elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201401
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: CLT.TRACON, NC
Aircraft: Regional Jet 700 ER/LR (CRJ700)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B CLT
ATC / advisory: TRACON CLT
Aircraft component: Traffic Collision Avoidance System (TCAS)
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Confusion
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Conflict Airborne Conflict
Detector: Automation Aircraft TA; Automation Aircraft RA; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Procedure; Company Policy; Aircraft; Airspace Structure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: We were cleared the visual to 18R CLT. I had B737 traffic in sight approaching 18C from the east. I pointed out traffic to the flying First Officer and he shallowed his intercept angle. We were approximately 13 miles out at 4;000 FT when we got the TA followed by an RA to climb. The First Officer responded correctly but within seconds we got a command to descend even though the VSI was showing a 2;000 FPM climb command. I pointed this out and the First Officer continued to climb despite the ambiguous commands. I advised approach 'TCAS' climb. After clear of conflict we continued and landed without incident. Both aircraft on approach appeared to be exactly where they were supposed to be. This is not the first RA I have had at CLT with parallel approaches.




Synopsis: CRJ-700 Captain experiences a TCAS RA during visual approach to Runway 18R at CLT; caused by B737 traffic approaching Runway 18C. The RA command is initially to climb with the VSI indicating green in the climb direction then the command switches to descent with the VSI unchanged. The climb is continued until clear of conflict.
Date: 201906
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: CLT.Airport, NC
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
Airspace: Class B CLT
ATC / advisory: Ground CLT
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Ground Conflict; Less Severe; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Contributing factors: Airport; Human Factors; Procedure; Chart Or Publication
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: We landed on RWY 36L at CLT; gate assigned [gate]. We were taxiing through multiple ramp areas and frequencies and back to ground I to M; left on C; hold short of C10 and give way to landing traffic C10 high speed coming from right to left. As we approached C10 ATC (Air Traffic Control) queried if we were holding short of C10; we said we were. My FO (First Officer) had earlier reinforced the clearance to hold short of the intersection and I acknowledged. The landing traffic was exiting at C10 and decided they didn't have enough clearance to pass us. At no time did we cross C10; however if I were the Captain of the exiting aircraft during a high work load environment; I might have made the same decision. Because of the stalemate other landing traffic was forced to go around; and I was given a number to call the Tower. Which I believe was done at a very awkward time. We were given the clearance to enter ramp at C10 and contact ramp control. If I had a do over; I would have stopped even shorter of C10. We proceeded to [gate] with no incident.There was some initial confusion on my part from which direction the traffic was coming from. It's an awkward area to hold short on due to the reverse direction of the high speed at C10. It is a short high speed and the visual is quite limited from the left seat. Even the controller acknowledged that they never give this clearance to anything larger than an A321 due to small area concerned. We were switching frequencies between ramp and ground frequencies during a very congested time of operation. Plus the exiting aircraft we were to give way to were still on tower frequency and at no time did we hear their call sign on ground frequency.I would suggest some literature on the company -7 pages explaining this possible scenario during peak operations. I recommend a hot spot be created on the -9 pages explaining this as well. Another option; is to instruct landing traffic that are attempting to roll to C10 for easy gate entry during peak periods be instructed to exit right at D8. This procedure of having a taxiing Captain hold short of a reverse taxiway from my perspective is bound to cause repeated problems.




Synopsis: Flight Crew encountered confusing taxi instructions after landing.
Date: 202112
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: MD-11
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Autopilot
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew Diverted
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Climbing out; hand flying. Passing 10;000 feet; went to engage autopilot and it would not engage. Tried multiple times including after shutting off both AFS (Autoflight System) switches individually. We were scheduled to ZZZZ; so this made us non-Rasmussen capable. After talking with operations and maintenance to try to sort out our problem; the determination was made to return to ZZZ. This meant we had to dump fuel to get below max landing weight. We were approximately 40 miles WNW of ZZZ1. We communicated our plans to Center and coordinated the fuel dump. We were at FL280 when we started our dump. We dumped approximately 70k in fuel and made a non eventful landing in ZZZ. No emergency was declared.We had a 'no autoland' CAT 1 alert on taxi out. We performed a PDM after coordinating with operations and maintenance. During that time and discussion; we also noted our autopilot box was amber. We asked if it would work or was it associated with the no autoland. There was no way for them to confirm. A note in the MEL associated with the no autoland about checking the AP box status might have helped guide us to the gate for maintenance action.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported an autopilot problem and returned to departure airport.
Date: 201510
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: MD-82
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Turbine Engine
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Engine fire on takeoff. [Advised ATC and] followed QRH procedures and made overweight landing back at [departure airport]. Initially it was just a loop light followed by the master warning and fire handle light. Accomplished red box items and left engine would not come back to idle. All engine indications were normal with left engine except it would not go to idle. We turned back to land and was getting in QRH when all firelights and warnings went away. Kept engine at idle and landed overweight with fire [department] coverage. Shut down engine after landing and taxied back to gate after fire chief declared safe.


Second narrative: [Report Narrative Contained No Additional Information]


Synopsis: MD-82 flight crew reported engine fire indications on takeoff. Flight returned to departure airport.
Date: 202111
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ORD.Airport, IL
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Medium Large Transport
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground ORD
Second aircraft: B777 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Troubleshooting; Time Pressure; Distraction; Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Airport; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Upon arrival; our gate was occupied. Ground Control directed us to hold in the Alpha pad. The depiction on the ORD ramp page states that the entire aircraft should be behind the hold line. The size of the area is entirely too small for that to be accomplished. I pulled the aircraft in and parked as far into the pad at a 90 degree angle facing Taxiway TT. A regional and an Airbus taxied past with plenty of clearance. Ground Control directed an (other carrier) B777 to taxi on TT past us in the holding pad. The (other carrier) aircraft did not have wingtip clearance to taxi past us. With no awareness or concern he allowed his wingtip to pass over our aircraft's cockpit; missing us by a few feet. We notified Ground of the incident and they informed us we were parked incorrectly. That parking pad is not compatible for Aircraft X use. There is no way you can park an Aircraft X in that small area depicted on the diagram. The reference to Jeppesen page is not applicable to holding Pad A.


Second narrative: There is no ability to adequately insure aircraft separation especially with larger aircraft like the B777.


Synopsis: Air carrier flight crew reported after they were directed where to temporarily park on an airport pad; a larger aircraft created a critical ground conflict. The pilots contacted Ground Control regarding the near miss and were told they had parked incorrectly thus causing the ground conflict.
Date: 202009
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: PWK.Airport, IL
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 6
Aircraft: Single Engine Turboprop Undifferentiated
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class D PWK
ATC / advisory: Tower PWK
Second aircraft: Cessna Citation Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Airspace Violation All Types; Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Circling for 34 At Chicago Executive. Following a Citation Jet & Challenger Jet. Was circling for 34. Got a lot of wake turbulence behind the jets on the circling approach. Reported it to the Tower [who] suggested [I] do a 360 but because of the altitude of Class B decided not to do a 360 but wanted to stay out of the wake turbulence so could not descend below the Class Bravo. Due to the long base to final to maintain separation and avoid the jet wake [I] encroached the Class B airspace. Was aware of the fact [and] exited as soon as safely possible and landed at PWK.




Synopsis: Single Engine Turboprop pilot reported an airspace incursion resulted from his efforts to avoid wake turbulence on approach to PWK in trail of two corporate jet aircraft.
Date: 201203
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ADS.Tower, TX
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: PA-44 Seminole/Turbo Seminole
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Taxi
Airspace: Class D ADS
ATC / advisory: Tower ADS
Second aircraft: PA-34-200 Seneca I
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Aircraft
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Airport; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Aircraft X (me) was holding short Runway 15 at KADS on Taxiway J when Aircraft Y elected to attempt to pass me on the single-lane Taxiway A; off of which I was turned onto Taxiway J.  The airplane did not have room to pass.  Electing to remain holding short Runway 15; I did not move forward to allow the passage of Aircraft Y (which would have resulted in a runway incursion generated by me).  Aircraft Y's decision to attempt passage on the taxiway resulted in his left wing scraping over the top of my right wing.  Aircraft Y was determined to be airworthy following the 'paint exchange' and departed KADS; safely.  The taxiway incursion was not reported to Addison Tower due to extremely high volumes of critical radio communication as the airport was extremely busy at the time.




Synopsis: PA44 pilot holding short on Taxiway J at ADS; reports right wing tip contact with a PA34 attempting to taxi by on Taxiway A.
Date: 201310
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: DSM.Airport, IA
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B737-700
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Tower DSM
Aircraft component: Electronic Flt Bag (EFB)
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: During normal preflight planning for departure from DSM; the desired runway was discussed. Runway 13 was advertised but with near calm winds a Runway 31 intersection departure at D2 was considered and determined to offer acceptable performance. Full length Runway 31 was unavailable due to construction. The [EFB] indicated that at the Runway 31 intersection D2 had 8;600 FT available; just 500 FT less than the full length of 9;100 FT. We agreed on this plan but; when we requested this runway; Ground Control granted our request but indicated that there was only 7;300 FT available from D2; a full 1;300 FT less than the [EFB] indicated. With this newfound conflicting data and potentially unreliable performance data; a Runway 13 full length departure was requested. After a normal departure; we double checked the information in the [EFB] and the performance from ACARS and BOTH incorrectly indicated the available distance from D2 was 8;600 FT. In discussing this errant information; we determined that recent construction at the airport had reconfigured some of the intersecting taxiways but these changes have not been integrated into the performance packages. Dispatch (Ground Ops) and Flight Operations Performance should review all airports; and especially recently acquired cities; for accuracy of all runway data. This problem may be more pronounced at our newer and lesser utilized airports that were added [recently].




Synopsis: B737 Captain departing DSM discovers that the runway available from Taxiway D2 provided by the company is not correct.
Date: 201507
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Taxi
Aircraft component: Parking Brake
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Distraction; Human-Machine Interface; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: After push back and tow out I thought the parking brake was set; but Park Brake Light was not on. I was distracted by an extreme amount of loud feedback/engine noise over the headset and was concentrating on listening to the tow truck driver instructions.




Synopsis: B737 Captain reported he attempted to set the parking brake after push back but did not notice the Parking Brake Light was not on after the attempt.
Date: 201808
Local time of day: 1201-1800
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: Parked
Aircraft component: Pneumatic System - Indicating and Warning
Component problem: Improperly Operated; Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural MEL / CDL; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Routine Inspection
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Yesterday morning; I read in the [company] daily email updates; that Aircraft X had the APU bleed valve put back on deferral. We had this same problem [previously]. However; we also had a CAS message displayed on both PFDs. Maintenance did not know how to address the CAS Message; and wanted to defer the APU Bleed and dispatch the aircraft. When toggling through the CAS selection prompts on the MCDU; we were able to determine that the CAS MSG was due to the #2 EICAS displaying the following messages: A-I WING FAIL; BLEED 2 FAIL; and BLEED 1 FAIL. It should be noted that the APU bleed could be cycled ON-OFF and it responded; accordingly. When we refused to take the aircraft with the CAS MSG; Maintenance came out to the aircraft and was able to reset the power; and all faults cleared.A review of the aircraft logbook showed that the APU bleed had been previously written up several times. The APU bleed is not the problem. The #2 EICAS is seeing an erroneous bleed leak; and this is causing the X-ing out the bleed valve (if were it an actual bleed leak; the APU bleed valve would not be able to open up when commanded to do so).After finding that the APU Bleed was unnecessarily put back on deferral; I tried to reach out to Maintenance-Control; but they were too busy to take my input.My concern is this: we have an aircraft that was improperly deferred and is flying around with an illegal deferral. Almost as important; we have a much-needed system which is on deferral; yet the system is completely operative.Put out some type of advisory and/or memo to all Maintenance personnel; on how to accurately troubleshoot/diagnose an EICAS miscompare.




Synopsis: An EMB-175 First Officer reported that the APU bleed was unnecessarily deferred when other pneumatic system faults were displayed on EICAS.
Date: 201307
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Cessna 152
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Reciprocating Engine Assembly
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Distraction
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Airspace Violation All Types
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: While flying along the north side of the river headed west I experienced a loss of engine power. Since I lost nearly 400-500 RPM; I decided to land at the nearest suitable location. After losing 2;500 FT due to loss of engine power I selected [an airport] for my emergency landing location. I declared an emergency with [ATC] and proceeded to fly into an active Restricted Airspace. The landing was was uneventful.




Synopsis: The pilot of a C152 entered Restricted Airspace while diverting to the nearest suitable airport due to a lost of engine power.
Date: 201306
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZZ.ARTCC, FO
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B757-200
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZZ
Aircraft component: Powerplant Lubrication System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Time Pressure
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; General Declared Emergency; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: On random North Atlantic track right engine oil quantity began to decrease to zero. After 5 minutes the right engine oil pressure began dropping from normal. We declared an emergency; with ATC; and then flew a 15 miles offset; left of track; then began a descent and proceeded to our enroute alternate ETOPS diversion airport. We retarded the right engine to idle and left the right engine in idle for approximately one hour and forty minutes until we landed and shut the engine off. We landed using single engine procedures and the approach and landing was uneventful. Engine oil pressure remained stable in lower green band; 23-24; and oil temperature remained in the green band through out the diversion flight.Right Engine had an oil leak and we needed to land as soon as possible.




Synopsis: A B757-200 began loosing oil at FL350 on an Atlantic Track and diverted to an ETOPS alternated with the engine running at idle and oil pressure in lower green band.