elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 202103
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Weather elements / visibility: Mountain Wave
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation - Speed All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Weather
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: We were cruising at FL390 and we called the back for a break. I was the second pilot to exit the flight deck and while in the main cabin I noticed the pitch of the aircraft.  I then made a brief break and called to return to the flight deck.  Once the flight deck door opened and the A came out I noticed the thrust levers advancing to max power and the airspeed indicator slowly approaching the amber band.  I then immediately called for a lower altitude as I took my seat and once I was in my seat I looked at my First Officer and said we need lower now.  My First Officer then dialed a lower altitude on the FMC and selected descent via V/S (Vertical Speed). I then gathered all info on what we were experiencing and thought either we had an unreliable airspeed or runaway stabilizer.  As I looked back at our altitude; I realized we weren't descending and our airspeed was slowly approaching amber pole.  At that time I disconnected A/T (Autothrottle); A/P (Autopilot) and started a slow descent and requested my First Officer to call in our descent to ATC.  ATC then notified us that we needed to stop descent at FL370 due to lower aircraft.  My training kicked in and I figured if this went back we would need around 10;000 feet to recover so I then requested a vector off course.  We then were given 10 degrees left and I leveled off at FL370 continued to hand fly and one by one acquired A/P; HDG; VNAV.  Our Airspeed gained approximately 30kts and we were stable at FL370 on a heading.  ATC asked why the need to descend and I replied we encountered mountain wave and could not hold altitude. ATC then replied that we were the first to complain of mountain wave. Seconds later an aircraft at FL470 notified of +/- 1000 gain/loss and another airliner requesting lower due to mountain wave. We were then given direct to a waypoint on our flight plan and landed at destination without further incident. Be more vigilant while single pilot operations.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported altitude and airspeed deviations as a result of mountain wave activity in cruise.
Date: 201501
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Citationjet (C525/C526) - CJ I / II / III / IV
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Powerplant Lubrication System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Troubleshooting
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Weather
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Climbing out passing through approx. 15;000 feet the crew noticed that the left engine oil pressure was low; just into the red on the low pressure side of the gauge. We had just turned on the engine anti-ice so we continued the climb to get out of possible icing conditions to be able to turn off the engine anti-ice system. We cleared the possible icing conditions and turned off the engine anti-ice. There was no change in the oil pressure indication. I notified ATC that we needed to return to the departure airport. The checklist for low oil pressure indication was implemented. After trouble shooting per the checklist we not able to change the low pressure indication. We then ran the precautionary shut down checklist per the guidance of the low pressure indication checklist. We then [advised] approach control and performed a normal single engine landing with no other issues.


Second narrative: We proceeded to shut down the left engine and [advised ATC of] our return. It was a normal single engine descent and landing with no further issues. I do believe we worked well together as a crew to address the abnormal situation and that we made good decisions involving the Aircraft and procedures as well as in returning to a larger more maintenance capable airport where we did receive great service. The controllers were helpful and willing to help more if the need arose. The emergency ground response was good too.


Synopsis: During climb a C525 left engine oil indicated low pressure. After running the checklist and troubleshooting with no effect; the engine was shut down and returned to the departure airport.
Date: 201406
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Gulfstream G200 (IAI 1126 Galaxy)
Operator: Fractional
Operating under: Part 135
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Vertical Stabilizer/Fin
Component problem: Design
Reporter organization: Fractional
Reporter function: Technician
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Airframe
Human factors: Training / Qualification; Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Manuals; Procedure; Human Factors; Chart Or Publication; Aircraft
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was notified by a Maintenance Control individual that the following issue had occurred and what was found on a G200 aircraft. Maintenance integration. Horizontal Stabilizer (Stab) #2 Trim Motor Inoperative. While in flight; heard Trim Aural Alert constantly going off as Stab Trim was in motion but indicator did not move. Then AUTOPILOT MACH TRIM FAIL CAS message came on. Turned off autopilot and hand flew. When on ground; isolated problem by pulling both [Circuit] Breakers (C/B) and resetting one and testing trim. Found with # 2 Breaker 'In'; trim did not move. Technicians found the Left-Hand (L/H) Lower Wiper panel installed incorrectly. I grabbed a Technician that was familiar with the work on G200 tails [Stabs] and asked him if he had known of any issues with the wiper panels on the G200 being installed wrong and he stated he wasn't sure how they could be installed wrong. After looking at an aircraft not seeing anything obvious I waited to see if I heard anything on it. Three days later; while working another G200 aircraft; I was removing the Lower wiper on the left side and another Technician was on the right side to Facilitate Maintenance (F.O.M.). After getting my side off; the other Technician told me he was removing more panels to get his off. It was then we discovered how the panels could be put on wrong. The Aft panel spans top; bottom and around the aft side of the Vertical [Stab] where the elevator goes through. On the top side there is a screw hole in which a screw needs [to be] put in which makes sure the panel is installed before the Upper Forward panel. On the bottom; there is no such fastener or hole to make the Technician installing aware. The only thing that might ring a bell is the fact that the air load moving over the panels could lift that aft panel. After discovering the issue I presented to my General Manager and he put out a memo to notify the Technicians that incorrect installation could happen.




Synopsis: An Aircraft Maintenance Technician (AMT) was informed the Horizontal Stabilizer (H/S) #2 Trim Motor on a G200 (Galaxy) aircraft became inoperative in flight with the Aural Alert constantly going off as trim was in motion; but Indicator did not move. AUTOPILOT MACH TRIM FAIL message appeared. Vertical Stab left Aft Lower Wiper panel installed incorrectly.
Date: 201812
Location: ZMA.ARTCC, FL
Aircraft: Airbus Industrie Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZMA
ATC / advisory: Center ZMA
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Confusion
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Crossing Restriction Not Met; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Chart Or Publication
Primary problem: Chart Or Publication

Narrative: We were at cruise altitude and I was reviewing the FISEL7 filed arrival to enter the expected altitudes into the flight plan via the MCDU. At first glance; I only noticed MOSIE crossing at 8;000 [feet] and 250 KTS. Later; as I reviewed the arrival just before the descent briefing; I noticed that I had missed the restriction of FL240 at FATHR. I pointed out to the First Officer that I missed it earlier as it was very hard to see because of both the light blue color and the contrast with the night view on the chart. The blue was so light it looked nearly close to the white writing and was very easy to miss. Also; the blue depiction of the ocean didn't help the situation at all since it was exactly the same color as the altitude restriction. The First Officer agreed with this assessment. My recommendation would be to find another color to highlight both the speed and altitude restrictions on the charts. The red speed restrictions stand out quite well but the altitudes are very hard to see - and therefore easy for us to miss. I believe in either night or day mode the highlighted areas on the STAR and SID charts need to be made much easier to see so we can be certain not to miss and potentially violate a restriction.




Synopsis: Airbus Captain reported missing published crossing restriction on the Jeppesen plate; due to the lack of contrast.
Date: 201809
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ORD.Airport, IL
Flight conditions: IMC
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class B ORD
ATC / advisory: TRACON C90
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Workload; Communication Breakdown
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Weather; Airport
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: On descent on Fytte 4 RNAV arrival; crew was late entering 3rd runway change in FMC resulting in a turn to KURKK instead of JORJO. ATC provided vectors for the approach.


Second narrative: Planning approach to 9L. During descent ORD changed to west flow. We were assigned 27L. Planned approach to 27L. Later in approach we were switched to 28C. I set up approach manually and Captain programmed the FMC. I failed to verify the correct runway was loaded. On the arrival 28C goes to the south of the field on a left downwind. The aircraft continued on the 27L arrival which goes to N of field for a right downwind. ORD arrival gave us vectors that basically followed the correct routing to 28C.


Synopsis: B737 flight crew reported a heading deviation due to the incorrect approach in FMC after several runway changes.
Date: 201606
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: LAS.Airport, NV
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: B737 Next Generation Undifferentiated
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class B LAS
ATC / advisory: Tower LAS
Aircraft component: GPWS
Component problem: Design; Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Time Pressure; Situational Awareness; Confusion; Distraction
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Inflight Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Automation Aircraft Terrain Warning; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: On short final at LAS ILS 25L in perfect night conditions (VMC; no wind) perfectly stabilized at 500 ft AGL; we received a 'Too Low Terrain' followed by a 'Pull Up' Warning (that occurred at 300 ft AGL.) We both looked at each other in disbelief that this was happening since everything was 'perfect.'We decided to perform a go-around procedure; but did NOT perform a 20 degree nose up emergency thrust escape maneuver. Sometimes you just have to inject common sense into aircraft malfunctions/instrumentation errors and not cause huge concern/fright in our Passengers about a calm situation turning into an aggressive; emergency maneuver. It simply was NOT warranted in this situation; despite what the book says. Rocketing up in altitude in a busy airspace such as LAS creates its own risks that just were not warranted. Strangely enough; I had a similar experience about 10 years ago also at LAS 25L at night at 2000 ft AGL where we had the same thing happen! It turns out there was a bad database for terrain in the system and the plane thought we were near hills when we were not. I had followed up on that one with Maintenance. I wrote this incident in the logbook for Maintenance to check out.I wanted to get this report in so that when you analyze the FDAP you will have a back story to what really happened. I would do the exact same thing again despite what is drilled in to our brains about 'Pull Up.' This was clearly a malfunction in the airplane.


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


Synopsis: A B737NG flight crew at 500 ft AGL to LAS Runway 25L received an unexpected; false EGPWS 'TOO LOW TERRAIN' and 'PULL UP' caution warnings and executed a go-around. No terrain is located at the position so a database error is suspected.
Date: 201809
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: AVL.Airport, NC
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Regional Jet CL65; Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class C AVL
ATC / advisory: TRACON AVL
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Automation Aircraft Terrain Warning; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We received a Terrain; Terrain Pull Up from the EGPWS while descending in VMC toward UMUXE which is on the ILS 35 into AVL. We had been cleared for the visual approach to 35 with the runway in sight. I had vacated the vectoring altitude of 5100 ft for 4000 ft at UMUXE. The terrain just southwest of UMUXE at 3131 ft triggered the EGPWS event. In hindsight; delaying the descent until closer to UMUXE would prevent to GPWS warning.




Synopsis: CRJ pilot reported responding to a EGPWS alert while on a visual approach.
Date: 201501
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: SNA.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Citation Excel (C560XL)
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class C SNA
ATC / advisory: TRACON SCT
Aircraft component: FMS/FMC
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Fractional
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Training / Qualification; Human-Machine Interface
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: 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: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We departed SNA on the MUSEL 7 departure. We were initially cleared to 3000'.  The MUSEL 7 states that; upon reaching 1.0 DME from ISNA to turn left to 177 degrees for vectors to MUSEL.   Before 1.0 DME I armed the 'nav' mode to follow the flight director which was following FMS instructions.  Both pilots had checked the FMS prior to flight and confirmed correct data for the departure and flight.  At approximately 2000' I armed the autopilot and ATC instructed us to climb to 5000'.  At 1.0 DME; the fligt director commanded a left turn and stopped on 177 degrees for a few seconds; as it was supposed to.  The flight director then initiated a turn toward MUSEL.  The autopilot remained on.  At approximately 4000' ATC inquired if we were on the MUSEL 7 departure. We said 'Yes.'  They instructed that we were supposed to remain on 177 degrees and wait for them to vector us.  ATC gave us a new heading; and we complied.    While the FMS initially displayed the correct departure procedure. the flight director initiated  a left turn to MUSEL prior to the point desired by ATC. The SID chart should say 'EXPECT' vectors; like it does in the enroute portion of SIDs; to draw attention to the fact that this heading needs to be maintained until instructed to do otherwise.  Also; I believe Honeywell should check the autopilot/FMS performance for this approach [departure].


Second narrative: Having briefed and understood the departure we departed climbed to 3000 on 196 hdg then the 177 hdg.  Upon reaching MUSEL we turned towards TEYKI on the TRM transition.


Synopsis: C560XL crew experience a track deviation while departing SNA on the MUSEL7 departure which is detected by SCT. The reportes believe the FMC malfunctioned taking the aircraft direct to MUSEL instead of maintaining a 177 degree heading for vectors.
Date: 201305
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: SPB.Airport, OR
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Amateur/Home Built/Experimental
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class E SPB
ATC / advisory: CTAF SPB
Second aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Time Pressure; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Incursion Taxiway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Calm winds prevailed on arrival. Traffic was using [Runway] 33. I landed and fueled. Calm wind runway at SPB is Runway 15. I prepared to takeoff and announced on the radio that calm wind runway was 15 and winds where calm. I again announced I was holding for 15. Inbound traffic started to announce their 45's for 15; including one aircraft turning base on 15. I announced my departure on 15 and rolled. A fixed wing pilot who fueled ahead was non-responsive. I assumed he was holding on 33 and heard my intentions. Upon rotating I sidestepped to the west of the runway approximately 50 FT. The low wing came into view rolling on 33. It was immediately obvious he saw me and side stepped to the east. I announced that two aircraft; a red and yellow biplane and a low wing aircraft where departing in separate directions; 15 and 33 to alert other traffic. Other traffic acknowledged. The departing low wing aircraft announced he was crosswind 33 and I announced I was crosswind 15. We went our separate ways. The two aircraft maintained visual separation at all times. I estimate we passed each other no closer than 250 FT. The low wing aircraft was not using his radio which led to the event and was not following local procedure to use [the] calm wind Runway 15.




Synopsis: A pilot reported departing SBP Runway 15 with calm winds and having a near-miss with a fixed wing pilot departing Runway 33 who did not utilize CTAF communications procedures. Both pilots side stepped to avoid a collision.
Date: 201907
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: EMB-505 / Phenom 300
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Parking Brake
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Distraction; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: During engine start phase; copilot ran the before start checklist while Captain was taking care of passengers belongings inside cabin. Upon return to the seat; Captain proceeded to start Engine 2; when there was a CAS Message alerting baggage door open. Copilot went to back of aircraft to secure baggage door. Meantime; Captain's iPad and Cell Phone fell to the cockpit floor. Captain had to lower seat and retrieve belongings before continuing. Copilot has not arrived back to airplane when...About this time; the Captain felt the aircraft move; and toe brakes were immediately applied. The move caused the GPU to become unplugged; and caused minor damage to GPU receptacle bracket; causing the flight cancellation. Reviewing our procedures we determined that the engine was started without the park brake applied; (missed checklist item). Also; the [chocks] (2 or 3 wheels were [chocked]) were removed simultaneously without Captain's authorization or knowledge. Procedures were changed to two pilots onboard aircraft will run before start checklist together before proceeding start of engines. FBO was informed of wheel chalk issue.




Synopsis: An Embraer Phenom 300 captain reported an inadvertent aircraft movement incident; due to the parking brake not being set; which resulted in damage to a service door.