elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201408
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZSE.ARTCC, WA
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: A320
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class A ZSE; Class E P80
ATC / advisory: Center ZSE; TRACON P80
Aircraft component: FMS/FMC
Component problem: Design
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew FLC Overrode Automation; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Procedure
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: The Airbus FMGC; had it been followed during the HHOOD 2 RNAV arrival into PDX; would have descended the aircraft below the published MEA. The FMGC was checked prior to descent.  With the proper 280 knot descent programmed; the FMGC would have descended the aircraft below the published MEA of 7200 feet between HHOOD and BLRUN.  It is a continuing problem with the programming of the Airbus FMGC; it is trying to set up to handle a 'TOO STEEP PATH' alert after SHAFR; and thinks the aircraft needs to be at 7090 feet at BLRUN in order to meet the later requirements. This has not been a formal ATC issue because PDX approach normally starts vectoring us off the arrival and assigning a Minimum Radar Vector Altitude (which is different than an MEA) prior to reaching BLRUN.  However...if we had descended via the RNAV arrival all the way to SHAFR and beyond; we would have been below the MEA. This is a continuing Airbus problem that needs to be addressed by the fleet and the FAA.  It is a potential violation or accident waiting to happen.

Callback: Reporter states that a restriction must be manually entered at BLRUN to prevent the aircraft from descending below the MEA. He believes the MVA at BLRUN is 7000 feet.



Synopsis: A320 First Officer reports that when the HHOOD 2 RNAV arrival to PDX landing Runways 28L and R is entered in the FMGC; the MEA of 7200 feet between HHOOD and BLRUN is not honored. Manual entries to the FMGC are required to keep the aircraft above 7200 feet until after BLRUN.
Date: 201212
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZSPD.Airport, FO
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: MD-11
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground ZSPD
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Confusion; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Incursion Taxiway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Chart Or Publication; Airport; Manuals; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: We landed on ZSPD Runway 34 and taxied east to get to our gate on the west side. After following Ground's instructions we turned south on A; held short of P2 and contacted Tower. Tower told us to turn right on P2; cross 35R and hold short of 35L. I had discussed the Airport Operations restrictions with my First Officer so he told Tower we were unable. Tower told us again to turn right on P2 and cross 35R hold short of 35L. I told Tower we were unable; that our flight documents said it was prohibited to cross 35L using P2 and I asked if we could use P1. Tower came back a few minutes later and again told us to turn right on P2; cross 35R and hold short of 35L. We evaluated and discussed how the taxiway looked; it was daytime; that it seemed safe; we were very light (300;000 [LBS]) and that; in spite of our protests; Tower continued to tell us to use P2. I elected to use P2 as directed. We crossed the runways according to Tower's instructions and taxied to our parking spot without any problems. The ZSPD Airport Operations Information page under General; Operation; Runway Restrictions says: 'Crossing Runway 17L/35R from east to west by Taxiway P2-P5 is strictly prohibited.' The ZSPD airport diagram has a very distinct red circle with a white bar on the east side of 35R at P2 and P5. So looking at the Commercial Charts we both agreed that using P2 in our case was prohibited. However; we could not get any other instructions from Tower and they wouldn't allow us to taxi down Taxiway A to use P1 so I elected to use P2. Ensure the local ATC approves what is on the airport pages and that it agrees with their procedures.




Synopsis: Despite published prohibitions against crossing Runway 17R/35L from East to West on Taxiway P2 at ZSPD; Ground Control refused to let the flight crew of an MD11 cross at P1; the sole alternative to the prohibited crossings. When no other option was provided they crossed as directed.
Date: 202007
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Cessna 210 Centurion / Turbo Centurion 210C; 210D
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
Aircraft component: Oil Line
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Private
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: In cruising flight at FL190 (19;000 ft) I experienced a rough running engine operating LOP (Lean of Peak). It ran normally ROP (Rich of Peak) indicating a likely magneto issue. I reversed course to return but then I got a low oil pressure reading. I confirmed the low oil pressure with both oil pressure gauges and [advised ATC] requesting an expedited descent to the nearest suitable airport. ATC (Air Traffic Control) was very helpful and I landed at ZZZ without incident. An oil leak was discovered where the oil return line joins the turbocharger.




Synopsis: Cessna P210 pilot reported that an engine oil leak occurred in cruise flight resulting in a diversion.
Date: 202001
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Snow; 3
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: Luscombe Model 8/Luscombe 50
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Landing
Aircraft component: Wing
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Ground Event / Encounter Object; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Weather
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: En route as per my recollection; weather was stating 10sm vis at ZZZ and 3-5sm vis at Colorado Air and Space Port (FTG) Ceilings at 2500 ft. AGL (can't remember visibility exactly at FTG). About 18nm south of my destination airport FTG perceived weather started snowing and visibility began to deteriorate with ceiling lowering to about 1500 ft. and 3-5 miles of visibility.  Started thinking of alternate ZZZ but [the] weather looked better behind me and to the east so started thinking of diverting to Limon (LIC) or Meadow Lake (FLY). Observing METARS about 15nm out of destination (FTG); ZZZ reporting 10sm visibility and Front Range down to 1sm light snow. During my METAR check perceived weather conditions deteriorated rapidly and the light diminished substantially so I began a right turn to the east and within moments I hit what later turns realized was a snow squall and severe turbulence was encountered and was difficult to maintain control the aircraft so I performed an emergency landing in a neighborhood on a paved street. Touchdown was under control and on rollout at approximately 25 mph a 30+ knot crosswind came from the right and the plane veered to the right into the grass and made contact with an electrical meter on the right side of the road with minor damage to the electrical meter and the mid way down; midway across; underneath the right wing tearing the fabric surface and slightly bending the trailing edge of the wing. Electrical box is fully functional with cosmetic damage to the top cover. I pulled off the road and contacted the neighbors and was given permission to tie down the airplane to the property owners fence for as long as I needed and within a couple of hours returned to push the plane into a secure area next to a house until further action. No injuries.




Synopsis: Pilot reported during a diversion; he was forced to make a priority landing in a neighborhood on a paved street and struck an electrical box with the wing.
Date: 201712
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: LAX.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 170/175 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class B LAX
ATC / advisory: Tower LAX
Second aircraft: B767 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Clearance; Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Visual approach to 25L behind a heavy Boeing 767. PF encountered wake turbulence at just above the threshold and a go-around was initiated. Tower instructed climb to 2000; fly runway heading. At full power; 2000 feet came quickly and we blew through the assigned altitude. I took control of the aircraft and stabilized us back down to 2000 feet. PF was 'rattled' by the wake turbulence and became task saturated during the go around; high power setting and fast climb rate put [the FO] behind the aircraft. Result - we exceed assigned altitude by 600 feet. Along with the normal approach briefing; include the procedures for a possible go around (steps) in with the missed approach instructions (approach plate MAP brief).


Second narrative: On short final 25L into LAX; we encountered wake turbulence and executed a go around. ATC told us to maintain 2000 feet. On the go-around the TOGA button was pushed so when the climb sequence was called; the flaps were delayed and in an effort to not overspeed the flaps I accidentally flew through the altitude. That was when the Captain took over the controls and returned to the assigned altitude. Everything seemed very rushed and a lot was going on. Suggest trying to get the flaps retracted as soon as possible with such a low altitude restriction.


Synopsis: ERJ-175 flight crew reported executing a go-around after encountering wake turbulence from a B767 on short final at LAX.
Date: 201906
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: 7S1.Airport, MT
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class G SLC
ATC / advisory: CTAF 7S1
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Captain; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Excursion Runway; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I was on a cross country flight. While inflight I elected to make a fuel stop at Twin Bridges airport in Montana. A quick look online showed no NOTAMs for the airport. 10 miles out I announced on the UNICOM my position and intentions. While monitoring the UNICOM frequency I heard a lot of chatter. It appeared to be a group of 10 planes organizing something. I ask and was told they were departing momentarily for 'some fun'. I assumed they were a lunch group heading out on a group flight to another airport. When I was about two miles out the planes started to take off in sequence. I extended my downwind to allow them to depart. When the last plane started to roll I turned inbound. On short final I noticed a laggard member of the group sitting on the cross runway. An uneventful landing and taxi to the end of the runway toward the fuel pumps. I was surprised to find the ramp to be full of people blocking the ramp. I announced my intentions to back taxi on the UNICOM. I turned around to back taxi only to find the laggard plane taking off while I was still on the runway. I quickly pulled into the tall grass along the runway to allow the departing plane to pass me. As I continued to back taxi I was again surprised to find a plane on short final; I quickly exited onto the cross runway to avoid the landing aircraft. My real surprise was to learn that 10 planes had lined up to drop bowling balls on the spot I had just been on! I cannot make this stuff up! No NOTAM; no announcements other than 'having fun'. Not sure how I would do things differently in the future. Assume less is all I can think of. I will never assume that my fellow pilots are going to communicate their intentions. My assumption was that when they said they were departing I thought they meant to another airport not departing the ground with a return trip to drop 10 bowling balls onto the runway I announced I was landing on. I do know the organizers of events like this would be well served issuing a NOTAM; having an air boss on the radio and over-communicating to other pilots in the vicinity of their impromptu air show.




Synopsis: GA pilot reported runway excursion to avoid departing traffic. No NOTAM was available for airport event.
Date: 201308
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: MVY.Airport, MA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Gulfstream IV / G350 / G450
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class E K90
ATC / advisory: TRACON K90
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Second reporter function: Approach; Departure
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings
Primary problem: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings

Narrative: On approach and heading vectors at 5;000 FT nearing MVY Approach pointed out traffic at our assigned altitude at 12 o'clock. There was no contact visually or TCAS indication. Approach was partially blocked as it sounded as if he was giving an immediate 45 degree turn. We quickly jumped in to have him repeat for our aircraft and he again stated turn immediate to hug 180 degrees. I was ready with TCAS switch to override automation if need be and clicked off automation with a positive turn. In the turn; plane dropped less than 200 FT to 4;850 FT and I quickly corrected. Nothing from ATC was mentioned and we shortly given another heading once clear toward the airport. [Flight was] uneventful from there on.


Second narrative: On arrival; a GLF4 was descending to 5;000; on a vector for a visual approach to Runway 6 at MVY. I observed an unassociated beacon splat ahead of the GLF4 indicating an altitude of 5;000. At times on our RADAR system we see 'false targets' that often last only a sweep or two; and my initial reaction was that the unassociated beacon splat was one of those. When the unassociated beacon splat lasted more than a few sweeps; I decided to treat it as an actual aircraft. The GLF4 was at the same altitude heading right towards the splat; therefore I called traffic and subsequently issued a safety alert for the GLF4 to turn due south. I issued this control instruction while the GLF4 was still in PVD Approach's airspace; a violation of LOA. Reviewing NOP data; the unassociated splat was on a beacon code which mirrored the beacon code of an Air Taxi; who was at 5;000 FT on the FMH 357R/31NM (splat was on the FMH 240R/31NM). The unassociated splat lasted a total duration of 1 minute and 30 seconds. Our FMH ASR-8 RADAR system often detects 'false targets' and it is becoming increasingly difficult to differentiate the false targets from real ones; as they are often lasting for many sweeps in duration. The RADAR needs further troubleshooting to remedy this problem.


Synopsis: An IFR arrival into MVY reported an apparent traffic conflict observed on TCAS and issued by ATC; the ATC report indicated that the conflicting target was likely a 'false target' sometimes experieced with the RADAR system.
Date: 201707
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: DEN.Airport, CO
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew FLC Overrode Automation
Contributing factors: Procedure; ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: While receiving the CPDLC clearance we observed a 'Load New Route' annotation after our login was accepted. We observed that the amended clearance matched our filed clearance of BAYLR 3 TEHRU clearance and there was no changes compared to our filed clearance. The revised routing stated 'BAYLR 3 TEHRU as filed climb via the SID' We selected the load command and then attempted to accept the clearance but were unable due the accept command being replaced with an 'aborted' command.'  We executed the FMC and observed that the leg routing was the BAYLR 3 Departure but had a first fix direct to TUULO with a 34R Departure Runway that we had originally selected.  The revised CPDLC routing loaded an incorrect routing into the FMC and deleted the initial 353 heading and the CRAGR fix with hold down 10;000 restriction. This omission could have led to a potential lateral and or vertical deviation immediately after departing Runway 34R. I contacted DEN Clearance Delivery to confirm if our CPDLC was accepted. ATC informed us that we had aborted the link and I informed that we had not done so. ATC stated that we have had many Company aircraft reporting the same problem lately and ATC cannot determine why the complication is present.  We verified that we had received the clearance and proceeded with our preflight duties.  Per Company procedures and briefings we identified the incorrect FMC routing from the CPDLC and manually reloaded the BAYLR 3 departure with TEHRU transition. We confirmed the LEGS on the FMC which now included the correct fixes and briefed our departure per Company procedure. The flight departed without any further complications or delay.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported an issue with the CPDLC generated clearance.
Date: 201511
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: RDU.Airport, NC
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class A ZTL
ATC / advisory: Center ZTL
Second aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown
Second reporter function: First Officer
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Automation Aircraft RA; Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: While climbing out of RDU; we had several intermediate level offs. The last clearance was to climb to FL310. Shortly after leveling at FL310; we got a TA for an aircraft coming from the opposite direction at FL310. Atlanta Center asked us to verify that we were level at FL300; and we replied 'negative; level at FL310'. We then got an RA; and responded by disconnecting the autopilot and climbing. Atlanta Center also directed us to turn right to 360 degrees and climb to FL340. We entered the turn while still climbing. We saw the other aircraft pass maybe a mile away (he was descending in response to his RA); and after we were clear; Atlanta Center cleared us back on course. We discussed it with the Controller; and he was not sure whether he had cleared us to FL300 or FL310.I believe the Controller made an error by assigning us FL310 when he meant FL300. The TCAS procedures worked well.


Second narrative: After going over what had just happened; we both thought we heard cleared to FL310.


Synopsis: B737-800 flight crew reported responding to an RA from opposite direction traffic at FL310.