elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201206
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: AOO.Airport, PA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Super King Air 350
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Parking Brake
Component problem: Design
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Flight Engineer; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Distraction
Anomaly: Ground Excursion Taxiway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Even though our aircraft is a FAA certificated single pilot airplane; for operational and insurance reasons we operate with a copilot. On this day; the co pilot was fresh out of orientation and currency flights; so it was an 'OE' flight. We took things slow; had him load the FMC before taxiing from the ramp. As is our practice; we had received our clearance prior to taxi; so we had our cleared ATC route written down. It was different than filed; but the co pilot had been the one to receive the clearance and had a 3 digit identifier written down for our first fix - I had verified what was written down; and it looked correct. At the end of the runway I parked in the run up block and set the brakes to run through the pre take off checklist - challenge/response as is our practice with a two pilot operation. Upon review of the FMC programming; I discovered that the first fix the new co pilot had inserted was not what he had written down; and the course was 90 degrees off. A training session ensued. During this training session; the brakes released. I had had this happen in the past; especially if the brakes were not adequately 'pumped' after pulling the parking brake handle. Today; I did not catch it until the nose was off the hard surface of the run up pad. We were perhaps 3 feet into the grass and no damage was done. I shut down the engines and called for a tug to push us back onto the pavement. In my opinion; factors are: 1) Poor brakes (design from the factory - we intend to purchase after market brakes once the Company can jump through all of the required FAA hoops for an STC.) 2) Training in progress - it would cost our company thousands of dollars to purchase a PC based trainer for this particular FMC; and they are not inclined to pay for either the program OR simulator training for co pilots. 3) My diversion of attention and desire to create a synergistic environment - encouraging the (insurance required) co pilot to actually be a part of the flight. A less costly PC trainer for industry avionics would have helped. We could do more familiarization on the FMC prior to 'OE'. Another option would have been to take the operation out of a crew concept and do everything myself.




Synopsis: King air Captain reports a taxiway excursion due to a parking brake failure while discussing FMC programing with a new Copilot in the runup area.
Date: 201208
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZZ.Airport, FO
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Initial Approach
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZZ
Aircraft component: Gear Lever/Selector
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: During approach the landing gear lever was jammed in the off position; we could not extend the gear normally. We informed ATC; executed a missed approach and declared an emergency. We were given vectors back for an approach with enough time to complete all checklists including the manual gear extension. With the gear extended manually and confirmed down and locked we completed a normal landing in visual conditions. We alerted the Tower that we would not have nose wheel steering after landing as a result of the abnormal condition and would need assistance. The passengers were made aware of a technical problem with the gear lever. I informed them that I would be using an alternate method of lowering the landing gear; thanked them for their patience and reassured them that we would be making a normal landing. The airport did an outstanding job. Our passengers were deplaned and taken to the Terminal by buses and the aircraft then towed to gate.




Synopsis: B737-800 Captain reported landing gear lever would not move from off position during approach. Crew declared an emergency and extended landing gear using alternate system.
Date: 201901
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: BWI.Airport, MD
Flight conditions: Mixed
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737 Next Generation Undifferentiated
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Ferry / Re-Positioning
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class B BWI
ATC / advisory: TRACON PCT
Second aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Time Pressure; Workload
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter
Detector: Person Flight Crew; Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We were alerted to ferry an empty -700 from BWI to ZZZ. Because of the very short distance of the flight; we briefed the departure; the arrival; and the approach into ZZZ. Via ACARS I retrieved the current ATIS for both locations. Dispatch filed us to go west of the DC area (FRDMN) and then back to ZZZ and climb to 10;000 FT. Our clearance via CPDLC amended that to simply 'Fly runway heading; climb and maintain 4000 FT.' The Captain suspected that we might get short vectors and never go above 4000 FT; so he briefed that once the aircraft was cleaned up he would engage the autopilot and set LVL CHNG to ensure we did not pop through our altitude. Takeoff roll and initial climb were uneventful (with the exception that we were climbing very quickly since we were light weight) and passing about 1500 FT MSL we were clean. The Captain engaged the autopilot and LVL CHNG and selected 220 knots to shallow out the climb. At approximately 3800 FT MSL we encountered what I believe was wake turbulence from a preceding aircraft and the autopilot kicked off. By the time we recognized that the autopilot was off we were already 300 FT above our altitude and still climbing. I called out 'altitude' at the same time the Captain was pushing the nose over; we topped out at 4420 FT MSL. As we were descending through 4350ish; Potomac Approach called us to maintain 4000 FT. Ironically; we might have been better off just hand flying the aircraft instead of relying on the automation to keep us out of trouble. The turbulence and subsequent autopilot disengagement happened at exactly the wrong time.




Synopsis: B737 NG First Officer reported overshooting their cleared altitude departing BWI after encountering possible wake turbulence.
Date: 201309
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Regional Jet 200 ER/LR (CRJ200)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Landing
Aircraft component: Antiskid System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Technician
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Airframe; Maintenance Powerplant
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Maintenance
When detected: Other On Landing
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Aircraft; Manuals
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Late evening; I started my maintenance on the Removal and Installation (R/I) of the Main Landing Gear (MLG). Around XA:00 am my work was finished and I thought I had completed the work IAW the Aircraft Maintenance Manual (AMM). But I overlooked a very important step which was to do the Functional Test of the Anti-Skid System. This event was determined because on landing it resulted in some tires bursting. I am unsure of how many. The event that happened with the Main Landing Gear occurred because [I] overlooked the Functional Test that was required. Once I identified what had happened; I went back to the AMM; reread it; [and] filled out an ASRS report. The best suggestion I can give to myself and future mechanics is to pay very close attention to the AMM; because it could easily avoid potentially bad situations. Aircraft damage.




Synopsis: After reviewing the Aircraft Maintenance Manual (AMM) procedures he used to Remove and Install (R/I) a Main Landing Gear (MLG) on a CRJ-200 airplane; an Aircraft Maintenance Technician (AMT) realizes he failed to perform a required Functional Test of the aircraft's Anti-Skid System. The MLG tires on the CRJ-200 had blown on landing.
Date: 202004
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZZ.ARTCC, FO
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Autopilot
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer
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: Aircraft Equipment Problem Dissipated
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: After departure from ZZZZ to ZZZZ1 it was discovered that the lights in the Captain's autopilot button on the MCP (Mode Control Panel) may have initially been operating intermittently. The light may not have illuminated upon initial press of the button; but shortly afterward came on and remained on for the duration of that flight and the subsequent leg to ZZZZ2. The autopilot along with copilot side MCP autopilot switch/lights were verified operational. In light of recent changes to health screenings for COVID-19 in ZZZZ1 the flight crew came to a unanimous decision that since the malfunction had rectified itself and posed no further issues the malfunction would not be written up as a discrepancy at that time unless the problem persisted. This decision/action was likely a direct result of at least 1 crewmember's concerns about safety/security and the uncertainty of officials actions in ZZZZ1 during this COVID-19 pandemic.The actions by the flight crew are a direct result of unprecedented times amidst the COVID-19 pandemic forcing crews to analyze safety in a new way and juggling decisions in an attempt to find a positive outcome.Further actions could/should have been taken by the crew to at a minimum at least consult the DDG (Dispatch Deviations Guide) with regard to the lighting. After a post flight review of the DDG I am under the opinion that this item could be an MEL item allowed by flight crew deferral. Alternate actions could also have been an in flight phone conversations with Dispatch; Maintenance; etc.; to work through any issues with regards to the aircraft and with regards to crewmember security concerns as a result of COVID-19. Safety should always remain paramount even during these unprecedented times.




Synopsis: Air carrier First Officer reported the flight crew decided not to write up a minor in-flight equipment malfunction as a discrepancy; which might not be deferrable. The decision was due; in part; to the crew's uncertainty around recent changes in COVID-19 screening procedures at the destination airport.
Date: 201404
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: HEF.Airport, VA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Night
Aircraft: Falcon 900
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class E PCT
ATC / advisory: TRACON PCT
Second aircraft: B757 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Inflight Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I was the pilot flying (left seat) in a Falcon 900B. [Right seat pilot] was the PIC/pilot not flying. Approaching Manassas; while descending from 6;000 to 4;000 FT; ATC instructed us to turn to the left to a heading that was approximately 90 degrees from the current heading. The autopilot was engaged and as the turn was being initiated the aircraft encountered severe wake turbulence. As the aircraft was banking left; without any prior warning; we hit the wake turbulence causing the aircraft to roll instantaneously to a bank angle of at least 90 degrees at which time the autopilot disconnected and I then leveled the wings and stabilized the aircraft. The pilot not flying queried ATC as to what was in front of us and she replied that a B757 was 5-7 miles ahead and asked why? The pilot not flying informed ATC that we were almost inverted. We continued on and landed at HEF without incident. Subsequently; I have been informed that there was approximately 6 miles separation between us and the B757. In addition; we crossed the same point in space in about 15 seconds after the B757. I believe that this happened due to our proximity to the other aircraft and that ATC vectored us to the left for spacing. Because we were already banking in the turn when we encountered the wake turbulence; it induced a severe rolling moment that caused the upset. What could be done to prevent this from happening in the future would be to maintain adequate spacing and if it is necessary to vector traffic--do not direct said traffic through the wake of the preceding aircraft.




Synopsis: Falcon 900B pilot reported wake vortex encounter in trail of B757 on descent into HEF that resulted in a roll to a 90 degree bank.
Date: 201202
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: Marginal
Aircraft: B757-200
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Turbine Engine
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; General Declared Emergency; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: At rotation vibration was noted but source was not obvious. All engine indications were normal. Thought it might be the snubber on nose gear. Vibration continued until 2;000 FT when a loud pop was heard accompanied by a yaw and left engine failure and overtemp. Emergency was declared. Leveled off at 5;000 FT; heading vectors until all checklists were completed; flight attendants notified to prepare for cabin evacuation; Dispatch notified through ACARS engine failure returning; used autopilot through out flight until 3;000 FT. First officer was flying Captain did the landing. Flight attendant did the brace; brace. On touch down we made the announcement remain in your seats taxied to the gate uneventful.


Second narrative: At rotation a vibration was noted; but the source was not obvious. Engine indications were noted; and normal. The noise sounded like the nose wheel still rotating against the snubber; but just a little louder. At 2;000 FT a loud pop was heard; and an accompanying left engine failure; and yaw. I was the flying pilot at the time. The Captain declared an Emergency. We proceeded straight ahead to 5;000 FT while working the problem. The Severe Engine Damage checklist was run; and the engine shutdown. The Captain then coordinated with the Flight Attendants; and Dispatch. We then proceeded back to the airport and shot the ILS. The cabin had been prepped. The Captain took the aircraft at 1;500 FT; and the landing was normal.


Synopsis: A B757 made a quick return to departure airport because of an engine failure after takeoff. Am emergency was declared and evacuation preparations made. The Purser's perspective of the incident is included along with that of the flight crew.
Date: 201211
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: MD-82
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Pressurization System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: After takeoff I noticed the cabin did not pressurize. Checked and confirmed: Cabin ALT Control lever in auto; both packs on; checked L/R Pneumatic Pressure gauges. Both indicated zero. Pressurization flow light came on. Leveled off at 5;000 feet; asked for a heading. Completed QRH checklist. Unable to pressurize. Declared an emergency. Burned off some fuel. Completed checklists and communicated with flight attendants; passengers; Operations and Dispatch. Landed overweight at 140;000 lbs. Day VFR; dry runway; 8 KTS headwind. Normal descent rate; smooth touchdown; brakes stayed cool. Communicated with ARFF. Emergency vehicles followed the aircraft per their procedure. Debriefed Maintenance; Dispatch; and DC-9 fleet Captain; First Officer and cabin crew did an excellent job.




Synopsis: MD-82 Captain reported loss of cabin pressurization after takeoff. Emergency was declared and flight returned to departure airport.
Date: 201511
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: HNL.Airport, HI
Flight conditions: Marginal
Weather elements / visibility: Fog; Rain; 9
Light: Night
Aircraft: Challenger CL601
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground HNL
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Ground Incursion Taxiway
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: Taxi
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Weather; Human Factors; Airport; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We were cleared to taxi for departure from FBO at HNL for departure runway 8R. The intended clearance was to taxi C; RT; RA; RB to 8R; holding short of 4R approach corridor. After listening to the tapes of the clearance; which was very quiet and muffled; the clearance was read back not including the holding short of the approach corridor portion. The understanding of the crew was to hold short of runway 4R if we ever came across the runway hold short environment; not the approach corridor. The crew was notified on the way to 8R that they had been issued a clearance to 8R and should have held at the corridor for 4R. The crew never saw the hold short markings for this corridor. The weather was very rainy; causing bad reflections off all taxiways. NOTAMS included all taxiways being worked on at the time. The approach lighting for 4R was very bright; and washed out the taxiway markings on RA. Also; the controller never corrected the clearance when it was read back incorrectly and they were not stopped when they crossed the hold short markings (which are far back from the corridor upon looking at it after the fact). What really caused the problem was a miscommunication of the clearance from the controller; as well as the fact that the hold short area on RA really needs to be clearer. When the MALSRs for 4R are illuminated; especially when it is raining; the hold short is very hard to see. Also; the hold short area needs some flashing lights to distinguish it in low visibility conditions.


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


Synopsis: CL601 flight crew reported being cleared to taxi via Taxiway RA and hold short of the Runway 4R approach corridor; but the hold short instructions were not heard or read back. The hold bars were crossed without notice. Conditions were night time with rain and fog and the MALSR for Runway 4R washed out taxiway markings.
Date: 201708
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: LGA.Airport, NY
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: Regional Jet 900 (CRJ900)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower LGA
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Airport
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: Taking off of Runway 13 in LGA; we have encountered a significant bump/impact just before and crossing Runway 4/22. The first section of Runway 13 that has a joint connection is uneven and then when crossing Runway 4/22 has another impact point that is causing a jolt on takeoff. I would equate it to a harder than normal landing amount of force. Although it is manageable; I believe over time this is going to cause damage to landing gear or other components of the aircraft. Fix the bumps to make a smoother takeoff.




Synopsis: CRJ-900 Captain reported the point where the runways intersect at LGA is uneven. This causes a large jolt for aircraft taking off on Runway 13/31.