elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201309
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZDC.ARTCC, VA
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 145 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZDC
ATC / advisory: Center ZDC
Second aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude
Detector: Automation Aircraft RA; Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We were in level cruise flight and were at 11;000 feet. ATC issued a descent clearance to another airplane; to stop his descent at 11;500 from 12;500 and issued a traffic report to us and them. The other pilot acknowledged the clearance to stop his descent at 11;500. We reported we were looking for traffic; but he was right above us so we never saw him at all. Soon after we got an RA to monitor vertical speed. The First Officer disconnected the autopilot and pushed the nose down to follow the RA. The airplane above us continued his descent and the RA wanted full down VS; at which time I took the controls and pushed down further. I advised the Controller of this and then continued back up to 11;000 feet when we were clear of traffic. I told the Controller that the airplane came within 200 feet vertical (was in red 02= within 200 ft) of us. The other pilot said in a not so nice way that we were wrong and that our TCAS was wrong. I asked for an 800 number to call. I called and talked to a Controller; who had talked to the Controller handling our flight. He said the Controller had turned away from his screen and that the other pilot continued his descent through 11;500 into our altitude.




Synopsis: EMB145 Captain at 11;000 feet reports and airborne conflict with VFR traffic instructed by ATC to stop descent at 11;500 feet. The VFR traffic continues descent causing a descend RA for the EMB145 crew.
Date: 201304
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Aircraft: MD-82
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Airspeed Indicator
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Confusion
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Diverted; General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: We declared and emergency and diverted uneventfully to the nearest suitable airport due to unreliable airspeed indications at FL330. Conditions at the time were daylight VFR. The Captain was flying and the First Officer pilot not flying. The first indication of a problem was the auto throttle disconnecting followed by an autopilot disconnect. The mach trim light also annunciated on the overhead panel. There were no other failure indications. We moved the Digital Flight Guidance System (DFGS) switch to the First Officer's side in an attempt to reengage the autothrottle and autopilot but they would not engage. In reviewing the Mach Trim Light abnormal; it became evident that there was a discrepancy between the Captain and First Officer's indicated airspeeds and Mach numbers. The Captain's indicated approximately .75M and 270 KTS and the First Officer's .79M and 280 KTS. While running the Unreliable Airspeed Indication Abnormal Checklist it became evident that neither the Captain's nor the First Officer's airspeed and mach indicators were responding properly to adjustments in power settings. The standby airspeed indicator seemed to be the only reliable indicator. Flying reverted to pitch and power settings from the checklist with a standby airspeed indicator crosscheck.


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


Synopsis: An MD-82 flight crew diverted to the nearest suitable airport in response to unreliable airspeed/mach indications on both pilots' flight instruments.
Date: 201211
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZOB.ARTCC, OH
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZOB
ATC / advisory: Center ZOB
Aircraft component: FMS/FMC
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Human-Machine Interface; Distraction; Confusion
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: On the ground before departure we loaded the route supplied by the flight plan. After receiving an updated clearance; we loaded the new route. The new route included the WYNDE 4 arrival into ORD. En route to ORD the First Officer briefed the arrival and runway that was selected to land in ORD. The route was double checked by both of us. Somewhere around the FNT VOR; it appeared that the FMC had a momentary malfunction. The route came up but before we could check the route; we had passed FNT and the FMC started toward DEWIT Intersection. The Controller asked if we were heading toward EMMMA Intersection that was on the arrival. I responded that we were past EMMMA as; (looking at the FMC) EMMMA Intersection had disappeared. The Controller advised that we were 3 miles southeast of EMMMA. He then cleared us to GRR to rejoin the arrival. The First Officer entered GRR in the FMC and we proceeded to GRR. I asked the Controller is there were any separation problems; and he responded NO and there were no problems. Since we were within 3 miles of EMMMA when the problem was resolved; it appears that there were no pilot deviations before the correction. As for the FMC; it appeared that EMMMA and LTOUR intersections had disappeared. GRR was in the box and the First Officer just brought up GRR to get back on the arrival. I made a logbook entry as to the failure of the FMC.




Synopsis: A B737 FMS dropped a WYNDE 4 RNAV segment immediately after FNT and proceeded to a DEWIT Intersection which was not on the flight plan. ATC caught the deviation and cleared the flight direct GRR.
Date: 201909
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Challenger 350
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Main Gear Tire
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Contracted Service
Reporter function: Technician
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Powerplant; Maintenance Airframe
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Fatigue
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Maintenance
When detected: Routine Inspection
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Incorrect / Not Installed / Unavailable Part; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Aircraft X was in maintenance with contracted maintenance servicer at the same time as Aircraft Y. A technician with contracted maintenance servicer apparently was confused on which aircraft required the left hand outboard main wheel to be changed due to wear. Aircraft X actually required the wheel change but the technician removed the main wheel assembly from Aircraft Y. [While] changing the parts in maintenance management software; I noticed that the serial number of wheel assembly coming off was not what we were tracking in maintenance management software (SN X). There paper work stated (SN Y). I contacted the contractor and asked them to verify the removed serial number. The double check and it was actually SN Y; not knowing that they actually removed it from the wrong tail number; I released the aircraft from maintenance. The technician should have paid closer attention to which aircraft required the wheel change. I should have researched further the history of the removed wheel serial number.




Synopsis: A&P Mechanic reported upon review; main gear tire was replaced on wrong aircraft by technician.
Date: 201812
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: No Aircraft
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Reporter qualification: Flight Attendant Current
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness; Time Pressure
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Security; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Other Person
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Going through the crew security line; my purse was flagged for additional screening by TSA. I was taken to a private room immediately adjacent to the conveyor belt and asked if I knew there was a firearm in my purse. At that time; I was shocked to realize that I had made an honest mistake and unintentionally left my legally owned handgun in my purse. I had meant to leave it in my car the previous morning. However; I became distracted while rushing to work for [early morning] check-in; finding a parking spot in a nearly full garage; and forgot to remove the handgun from my purse and leave it in my car. I legally own this handgun but did not knowingly; or intentionally carry this firearm to work in my purse. I made an honest mistake by not leaving it in my car.




Synopsis: Air carrier Flight Attendant reported unknowingly enter the TSA security checkpoint with a legally owned firearm in possession.
Date: 201703
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Climb
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Confusion; Distraction
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Contributing factors: Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: The correction that was just posted about the climb via phraseology was the last straw. Maybe I'm just not that smart; but this is the opinion of one 43 year; 29;000 hour Pilot. The repeated instructions on the climb verbiage should be a hint to the FAA that the Human Factors on this process seriously flawed. The many similar variations are distracting during the phase of flight where we are climbing; accelerating; cleaning up; navigating and changing frequencies. Having to stop the mental process to try to understand the instructions at this critical phase is an unnecessarily threat.




Synopsis: Air Carrier pilot reported that the 'climb via' verbiage used for climbing instructions is flawed.
Date: 201308
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: Marginal
Weather elements / visibility: Thunderstorm
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Dash 8-200
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: AC Generator/Alternator
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: While at FL210 we had a few caution lights go off in the advisory panel; including the L AC GEN and L TRU. Also the cabin pressurization lights and the fuel tank/temp flickered up and down rapidly.  As the Pilot Flying; I called for the L AC GEN checklist and the Pilot Monitoring followed through with the procedures on the book. The checklist directed the L AC GEN to be turned off; this stopped the flickering of the gauges.  The engines gauges were normal the entire time.  As there was bad weather in the vicinity; we decided it was best to divert to the nearest airport.  An emergency was declared and we landed safely without any further due incident.




Synopsis: A DHC-8-200 advisory panel alerted L AC GEN and L TRU so the checklist was completed which included selecting the L GEN OFF. Then; because of weather conditions; an emergency was declared and the flight diverted to a nearby airport.
Date: 202201
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Tower, US
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; High Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Operating under: Part 91
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch; Taxi
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Second aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Local
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Distraction
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: Taxi
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was working Local Position and Aircraft X wanted to depart for a maintenance flight overhead. They called ready to depart. I cleared them for takeoff Runway XXR making right hand turns spiraling overhead. I had Aircraft Y in left closed traffic for Runway XX they were midfield. After clearing Aircraft X; I then cleared Aircraft Y to land and told them about the traffic departing. As I was doing my scan I noticed Aircraft X turn onto Runway XY for departure. I immediately cancelled their take off clearance and also Aircraft Y; and told them to go-around left side of the runway. I then explained what to Aircraft X what they had done wrong and fixed the issue and then cleared them for takeoff.




Synopsis: Tower Controller reported a pilot took the wrong runway for departure; resulting in takeoff clearance cancellation and traffic for another aircraft.
Date: 202001
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Cessna 402/402C/B379 Businessliner/Utiliner
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
Aircraft component: Magneto/Distributor
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; Flight Crew Returned To Gate; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: During taxi-out I noticed the left engine RPM was slightly lower than a normal engine taxi (800 RPM - 1;000 RPM) instead the engine was around 700 - 600 RPM. All other engine indications nominal. During the before takeoff flow during the magneto check I noticed a drop of nearly 200 in the normal mag check time. I continued with the rest of the mags and elected to return to the left engine left mag switch and recheck it. When I did; the engine RPM dropped dramatically in less than a second. I attempted to engage the magneto switch again to save the engine but my finger slipped when attempting to reactivate the switch and was unable to switch it back on prior to the left engine falling below 500 RPM at which point a loud metal sheering/snapping/cracking noise came out of what I perceived to be the interior of the engine. After conducting a gate return and securing the aircraft contacting Operations; Station Manager and Contract Maintenance a logbook entry was created and the aircraft was downed. Myself and my First Officer did a post flight inspection and we could not see any exterior aircraft damage. Cause: Engine magneto failure causing further engine damage.Suggestions: Re-engaging the magneto switch within a faster time period to try and reduce engine damage due to engine magneto failure during engine run-up procedure.




Synopsis: C402 Captain reported experiencing a magneto failure during taxi-out resulting in engine damage and eventual return to gate.
Date: 201808
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ramp ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Upon taxi into gate; [guidance system] was active; both pilots cleared ramp area. Approximately 20 ft remaining FO yells for me to stop. I immediately stopped aircraft and FO [advised] fueler was backing up into our safety zone. We were in a B737 MAX with the split winglets and thus the clearance provided below the wingtip was considerably less. After speaking with ramp [personnel] who reviewed the ramp video; I believe the monitoring and quick response of the FO averted possible damage or impact to aircraft. Ramp fueler personnel inattentive to position on ramp. [Not] all ramp personnel may be accustomed to the 737 MAX winglet design and the increased clearance required. Training for this may be beneficial.




Synopsis: B737-800 Captain reported making a sudden stop to avoid a collision with a fuel truck on the ramp.
Date: 201908
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: FTG.Airport, CO
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Champion Citabria 7ECA
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Landing
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Ground Event / Encounter Ground Strike - Aircraft; Ground Event / Encounter Object; Ground Excursion Runway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged
Contributing factors: Airport; Human Factors; Weather
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Upon landing the Tower gave directions to exit the runway and I attempted to comply. A crosswind gust came at exactly that time and I was unable to control the airplane. The left wheel came into contact with the airport taxiway indicator sign at the right wheel and sheared off the gear. The airplane came to rest in the grassy area between the runway and the taxiway.The propeller contacted the ground and the engine stopped.There were no injuries.If the aircraft had not contacted the sign this would have not resulted in any damage to the aircraft. Maybe the signs could be constructed of a more forgiving material so that damage would not occur to the aircraft with incidental contact. There was no damage to the signage.Also; Tower should have waited for me to request an exit after finishing my landing. Rather than make a hasty demand for my exit. I understand that I did not have to attempt that particular taxiway exit. And could have requested an alternative.




Synopsis: Citabria pilot reported loss of control and runway excursion during landing resulting in aircraft damage.
Date: 201701
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Dash 8 Series Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Dispatcher
Reporter qualification: Dispatch Dispatcher
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Dispatch
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Aircraft X was being test flown and repositioned to ZZZ1 from ZZZ following maintenance in ZZZ as flight 1234. In preparation for the following flight; 5678 to ZZZ2; an amended release was sent with a change of tail number; as the flight had originally been on a different aircraft and the alternate was changed. This was done with the understanding that the release could not be accessed by the crew if the aircraft remained red tailed for a maintenance issue. The captain was advised of the tail swap via crew text message. At the time; I was unadvised and unaware of the additional maintenance action that had to be taken to clear the airplane for revenue flying. After my shift had ended; the plane departed for ZZZ2 without the necessary actions taken to clear the airplane for revenue flying.When the release was sent; a message popped up advising that there was an open maintenance item on the airplane and asked if the release was to be sent with the open maintenance item. Yes was selected and there was no communication with maintenance control regarding the open maintenance items at that time. I would suggest that releases are not sent or not allowed to be sent while an aircraft is red tailed and the flight crew should not be able to print a release if the airplane has an open maintenance item. Clearer communications should be established between maintenance control and dispatch; specifically concerning open maintenance items and any special action that must be taken by maintenance to clear an aircraft for revenue flying.




Synopsis: DHC-8 Dispatcher reported an aircraft was dispatched after a post maintenance inspection ferry flight that indicated the aircraft needed additional maintenance.