elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201502
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: TEB.Airport, NY
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: HS 125 Series
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class D TEB
Aircraft component: FMS/FMC
Component problem: Design; Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Distraction; Confusion; Communication Breakdown; Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
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: Chart Or Publication; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was the captain flying and departing TEB. Our clearance was the RUUDY5 departure GAYEL transition; etc... I had to manually program our FMS-GNSXLS- for WENTZ @1500 feet; TASCA @2000 feet and RUUDY intersections; and then the GAYEL transition. When we departed RWY 24 @ TEB; I was in heading mode to intercept the 260 degree course to WENTZ. I switched to NAV to track to WENTZ and cross @ 1500 feet. Crossing WENTZ; I switched back to heading mode to track 280 degree to TASCA to cross @ 2000 feet. We were cleared to climb to 10;000 feet. The PNF then switched back to Navigation (NAV) mode after crossing TASCA. Because the FMS had been programmed for the GAYEL transition; the autopilot turned north to GAYEL before crossing RUUDY because it is a 90 degree turn. We should have been back in heading mode and departed RUUDY on a 280 degree heading until vectors to GAYEL. ATC stated; 'XXX; I don't know where you are going but you should be heading 280 degrees'. We turned to 280 degrees and climbed to 10;000 feet. There was no conflict with other aircraft.After talking to the Pilot Not Flying (PNF) and the other pilots in our flight department; we have decided to not accept this departure (RUUDY5) because of the age of our FMS; the switching of modes 3 times in 8 miles while climbing; cleaning up of the aircraft; running checklist; avoiding traffic; and abiding by the noise abatement procedure for RWY24 at TEB.




Synopsis: The flight crew of an HS125 attempted to fly the RUUDY SID from TEB using a rapid reprogramming of heading and navigation modes in order to comply with the charted heading and fix to fix routing involved. Unfortunately; due to the aged minimalism of their FMS capability; the programming after TASCA was incorrect and the jet turned direct to GAYEL via a heading of 280 degrees after RUUDY as charted. Departure control caught the error and corrected their track.
Date: 201507
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: SVZM.ARTCC, FO
Aircraft: Heavy Transport
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A SVZM
Aircraft component: Navigation Database
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Chart Or Publication
Primary problem: Chart Or Publication

Narrative: The new procedure for UM423 says 'Between GNA and BVI proceed south along route to BVI and descend to 10;000 feet. Continue south along UM402 to MAO.'Along that route near KAV the grid MORA's (Minimum Off-Route Altitudes) are 15;200 feet. One revision reflects that the other database should be updated.




Synopsis: The charted altitudes on UM423 between GNA and BVI differ between two sets of information. One shows the MORA (Minimum Off-Route Altitude) to be 15200 feet and the other says to descend to 10000 feet.
Date: 201503
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ATL.Airport, GA
Light: Night
Aircraft: Widebody; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 129
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class B ATL
ATC / advisory: Tower ATL
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Local
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness; Workload; Communication Breakdown; Confusion
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; 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 Separated Traffic
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I was working Local Control-3 (LC); combined with LC-4 and LC-5.  It was late in the evening and I had just relieved another controller a few minutes earlier.  I was standing up at the time.  When I cleared Aircraft X 'RNAV TO FUTBL; RWY 27R; CLEARED FOR TAKEOFF'.  Aircraft X read back the cleared for takeoff part and then asked what I had said at the beginning.  I asked him to clarify his request and then reissued the previous instruction.  Aircraft X did not read back the 'RNAV TO FUTBL' part; but that was not abnormal for foreign carriers to omit parts of the clearance that do not require a read back.  Most of the day; the south winds were pushing aircraft within the first mile or two off the end slightly north before they established on the heading to FUTBL or SLAWW; our two RNAV fixes.  Since I was standing; I observed Aircraft X start to drift north and then lost sight of him behind the Ground Control-C (GC) ASDE-X display.  When I expected him to reappear from behind the screen he did not and then I saw on the RACD that he was significantly off course.  I issued an immediate left turn; and shouted across the tower to LC-2 that I had Aircraft X turning.  They were just starting to shout at me about Aircraft X.  Once that was settled; I issued a 230 heading Aircraft X right as DR-S called in.  I did impromptu coordination with DR-S; assuming they heard the 230 heading; and then switched Aircraft X.STOP RNAV OTG [Off The Ground]!  How many deviations do we need to have before it is determined to be an unsafe operation?  There are only a handful of ATC facilities that are easy to modify procedures; but there are millions of pilots worldwide that have to be proficient on the procedures; every time they are changed!If the above isn't possible; then anytime foreign language pilots give a controller an uneasy feeling due to the language barrier; then use headings instead of RNAV.  I should have issued the heading when Aircraft X asked me the question about what I first said in my takeoff clearance.




Synopsis: ATL Local Controller has a clearance problem with a foreign carrier and when the aircraft departs it drifts off the RNAV course into another Local's airspace.
Date: 201310
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: A310
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Check Pilot; Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: In level flight cabin pressure regulator #2 faulted.  #1 regulator did not control cabin altitude and it rapidly climbed through 10;000 feet.  Oxygen masks were donned; jumpseater awakened and told to put oxygen mask on; and crew began ECAM procedures.  Cabin pressure control regained using manual control.  Descent begun to 10;000 feet and emergency finally declared with Center.  Once below 10;000 feet cabin altitude normal operations resumed and continued to destination.  Excellent performance by the First Officer.


Second narrative: [Narrative had no additional information].


Synopsis: A310 flight crew reported loss of cabin pressure. An emergency was declared and control of pressurization system was regained using manual backup.
Date: 201905
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: BOI.Airport, ID
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class C BOI
ATC / advisory: Tower BOI
Aircraft component: Horizontal Stabilizer Trim
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
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: At approximately 1;500 feet AGL; while attaining final flap configuration; the nose up trim quit working. I asked the Capt to try his trim switch to see if it would trim nose up and it would not. I bumped it forward to see if that worked and it did. The aircraft was a little nose heavy; but still fully controllable; so I elected to continue and land instead of going around and asking the Capt to try and trim manually during another approach. The flare and landing required more back stick force than usual due the out of trim condition; but it was completely controllable and the landing was normal. We submitted a maintenance write up; and I believe the Capt followed it up with a verbal to [Maintenance Control and required company notifications.]


Second narrative: Below 1;000 ft; elevator trim became intermittent for FO (First Officer). Captain's elevator trim only worked one direction.


Synopsis: B737 flight crew reported an electrical trim malfunction on short final.
Date: 201312
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZLA.ARTCC, CA
Aircraft: RV-12
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Flight phase: Cruise
ATC / advisory: Center ZLA
Second aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was providing RADAR advisory services for VFR Aircraft X; a RV12/G enroute eastbound at 9;500 FT. A fast-moving Mode-C Intruder target was level at 11;500 NW of Aircraft X. I noted that the Mode-C intruder had descended to 10;500 FT and appeared to have leveled there for quite some time. Due to the fast rate of speed of that target; I made a traffic call to Aircraft X; noting traffic was at 7 to 8 o'clock and 5 miles at 10;500 FT; altitude unverified and type unknown; overtaking; and passing north to south. Aircraft X reported the traffic in sight. At some point; I commenced giving a position relief briefing. During the briefing; the Mode-C Intruder started descending into Aircraft X. Around the same time; there was a large number of track jumps; and the Mode-C Intruder was in close proximity with Aircraft X. I immediately issued a traffic alert to Aircraft X giving an approximate position due to the track jumps; apparent Mode-C swaps; and Aircraft X's vector line spinning quickly clockwise; either due to RADAR anomaly; or pilot action. There was no response to the traffic alert. Roughly 15 seconds later; the pilot noted that he had taken evasive action; and that the traffic was really close. I asked if the pilot of Aircraft X had seen the aircraft type of the other aircraft; and he responded that it was a large 4 engine prop; possibly an [P3] Orion. Following the incident; the Mode-C intruder continued to descend and turn westbound toward the Big Bear (L35) Airport. I immediately reported the event to Management; the only aircraft that landed within that time period was a Cheyenne. The pilot of the Cheyenne was apparently questioned and noted that he did not see any traffic during the descent.




Synopsis: ZLA Controller described a conflict event involving an apparent military aircraft and a VFR transiting aircraft at 9;500 FT; the identity of the second aircraft was never determined.
Date: 201704
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZAB.ARTCC, NM
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-700
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class A ZAB
ATC / advisory: Center ZAB
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Conflict Airborne Conflict; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Illness / Injury
Detector: Automation Aircraft RA
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; General Physical Injury / Incapacitation
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Airspace Structure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: ATC advised maintain FL200 for crossing traffic at FL190. Descending at 800-1;000 FPM got TCAS climb RA at FL208 and performed QRH procedure with climb of less than 1;000 feet. Advised ATC of RA climb and heard flight attendants discussing injuries in aft galley to 'B' and 'C' flight attendants. No other injuries. Six hours in hospital with no broken bones; but strained muscles and possible bruising. 'B' was most sore and was unable to sit on jump-seat for landing as she landed in the corner of galley on top of liqueur kit bottles. First Officer did an outstanding job calling out need for continued climb until clear of conflict. Never got a TA and red climb requirement to fly was tall. Uneventful landing and EMS met aircraft at the gate.Possibly sitting the flight attendants down earlier; but they were unfortunately cleaning up when a non-normal maneuver was performed for the safety of flight TCAS RA. We can't prepare them for that situation; as it is always a possibility.




Synopsis: B737 Captain reported a TCAS RA descending to FL200 with an aircraft at FL190. The response to the RA caused injuries to two Flight Attendants.
Date: 202007
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Technician
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Maintenance
When detected: Routine Inspection
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Environment - Non Weather Related; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Doing a scheduled check for Aircraft X in long term storage on the ramp; and closing everything up upon completion I noticed speed tape torn around Pack 1 and 2 inlets and exhaust. Confused; I checked both inlets with a light to see if any tape was sucked in. But because the duct bends I am not 100% sure if any of the speed tape ripped and entered the system. Checked all the planes on the ramp. There is one other plane out of XX with speed tape on the pack intakes. I am unsure if it is required; applied new speed tape to both Pack 1 and 2 intake and exhaust and hung streamers to help prevent this in the future.




Synopsis: Technician completing a routine check on stored aircraft reported finding torn speed tape in the Pack 1 and 2 inlets and exhaust. Reporter could not visually verify if the tape had entered the system due to the duct bends.
Date: 201309
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZDV.ARTCC, CO
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZDV
ATC / advisory: Center ZDV
Aircraft component: FMS/FMC
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Situational Awareness; Training / Qualification
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; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: The flight plan consisted of many direct fixes including the 'new' fixes such as KD54S. I had just read a report the previous day about mis-entry into the FMC using similar fixes. I was conscious of the potential for error while programming the FMC but still managed to transpose the cleared fix - KD54S- into an incorrect fix KD45S. The first officer and I noticed the big dog-leg in the flight plan; but I had thought it was for avoidance of a very large dissipating weather cell around the Denver area. Approximately 5 minutes after passing CLEVE; Denver Center queried us regarding the fix we were navigating to. I responded to KD45S and immediately saw the correct fix should have been KD54S. I entered the fix into the FMC and told the Controller what had happened and that we were turning toward KD54S. The Controller said it was not a problem and issued a clearance further west and more direct toward our destination.




Synopsis: Air Carrier Captain reports entering transposed numbers for a NRS (National Reference System) waypoint into the FMC; resulting in a track deviation detected by ZDV.
Date: 201210
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Fuel Issue
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate; Pre-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Human Factors; Procedure; Weather
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Looking at paperwork shows a FOD [fuel on deck] value of 6.4 with ACF calculations etc. etc. Flight planned at FL360. Noticed turbulence over Rockies and it was obvious that at some point we would have to descend below planned FL. Flew ABOVE planned at FL380 to save gas and added 1.5 then had to descend to FL320 and then FL300 for ATC requirements 1 hour out. Given this we landed with only 6.2. Now; figuring the savings at 380 vs. 360 was about 800 LBS for several hours if we stayed at 360 would have landed with 5.4 then less the 1.5 I added would have been 3.9 thousand pounds; unacceptable.




Synopsis: Air Carrier Captain laments the low fuel loads that the company flight planning software routinely provides and offers an example.
Date: 201905
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: OSH.Airport, WI
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 3
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class D OSH
ATC / advisory: Tower OSH
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Incursion Taxiway; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I received a taxi instruction. Shortly; ATC asked if I was ready to go; I replied yes. They then gave me different taxi and departure clearance. I departed Runway 23 as that was my understanding. However; shortly after departure; ATC indicated that I had departed via Runway 23. They gave me a turn and altitude instruction. I followed; until clear of Class D. After hearing the 'you departed Runway 23' ATC comment; I began to question why I received this and what it meant. I believe it is possible that I was supposed to depart Runway 27 via Runway 23 intersection. I have not yet reviewed the ATC recording/archive; but I will to have a better understanding of what was communicated.




Synopsis: A Pilot reported they may have misunderstood their revised clearance and departed from the wrong runway.
Date: 201907
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: SDF.Airport, KY
Aircraft: A300
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Tower SDF
Second aircraft: MD-11
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Local
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown; Confusion
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Other Person
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Aircraft; Company Policy
Primary problem: Company Policy

Narrative: Aircraft X was told to taxi and hold short of the runway (due to lots of taxiway closures). Aircraft Y was a previous arrival that was holding short of the runway at the approach end. I was informed later tonight afterwards that I told Aircraft X to cross the runway when I meant to instruct Aircraft Y to cross. Both read it back. I caught it and told Aircraft X to hold short; and then cross once landing traffic was no longer a factor. Just make sure I issue the correct callsign.




Synopsis: SDF Tower Controller reported they issued a runway crossing clearance to the wrong aircraft due to confusion caused by similar sounding call signs.
Date: 201604
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: SR20
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Cruise
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Engine
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Instructor; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: On engine start and run up; no abnormalities observed. Once in cruise flight; engine began to shake badly; power indications seemed normal; CHT & EGT temperatures showed normal. PIC contacted approach and returned to [departure airport].

Callback: The reporter indicated that Maintenance found a broken valve in one of the engine cylinders.



Synopsis: A SR20 flight instructor reported a severe engine vibration in cruise that resulted in a return to the departure airport. It was later discovered that a cylinder valve was broken.