elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 202106
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: A320
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
Aircraft component: Turbine Engine
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Troubleshooting
Second reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Other Take Off
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Gate; Flight Crew Rejected Takeoff; General Maintenance Action; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Previous flight had reported engine fluctuations on takeoff and climbout. Maintenance took a look at the plane and Ops checked it good. On our takeoff; once takeoff thrust was set we began a normal reduced thrust takeoff with an EPR (Engine Pressure Ratio) setting of about 1.41. Once above 80 knots the Captain called out that the EGT and N1 were fluctuating and took control of the aircraft and performed the Reject. The auto brakes engaged at Max. We made the required callouts; cleared the runway and performed the QRC. We did receive HOT Brakes due to the reject and allowed them to cool before returning to the gate.


Second narrative: Advancing power was normal with Flex FMA (Flight Mode Annunciator) displayed and EPR (Engine Pressure Ratio) thrust set prior to 80 kts. As the aircraft accelerated EPR indication on eng 1 began to fluctuate. As takoff roll continued EPR EGT and N1 began fluctuations with EPR going above yellow tick mark and almost as low as 1.3 EPR (TO EPR was 1.43). Reject was initiated at approximately 110 kts and we noticed ATC and cabin and cleared the runway to run the rejected to checklist. After allowing the brakes to cool we returned to the terminal.


Synopsis: A320 flight crew reported a rejected takeoff after engine fluctuations reoccurred during takeoff roll and returned to the gate.
Date: 201411
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: TEB.Airport, NY
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 20
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: Falcon 2000
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class E N90
ATC / advisory: TRACON N90
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Engineer; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude
Detector: Automation Aircraft RA; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Procedure
Primary problem: Airspace Structure

Narrative: While being vectored to the ILS 19 final approach course in VMC at an assigned altitude of 2000 feet; NY TRACON issued the following clearance: 'Turn right heading 165; Maintain 2000 feet until established; cleared ILS 19.' We acknowledged the clearance; when ATC called out traffic at 2 o'clock; 2 miles; altitude indicates 1900 feet. We then experienced a TCAS Traffic Alert. As we were in the right turn; I asked the controller if he still wished us to turn to heading 165. He instructed us to maintain present heading; and then paused as if uncertain as to what instruction to issue. We experienced a TCAS 'CLIMB' RA; with which we complied. We announced 'TCAS Climb;' and reached a maximum altitude of 2400 feet. After watching the traffic cross below us; TCAS issued a 'Clear of Conflict;' and we returned to our assigned altitude of 2000.' The controller asked us if we had Teterboro in sight; which we did; and he cleared us for a Visual Approach to 19. We landed uneventfully. After landing; I contacted NY TRACON in an effort to learn about the traffic and how we were able to pass within such close proximity. The supervisor informed me that this was a known issue; as the floor of the Class B Airspace from just south of TUGGZ to north of UNVIL and extending well west of CDW is 3000 feet. The floor of the Class B Airspace does not drop to 1800 feet until south of TUGGZ; and the northern boundary of TEB's Class D Airspace is also just south of TUGGZ. As a result; traffic departing MMU or CDW can legally fly VFR at 2000 feet between UNVIL and TUGGZ; crossing the TEB ILS 19 final approach course; without any requirement to contact NY TRACON. This can and does lead to TCAS RA's. Pilots will want to be aware of this geometry and remain vigilant when landing south in Teterboro.




Synopsis: Falcon 2000 Captain experiences a TCAS RA at 2;000 feet during vectors to the ILS 19 at TEB. The RA is complied with and the intruder passes below at 1;900 feet. N90 had issued a turn to intercept the ILS; which was also a turn into the traffic and was pointed out. Class B airspace above compresses VFR traffic into the approach path for TEB.
Date: 201512
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Night
Aircraft: A319
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Aircraft component: Turbine Engine
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Dispatcher
Reporter qualification: Dispatch Dispatcher
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Inflight Event / Encounter Bird / Animal
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: Shortly after the flight took off; I received a call from the crew stating they had heard a thud and perhaps it was a bird strike. Maintenance control was brought into the conversation and it was determined there were no abnormalities with the aircraft and it was safe to continue on. Since it was a possible bird strike; an inspection was set up to be done on arrival. Approximately four hours later; our airline operations manager received a call from airport operations duty manager stating that some debris had been found on the end of the takeoff runway; and they suspected it could have come from our flight (due to timing and report of possible bird strike). I was advised and called the manager to get more information. After hearing that there were multiple pieces of aluminum found; I requested some pictures of the debris and asked to set up a call with our maintenance manager. In the mean time I advised the crew of the debris found. After speaking with the crew; even though there were no abnormalities and we did not know if the debris came from our aircraft; the crew wanted fire trucks to be available as precaution only. After receiving the photos and speaking to the manager; our maintenance people said it was highly unlikely that the debris had come from our aircraft. I then advised and in turn advised the crew. By that time the flight was in the process of landing. No emergency was declared and the landing was uneventful.  However upon inspection; the number 2 outboard engine acoustic liner section was missing. I was told the liner could have come out due to metal 'fatigue.'




Synopsis: A319 Dispatcher was informed of a possible bird strike during takeoff by one of his flights with no apparent ill effects. Airport personnel discovered aluminum debris at the end of the departure runway. The crew was informed and elected to continue. Post flight revealed missing pieces of acoustic liner on the number two engine.
Date: 201306
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Weather elements / visibility: Rain; 2
Aircraft: Helicopter
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach; Departure
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: Flight Crew Landed As Precaution
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Weather; Procedure
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: I was working the Arrival; Departure and Satellite position for [Class B and Class D] Airports. When I first sat down on position; The Class B airport was VFR; and although the scope showed precipitation; the weather was not an issue. I got a couple of ride reports from the pilots; it was smooth rides and light rain. I worked for maybe 20 minutes and the weather was progressively getting worse. I took the handoff from Tower for a VFR helicopter. I continued to work and the traffic volume started to pick up. The helicopter checked in and I ask him his destination. He said [his planned destination] wasn't happening and he was going to go to [the Class D]. I asked if he had the current weather; he said no. I read him the weather and asked him his flight conditions. He mentioned he had only 2 miles of visibility. I asked him if wanted to be vectored for an approach; but he said he didn't need it. The helicopter was 3 miles from the airport and still didn't have [the Class D] in sight. I asked him again if he wanted to be vectored for an approach. The helicopter refused and would was confident that he would be able to see the airport. I pointed out the field to him and that's when he mentioned he would just have to set her down right here. As all this was going on; the volume had picked up and weather had gotten worse. Some aircraft were asking to deviate. When I finally got back to the helicopter; he was no longer with me on frequency. I informed the Supervisor and he took the appropriate action. I should have attempted to make the aircraft IFR instead of trusting that he was going to be able to see the airport. I could have been more insistent that he use an approach instead of attempting to see the airport.




Synopsis: TRACON Controller described a helicopter off field landing event; the reporter indicating he should have been more insistent on IFR handling regardless of the pilots requests.
Date: 201206
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: J3 Cub
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class G ZZZ
Aircraft component: Engine
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Captain; Instructor; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: [After] takeoff; it became evident that aircraft was not climbing enough to clear trees. I maneuvered the aircraft between obstacles and over the river until gaining sufficient altitude to return for a safe landing. I suspect a stuck valve was the problem in the [Continental] A-65.




Synopsis: Piper Cub pilot reported loss of power after takeoff; so he returned to departure airport.
Date: 201808
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: BHM.Airport, AL
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Rain; 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Transport
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Tower BHM
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Time Pressure
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Ground Excursion Taxiway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Contributing factors: Airport; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: After landing; Tower said to turn at [Taxiway] H2. It came up quick. I slowed to turn and in the process; the left main barely hit the grass alongside Taxiway H2. [There was] no incident; no airport or airplane damage; just hit the grassy area for a few inches.




Synopsis: Small aircraft pilot reported exiting the taxiway onto the grass while turning off the runway at BHM airport.
Date: 201603
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: CLE.Tower, OH
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class D CGF
ATC / advisory: Tower CGF
Second aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 1 Eng; Retractable Gear
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Departure; Approach
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Distraction; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict NMAC; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: CGF tower called for IFR release on Aircraft X. I issued release with a right turn heading 100. As I began a position relief briefing; CGF tower called for another IFR release on Aircraft Y. I issued 'visual separation approved between Aircraft X and Aircraft Y; Aircraft Y released heading 210.' As a tower controller myself; I believed that CGF tower would let Aircraft X run out for a couple of miles and then release Aircraft Y with a turn off the deck inside of Aircraft X and maintain tower visual until divergence was established. What CGF tower did was keep Aircraft Y on runway heading for nearly 5 miles. The controller who relieved me called to CGF tower to ask them to leave Aircraft Y on runway heading. During the call CGF tower informed the relieving controller that Aircraft Y was in the turn. I don't recall the relieving controller's response. Aircraft X and Aircraft Y's targets merged about 7 mile east of CGF at 030. Aircraft Y checked on to the frequency as the targets were merged saying that he had Aircraft X in sight. I don't know at what point Aircraft Y got Aircraft X in sight or what the CGF tower controllers actions were while Aircraft Y was on their frequency. I don't know how to prevent this from happening again. The CGF tower controller and I obviously had very different ideas about how visual separation would be used in this operation. It is possible that Aircraft Y had Aircraft X in sight before the CGF tower controller turned Aircraft Y off of runway heading.




Synopsis: CLE Controller reported of a situation where he was not sure as to what type of separation the Tower was using. Controller reported thinking that the Tower would do what he was thinking; but did not. Aircraft had the other in sight but reporter did not know when this visual separation had happened.
Date: 201209
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZAN.ARTCC, AK
Aircraft: B777 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZAN
ATC / advisory: Center ZAN
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure; ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: I took over the sector and during the briefing I asked if there was anything special I needed to know about the Russian traffic coordinated over RUSOR. I asked this question because I had overheard the previous controller having coordination problems with this particular transfer approximately 20 minutes prior. I was told that that everything was taken care of and I assumed the sector. During my time on position I noticed a B777's projected position being hundreds of miles west of its coordinated boundary fix and thought that since the system tracks the target with the time associated with the transfer; I thought the B777 would not be a factor for quite awhile. Later; I received two messages; both were that the B777's estimate and altitude were out of conformance. Based on the target's position in Advanced Technologies and Oceanic Procedures (ATOP); I assumed that this was erroneous information and did not investigate further and deleted the messages without processing them. I then received a call from the D63/69 Controller asking what aircraft I had coming to them currently over ROCET. Over that fix was an unknown beacon code with an altitude of FL350. I told the Controller I did not know who the aircraft was and would investigate. I then called my supervisor; and asked him if he knew who that target was. He replied that it was the B777. The problem is that the B777's target showed a RUSOR time. His target did not track and show him going over the fix; which; is what ATOP is supposed to do. Also; his coordinated altitude of FL410 did not match his current altitude of FL350. I took immediate action to try and talk with the B777 and also to obtain voice communication with him; and then coordinated with R63/69 the information. The target was not tracking with the projected time in the system. The only way to have verified this would be to manually open the coordination window to check the coordinated time; but I did not know there was still a problem with the transfer so I did not investigate. I also could have processed the position report; but I assumed the report was erroneous because we often get erroneous reports from previous sectors because the ADS-C shows a different altitude than what is coordinated.




Synopsis: ZAN Controller described a confused transfer of traffic to Russian airspace event noting equipment and possible procedural problems that were causal factors.
Date: 201812
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZZ.Airport, FO
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: A319
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Air Conditioning Distribution System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: After parking; the flight attendants brought our attention to black soot on top of overhead bins throughout the aircraft. It was shown to outgoing Captain and maintenance. Calls were made to [Operations and Maintenance]; by me. I was told that [Maintenance] discovered 'filters FULL' and the bins were subsequently cleaned. Passengers were boarded and aircraft departed.


Second narrative: After shutdown the flight attendants told us that there was a fine black soot that developed on the overhead bins in the entire airplane they noticed after we shut down. It was written up and pictures are attached. As we were in the secure area the Captain called [Operations] and was eventually told it was because of 'clogged air filters.' We did not take the plane back out; but I am concerned there is more here. If it truly was clogged air filters why were they allowed to get that clogged that there was a fine black soot like this? Could they be properly cleaned and or replaced in [destination]? If the air filters were clogged was a proper cleaning of the entire duct system completed?


Synopsis: A319 flight crew reported being advised by flight attendants of a fine black soot throughout the aircraft. Maintenance said the cause was clogged air filters.
Date: 202005
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Regional Jet 200 ER/LR (CRJ200)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Hydraulic System
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: We were doing an out and back to ZZZ. The flight to ZZZ from ZZZ1 was uneventful. The flight from ZZZ to ZZZ1 had a normal taxi; takeoff and level off. Shortly before descending on the arrival into ZZZ1 we got Hydro pump 3a caution message. I was the Pilot Flying and the Captain was the Pilot Monitoring so I called for the QHR and took the radio. While the Captain was running the QRH he noticed the capacity of the hydraulic 3 system was 0. I noted the same and shortly after we noticed we got the hydro 3 low caution message. We ran the QRH and took note of what systems we had lost. Since we would lose the landing gear controls and nose wheel steering we decided to advise ATC. We notified Dispatch of the issue through ACARS. The Captain informed the Flight Attendant and made an announcement on the PA to the passengers. We notified ATC that we would like ARFF and a tug on standby as we might be stuck on the runway. We knew our brakes would be degraded and nose steering would be inop so we both decided to use the longer runway of XXR. ATC vectored us down and put us in a delayed vectors pattern so we could run our checklists.  We ran the QRH and we also had to manually extend the gear. The approach was stable and it was a visual backed up by the ILS. I landed the plane safely and we managed to take the high speed taxiway off the runway. We had enough yaw control to steer us into the ramp. Steering became difficult and with the limitation of the brakes we decided to stop in the ramp and get tugged to our gate. We were safely tugged into our ramp and explained what happened to the maintenance crew. They examined the aircraft and found out that the hydraulic line has burst somewhere and all the skydrol leaked out of the system. It was our last flight of the day so we contacted the Command Center and notified them of what happened. Hydraulic system 3 lost all pressure in flight and failed.




Synopsis: CRJ-200 First Officer reported a hydraulic system failure and having to land the aircraft.