. When out of nowhere a violent jolt lifting me up to the aircraft ceiling then throwing me to the floor and I experienced more than one jolt throwing me around the seats and to the floor again where I tried to hold onto the bars underneath a passenger's seat. Passengers were trying to hold me down. A passenger said we will get you help; are you okay? I heard another say is she breathing as I lay there flat on the floor not able to move due to my ankle was twisted under a passenger's seat. It was painful to move it. I feared it was going to hit again and become turbulent. I knew I needed to get buckled quickly. Thankfully there was an empty seat right above where I was located on the floor. I used my left hand and left leg to pull myself up into the seat. I got buckled and then the A flight attendant walked down the aisle to tell me the paramedics will meet the aircraft and to stay seated as the passengers deplane first. We landed and the A flight attendant made a PA announcement asking the passengers to stay seated he then proceeded to disarm the aft doors and returned to the fwd doors. The passengers deplaned and then the paramedics got on the aircraft to help me.Have the flight attendants remain seated when they expect this kind of weather. My right ankle is broken.




Synopsis: ERJ-175 Flight Attendant reported broken ankle related to turbulence encounter.
Date: 202009
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Aircraft: B767-300 and 300 ER
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Descent
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Electrical Distribution Busbar
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: The APU was deferred and I was the Pilot Flying on this leg.  While descending through FL180; as Captain activated the exterior lights; I observed numerous fluctuations in my EFIS (Electronic Flight Instrument System) screens followed by a loss of the Flight Director; seed tape and information on my EHSI (Electronic Horizontal Situation Indicator). At that time; I lost my CDU as well as many of the ambient and indicating lights in the flight deck area. The upper EICAS screen began listing numerous amber messages. Captain determined that the aircraft had a Right AC Bus failure. Due to the loss of some indicating information on my flight instruments; I transferred aircraft control to Captain and he called for the R AC BUS OFF Non-normal Checklist. As I worked through the checklist; ATC cleared us for the ILSXXR approach. At the completion of that checklist electrical function had been restored. The upper EICAS screen only displayed an amber R UTIL BUS OFF message. Captain then called for the R UTIL BUS OFF Checklist. While resetting the R Utility Bus switch the Right Bus Tie tripped again and the partial loss of indicating instruments and lighting reoccurred. Per the R AC BUS OFF non-normal checklist; the Right Bus Tie may only be reset once in flight. The Captain and I agreed landing in the current condition was the best option. The flight was completed with no further issues.




Synopsis: B767-300 flight crew reported electrical anomaly in flight.
Date: 201312
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: CID.Airport, IA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Musketeer 23
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Landing
ATC / advisory: Tower CID
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Other / Unknown; Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown; Ground Excursion Runway; Inflight Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Other Landing roll out.
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Weather; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was landing on Runway 27. Winds were 16 knots from 190; a strong left crosswind. My previous landing had been on Runway 13; and I wanted to practice crosswind landings.I landed with the left wing low and nose high; slightly to the right of center-line. I lowered the right wing and then the nose. I raised flaps to increase brake effectiveness (per the POH).I believe the airplane initially swerved to the right. I then over-corrected and it swerved to the left. I did not have adequate directional control to stop the swerve. The aircraft left the runway into the (snow covered) grass on the left (upwind) side of the runway.There was no damage to the aircraft or to the runway lights; etc. The aircraft was removed from the snow with a tractor.I have landed in crosswinds stronger than this before. I believe the problem was a loss of directional control due to either 1) letting the nose wheel come down with a strong right rudder input or 2) inadvertent application of right brake.It is worth noting that I was using larger than normal snow boots. Next time I will change my footwear into sneakers before flying. I think this may have made it difficult to operate the rudders without toe brakes.




Synopsis: A Beech Musketeer 23 pilot; practicing cross wind landings was unable to arrest a swerve into the wind after touchdown and exited the runway onto snow covered grass. No damage or injury resulted. The reporter cited large snow boots as a possible contributing factor.
Date: 202008
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 170/175 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Second aircraft: UAV - Unpiloted Aerial Vehicle
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Conflict Airborne Conflict
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken

Narrative: On a 4 mile final; Captain witnessed a potential Drone in close proximity to the south of final approach course.  Only caught a glimpse before we passed.  Not completely sure if it was a drone; it could have been a hand balloon.  We were cleared for the visual; flying the profile of the ILS.  We saw the object right around ZZZZZ intersection at roughly 1000-1100 ft.Object was at same altitude; but offset from the final approach course and not in direct conflict.Keep an eye out for those little buggers!




Synopsis: E-175 Captain reported an airborne conflict during final approach with a Drone in close proximity to ILS final course but no immediate conflict.
Date: 202006
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Climb; Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
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: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: While briefing the PDC neither of us saw the change to the departure procedure.  The Captain was the flying pilot and briefed the procedure and I was monitoring and also missed the change.  While on departure ATC gave us a 'direct to' which we didn't see the waypoint in the FMC and told ATC that we didn't have it on our plan.  They gave us a reroute and everything was fixed as far as they were concerned.  We discussed the occurrence in our debrief of the departure and realized that we had both missed the change.


Second narrative: I'm writing this to report that I unintentionally missed the revised segment that was given on our PDC. The revised segment changed the transition point and initial routing. I briefed the departure and missed the revised segment. It's totally my fault. I attribute it to being rusty. This was my first time flying since April and was out of my normal routine.


Synopsis: Air carrier flight crew reported they unintentionally missed the revised route segment given in their PDC.