elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201307
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ABE.Airport, PA
Aircraft: B757-200
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class C ABE
ATC / advisory: Tower ABE
Aircraft component: Autoflight System
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Confusion; Human-Machine Interface; Situational Awareness; Training / Qualification; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Deviation - Speed All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I have about 35 total hours in the airplane; including IOE. The Captain is high minimums. Our company procedure is for a high minimums captain to do all of the takeoffs and landings. Not necessarily all the flying in between. Typically after the high minimums captain gets the aircraft in the air; he passes the aircraft to the first officer. This happens at varying times/altitudes/ and configurations depending on the preference of the crew. In this instance; the Captain chose to hand over the aircraft right after takeoff. At 400 FT I called for heading select. We were doing a FLCH takeoff because initial altitude was 3;000 FT. As he handed over the aircraft; he took the radios and we were cleared to 7;000 FT pretty close to 1;000 FT with a turn to 310. FLCH and 215 KTS were selected. I looked at the MCP to verify the altitude and when I looked back at my instruments; I was at 2;300 FT or so and my FD command bars were indicating fly down. I initially started to follow them; but noticed my speed accelerating past 250. So I pitched up to regain the speed and waited as the Captain retracted the flaps. Not sure of what exactly happened; or what was going to happen; so I hand flew the aircraft and re-established automation.Inexperienced crews need to be vigilant. I am also still looking at the MCP instead of at my displays. Old habits are hard to break. Going slower and taking our time would have helped. I am also not a fan of doing switching of controls down low in a turn. Next time; I will suggest that a high minimums captain fly until clean up.




Synopsis: A First Officer just off IOE and a new B757-200 Captain failed to assure common understanding of the autoflight configuration when the First Officer (restricted from takeoffs and landings due to the Captain's high minimums status) assumed control after takeoff but prior to flap retraction. A short period of confusion and the start of a descent vice climb ensued. Concentration on the FD command bars vice raw data was a contributing factor.
Date: 201604
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Aircraft: B737-700
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Lifevest/Jacket
Reporter organization: Contracted Service
Reporter function: Technician
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Airframe; Maintenance Powerplant
Human factors: Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural MEL / CDL; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Maintenance
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: MEL; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I was sent to aircraft X to clear an MEL on the missing life vest seal. (I) found a zip tie on the pouch that prevented the life vest from being used. I removed the zip tie; inspected the life vest; installed the proper seal and cleared the MEL. I then asked the flight attendant 'how it got the zip tie on there?' (I) was told by him that the OPS supervisor in (STA) had installed the zip tie. (I) also asked the Captain (and) he was not aware of the zip tie being there.




Synopsis: When clearing an MEL item on a B737-700 the Mechanic found an improper seal installed (zip tie) on a life vest pouch. The zip tie was installed by someone other than Maintenance.
Date: 201603
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Super King Air 200
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Brake System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Troubleshooting; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Ground Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Ground Event / Encounter Aircraft; Ground Incursion Taxiway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I flew the aircraft to ZZZ with another pilot who managed the aircraft for its owner with two passengers. The flight and landing were uneventful; however on rollout I had an issue with the right rudder pedal; making directional control difficult. I advised the other pilot; who then took over control of the aircraft; who confirmed to me that he had taken control. He had previously told me that when he and I flew together he was ultimately in control of the aircraft and could 'take over' the aircraft at any time. The tower offered a back taxi although he opted to taxi to the end of the runway and from there to the parking area. I did suggest during the process to shut down and call for a tow. As the aircraft exited the runway he attempted to use high differential power settings to try and maintain directional control. He stated he no longer had control as the aircraft was veering down the taxiway gaining momentum; at which time he put both power levers to idle. The aircraft veered hard to the left on an adjacent taxiway; struck a parked aircraft; and stopped after which I shut down the engines.




Synopsis: BE20 pilot attempted to taxi post-landing with marginal steering ability by using differential engine thrust. Taxiway incursion resulted along with a parked aircraft being struck.
Date: 201201
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: SDL.Airport, AZ
Aircraft: Viking
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Tower SDL
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Ground
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Ground Incursion Taxiway
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: Taxi
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Airport; Human Factors
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: While working Ground Control Aircraft X exited Runway 21 at A-10 and was instructed to taxi to parking via A and hold short of A-8. The aircraft read back the hold short; he then taxied through the intersection and nearly 't-boned' another aircraft joining A at A-8. In my opinion; and also based on the pilots statements; the airport signage is woefully inadequate. If the airport installed better signage it would help to reduce the chance of this happening again.




Synopsis: SDL Controller described a near collision with another taxiing aircraft; the reporter claiming less than adequate signage as the primary causal factor.
Date: 201708
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: DC-10 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Hazardous Material Violation; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Equipment / Tooling; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: During preflight; I discovered a crushed cardboard container containing Flammable Gas. I additionally discovered a container that was a liquefied nitrogen- TYPE container; looking a little like an old fashioned milk jug; in a cardboard container that had no top on the metal container:  i.e.; the cardboard box surrounding it had no upper surface.




Synopsis: DC10 First Officer reported discovering damaged dangerous goods containers during preflight.
Date: 201509
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: N90.TRACON, NY
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Dawn
Aircraft: Citationjet (C525/C526) - CJ I / II / III / IV
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class B NYC
ATC / advisory: TRACON N90
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Deviation - Speed All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Contributing factors: Manuals; Procedure
Primary problem: Manuals

Narrative: Airspeed of 270 knots was assigned at 13;000 feet (limit is 278 for CJ-3) and aircraft behind was slowed to 260 knots as we descended to the Airport. Descent was continued. As assigned; to 6;000 feet and I noticed speed still above 250 knots as we went below 10;000 feet. Pilot flying reduced speed at my request; but unclear if clearance intended for us to stay at 270 knots to 6;000 feet. Please clarify if 250 knots is a maximum under 10;000 feet except only in an emergency; or if an assigned speed is valid. We continued to be 'pushed' to keep speed high during final approach! No comments by ATC as we did not ask (confess?). No conflicts; no safety concerns; just seeking clarity.




Synopsis: Aircraft was assigned 270 knots at 13;000 feet and did not reduce to 250 knots below 10;000 feet.
Date: 201510
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZTL.ARTCC, GA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: A320
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class A ZTL
ATC / advisory: Center ZTL
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation - Altitude Crossing Restriction Not Met; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Procedure; Aircraft
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: While descending via the IVANE5 RNAV arrival with an ATC issued airspeed restriction of 280 KTS; ATC then altered our altitude restriction over MAYOS to descend to FL220. After inserting FL220 into the MCDU both the Captain's and FO's instruments showed us on profile. Subsequently; the FO's profile started showing a 'high' prediction over MAYOS while the Captain's instruments showed 'on profile'. The captain applied speed brakes to increase the descent rate while attempting to maintain the 280 KT restriction. We crossed MAYOS at FL232 and alerted ATC. ATC made no comment and proceeded to clear us to descend via the IVANE5 arrival. The flight proceeded to landing without incident.The event occurred because of the amended clearance of a hard altitude and airspeed given once on an RNAV arrival. The hard altitude of FL220 at MAYOS followed by a subsequent altitude of FL 220 or above at the next fix appears to confuse the Airbus navigation. Compounding the event was the discrepancy between the Captain's and FO's flight instruments. My profile doughnut showed us right on and his showed us right on until crossing MSTRD.The company should work with ATC to limit these amended clearances and if they are going to be given then issue them with plenty of time to prepare. Company should put out a read file on this particular situation and if it can't be corrected through software updates than it should be trained. I will be very cognizant in the future when given this clearance and as another barrier have the progress page up.


Second narrative: [Report Narrative Contained No Additional Information.]


Synopsis: On RNAV approach; A320 flight crew was issued a speed restriction along with a modified altitude to maintain on the arrival. As a result of maintaining the airspeed; crew failed to meet the fix crossing restriction.
Date: 201705
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Dawn
Aircraft: B767-300 and 300 ER
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Weight And Balance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Upon commencing descent from cruise; we heard a loud noise coming from the back of the aircraft. It sounded like cargo containers smashing into each other. Captain asked me to check loading paperwork for any open cargo slots on main deck and lower deck. Captain has advised ATC about the issue we had and requested shallow descent/early descent. I was able to confirm there were no empty cargo positions by verifying loading sheets. The Captain advised company via ACARS. We continued to hear loud bangs throughout descent. I would like to add an additional note regarding ZZZ1 station: I have flown with the same Captain throughout the week; same route; between ZZZ1 and ZZZ. A couple of days prior; as we were ready for departure; the station manager returned to the cockpit advising that the Weight and Balance was wrong. He mentioned the following: 'I have discovered a pallet marked 'EMPTY' that is full of boxes. We need to unload; weigh the pallet and provide a new W&B form'. Looking back to a couple of days ago with the incorrectly marked container and the failure to secure cargo on the flight. I believe it would be welcomed a refresher of cargo loading procedures for ground personnel.




Synopsis: B767 First Officer reported they heard a loud noise coming from the back of the aircraft during descent.
Date: 202101
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Hazardous Material Violation; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Other Person
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate; Routine Inspection
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Notified by Duty Officer after flight completion; that 243 kg of dry ice had been loaded into Position 13C without documentation. No performance limitations were exceeded according to ZZZ1 Operations. Unable to determine cause.I suggest two person independent verification procedures.




Synopsis: Captain reported undocumented transport of Hazmat cargo; at destination arrival.
Date: 201204
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: B747-400
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Turbine Engine
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Relief Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Inflight Event / Encounter Bird / Animal
Detector: Person Flight Attendant; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Completing gear retraction a loud 'growling' noise started on left side of aircraft. Engine vibration N2 5.0 was only indication of an abnormal situation. A few minutes after takeoff there were three jolts with no indications from the engines; a call from flight attendants alerted us to smoke coming from engine number one with each of the jolts. Once ATC was notified; Dispatch/Maintenance consulted and checklists completed. We dumped fuel to maximum landing weight and returned to [departure airport]. Notified on ground of bird strike; crew debriefed and critiqued.




Synopsis: A B747-400 Relief Pilot reported experiencing high vibration and loud noise from #1 engine after takeoff. They returned to departure airport where they were advised they had struck a bird.
Date: 201706
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: Y14.Airport, SD
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: PA-28 Cherokee/Archer/Dakota/Pillan/Warrior
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class G Y14
ATC / advisory: CTAF Y14
Second aircraft: SR22
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Instructor
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Situational Awareness
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: When on downwind at Y14; [I] made a call when midfield at 1000 AGL. [A second aircraft] made a '10 miles to the west; landing runway 16 Lincoln County' call. [We] made [our] landing and proceeded to takeoff for more pattern work. When approaching downwind for runway 16 [we] made another downwind call to Y14. Upon turning base to final; I noticed a shadow of an airplane coming directly at us. I took evasive action to get out of the area to avoid a mid-air collision. When finally getting visual contact with [the other aircraft] there was 100 ft vertical separation between our two airplanes. While no radio calls are required at Y14; [the other aircraft] did take advantage of 91.113 and endangered the lives of other pilots and pedestrians on the ground.




Synopsis: PA28 instructor pilot reported experiencing a NMAC in the pattern at Y14.
Date: 201709
Aircraft: EMB-505 / Phenom 300
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Aircraft component: Flight Dynamics
Component problem: Design
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Manuals
Primary problem: Manuals

Narrative: GEA 1 FAIL during cruise caused multiple system failures including but not limited to Auto Pressurization; landing gear position indication; all left engine and fuel instruments / gauges. The QRH procedure for GEA FAIL is Crew Awareness. Crew contacted Operations and [maintenance control] and received no useful information. QRH needs a description of lost systems and logical was to address the multiple outages.  Flight Training company does not train nor provide written documentation on the GEA (GARMIN ENGINE AIRFRAME) UNIT. Additionally a GEA 1 Failure in the Simulator only causes a failure of the left engine fuel quantity and flow not close to a real event.




Synopsis: Embraer 505 Captain reported an in-flight failure of the integrated flight instrument system.
Date: 202201
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: SFO.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class B SFO
ATC / advisory: Tower SFO
Aircraft component: Radio Altimeter
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Troubleshooting; Situational Awareness; Distraction; Confusion; Time Pressure
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Automation Overrode Flight Crew; Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Performed a normal ILS approach to Runway 28R. Turned off the auto-pilot at approximately 1;500 feet. During flare; at approximately 3 feet; the auto ground spoilers deployed. Causing the aircraft to pitch up and the main wheels to touch down. The auto spoilers should not have deployed until the aircraft was on the ground. Suspect some sort of interference from 5G to the radio altimeter.


Second narrative: First Officer made normal hand flown ILS approach to Runway 28R at SFO. We broke out of the clouds at 500 [ft.] AGL and flare was normal. Right before we made ground contact and before I could react; the speedbrake lever motorized up and deployed the speed brakes which made us plop onto the runway from about 3 feet or so. It wasn't a hard landing; but it ruined what would've been a good landing for the First Officer. There were no EICAS (Engine Indicating and Crew Alerting System) messages or any other system failures annunciated. With over 18;000 hours as Captain of Boeing airliners; of which 3;000 is in this type; I've NEVER had the auto speedbrakes deploy uncommanded before ground contact. I find it curious that this should occur on my first arrival at SFO after publication of the 5G NOTAM. After arriving at the gate we made log entries to document the event; and I also contacted the pilot office to advise them so appropriate investigation could begin. Hopefully the data recorded by the aircraft will allow determination of the cause. In the meantime I will closely monitor the speedbrake lever on all landings to prevent it happening again; especially at a greater distance above the pavement. While I operate in the 5G environment; I have no intention on being the first to make a 5G landing.


Synopsis: Air carrier flight crew reported the ground spoilers deployed 3 feet prior to landing. The aircraft pitched up and the landed firm. The pilots believe this was a result of a radio altimeter malfunction caused by 5G interference.