elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201706
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZZ.Airport, FO
Flight conditions: IMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: A319
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZZ
Aircraft component: Navigational Equipment and Processing
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Descending through 22000 feet we had multiple system failures. We lost both autopilots and auto throttles; radar; altimeters and Nav displays. We couldn't restore anything; Requested radar vectors for landing. During our descent we ran appropriate checklists and landed safely. Our next flight canceled and aircraft was taken into a remote station to be worked on.


Second narrative: On arrival we experienced multiple system failures. During cruise at 36;000 ft approximately half way through the flight the autopilot disconnected. We reengaged it and continued the flight with the autopilot engaged. The weather radar display seemed to display erroneous information. We tried several times to adjust the tilt to eliminate ground clutter. The returns from the weather radar did not seem to be compatible with what we could see outside. Before we began our descent we were given radar vectors to keep us between two thunderstorms. During our descent while passing through approximately 22;000 ft the autopilot disconnected. We lost the auto thrust system and we were down to standby navigation after losing normal displays on both primary flight and navigation displays; including weather radar and terrain on ND. Passing through the transition altitude we were unable to switch the altimeters out of standard. I was the flying pilot when the system failures occurred. The first officer immediately began executing the ECAM actions. We were unable to restore any of the lost systems. We advised ATC; asked for and received vectors to the ILS. We exited IMC conditions before glide slope intercept. We configured and ran the appropriate checklists and landed uneventfully. We taxied to the gate normally and declined assistance when asked.


Synopsis: A319 flight crew reported numerous anomalies during descent for landing including loss of autopilot; autothrust; primary flight displays and navigation displays. ATC assistance was requested and the crew continued to landing using standby navigation.
Date: 202011
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I have spent this pandemic sitting reserve and trying to minimize my risk of catching COVID by minimizing my flying.  I have family members in my household that have respiratory issues so we all work hard to stay as safe as we reasonably can and we have made many sacrifices this year as a family.  Of course on occasion I will get called out to fly; and when I do; I am as cautious as I can be.  But I am getting increasingly frustrated showing up in the flight deck with pilots with no regard for the mask wearing recommendations.  Also troubling; is learning they are frequenting bars and regularly visiting others.  I know individual choice is just that.  But I do not understand why we as a company and union have not made it a norm to require a mask; at all times at work; not just for show in front of the passengers.  I have a right to feel as safe as I can on the flight deck too.  I understand at this point mask wearing is a choice on the flight deck; and it is one that I made.  But it should be a requirement.  As for arguments about communications issues and oxygen use; I have worn a variety of masks including those provided by the company and have not had any internal or external communications issues and removing an over the ear mask is no more problematic than sunglasses or a headset. They are non-issues that can be managed easily by a professional crew.As the infection rate goes up and we try to spread out the flying among more pilots; this conflict will become more of an issue.  It is best to err on the side of caution and safety and just wear a mask at work.  All the time.  Nurses and doctors wear them all day long and are able to communicate just fine.  There is no reason why we shouldn't too.




Synopsis: Air Carrier First Officer reported being uncomfortable and frustrated because many other pilots choose not to wear a face mask in the flight deck.
Date: 201909
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: PA-28R Cherokee Arrow All Series
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Nose Gear Door
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: When the landing gear was lowered on final approach; I did not get a green down and locked indication for the nose gear. I advised Tower; and abandoned the approach. I advised ATC I would like to fly west of the airport to clear the Class D airspace and work the problem.I ran the Gear Extension Checklist; changed the indicator bulb; and checked all the circuit breakers to no avail. I was fairly confident the gear was down; and that it was an indication problem; however; since there was no green down and locked indication it was only prudent to [advise ATC] in case of a possible gear collapse on the runway.On short final with the runway assured; I shut down the engine; and was able to get the prop stopped horizontally to minimize damage to the prop and engine should the gear collapse.I touched down on Runway XXR without incident; and was able to clear the runway. There was no damage to the aircraft or property.After a visual inspection; I could see that that down lock was engaged; and canceled [priority handling].The aircraft was towed to the hangar as a precaution. I am currently waiting for the aircraft to be inspected by an A&P mechanic for evaluation and required maintenance.




Synopsis: PA-28R pilot reported being unable to confirm that his landing gear was down and locked; resulting in a precautionary landing.
Date: 201503
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: CLT.Airport, NC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: A321
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class E ZTL
ATC / advisory: Center ZTL; TRACON CLT
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude
Detector: Automation Aircraft RA; Automation Aircraft TA
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Captain was flying. Departed CLT on ZAVER 2 departure procedure; BNA transition. Aircraft was at about 10;000 feet - 11;000 feet near HEDMA climbing with ATC clearance to 23;000 feet. On IFR flight plan communicating with Atlanta Center. Received TCAS traffic advisory (TA) for traffic at 11;500 feet. I challenged ATC with converging traffic information and ATC responded with: Yeah; there may be some VFR traffic at 11;500 feet. Received descending TCAS resolution advisory (RA); immediately began descent. After conflict resolved; resumed climb. ATC failed to provide separation with VFR traffic that was communicating with Charlotte Approach.




Synopsis: A321 Captain climbing through 10;000 feet; experiences a TCAS TA and queries ATC about traffic at 11;500 feet. ATC replies that there is traffic at 11;500 feet as the TCAS changes to a descending RA.
Date: 201601
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: RJAA.Airport, FO
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
ATC / advisory: Center RJJJ
Second aircraft: Widebody Transport
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation - Altitude Crossing Restriction Not Met; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Weather; Human Factors; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Departing Narita at night from Runway 34R after a heavy jet using the TETRA 5 SID. The FMC was programmed properly for the departure but after takeoff/climb established with the aircraft in the clean configuration a discontinuity was observed on the legs page. I was the flying pilot so I switched from VNAV to FLCH and used a 230 knot climb speed as per the departure advisory while we closed the discontinuity. Either wake turbulence or wind shearing during the climb out was experienced at about the time a radio frequency change and an on course heading change were in progress. The departure has a 7000 foot crossing restriction and then a climb after; it also has a ninety degree turn 4 miles after the first fix about 4 miles from the airport (approximately 8 miles from the runway). The clearance that we received on the ground was to climb to FL210; shortly before the crossing restriction fix ATC called to say maintain 7000 ft. and switch frequencies; I had not put the autopilot back in VNAV climb which had the restriction programmed in it and we continued through 7000 feet before I manually descended back. The next controller verified our altitude at 7 and immediately gave us a climb clearance to FL210 all during turbulence and within 15 seconds of each other. The autopilot was left in LNAV for lateral navigation and was not interrupted during the closing of the discontinuity and no deviations to course were observed. That's not to say that an excursion from course could have occurred but gone unnoticed during a critical phase of flight. ATC made no comment and we continued to destination. If I had reestablished the autopilot in VNAV the aircraft would have caught the restriction; as it was I missed it and the excursion from altitude occurred.


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


Synopsis: Air carrier flight crew reported climbing through a crossing restriction departing RJAA with distractions from windshear or a wake vortex encounter playing a part.
Date: 201811
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: LAX.Airport, CA
Light: Night
Aircraft: B737-700
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower LAX
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Fatigue; Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Distraction; Time Pressure
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Weight And Balance; Inflight Event / Encounter Fuel Issue
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight; Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors; Company Policy
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I had flown seven out of the last nine days. This was the third leg on the last day of a four-day trip. Before push; the [weight and balance system] said we had a required 297 pound taxi burn to get to below ATOG. We elected to request Runway 25R so to burn the fuel on taxi out. The push took over 10 minutes from gate; due to a Trainee doing his first push. It involved a lot of stopping and starting and aggressive braking of the tug after we had both engines started.When we were finally ready to taxi; there was congestion. We realized that burning off fuel was no longer a problem; as a matter of fact; we were worried we were going to burn below our min takeoff fuel. We requested [Runway] 24L; and ran the Departure Plan Checklist. We taxied out to take our place in line. We were really watching our fuel burn at that point; as we were within 100 pounds of our min take off fuel. We were holding short behind a (other carrier) aircraft at the end of the runway when Tower cleared an aircraft to take off from the intersection behind us.I asked what our sequence was; and Tower did not reply. He then cleared (other carrier) to takeoff from in front of us. We were next cleared onto the runway. It was not until I read back 'cleared for takeoff' and the First Officer went to push the power up that he realized that the autothrottles were not armed and we had not run the checklist. I told Tower to cancel our clearance so that we could run the checklist. The checklist was completed and we took off. (Fuel was so tight on this one; that when we got to [destination]; we had to extend the gear just a bit early to burn down below max landing weight.)




Synopsis: B737-700 Captain reported forgetting to complete the Before Takeoff Checklist prior to taking the runway.
Date: 201208
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: MSN.Airport, WI
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Lancair 235
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class C MSN
ATC / advisory: TRACON MSN
Second aircraft: Cessna 310/T310C
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Airport; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Under positive control by MSN Approach Control arriving from the west and descending out of 3;500 FT for MSN airport to a left base for Runway 03; we heard a traffic alert given to a Cessna 310 from Approach Control. 'Traffic at 12 o'clock; less then a mile; descending out of 3;000 FT is a Lancair.' We were then advised; 'Traffic at 1 to 2 o'clock; less then a mile; climbing out of 2;500 FT is a Cessna 310.' I was the pilot flying from the right seat. I immediately looked right and saw a Cessna 310 staring back at be from my 2 o'clock position; climbing at me; with no relative movement in either direction; only quickly getting larger. I immediately put our Lancair in a climbing left turn and watched the Cessna 310 pass to our rear by 300 feet; and 100 feet below. I could hear ATC's audio alert tone going off when he gave us the advisory. We were both VFR; but under positive control in Class C airspace with Squawk codes. It was not busy at the time. More should have been done in this situation. I believe my evasive action prevented a serious incident. The flight resumed as normal; and a normal landing was made at MSN on Runway 03.




Synopsis: A NMAC occurred in the vicinity of MSN airport when the reporter's Lancair and a C-310; both VFR in MSN Class C airspace and in contact with Approach Control; received late traffic advisories from the Controller.
Date: 202012
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: FCA.Airport, MT
Weather elements / visibility: Snow
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Weather; Company Policy
Primary problem: Company Policy

Narrative: Ice build up on all landing gear from inbound flight. Every work group I spoke to noted the lack of guidance on the issue. The initial reaction from the first rampers I spoke to was 'call Maintenance' but other people would have been fine with just using the PCA. On calling Maintenance control they noted how stations are very inconsistent on this issue. Dispatch noted the same. Since about half the ramps reaction was to have Maintenance handle it; we took that path to not have half the ramp uncomfortable with the action. Large delay to wait on Contract Maintenance. No further info.Provide consistent guidance and procedures for all work groups on deriving landing gear.




Synopsis: Air carrier airport operations crew is confused on who to contact for a landing gear contaminated with snow/ice.
Date: 201705
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Cruise
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Cockpit Window
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Instructor; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: During flight at 4200 ft.; while recovering from a spin; in the nose down attitude with power at idle; the pilot and instructor heard a thump followed by the windscreen flying up and off of the aircraft. After noticing this the instructor took controls and gently slowed the aircraft to limit wind and noise in the cockpit. Instructor made sure aircraft was not further damaged and the pilot was uninjured. Instructor proceeded to fly the windscreenless aircraft to ZZZ; 3 miles away and make a normal landing on runway 36 without further incident.

Callback: This was an intentional spin and it appears that the lower edge of the windscreen had come free from the lower edge rather than a structural or fastner failure.



Synopsis: C172 flight instructor reported the windscreen departed the aircraft during recovery from an intentional spin.
Date: 201202
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZBAA.Airport, FO
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B747-400
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower ZBAA
Aircraft component: Pneumatic Ducting
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Diverted; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Airport
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Within 500 FT after takeoff first heard and noticed the ECIAS RIGHT DUCT LEAK message. The Runway 01; TONIL RNAV SID is a very busy departure procedure and with the non standard (metric) altitudes; language; and vectors off the SID to waypoints not on the procedure requires the utmost attention of the pilot flying and pilot not flying. Directed the Relief Pilots to run the associated checklist; and they isolated the right duct system per the Flight Manual procedure by 3;000 FT. Discussed the enroute weather (deep low pressure system at 175W) and determined that a decompression scenario with compromised anti-ice capability and decided that a divert was required. [We] considered RKSI the best because it was VMC and RJAA as a secondary which was IMC. Note: no wing anti ice on the right wing. [We] called Dispatch and Maintenance Control to review situation. Some discussion resulted with Maintenance Control concerning the availability of engine anti ice (NAI) on engines 3 and 4 and the resolution was that NAI was available on engines 3 and 4. Discussed landing above max landing weight or dumping fuel to allow landing below maximum weight. Went with the longer (2 hours vice 1 hour) flight time and diverted to RJAA. Dumped 15;000 LBS of fuel enroute and landed uneventfully below max weight on the longest Runway; 34L; per our request. At the gate Maintenance discovered a broken clamp on the high pressure ducting; missing covering on the nacelle and a gap in the ducting. [We] departed a few hours later. On taxi out discovered the #3 bleed valve would not close and called Maintenance Control. Cycled a circuit breaker and ran the engine up to 70% N1 on taxiway with no effect. Ran out of time and the Tower denied takeoff due the night curfew. Once on Runway 34L to taxi back to the gate I directed a Relief Pilot to run number 3 engine up 80% or higher to see if the bleed valve would move. It did close but it was not responding normally and its engine anti ice valve remained on or open after the switch was closed.




Synopsis: When the B747-400 flight crew received a RIGHT DUCT LEAK OVHT EICAS message shortly after takeoff from ZBAA they elected to divert for maintenance due to enroute weather over the Pacific and wing anti-ice considerations.