elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201404
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Turbulence
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Citationjet (C525/C526) - CJ I / II / III / IV
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Pressurization System
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: While descending through FL250 the cabin altitude suddenly increased to 16;000 FT with a trend to continue climb; therefore; after using O2 we requested a descent to 15;000 FT and they asked if we intended to declare an emergency. We reported that we were ready to do so if necessary to receive a clearance to descend. ATC replied they declared the emergency for us and we were clear to descend to 15;000 FT and we initiated an emergency descent. While descending to 15;000 FT we were cleared to continue descent to 10;000 FT. Upon reaching 10;000 FT we discontinued the use of O2. There was no evidence of any structural damage that may have caused the problem and we addressed the cause of the pressurization failure to the outflow valve or the system's controller; therefore we requested to continue to destination which was estimated in 35 minutes.




Synopsis: CE525 Captain experiences loss of pressurization descending through FL250. Oxygen masks are donned until leveling at 10;000 feet and the flight continues to destination.
Date: 201707
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ORD.Airport, IL
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E C90
ATC / advisory: TRACON C90
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Fatigue
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: My Captain and I were operating our 2nd redeye in a row. Our flight was delayed more than 2 hours and it was [very early morning] when we finally left [the departure airport]. About an hour before arrival we started receiving reroutes and altitude changes for thunderstorms in ORD. At some point ATC cleared us 'to FYTTE; via the FYTTE 4 arrival; hold at FYTTE as published; 10 mile legs ok'. The captain inserted the hold from the database and I said it looked good. As he finished and looked at the Navigation Display he seemed shocked and told me to tell ATC we would be high at a certain waypoint. I was very confused because I did not think we were given a descent clearance and did not confirm a lower altitude was set in the FCU. The captain started down as I told the controller we were a little high and her response was 'you were not cleared to descend via the arrival but just cross FYTTE at 11;000.' We had deviated about 300 feet. We continued our descent down and started our hold at FYTTE. On our outbound leg the controller asked us to verify we were holding as published. The Captain told me to ask her where it was published and another pilot came on the radio and said it was at the bottom of the chart. We both looked at the chart and realized the hold is published with left turns but the database had right turns; so we were holding on the wrong side of FYTTE. I told the controller we would fix it on the next turn. We continued holding for 5 minutes and were cleared direct to FYTTE to resume the arrival and began our approach to 10C. We landed without further incident.Fatigue was the major contributor to these deviations. I had only slept 4.5 hours the day prior because a maid had knocked on my door to clean my room even though I had the Do Not Disturb sign on my door. Operating another flight plus a delayed redeye with that little of sleep was poor judgement on my part and I will call in fatigued next time.




Synopsis: Air Carrier First Officer reported a hold on the wrong side of FYTTE on the FYTTE 4 arrival to ORD due to fatigue.
Date: 202108
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 15
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Cessna 310/T310C
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class G ZZZ
ATC / advisory: CTAF ZZZ
Second aircraft: Cessna Single Piston Undifferentiated or Other Model
Aircraft component: Air/Ground Communication
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Contracted Service
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Distraction; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Weather; Aircraft; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: After normal pre-flight; start; taxi; and run up; I pulled up to the hold short line for runway XX at ZZZ. At the time; the frequency had static and it was difficult to hear other aircraft. My radios worked fine on all other frequencies. After following standard procedures and visually clearing for traffic; I announced intentions on the ZZZ CTAF to takeoff from runway XX. I began the takeoff roll with no abnormalities and heard no other aircraft make any radio calls on frequency. I noticed some heat haze/mirage looking down the runway. Around 80 knots; 12 knots below rotation speed; I noticed a single-engine airplane taxiing across runway XX at approximately 4;000 in front of my present position. Based off of computed takeoff; accelerate-stop; and climb performance data; I decided to continue takeoff. I knew that continuing would result in the least amount of runway used and would offer the best deconfliction outcome. I lifted off at 92 knots approximately 3;000 feet away from the traffic crossing the runway. The other aircraft cleared the runway as I was climbing through 200 feet AGL. All subsequent phases of flight were normal. I believe that this event was caused by environmental conditions such as the aforementioned radio static and mirage which prevented the other aircraft from knowing my position/intentions.




Synopsis: Pilot reported a ground conflict on takeoff with an aircraft that crossed the runway in front of the pilot's aircraft.
Date: 201208
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: TCAS Equipment
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Training / Qualification; Distraction; Confusion
Second reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Automation Aircraft RA; Automation Aircraft TA; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Had a phantom TA followed by a RA. All were phantom and required a descent and then a climb on final. Finally for sure it was fake and we just had to fly with it on. It went away at 1;500 FT or so.

Callback: The Reporter stated that his aircraft type was a B737-800 which he has many flight hours in and has never seen this type event before. They were at 3;300 FT flying downwind and were given a 90 degree turn for a vector crosswind to final when the TCAS alerted TRAFFIC. The Reporter expanded the TCAS range and initially did not see traffic until a RA was displayed directly in front of the aircraft with a DESCEND command. The Reporter; the flying pilot; began a descent but the Captain became alarmed by the airspeed increase and the flaps 5 speed limit. Additional confusion ensued because of the frequency change to Tower. ATC reported helicopter traffic at 300 FT but that could not have been the traffic displayed. The TCAS then commanded CLIMB but both pilots realized at that time the false TCAS commands and continued the approach to a normal landing.

Second narrative: Received TCAS TA followed by an RA turning final to Runway 9. Followed TCAS guidance and reported to ATC. Landed normally. No traffic was observed.


Synopsis: A B737-800 crew reported a TCAS null bus fault with a DESCEND then CLIMB command at 3;300 FT while being vector crosswind to final.
Date: 201204
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skylane 182/RG Turbo Skylane/RG
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Second aircraft: Flying Fortress (B17)
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Glider; Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Staffing; Airport; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: After takeoff I had just departed the right downwind at about 45 degrees and was leveling out from climb at 2;000 FT. As I became level; the B-17 crossed in front and slightly below me; a huge; silvery apparition. The B-17 was in an extreme forward slip heading upwind; with its nose pointed at about 45 degrees to the flight direction and away from the airport. There was no time for corrective action.I was still well within the Class D and on Tower frequency. I heard no references to 'B-17'; only to 'North American' and 'Vultee' at the time; nor were there any alerts from the Tower; although I was still well within visual range. At the time; also; airport operations were being run normally; i.e. no general restrictions were in place. I heard no communication by either the Tower or the B-17 crew; nor did I comment.The three main factors that I think contributed to the event seem to be:1. During my climb I had reduced forward and right-side visibility. I routinely look for traffic on a wide downwind or entering on a 45. This is the first time in 30 years of flying around that I encountered traffic upwind on the downwind leg. 2. The B-17 pilot was looking away from the airport; left wing down; so would have had limited visibility as he entered the traffic area around the airport.3. The Tower Controller was asleep to the situation being created by the semi-aerobatic maneuvering of a huge airplane close to the main runway and remiss in not clearly alerting us to the situation. We all know 'B-17'; but not necessarily the manufacturer of a specific airplane. Is it North American in this case? To me; the B-17 is and will always be a Boeing airplane.Situations like this could be avoided by:1. Clear communications.2. Either not allowing unconventional maneuvers in a busy traffic area; or allowing them and holding other traffic on the ground for the brief periods involved. We could all then also enjoy the air show.




Synopsis: A C182 pilot departing the pattern experienced an NMAC with a B-17 entering it from the opposite direction.
Date: 201906
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Turbulence; 12
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Sundowner 23
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class G ZZZ
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Ground Event / Encounter Object; Ground Excursion Runway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Other landing roll
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Weather
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: I was returning from a cross country trip. Approximately 6 miles north of the field I got the weather information. The winds were being reported 240 at 05KTs; variable between 200-270. I was number two for entry into the pattern. On downwind abeam the touchdown point (1000ft markers) I reduced the airspeed to 90MPH and lowered the flaps 10 degrees and began a descent. Upon reaching the 45 degree mark I turned base to land and lowered the flaps to 20 degrees and slowed the airspeed to 85 MPH. On final I input the last remaining notch of flaps to 30 degrees and maintained a constant approach angle. Due to the left crosswind I used the side slip method on final to correct for the crosswind by applying right rudder and left aileron into the wind. Once I crossed the runway threshold I slowed the airspeed to 80 MPH. Upon reaching the flare point I increased the nose pitch angle and glided to approximately 200 feet past the 1000 ft markers. Upon touching the main gear and nose wheel down a sudden gust lifted the left wing and begin to skid the airplane to the left side of the runway. I applied right rudder to correct. The airplane was unresponsive to the input. The airplane was approximately 45-55 MPH at this point (below stall speed). The airplane immediately left the runway to the left and collided with the taxiway sign on the underside of the left wing. The airplane corrected course upon colliding with the taxiway sign back onto the runway. No further damage was immediately noticed. I taxied back to the hangar and inspected the airplane. The left wing was damaged on the underside and the fuel tank was leaking due to hitting the sign. Damage was noticed on the left side of the horizontal stabilizer.  The prop was bent a little bit due to the sign as well.




Synopsis: Beech Sundowner pilot reported minor damage to the wing and the prop following loss of directional control shortly after touchdown led to a runway excursion and contact with a taxiway sign.
Date: 201411
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZBAA.Airport, FO
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B747 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Descent
ATC / advisory: Center ZBAA
Aircraft component: FMS/FMC
Component problem: Design
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Procedure
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: We were originally told to expect runway 36L 5 min prior to KM. We had already entered the KM 03A STAR expecting runway 01. When we looked for the KM 01A STAR we also could not find it in the database so I MANUALLY entered the waypoints for KM 01A. We were then given a frequency change to approach control within 60 Seconds of reaching KM. ATC then changed our runway to 01 and were cleared for the KM 07B RNAV STAR. Again the KM 07B star was NOT in the FMC database and I had to quickly MANUALLY enter in the KM 7B waypoints to prevent a route clearance violation. Although this was my first arrival into ZBAA in the B747 I have had many arrivals into ZBAA over the past 5 years flying a different Boeing aircraft. Had I not been ready for the change we WOULD HAVE deviated from our last second ATC change clearance! I had briefed the Captain of the last second changes that ZBAA approach control REGULARLY pull on our crews and so we were ready for the last second change. The reason for this report is to attempt to preclude routing deviations by our crews flying into ZBAA. Here are the FMC database options available for KM arrivals to ZBAA: KMB01 KMB36B KM001 KM01 KM018B KM019 KM036B KM18B KM19 KM36B KM701 KM718B KM719 KM736B K01 K36B. As you can see NONE OF THESE FMC arrivals match up with the Jeppesen STARS which we are given in our charts! We were given KM 7B on (10-2H). The other Jeppesen supplied arrivals over KM are: KM 7A (10-2G); KM 7C & KM 7F on (10-2J): KM 02A on (10-2T) and; KM 01A; 03A & 05A on (10-2S). NOTHING MATCHES AS IF HONEYWELL DOES NOT EVEN LOOK AT THE JEPPESEN SUPPLIED APPROACH PLATES!




Synopsis: B747 First Officer describes routine runway and arrival changes that are issued by ATC during arrival to ZBAA. In addition; the arrival designations printed on Jeppesen charts and used by ATC do not match the designations used by the Honeywell FMC.
Date: 202106
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: MKJS.Airport, FO
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Tower MKJS
Second aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Ground Conflict; Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Aircraft X was holding short for Runway 7 at MBJ while [other airline flights] were on the approach. As Aircraft Y approached the runway (approximately 1 mile final); I heard a voice on the Tower frequency say cleared for takeoff" No callsign was given; and the voice did not match the Tower controller who had cleared us to hold short. We held our position. If we had taxied onto the runway; we would have created a collision threat with the aircraft on short final. We did not respond to the call or mention it to the controller because to do so in that moment would have created confusion on the busy frequency. Operations continued as normal with no additional threats. It is my belief that one of two things happened. Either a person with a transmitter outside the airport attempted to get us (Aircraft X) to taxi onto the runway in front of a landing aircraft; or someone in the Tower spoke too close to an open microphone while discussing a takeoff clearance. I do not think the second scenario is as likely; since the tone was not conversational; the voice sounded young; and no other words were spoken other than "cleared for takeoff"."




Synopsis: Air carrier First Officer reported ignoring a false ATC instruction heard; which would have resulted in a collision threat.
Date: 201304
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Regional Jet 700 ER/LR (CRJ700)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Cockpit Lighting
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew Rejected Takeoff
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: As soon as we applied takeoff power and just at or after break release we noticed that the ED1; ED 2; FMS and RTU screens were blank. We pulled the power back; executed the memory items; followed the rejected takeoff checklist and exited the runway.We then adjusted the display rheostat and the back lights came [back] on. I believe I bumped the rheostat with the pen in my hand or my hand. We both manipulated the knob several times to replicate the conditions. We performed all necessary checklists; notified Dispatch and completed the flight without incident. Our training prepares us to make safe and fast decisions under high workload/mental saturation conditions. The decision to abort was easy as the safety of the abort was never in question and we were missing most of our display screens.




Synopsis: The flight crew of a CRJ-700 immediately rejected their takeoff when they noted they had lost most of their multi function displays as takeoff thrust was being applied. They determined the associated rheostat had been inadvertently dimmed during final takeoff preparations.
Date: 201711
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Dawn
Aircraft: A321
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Cargo Door
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: On climb out thru 19;000 feet we noticed the cabin altitude had gone above 9000 ft.  We notified ATC and leveled off at 20;000 ft.  ATC could not get us lower right away so I [exercised PIC authority] and we were given clearance to 14;000 ft and we started back to [departure airport].  The cabin altitude reached a max of 10;400 ft and the masks did not deploy. We returned for a normal approach and landing. After gate arrival and maintenance checking the airplane I was advised that a cargo door seal was installed incorrectly.




Synopsis: A-321 Captain reported returning to departure airport after experiencing loss of cabin pressure that was later traced to an improperly installed cargo door seal.