elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201308
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; High Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
Aircraft component: Reciprocating Engine Assembly
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; Flight Crew Diverted
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: During a flight with a pilot friend a vibration occurred in the engine.  We determined we would not make it back safely to an airport and needed alternative plans.  A road was off our wing and with power pulled to idle we determined that was the only course of action we had.  We paralleled the highway; contacted emergency service on 121.5 and indicated an emergency and that we were landing on a highway.  Once clear of traffic I landed the Stinson in the southbound lane.  I contacted 121.5 once again that there were no injuries or others involved.  The FAA was notified and was on scene hours later.  They released the plane to me calling it an occurrence with no damage to property or persons. They informed me I followed regulations and acted in accordance with emergency procedures.




Synopsis: Stinson pilot experiences engine vibration and elects to land on a highway as a precaution with no injuries or damage to the aircraft.
Date: 201409
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 145 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Landing
ATC / advisory: Ramp ZZZ
Aircraft component: Normal Brake System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Training / Qualification; Troubleshooting; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural MEL / CDL
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight; Pre-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; General Maintenance Action; General Release Refused / Aircraft Not Accepted; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Manuals; Procedure; Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Upon lowering the gear we got an EICAS Outboard Brake INOP message. Ran QRH and landed safely. As we taxied in the inboard brakes were heating up into the caution zone and outboard were cold. After contacting Maintenance Control they had me go out and physically check if the inboard brakes were hot and outboard were cold. They were. The next test was to turn the pumps ON and pump the brakes to check the brake pins. Outboard were NOT working. The next question they asked me was if I felt comfortable Ferrying an airplane without the outboard brakes working. I declined. I told them that if we have an abort and the inboard failed or the buckets fail we could have a total loss of the aircraft. When Contract Maintenance showed up Maintenance Control asked them if they would write a ferry permit to fly without the outboard brakes working. They refused. They then had me turn the pumps on and pull circuit breakers. I found one breaker but had trouble finding the second breaker. I asked him what the book said on the location of the breaker and he said 'I Don't Know. I don't have a Maintenance Manual for that aircraft.' Is this legal to use the wrong book? Anyway; I found the right one and reset the system. I get back to my base safely with no further incidents and met another Captain in the crew room that was asked to deadhead to ferry my plane out because I refused. I do not think you can legally Ferry a plane with only one set of brakes or MEL the faulty brakes. And them asking us to do it is UNSAFE and UNSATISFACTORY.Stop pressuring pilots to risk there lives instead of fixing the problem just to get their completion factor numbers.




Synopsis: An EMB145 EICAS alerted OUTBOARD BRAKE INOP so the QRH was completed and during taxi the inboard brakes heated while the outboard remained cool. Contract Maintenance could not fix the brakes and both the pilot and Mechanic refused to authorize a maintenance ferry flight.
Date: 201408
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Helicopter
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Other Camera
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZZZ; TFR ZZZ
ATC / advisory: CTAF ZZZ
Second aircraft: Military Trainer
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Time Pressure
Anomaly: Airspace Violation All Types; Conflict NMAC; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Environment - Non Weather Related; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Aircraft X entered an active air show TFR that was assumed was due to the air show aircraft completing their show and national anthem flyover. The air show TFR was overlapped by a sporting event TFR that the Aircraft X had an approved waiver for issued by the TSA. After the air show and national anthem flyovers were completed Aircraft X entered the area to complete my work.After 30 minutes there was another flyby by a group of aircraft at the start of the event. Later they said that air show TFR was still in effect and that the Aircraft X entered the airspace without prior authorization. The ZZZ Tower was closed. Because of those circumstances the Aircraft X pilot was unable to verify the air show NOTAM effective times. In my opinion Aircraft X was operating now within the TFR that it had an approved waiver for. Aircraft X operated at this event earlier in the year and there is always ground communication from track control and coordination with the air boss with ALL aircraft in the vicinity. There was no event control or communication from the air boss at this event on the common track frequency. If the air boss on the ground was communicating on a common frequency Aircraft X would have known about the other flyby and would have remained clear of the area. FAA inspectors knew Aircraft X was in the airspace and the air boss also knew it was in the airspace. My question is; why did the air boss allow the second flyby to occur if there was a known conflict in the air space?




Synopsis: An annual air show and a sporting event overlapped causing confusion about the efficacy of the overlapping TFRs so that entering the sports TFR violated the air show TFR. A near miss resulted because of the confusion.
Date: 202009
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ORD.Airport, IL
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B737 Next Generation Undifferentiated
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class B ORD
ATC / advisory: TRACON C90
Second aircraft: B777 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: In descent from 9000 to 7000 with autopilot engaged hit by moderate jolt of wake turbulence. Continued descent and aircraft began to roll past 30 degrees angle of bank. Autopilot disengaged and aircraft rolled upright. Autopilot reengaged. Checked on flight attendants; all were ok. No passengers were up at the time. Enquired ATC about who we were following. Appeared to be a B777 ahead going to a different runway.


Second narrative: While descending from 9;000 to 7;000 we were given a turn to 170 for vectors to intercept the ILS 9R. In the turn; we experienced wake turbulence - with a bank angle approximately 30 to the right. The Captain disengaged the autopilot and hand flew the airplane back to level flight. I checked on the flight attendants to make sure they were all ok because it was so abrupt and sudden. All 4 of the flight attendants reported to me they were fine. Within a couple of minutes at 7;000'; we encountered wake turbulence again. This time it was a 40 - 45 degree bank angle to the right. My Captain was still hand flying and recovered the airplane. I asked ATC what type of aircraft we were following; the controller responded we weren't following anyone but there was a 777 ahead of us but 2;000' below us. The 777 was being vectored ahead of us for [RWY] 10C. Perhaps more spacing was required even though we were being vectored for different but parallel runways.


Synopsis: B737 flight crew reported encountering wake turbulence on arrival into ORD in trail of a B777.
Date: 202009
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Reporter qualification: Flight Attendant Current
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Passenger Misconduct
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: Taxi
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors; Company Policy
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I am working C position on this flight. I briefed the OWWE (Over Wing Window Exit) and all were in compliance. My A FA; upon doing her final walk through for takeoff had to tell passenger seated XX2 to stow her bag back under the seat in front of her. Passenger in doing so FA A noticed she was wearing a small boot on her left foot. FA A informed the pilots we had to re-seat passenger. Pilots pulled over; passenger was reseated and we went on our way.I do not know the exact time of day this happened; but was told we arrived 5 minutes late. But it says differently on our payroll sheet which says we arrived early. With that being said; we had a few mask situations during descent; one passenger complaining another wasn't wearing her mask; both passenger were through passenger. Announcements were made; 2 of the 4 FAs spoke to the unmasked passenger. During cleaning of aircraft a passenger informed me of the passenger not wearing her mask. I spoke to the unmasked passenger explaining why she had to wear a mask; but we ended up requesting either Operations or a Supervisor to speak to unmasked passenger because she told me the old lady needs to mind her own business. Operations agent took unmasked passenger to jetway to talk and situation was resolved. Unmasked passenger sat YY4 the complaining passenger moved fwd about row XD. Now we're boarding. One passenger tried to sit in OWWE using a seatbelt extension; passengers were letting their masks fall below their nose; a passenger received a call and took her mask off while walking through cabin; I got her attention by stepping into the aisle and put my hand in front of my face. She understood what I was getting at; she stopped; put her mask back on and was apologetic. Both the D & I had heavy mask patrol that flight. While briefing my OWWE I never noticed the boot wearing lady's foot with boot. All items were stowed.




Synopsis: Flight Attendant reported multiple passengers did not comply with face masks policy.
Date: 201708
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Second aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict
Detector: Automation Aircraft RA; Automation Aircraft TA
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Level at 16;000 ft just north of ZZZZZ intersection we observed traffic on TCAS below and to the left of our position; climbing at a high rate. ATC never informed us of any traffic in our vicinity. Within seconds; we received a resolution advisory to descend. The Captain immediately started to comply with the TCAS resolution and started a descent until clear of conflict. I; as the Pilot Monitoring; tried to immediately notify ATC of the conflict; but I was unable to for about five to ten seconds due to radio congestion. As soon as possible; I notified Center that we were descending to comply with TCAS resolution. It seemed that ATC was not even aware of the traffic in our vicinity otherwise he may have given us at least an indication that there was another aircraft climbing towards us. Center then asked us what kind of resolution it was and at what altitude we had descended to; to which I replied a descent resolution and 15;000 ft. We were then handed to Approach and continued the visual approach without further incident.


Second narrative: Fifteen miles north of ZZZZZ on an enroute descent; we received an RA and responded correctly. We were level at 16;000 ft and descended to 15;000 ft feet as commanded. An aircraft below us was rapidly climbing into our altitude so we descended. Center was surprised at finding out we had descended due to an RA. It happened so fast that we never got a caution advisory; just an RA.


Synopsis: The flight crew of a 737 reported the need to comply with an RA to avoid an airborne conflict that ATC was seemingly unaware of.
Date: 202201
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: MIA.TRACON, FL
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class B MIA
ATC / advisory: TRACON MIA
Second aircraft: B787 Dreamliner Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Procedure
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: Descending around 13;500 [feet]; [aircraft] hit the wake turbulence of B787 heavy. Had 9 mile spacing. Autopilot disengaged. Aircraft went into upset recovery; I was Pilot Flying; [I announced] 'My aircraft' [and] took over manually. Stabilized aircraft; was cleared descend via. [I] had to offset and depart STAR to gain control; notified ATC; ATC vectored us for RNAV 26R.  Landed uneventfully; no injuries; no damage. Winds were just right to put us into the wake; spacing was adequate however we encountered wake anyway. [When using] descend via following a heavy; ATC should provide offset vectors and descent instructions to keep above and upwind of heavy. Recommend a 1;000 ft. difference above the heavy as we follow it in for approach with an offset of 2 miles upwind. That should keep a good separation to avoid wake.

Callback: Reporter stated that even with 9 miles spacing the wake was significant.



Synopsis: B737-800 Captain reported encountering wake turbulence on descent into MIA in trail of a B787.
Date: 201905
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Night
Aircraft: B737-700
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
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: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Hazardous Material Violation; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Dispatch; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: About 15 minutes after takeoff; we received a Dispatch message stating there was an aircraft battery loaded in the aft cargo bay in spot D1; and the Ground Agent forgot to get the Captain signature on the HAZMAT paperwork. ZZZ Ground Agent was faxing the paperwork to ZZZ1 and requested the Captain sign the paperwork on landing. Captain had a conversation with Chief Pilot and decided not to sign the paperwork after the fact. There was no notification of the battery; either verbal or written; to any member of the Crew while on the ground at ZZZ.




Synopsis: B737-700 First Officer reported receiving an inflight notification from Dispatch regarding an aircraft battery on board. Flight crew was not notified of the Hazmat while on the ground.
Date: 201506
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: SA-227 AC Metro III
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Ferry / Re-Positioning
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground ZZZ
Second aircraft: Small Aircraft
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: Captain; Instructor
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Distraction; Confusion; Communication Breakdown; Workload
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Upon landing; Tower instructed us to taxi on Mike and hold short of RWY XYL and to switch to Ground. This was read back and we switched to ground frequency. Captain was taxiing; First officer on radios. When switched to ground we were instructed to taxi via Mike and Lima. Lima is on the other side of 26L. I did not hear the hold short RWY XYL part of the taxi clearance with ground; my First officer did tell me he heard it and read it back. As I approached the runway I looked left and right and called clear left; as I didn't see any traffic. My First officer called clear right. As we were crossing the runway my First Officer instructed me to stop. We were already past the center line of the runway and could not stop in time. At this point I looked up to see a small aircraft that was airborne. Approximately 800 feet AGL and near the first third of the runway; approximately 5;000 feet to our left. Once reaching the other side; Ground instructed us to call the Tower phone number. Upon shutdown; I contacted the Tower and explained what happened. A factor in the missed communication was some guidance I was giving the First Officer on how to bring the power levers into ground idle correctly. In the future; I will be sure to double-check all runway crossing clearances if there is any doubt; all feedback on proper operation will wait until debrief at FBO.


Second narrative: A contributing factor to the miscommunication was the Captain showing me the proper way to operate the ground idle feature of the aircraft. In the future; I will be more aware of the aircrafts movements and make sure the crew is clear on taxi instructions.


Synopsis: Flight crew landed and with clearance to the gate crossed an active runway they were told to hold of. The Captain who was instructing the First Officer; understood the route but missed the hold short portion.
Date: 201506
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: MDW.Airport, IL
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 170/175 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: No Specific Anomaly Occurred All Types
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Manuals
Primary problem: Manuals

Narrative: It came to our attention while looking at our LIDO charts prior to departure that the takeoff minimums in MDW are different between the Jeppesen and LIDO charts.  The takeoff minimums for 31C in MDW for Jeppesen are TDZ 1000 Rollout 1000. LIDO shows takeoff minimums for 31C as 600R. The AFC chart does not indicate any CL for any runways and the Jeppesen chart indicates CL for runway 4R/22L. Also; the MDWAY1 Departure text on LIDO does not mention the 'maintain 250kts to advised'; it is only on the pictorial of the departure. This is unlike any other departure in LIDO where the text indicates all the restrictions.




Synopsis: ERJ-170 pilot identifies discrepancies between Jeppesen and LIDO charts at MDW.