elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201901
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Weather elements / visibility: Fog
Aircraft: A320
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Anomaly: 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: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Departed Rwy XX at ZZZ. Tower had just opened and revised our clearance to include [a specific] Departure. We loaded that into the box and briefed the departure. The Flight Director commanded a right turn prior to the ZZZ1 VOR instead of entering the hold to climb. Before we could correct it; Approach cleared us onto the airway; and stated 'it's no problem; [those] aircraft FMS' seem to always command that turn early.'


Second narrative: We initially called Center for our clearance and were cleared as filed without a SID. We briefed that and were ready for a departure on RWY XY. After de-ice; tower was open and on call for taxi they gave us a new clearance that included [a specific] SID as filed. We plugged that into the box and looked at it as we were taxiing out in the fog (approximately 1/4 mi. vis). We did not notice the note regarding the climb in the hold to the MEA/MCA before proceeding on course. The larger threat is that the box didn't depict any type of hold at ZZZ1; just a turn prior to ZZZ1 to continue on course. On contact with Departure; they asked if we were proceeding to ZZZZZ; which we said we were; as cleared; and they mentioned that there should be a climb in hold. I then said 'yes; now we see that.' The controller said 'Yes; [those FMS's] always do this because your box sequences to the next fix without the hold. [Others] have it depicted in the box.' He said 'no problem; proceed on course.'


Synopsis: A320 flight crew reported deviating from the departure clearance after takeoff.
Date: 201201
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: MD-83
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Altitude Hold/Capture
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Human-Machine Interface; Distraction
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Clearance; Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control; Flight Crew FLC Overrode Automation
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Level at 11;000 FT and searching for assigned crossing traffic as we reached an intersection on the STAR. While configuring the aircraft and simultaneously turning to the outbound heading with the autopilot engaged; the aircraft exited ALT HOLD and began an uninitiated descent. We descended no more than 250 FT when I detected the descent; disengaged the autopilot and quickly returned to our assigned altitude.While we were very busy on the approach and both searching for assigned traffic we asked this aircraft to do too much; i.e. slow; configure; and turn all at the same time. This aircraft; in particular; has a tenancy to switch into uncommanded Vertical Speed mode and did so this time while we were distracted. I will be more vigilant next time I'm asking the auto flight system to multi-task.


Second narrative: [No substantive additional information was contained in the secondary report narrative.]


Synopsis: The flight crew of an MD-83; distracted by searching for traffic; suffered a momentary excursion from their assigned altitude when the autopilot exited altitude hold mode and descended until the pilot flying disconnected the autopilot and returned to their assigned altitude.
Date: 201903
Location: LGA.Airport, NY
Aircraft: Embraer Jet Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground LGA
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Distraction; Confusion
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown; Ground Incursion Taxiway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Airport; Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: At LGA on Taxiway A between Taxiway F and J; there are no blue taxiway edge lights. Instead there are blue reflectors which are useless and do not show the taxiway edges in the dark. This stretch of taxiway also does not have green taxiway centerline lights; or if it does; they were not illuminated making it very difficult to determine the edge of the taxiway. Lack of proper lighting was the driving factor with this event. It would be nice if the airports that have decided to use blue reflectors instead of blue taxiway lights for edge markings at night would also have green centerline lights and illuminate those. In fact; I believe this is required by FAA Advisory Circular 150/5340-30J.




Synopsis: ERJ Captain reported taxiway edge lights are not available for Taxiway A between F and J at LGA. The blue reflectors are reportedly insufficient in the dark.
Date: 201409
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Aircraft component: Communication Systems
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Dispatcher
Reporter qualification: Dispatch Dispatcher
Human factors: Confusion; Communication Breakdown; Workload
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Dispatch
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Procedure; Company Policy
Primary problem: Company Policy

Narrative: I was an unassigned desk when I came to work on this date. The Manager on duty (MDO) assigned me to an extra Sector. I asked what sectors I should be watching when I signed in. The MDO told me on multiple occasions I should only be watching a specific Sector as that was what was built for me. [Later in the afternoon] the Chief received a SATCOM call from a flight looking for a re-dispatch. It was then we discovered that flight was on Sector XX and was not being monitored by any dispatcher. I quickly began monitoring Sector XX and worked up the re-dispatch for the flight. However early afternoon in to the evening; no dispatcher was flight following that flight and I have no idea how many other flights that could have landed in that time frame on Sector XX.




Synopsis: A Dispatcher discovered that a sector with an unknown number of flights was unmonitored for an extended period of time.
Date: 201602
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: BIL.Tower, MT
Aircraft: Large Transport
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach; Landing
Airspace: Class C BIL
ATC / advisory: Tower BIL
Second aircraft: Small Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turboprop Eng
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Local
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Developmental
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Confusion; Distraction
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Ground Conflict; Less Severe; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors; Airport
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: Aircraft X was cleared to land Runway 10L. The pilot read it back correctly. Aircraft X landed Runway 10R.Aircraft Y was cleared for takeoff Runway 10R. Was told about the traffic on final; was landing Runway 10L. The pilot read it back correctly. Aircraft Y stopped short of the runway and questioned the aircraft landing Runway 10R.I checked the gear down on about a 2 mile final on the Aircraft X. Gear was down. Our runways are 750 feet apart; centerline to centerline. It is hard to tell which final the aircraft is on because the Tower is too tall and too far set back from the runways to determine exactly what final they are on. I cleared Aircraft X to land after Aircraft X passed the threshold to ensure a landing clearance to the runway. Turned Aircraft X off the runway. Cleared Aircraft Y for takeoff.Build a new runway that isn't so close to the other runway.




Synopsis: Controller reported of clearing an aircraft to land on a specific parallel runway. Another aircraft was cleared for departure on the parallel runway; but stopped short and asked Tower about landing aircraft on his runway. Controller said it was hard to tell what runway the aircraft was landing on. Aircraft landed exited runway then the departure aircraft departed.
Date: 201902
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: .75
Aircraft: No Aircraft
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Local
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was working Local Control while the Supervisor was on the OS/CIC position. Ground Control and I advised the Supervisor the weather was quickly deteriorating to the east. Though all employees are certified weather observers; the Supervisor did not augment the ASOS (Automated Surface Observing System) in a timely manner to indicate visibility less than 3SM (actual visibility 2SM). Then; the Supervisor failed to indicate visibility less than 1SM (3/4SM). I told Aircraft X visibility most likely less than a mile because I could no longer wait on the Supervisor to update the weather. A new ATIS was issued to indicate visibility 3/4SM (7 minutes after I was relieved). It is important especially for our air taxi operators to know when visibility is below 1SM as they have restrictions for flying passengers.This is the second time the Supervisor failed to correct inaccurate weather information (ATIS) to ensure the pilots/operators had the current information that can be used in a timely manner.  When this happened before; I notified the Air Traffic Manager and my Facility Representative about this Supervisor failing to correct weather information in a timely manner. The Air Traffic Manager; at that time; said the situation was discussed with the Supervisor. The Supervisor was told to collaborate with Tower personnel when weather was marginal in order to protect our customers.I attempted to discuss this situation with the Supervisor. The Supervisor said the weather already indicated IFR conditions (ceiling OVC007); and the ATIS was updated once the ASOS recognized the change in visibility.We need to work together to protect our operators. This lack of a safety culture; especially by management; is dangerous and needs to stop. We cannot allow junior controllers to see; much less emulate; complacent behaviors from their senior peer group or management.




Synopsis: Tower Controller reported that a Supervisor did not act in a timely manner when the weather changed.
Date: 201301
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Pax Seat
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Technician
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Maintenance
When detected: Routine Inspection
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Incorrect / Not Installed / Unavailable Part; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I was assigned to taxi one aircraft to [the hangar] and pick up one aircraft to bring back to the gate. I was about to leave [when] I was approached by a [contract] Mechanic/Repairman about an open item left on the aircraft to do. I was told that the seat belts and cushions had to be replaced and the seat disinfected at 26E and 26F. I was then shown 3 cushions and 3 sets of belts in the forward coat closet. I picked up a few cushions and belts and noted that none were new; in fact one belt was frayed. I asked the mechanic where he got these parts from; he said they were taken off of the seats that were removed from some aircraft that they were working on. I asked where the borrowed part/removed part document was. They did not know what I was talking about. I told them that these were not serviceable or usable. We proceeded to go to the back of the aircraft to 26E and 26F where there was a note taped to the seat. I told [the Contractor] that we do not work off of papers taped to the aircraft; everything has to be documented in the log book. I called my crew chief and advised him of the situation. He told me that he was aware of some of this situation; but he never told me of what was going on before I left to pick up [the other aircraft]. To protect myself I made a maintenance entry in the [logbook] noting the seat situation. I left my shift after I brought the aircraft back to the gate. I see one of my co-workers accomplished the replacement of the seat belts and cushions which were probably the ones in the coat closet. I don't think [he] was aware of where those parts came from; because I don't think my crew chief told him that those parts were not serviceable.




Synopsis: During routine maintenance on a B737; a Maintenance Technician was encouraged by Contract Maintenance personnel to install parts that had been removed from another aircraft without the proper documentation. After refusing; and documenting the aircraft defect; he performed aircraft taxi moves. He returned to find that the parts had been replaced by another Technician; but he is unsure of the source of the parts.
Date: 201512
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Airspeed Indicator
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: On takeoff roll; I lost my airspeed indicator and informed the Captain. Continuing the flight and after rotation; noticed no increase in altitude on my altimeter or VSI. Handed control of the aircraft over to the Captain after confirmation of actual airspeed and climb and clean aircraft.After communicating with Dispatch; we elected to continue to destination; however we entered and remained at our filed cruise altitude of FL340 without required the instruments for Reduced Vertical Separation Minimums (RVSM) airspace.




Synopsis: B737 First Officer reported a loss of airspeed indication during takeoff and informed the Captain; but the takeoff was continued. Once airborne the altimeter and vertical speed were also noted to have failed and the flight controls were passed to the Captain. The flight continued to destination at a Reduced Vertical Separation Minimums (RVSM) altitude; without the necessary equipment.
Date: 201311
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZZ.Airport, FO
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 145 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZZ
Aircraft component: Fuel Tank
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Human factors: Confusion
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Inflight Event / Encounter Fuel Issue
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; General Maintenance Action; General Declared Emergency; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Shortly after takeoff; on initial climbout; the Flight Attendant contacted the flight crew on the emergency interphone to report a possible fuel leak out of the left tank. The Flight Attendant also had video available that passengers were taking with personal smart phones of the event. [We were] continuing to climb due to mountainous terrain on the departure path. An initial scan of the Fuel System did not reveal an obvious leak; fuel imbalance less than 100 LBS. The Flight Attendant offered the video to the Captain (pilot not flying); the Captain accepted. After a brief review the Captain also concluded the aircraft was leaking fuel just outboard of the outer flap panel. The Captain immediately declared an Emergency with Departure; requested ARFF support; and instructed the First Officer (pilot flying) to return to the airport. After leveling off (10;000 FT) the fuel leak stopped. As the fuel leak did not pose a flight controllability issue; the Captain elected to have the First Officer continue as pilot flying; while the Captain undertook the necessary coordination with ATC; Operations (via ACARS) for a safe air return. After landing; the Captain taxiied to a remote parking location; where ZZZ Station Operations were already waiting. [We] powered down the aircraft to remove any ignition sources. Passengers were deplaned after ARFF and the Captain determined the area outside the aircraft was safe. Fuel leak during the most critical phase of flight; leak not visible from the flight deck. A post flight examination by Maintenance personnel revealed a flapper valve was leaking.




Synopsis: Flight Attendant notifies flight crew that fuel was leaking from Left tank shortly after takeoff.  Captain offered video of left wing taken by passenger and concluded fuel leaking just outboard of outer flap panel. Emergency declared and the EMB-145 aircraft returned to field. Maintenance inspection revealed a flapper valve leaking.
Date: 201708
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: FHR.Airport, WA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Citation V/Ultra/Encore (C560)
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class E NUW
ATC / advisory: TRACON NUW
Aircraft component: GPWS
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: After takeoff we got the GPWS Terrain audio warning. Continued the climb as normal. We had all the surrounding area in sight and NO terrain was an issue. Database for this location in the GPWS system is incorrect. Chief Pilot was notified of this GPWS warning and issue has been passed on to our Safety and Tech Ops people and they will be contacting Honeywell.




Synopsis: CE-560EP Captain reported receiving a false GPWS terrain warning on climb out from FHR; presumably related to a database error.
Date: 201312
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: CDW.Airport, NJ
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: SR22
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class B EWR
ATC / advisory: Tower CDW
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Airspace Violation All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR
Detector: Automation Aircraft TA; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Exited Penetrated Airspace; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Airspace Structure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: I had filed an IFR flight plan but after checking with CDW clearance/ground planned to depart VFR and pick up IFR clearance when airborne outside horizontal limits of Class Bravo to the west of departure airport. CDW Tower cleared straight out VFR departure Runway 28. I maintained 280 heading in the climb out intending to stay under the EWR Class Bravo (3;000 FT-7;000 FT). Tower asked me to remain on frequency for avoidance of traffic at 1;700 FT incoming to CDW at my 11 o'clock. I climbed rapidly and reached 2;500 FT-3;000 FT when Tower told me traffic no factor frequency change approved. At the same time; my TCAS indicated that another aircraft was approaching around 10 o'clock at my altitude; so I steepened climb and inadvertently penetrated Class B to remain safe and climbed to 4-5;000 FT before realizing that I had penetrated the Class Bravo. After checking for traffic; I descended rapidly at about 2;500 FPM; but was over top of MMU airspace up to 2;700 FT; so leveled off at 2;900 FT and proceed west until I was away from Class B horizontal limit. While over top of MMU airspace I got a TCAS warning of an aircraft at my 10 o'clock at 3;000 FT; so I banked hard to the right and made visual contact with the small jet; who was taking the same evasive maneuver to his right. I then proceeded southwest beyond the Class Bravo and then proceeded south toward the WHITE intersection to pick up my IFR clearance.




Synopsis: SR22 pilot experiences two separate TCAS events and an inadvertent Class B entry while departing CDW VFR with the intent of picking up the IFR clearance airborne.