elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201404
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B757 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Window Ice/Rain System
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: At FL360; the First Officer's R1 window arced and split from the bottom left hand corner to the opposite side of the windscreen about one halfway up the window. The split was also discolored (very dark brown burn color). The splitting was also accompanied by a small fire (size of a small match being lit) which extinguished itself and a slight burning smell that also dissipated very quickly. The overhead window heat amber off light was illuminated; and the pressurization was normal. While referencing the Window Damage Checklist in the QRH; the R1 windscreen shattered. We declared an emergency with ATC; conference with Dispatch and Maintenance Control and briefed the flight attendants and passengers during the descent and landed slightly over the max landing weight at the diversion airport.


Second narrative: Started as small crack in First Officer forward window and progressed to larger crack with arcing and small flame. Slight burning smell was noticed and we accomplished QRH for window damage. After a few minutes a loud pop was heard and entire outer pane of window cracked. I was flying and was told to start descent and eventual diversion. Declared emergency with ATC and headed to ZZZ while Captain coordinated with Dispatch and Maintenance Control. Captain took control for landing on final and landing was uneventful. WX was VFR. Landing was about 2000 lbs over the structural limit.


Synopsis: B757 flight crew experiences an R1 window heat failure followed by a crack in the outer pane. As the QRH is being consulted the window shatters and a descent and diversion is initiated.
Date: 201209
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: B757-200
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Leading Edge Slat
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Technician
Human factors: Confusion; Workload; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Maintenance
When detected: Routine Inspection
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Manuals; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We were reviewing the paperwork for [a Boeing 757 Leading Edge Slat Trailing Edge Wedge Skin Inspection (AD 91-22-51)] for a verifying signature just before noon. We recognized in reading this that we made two mistakes on [the previous] aircraft pertaining to the entries and signoffs: 1) The part number 012N8812-53 that was recorded for #5 Leading Edge Slat was not a valid part number in the B757 IPC search. This may need to be inspected as though it had no Data Plate. 2) The part number 012N8892-22M was recorded for #6 Leading Edge Slat. After reviewing the Table on 5.A and foot note at the bottom of Card 14; we found that the Slat needed to be inspected. I notified my Lead. He reviewed the paper with us and had me contact our Manager; who instructed me to call the Boeing Desk. I called and they explained how to re-inspect the slats. There should be a note that states that the part number should start with 114N3002- or 012N8892- and you are looking for these - numbers to inspect. Foot notes are not clear. It read to me; at the time; that Alpha (A) was the only end letter that applied; not all letters at the end; like (M). First time seeing this inspection (for our crew as well) and having other inbound flights to work. Noise level; arriving flight and ground equipment. [We need] clearer notes. Double check P/N's and S/N's [and] compare them to what was documented. Review the numbers with the Lead or better yet with [a Maintenance Technician] that has done the inspection before. Review the paper work inside before and afterwards with your co-worker(s).




Synopsis: While performing a complex inspection with paperwork that was unfamiliar; two Maintenance Technicians did not properly perform the required tasks. This was not recognzied until working on the second aircraft; one week after the improperly inspected aircraft was released for service.
Date: 201702
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: SLC.Airport, UT
Flight conditions: Marginal
Light: Night
Aircraft: Medium Large Transport
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach; Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B SLC
ATC / advisory: TRACON S56
Aircraft component: Microphone
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Confusion; Communication Breakdown
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors; Weather
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: On about a 20 mile final to Runway 34L we lost communication with Approach. due to a stuck mike. We switched to Tower about 19 miles out and let them know about our losing contact with Approach. Shortly thereafter we got the runway in sight and called the visual. Tower cleared us for the Visual Approach to 34L. Approximately 2 to 4 miles out with easy visual contact with the runway; Tower called and said that Approach had just called and said the field Visibility was now 2 miles; and what did we want to do? The First Officer responded that we would continue; due to having the Runway easily in sight. My mind was now racing. We had about 30 secs to landing with the Runway easily in sight which at the time seemed like the safest course of action. We had no alternate; but I had added an extra 600 lbs. of contingency fuel; but the Vis was now dropping. According to Operations we only need 1000 & 1 day or 1000 & 2 at night to cancel IFR; or same if on a Charted Visual Flight Procedures (CVFP). But this Visual App. requires 1000 & 3. But I thought there had to be some sort of provision for continuing at this point on the Visual App. as long as we had the Runway in sight.


Second narrative: [Report narrative contained no additional information.]


Synopsis: Air carrier flight crew reported an event of changing visibilities late in the approach from VMC to IMC with the field and runway in sight throughout the approach and landing.
Date: 201906
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: SEA.Airport, WA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class B S46
ATC / advisory: TRACON S46
Second aircraft: Medium Transport
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Confusion; Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Airspace Violation All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Separated Traffic; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Company Policy; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Airspace Structure

Narrative: Received a request for a westbound transition through the SEA Class Bravo airspace. Issued Aircraft X a westbound transition through the airspace via the Seahawks transition. The aircraft acknowledged the clearance. I then focused my attention to the aircraft I had on final. As I returned my attention back to Aircraft X I witnessed that he was not complying with the clearance he had been given. Instead of flying the Seahawks transiting the aircraft had immediately turned westbound after departing Renton cutting through BFI airspace. As I saw Aircraft Y climbing out of BFI I immediately issued traffic to Aircraft X and then called BFI on the shout line to point out traffic and advise them [that Aircraft X] had [Aircraft Y] in sight. No brasher warning was issued as management makes the excuse that the charts can be confusing. The pilot was instructed to call the tower so that a conversation could be had with them. This is usually the most that will happen at SEA for whatever reasons. Safety tends to take a back seat in my opinion. Our airspace needs to be addressed. It is too small for the amount of traffic that it now handles. Apparently management and higher union officials feels differently as they feel no need to address the issues plaguing the facility. If the matter is looked into I recommend also looking at the following day as a different controller had a similar incident with a VFR aircraft being issued the same transition and then not complying with what was expected and management just blew it off.




Synopsis: Seattle TRACON Controller reported a VFR aircraft did not comply with their Class B clearance and flew into conflict with an aircraft conducting an approach.
Date: 201405
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Cessna 150
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Engine
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Commercial
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Upon initial climbout; the power dropped from around 2;500 RPM at full throttle to 2;000 RPM at about 300 FT AGL. The issue was noticed immediately as the aircraft was no longer climbing and a call was made to the Tower to return to land on the closest available runway. There was also an open field on the south side of the runway in case there was a total power loss. The power available was enough to return to land on Runway XX where a landing was made without incident. Upon landing; the aircraft was taxied to park at a tie down spot until it could be inspected by an authorized mechanic. In December of 2013; a valve was stuck on one of the cylinders. Our Mechanic then cleaned each valve to ensure that this would not happen again and there have not been any other incidents since they were cleaned. This could possibly be the source of the issue but until he has the opportunity to inspect the aircraft again; it is not certain what caused the partial power loss.

Callback: The reporter indicated that the Mechanic reported that a fouled spark plug was observed; however after cleaning the spark plug full power was still not available. A cracked cylinder was then discovered; and all four cylinders were subsequently replaced.



Synopsis: The pilot of a Cessna 150 experienced a partial power loss during climb and successfully returned to the departure airport. A cracked engine cylinder was later discovered to be the cause of the malfunction.
Date: 201912
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: LGA.Airport, NY
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class E ZNY
ATC / advisory: TRACON N90
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Altitude Crossing Restriction Not Met; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: On KORRY 4 Arrival to LGA. Assigned 300+ knots. 10 miles prior to BRAND ATC directed us to slow to 250 knots. After updating the box; it was determined that we were unable to comply with the slow down and still reach KORRY at 10;000'. I; as Pilot Monitoring; was unable to contact ATC to request relief due to radio congestion. Pilot Flying did his best to meet restrictions but was unable due to circumstances. When contacting Approach Control; I notified them that we were unable to meet the restrictions at KORRY. He did not respond to the crossing restrictions at all and gave us a clearance for ILS intercept. ATC needs to be educated about aircraft performance. They are constantly requesting us to do the impossible. We cannot go down and slow down at the same rate or as planned by the FMC. Educating them as to what aircraft can do and how to plan accordingly and to give acceptable clearances would alleviate thousands of reports.




Synopsis: Pilot reported missing a crossing altitude restriction due to high airspeed assigned by ATC.
Date: 202110
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737 MAX Series Undifferentiated
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Undershoot; Deviation - Altitude Crossing Restriction Not Met; Deviation - Speed All Types; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Weather
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: On the arrival into ZZZ we were cleared to descend from FL390 to FL310 to cross SLT at 310 with a speed of 280 kts. I checked the descent page on the FMC to make sure the speed was 280 kts. and current Mach of .78. I executed the descend now function (10 miles prior to TD) since the MAX likes to descend faster than programmed. When the aircraft reached the VNAV path it pitched the nose over and continued the descent and increased the VSI. I watched this and extended the speed brakes to try and stop this. The aircraft continued to speed up and we began to encounter light to moderate turbulence. We went from a 30-40 kt. tailwind to a 70 kt. headwind around FL330. When this happened; the aircraft speed jumped up and went into the clacker for around 2-3 seconds. I clicked the AP off and hand flew. I pitched the aircraft to level flight with the speed brakes still extended. We regained our normal speed and I re engaged the AP and stowed the speed brakes. We also notified ATC that we were unable to make our crossing restriction due to slowing for turbulence. They said that it was okay and to continue our descent to cross ZZZZZ at 18;000 ft. We wrote up the overspeed in the logbook and notified Maintenance and I spoke with them at the gate in ZZZ on the details.




Synopsis: B737 MAX First Officer reported turbulence during descent caused aircraft to overspeed; requiring a reduction of airspeed. This caused the flight crew to request relief from an altitude restriction at a crossing point.
Date: 201502
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: LAS.Tower, NV
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: A321
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B LAS
Aircraft component: Aileron Control System
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was the Pilot Flying (PF) and felt aileron control was degraded right after autopilot disengagement on final at 400 Ft AGL. Performed a go around and transferred control to the First Officer who had full control of the ailerons. Accomplished an uneventful landing. After landing; I discovered that the external battery pack that I was using to charge my iPad had become lodged between my sidestick controller and the nose wheel steering control handle; hindering full left aileron displacement. I suggest not putting the battery pack; nor anything else; in a position where this is possible.




Synopsis: A321 Captain experiences aileron control difficulties upon disengaging the autopilot at 400 feet on the approach and a go-around is initiated. The First Officer finds no control difficulties and the second approach is uneventful. Post flight reveals that an external battery pack is hindering full left side stick movement.
Date: 202008
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: CHS.Airport, SC
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Rain; Thunderstorm; Turbulence
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Learjet 60
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class C CHS
ATC / advisory: TRACON CHS
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness; Time Pressure
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Unstabilized Approach; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure; Weather
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: Our passengers were an hour late for the second leg of our 4 leg day; and were in a hurry to get to the next stop. There was a large area of thunderstorms between our departure and destination airports; but the FO/PM (First Officer/Pilot Monitoring) and I had already discussed our mitigation strategy. The storms were moving away from our destination; so we would fly around them and land behind the weather. The departure and en route portions of the flight went as planned. Arriving in the terminal area; there was a thunderstorm forming over the FAF for our assigned runway. We requested to land the opposite direction to avoid the thunderstorm; but ATC told us we were number 7 for the airport and that everyone else had gone through it no problem. A preceding aircraft had reported heavy rain but no turbulence. While being vectored for the approach; toward the rapidly developing storm; we made visual contact with the airport. After a short delay vector; ATC cleared us for a visual approach and we made a short approach to the runway - well inside the FAF; and just skirting the outer edge of the storm. On the base leg; while fully configured for landing; we received a windshear caution: amber light. It resulted in an airspeed increase which only lasted momentarily. As PF (Pilot Flying) I corrected and made a normal landing in the touchdown zone. In retrospect; this was extremely foolish. I should not have allowed myself to fly so close to a thunderstorm; should not have accepted the assigned runway; and ultimately should have gone around and diverted to another airport. I let time pressures get the better of me; which resulted in an unstable approach. It could have been much worse.I share this as a learning experience for all pilots. I like to think I have good decision-making; but I allowed the pressure of the mission to get the better of me. Thankfully this event turned out okay; but I shudder at the thought of what could have been. I will not make the same mistake again.




Synopsis: Learjet 60 Captain reported an unstable approach to landing due to weather.
Date: 201710
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: SFO.Airport, CA
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
Airspace: Class B SFO
ATC / advisory: Tower SFO
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Local; Handoff / Assist
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Situational Awareness; Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Ground Incursion Taxiway
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: Taxi
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Airport; Chart Or Publication; Human Factors; Company Policy
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: Ground Control was working moderate traffic; when at Local Assist; I heard them tell Aircraft X they were on the wrong taxiway. They were to take B to the end and join A; then A1 to the Runway. This has been an ongoing problem around Taxiway B where it transitions to F/F1 onto A when the aircrafts are not supposed to join A. There have been many attempts at redoing signs and repainting the area. I am not sure from the pilot's perspective what could be improved.The Ground Controller said to the pilot they would file a report if the pilot filed an ASAP. Don't hold your breath from this Ground Controller. I am just saying. I would be really interested in seeing what if anything a pilot would recommend to stop this from reoccurring.




Synopsis: SFO Tower Controller observed an aircraft deviate from its taxi clearance.
Date: 201902
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B787 Dreamliner Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Workload
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation - Speed All Types; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence; Inflight Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Weather
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: Encountered severe wave at FL410. Throttles moved to idle as airspeed increased. Autopilot was disconnected as aircraft climbed 900 feet. Speed brakes were extended; but airspeed exceeded MMO and VMO. We exited the wave and continued without any further events.




Synopsis: 787 Captain reported encountering a wind shear at FL400 resulting in airspeed exceedance; deviation from assigned altitude and loss of auto throttles.