elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201904
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Technician
Human factors: Distraction; Fatigue; Time Pressure
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Maintenance
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Staffing; Weather
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We had Aircraft X in ZZZ. When receiving the package; we realize there was a lot of work involved on the aircraft. There's a borescope number one engine; a bleed check number one engine and to open up number two engine to retrieve a broken borescope stem inside the motor and also a Transit Inspection Check. [Person #1] worked the borescope on number one engine; [Person #2] worked the bleed check on number one engine; and I was to retrieve the broken borescope stem T1/2 and number to motor.After opening up number two engine fan cowls and c ducts; I proceeded to install the HCU (Hydraulic Control Unit) lockout pin for safety for operation of the TR (Thrust Reverser) sleeves. After a long night of high winds blowing dust; we [were] ready to close the aircraft up at XA:00 AM in the morning. I closed the c ducts on number 2 engine and close the fan cowls and secured them. The wind must have blown the HCU [lockout pin] painted red streamer up into the motor where I did not see it when I closed the fan cowls. It was a long night with abnormal working conditions and the heavy workload. When I woke up at noon; I contacted my Manager to let him know what had happened and he called Maintenance Operations to let them know what had happened.




Synopsis: Maintenance Technician reported that after inspecting engine; he left the lock out pin red streamer in engine compartment.
Date: 201202
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: BML.Airport, ME
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Snow; 10
Light: Night
Aircraft: A109 All Series
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Ambulance
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZBW
ATC / advisory: CTAF BML
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: No Specific Anomaly Occurred All Types
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: The new wind turbine farms in the vicinity of Rumford and Berlin NH are not able to be seen with Night Vision Goggles.  Apparently these beacons are of a spectrum not visible with the night vision devices and could cause problems for Military or Scene Call ops for HEMS aircraft.  They are only able to be seen with the naked eye.

Callback: The reporter states that red tower and obstacle beacons are normally very bright in his night vision goggles but for some reason; unknown to him; the hazard beacons on these new wind turbines are completely invisible.



Synopsis: Helicopter pilot reports that the hazard beacons on the new wind turbine farms in the vicinity of Rumford and Berlin; NH are not visible with Night Vision Goggles.
Date: 201807
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: CTAF ZZZ
Second aircraft: Small Transport
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical; Conflict NMAC; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors; Airport; Aircraft
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Our flight departed enroute to ZZZ on a beautiful clear day with a filed VFR flight plan with FSS. We entered a modified 10 mile final to runway with less than 5 knots of wind. We called CTAF with a 10 mile final call; 5 mile final; and short final call. After the short final call a gentleman from the airport operations called and said a medevac aircraft operated was rolling opposite of us on Runway 28. We couldn't see the aircraft until he rotated with his lights on. THERE WAS ABSOLUTELY NO COMMUNICATION FROM THAT AIRCRAFT ON CTAF. On short final (along with a TCAS ALERT) we executed a missed approach and flew to the right of centerline to avoid the aircraft. The maneuvering capability is somewhat limited in a 737 with those mountains in the airport area but I knew per the 10-7 and prior knowledge that I could keep a 30 degree bank to the left and reenter a base/final and land again on Runway 10 which is the preferred runway for us. Even on a clear day an aircraft [like that] is tough to see when lined up on the centerline and taking off without a communication to others. Without the help of airport operations and a preempted missed approach by us; this could have been a disastrous situation. I called FSS and reported that an aircraft didn't make any radio calls and was putting others at risk. FSS said that happens on occasion and left it at that. The aircraft was going to ZZZ 1. There needs to be some accountability towards aircraft that don't communicate on CTAF especially in this state. This has happened more than once and will continue unless another option is used. I get that they need to depart ASAP and usually get priority but safety is paramount in situations like this. I think FSS could have been more helpful to both aircraft and could have communicated to the other aircraft that there was a 737 that was due in at that time as well as we just filed less than 30 minutes earlier and fly the exact same route daily. Finally I think that ZZZ airport manager should get a safety award for his alertness of the airport area.




Synopsis: B737 Captain reported taking evasive action to avoid another aircraft departing in their direction.
Date: 201705
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: CRQ.Tower, CA
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Light Sport Aircraft
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class D CRQ
ATC / advisory: Tower CRQ
Second aircraft: Small Aircraft; High Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Local
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict NMAC; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I was getting relieved from work after one hour on Local Control position. Aircraft Y was in the traffic pattern doing touch and go's for most of the hour. During the position relief briefing; I noticed that Aircraft Y was flying close to Aircraft X who was on final approach. I took corrective action; asked Aircraft Y if they were still on the downwind. They replied; 'Affirmative.' Then I instructed Aircraft Y to turn left 10 degrees; to not cut off the traffic on final. Aircraft Y read back; 'Turning left 10 degrees.' I then gave a traffic call. On the next sweep of the radar; I noticed Aircraft Y had made a right turn toward Aircraft X so I instructed Aircraft Y to fly north and then continue north until advised. Aircraft X advised me that Aircraft Y just flew beneath him about 200 feet away. I finished the relief briefing; and then went on break. I gave this pilot many control instructions and he read back everything in accordance with my instructions but still did the opposite of my instructions putting both aircraft at risk. I recommend the pilot in command get remedial training on compliance.




Synopsis: CRQ Local Controller reported a NMAC when an aircraft flew beneath another aircraft after not complying with ATC instructions.
Date: 202109
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: Gulfstream G100/G150 (IAI 1125 Astra)
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Aircraft component: Air Data Computer
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: ADC (Air Data Computer) 1 failure. Resulting in over speed/gearing warning horns. When the failure happened we switched over to ADC 2. During the descent the warnings kept happening however everything was fine. ADC 1 kept thinking it was over speeding then when we pulled the power out to slow down during our descent it thought we were flying below our gear down speed. We were able to utilize ADC 2 for and continue the flight safely to the intended destination.




Synopsis: Pilot reported ADC (Air Data Computer) 1 failing inflight; causing numerous false warnings and requiring Flight Crew to rely on ADC2 for the remainder of the successful flight to destination airport.
Date: 201712
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: RYN.Airport, AZ
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class D RYN
ATC / advisory: Tower RYN
Second aircraft: Amateur/Home Built/Experimental
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Confusion
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: While doing touch and go's at Ryan airfield (RYN); I was cleared for a touch and go on Runway 6R; as I was approximately half way on final there was an experimental aircraft on 6R taking off (it may have also done a touch and go); as his speed appeared fairly slow; the tower then requested I sidestep to Runway 6L which I did; upon touching down and then proceeding upwind (at approximately 300-375 ft AGL) I came into close proximity to the experimental aircraft who had turned making a left crosswind departure from the pattern (6R is a normally right hand pattern and I do not recall if the experimental aircraft had clearance to turn left); I then diverted down and to the right to avoid what appeared would have been a collision; recovered and continued upwind.If the tower had given the experimental aircraft clearance for a left turn; and then instructed me to change to Runway 6L; they might have; at that moment forgot (I think that is unlikely) that I was doing touch and go's (although I had been in the pattern; doing touch and go's; for approximately a half hour prior to this occurrence); they might have thought that the experimental aircraft would being moving faster than it actually did; hence they might have believed it would have cleared Runway 6L prior to my climb out; which it did not;I believe what caused the situation was a lack of awareness by the tower as to the speed of the aircraft involved and where they were at that given point in time. I think great care must be exercised when a nonstandard movement is authorized (assuming it was) from the pattern; especially when parallel runways are involved with simultaneous takeoffs taking place.




Synopsis: GA pilot reported a NMAC with turning traffic climbing from the parallel runway at Ryan Airfield.
Date: 201706
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: Cessna 402/402C/B379 Businessliner/Utiliner
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Ferry / Re-Positioning
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Flap/Slat Control System
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: IFR repo flight; approach cleared me for the visual XYL (short runway); I was in a left continuous turn keeping a jet in site landing on XYR; I had gone in range; and extended the gear.While turning base to final I decided to extend the next 'notch' of flaps when I heard a loud bang!/snap! and the aircraft rolled right approximately 60-70 degrees (total roll approximately 100 degrees) for a few very long) seconds; heading towards the bridge then the aircraft leveled.I told the tower there was something wrong with the flight controls and requested to land XYR; as XYL may be problematic if the flaps may have malfunctioned.I decided not to touch anything not to further the malfunction; the tower instructed me to make left traffic for RWY XYR; and the landing was uneventful.Upon reaching ops; I called in my times and asked Maintenance to meet me at the aircraft.I noticed the flap handle approximately 20 degrees but the indicator showed 0; the flaps where fully extended but loose as they could be pushed up.

Callback: Reporter stated that a post flight maintenance inspection revealed that the cable and chain system actuating the flaps failed.



Synopsis: C402 pilot reported aircraft rolled 60 degrees to the right on final approach when the next notch of flaps was selected.
Date: 201208
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ABI.Airport, TX
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 145 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Fuel Quantity-Pressure Indication
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Technician
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was working on the left hand wing fuel [system]. I got [two maintenance write ups]. One was to change the fuel tank unit under access panel 541BB and 541DB. [Another Maintenance Technician] said we had one tank unit but not the other. I got the fuel tank unit from the dock line parts bin when it came in. It was for access panel 541BB; and not 541DB. We had the fuel panels marked with a piece of tape with an X on the panel that was getting changed. I looked at the figure on the Illustrated Parts Catalog and saw the part number and the position. So that I would not put the tank unit in the wrong [location]; which would be 541DB panel; I compared it to the old part and installed it in access panel 541BB. This event occurred because I was focused on not getting the two parts mixed up that were on hand. Instead I got the part mixed up with another one that was in the same system. It would be helpful if the letter of the tank unit along with the panel number was added to the discrepancy and the sign off.




Synopsis: While conducting maintenance on an Embraer 145; a Maintenance Technician installed a fuel tank in the wrong location.
Date: 202202
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: MSY.TRACON, LA
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Medium Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class B MSY
ATC / advisory: TRACON MSY
Aircraft component: Radio Altimeter
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Confusion; Distraction; Human-Machine Interface; Troubleshooting; Workload
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Equipment / Tooling; Software and Automation
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: As the Captain continued his approach; downwind to MSY airport; the First Officer's radar altimeter began to flash; and display random; incorrect altitudes. Furthermore; a constant sound of a warning horn sounded; each time the radar altimeter mentioned displayed an altitude below 1;000 ft. When the landing gear was selected down; the horn silenced; and the radar altimeter in question now matched the Captain's radar altimeter. We landed without incident. A maintenance entry was filed; and a thorough bite test was performed by same. No faults were found. Maintenance Control suggested that the irregular indications we received may have been caused by 5g interference.




Synopsis: An air carrier First Officer reported their Radio Altimeter malfunctioned while on downwind to MSY.
Date: 201911
Aircraft: B777 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Cruise
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Chart Or Publication; Aircraft; Human Factors; Manuals
Primary problem: Chart Or Publication

Narrative: While in cruise; during a conversation with my FO (First Officer) about some non-normal procedures; I realized the QRH was not loaded on my iPad Content Locker. My FO confirmed his was missing also; as did the second FO. My Content Locker was recently updated to a different app. It may have been left out then. I had not received any notice that it was no longer required; or that it was being discontinued. I just recently completed transition training on the fleet; and the curriculum was based on its availability for use on non-normals. There was no hard copy on the flight deck of the aircraft I was assigned for the flight.




Synopsis: B777 Captain reported that; along with other crew members; iPad was missing QRH section.
Date: 202004
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Rain; 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: PA-28 Cherokee/Archer/Dakota/Pillan/Warrior
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: PFD
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: During IFR flight (IMC conditions) Garmin GTN 650 touchscreen froze after about 10 minutes from takeoff. Radio switched from ZZZ Approach to ZZZ Tower; frequency used prior to Departure. Knobs and buttons were operable; but could not switch frequencies or operate navigation functions from touchscreen. ZZZ Tower gave me vectors and allowed descent to VMC. Broke out at 2900 ft. MSL with [the] field in sight; made [an] uneventful landing. After [the] aircraft was parked; I rebooted GTN 650; normal operation. I did not want to reboot in flight since all radios went through the GTN 650.




Synopsis: Pilot reported that the touch screen for the integrated audio system froze; severely degrading communications; causing a precautionary landing.
Date: 201811
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: DFW.Airport, TX
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ramp DFW
Second aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Other / Unknown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: After we pushed back from gate in DFW with our parking brake set; both the Captain and I observed another aircraft pushing back from [their] gate. During that aircraft's pushback; 2 separate baggage vehicles drove behind/under that aircraft's tail on the service road. The aircraft had 2 wing-walkers; one on each wing; both kept their wands up in the air; and neither signaled that the pushback was not clear or should be stopped. My Captain called the Ramp Controller on the radio to report the incident.Just the day prior to this event; we had 1 fuel truck and 2 catering trucks drive in front of us while turning into our gate. Our ground crew; including wing-walkers; were in position and these vehicles still proceeded both on the service road and also outside of the service road boundaries.In recent months; DFW has had a noticeable increase in the number of events of airport vehicles not yielding to aircraft in motion. These events pose a serious safety hazard and demonstrate a blatant disregard for established safety procedures. Ground employees operating these vehicles are prioritizing their timely movement over the safety of the operations on the ramp.I feel there should be a safety stand-down where all employees operating vehicles on the airport surface and ramp areas are retrained in the proper procedures while operating their vehicles and stressing that safety is the number one priority while at work. Following established procedures contributes to the safety of everyone and mitigates risks associated with operations on the ramp. In addition; I feel there needs to be meaningful consequences for those individuals who do not follow the established procedures for operating on the ramp; even to include revoking privileges to operate vehicles on the ramp for a prescribed period of time. Willfully disregarding safety procedures puts everyone at risk; and if left unchecked; it is only a matter of time until an incident or accident occurs.




Synopsis: Air carrier flight crew noticed service vehicles driving behind a company aircraft during pushback.