elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201510
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: GQQ.Airport, OH
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 12
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: RV-12
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZOB
ATC / advisory: Center ZOB
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter VFR In IMC; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Diverted
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Weather
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: I was 'VFR on top' enroute to Galion; OH (GQQ). I had accessed an aircraft weather report at XA00 that morning; and predictions were for a low ceiling of 3000 until XC00 increasing to 5000 at XC00; both at my departure location and my destination airport. My original plan was to fly under the ceiling.I departed at approximately XB30 and eastbound in reasonable VFR conditions until about 50 miles into my flight. Clouds down low became too dense for VFR; so I backtracked and flew up through a hole and flew on top at around 7000 (varied) with the idea of descending through a hole at my destination; when the ceilings were supposed to have improved. However; I could not find a VFR route down; and was not sure would weather would be like if I returned to base; so I tuned 121.5 and asked for help as a 'VFR pilot trapped on top'. I was roughly 20 miles south-southeast of my destination airport; and had a bit more than 2 hours of fuel on board. I was flying solo.I was promptly connected with someone from ATC and he first headed me toward Defiance; but then found a closer airport. He ascertained my flying experience flying 'under the hood' (I told him I had 4 hours or so; and was comfortable doing flying by the gyro) and he tested the waters with me by having me fly for a few minutes right under the cloud tops. Then he vectored me with slow half-rate turns and a 500 foot per minute descent. I broke out of the clouds at about 1900 feet a mile east of the airport and made an uneventful landing. I had about an hour and 15 minutes of fuel on board when I landed. I stayed overnight until the weather cleared the next day allowing a return to base.The ATC was very helpful; and had a calm demeanor which helped me stay focused. His services were highly appreciated. My BFR and medical are current. My RV-12 is also in full compliance with condition inspections; and the instruments have been calibrated recently. Navigation was by panel-mount Garmin GPS and by use of the Foreflight program and an iPad.




Synopsis: RV12 pilot reported being stuck on top of a cloud layer upon arrival at his destination and called on 121.5 for ATC assistance. ATC provided a vector to an airport with better weather and an IMC descent to VFR conditions. The Controller received high praise.
Date: 201910
Aircraft: A320
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Air Data Computer
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: During our pre-departure setup; we noticed that ADR3 (Air Data Reference) had a fault light. We called Maintenance to check out the problem. Mechanic went through all the resets and could not get the fault to go away. The fault was deferrable so Mechanic went through his procedures to defer the problem. During this process he had to pull certain circuit breakers and when he did ADR 2 faulted. After about 20 minutes of trouble shooting the Mechanic realized that the circuit breaker panel was mislabeled. They were one off to the right. He brought up a picture of what the panel should look like and it did not match our plane. Then he pulled two of the breakers and the power loss did not match the label of the pulled breaker. Plus; the standby clock breaker did not have a label and blank circuit breaker had a label. In my opinion this is a serious safety of flight issue. Had we had a problem airborne and the procedure required us to pull a circuit breaker in that row; we would have pulled the wrong one.




Synopsis: A320 Captain reported that while troubleshooting a fault; the mechanic discovered that an entire row of circuit breakers were mislabeled.
Date: 201811
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: LGB.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Regional Jet 900 (CRJ900)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class D LGB
ATC / advisory: TRACON SCT
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: After given the clearance to descend via the DSNEE 4 RNAV arrival by LA Center; we complied and began the descent. Everything went uneventfully until we were switched to the next controller about the DSNEE fix on the arrival. At that time; she gave us a clearance to descend via to 5;000 feet; which is not a published altitude on the arrival. I repeated back the clearance verbatim. The Pilot Flying and I were a little confused with the clearance. I asked the Pilot Flying 'would you like me to clarify' [and] he said yes'. I then asked ATC for a clarification; she gave me the same clearance. I then told the Pilot Flying we are good to go to 5;000 feet. The Pilot Flying continued the descent to 6;800 feet [which is] below the published altitude on the MCKYE fix. He then stopped his descent and asked me to clarify the clearance again. I asked ATC if she wanted us to comply with all the altitudes restrictions on the arrival; [to] which she replied yes to all restrictions. We then stayed at 6;800 feet [and] proceeded to the next fix and altitude and then to our destination. I believe the root cause of this event is a communication error between the flight crew. I believe we as a flight crew should have cleared up the misunderstanding of the clearance together and come to agreement; before we asked ATC the clarify the clearance.




Synopsis: CRJ-900 First Officer reported miscommunication led to overshooting a crossing restriction while executing a 'descend via' clearance.
Date: 201902
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: MYAM.Airport, FO
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach; Landing
ATC / advisory: Tower MYAM
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Airport; Chart Or Publication
Primary problem: Chart Or Publication

Narrative: Where to start. The release did not put NOTAMS for MYAM in the release so we did not know about MYAM changing its name. A Tower; with ATIS; Ground and Tower frequencies have been built and opened. So we did not call Tower 20 miles out; it is now a part time Class D airspace. ARFF has been reduced so not sure if it is enough for our size aircraft. On Unicom frequency Tower called us to call on Tower frequency. We called and were told cleared to land. We called Ground Control and taxied in. They are still in training and cannot coordinate IFR departures. Center did not hand us off to Tower either and had us cancel IFR and squawk VFR. The NOTAMs did not populate in the release. Jeppesen charts are not updated for the change of Class airspace and frequencies. The Company page is also outdated now. Tower said they have been open 2 weeks.




Synopsis: A Regional Carrier Pilot reported they did not know their destination had an operating Control Tower until checking in on the UNICOM frequency.
Date: 201504
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZDC.ARTCC, VA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Turbulence; 100
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Learjet 45
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZDC
ATC / advisory: Center ZDC
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Clearance; Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control
Contributing factors: Weather
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: In cruise at FL400 encountered moderate turbulence.  We asked to descend to FL380 and Washington Center approved the request.  As we initiated the descent; the turbulence increased and caused us to uncontrollably climb at a rate of up to 2500 feet per minute for 20 to 30 seconds. I immediately instructed my first officer to advise ATC we were in an uncontrolled climb. It was not until 41;200 feet we were able to arrest the climb and reinitiate the descent.  As we passed back through FL400 again the turbulence started to decrease our descent rate but was not strong enough to cause us to climb again. We leveled at FL380 and had a smooth ride and continued the flight as normal.


Second narrative: The jolts we felt would be described as only moderate turbulence; however due to the uncontrolled climb I advised center of severe turbulence. There were no injuries and the flight continued without further incident.


Synopsis: Lear 45 flight crew reported an uncontrolled climb to FL412 from FL400 as a result of moderate to severe turbulence.
Date: 202104
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10000
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Landing
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Student
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Ground Event / Encounter Ground Strike - Aircraft; Ground Excursion Runway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Unremarkable landing on centerline; when applying brakes aircraft drifted right; unable to correct drift. Exited runway at low speed. Struck embankment with horizontal stabilizer when turning aircraft back to runway.  Performed normal shut down.




Synopsis: Solo student pilot reported departing the runway surface on landing resulting in damage to the aircraft.
Date: 201603
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: BUR.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: IMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 1 Eng; Retractable Gear
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class C BUR
ATC / advisory: TRACON SCT
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Distraction; Human-Machine Interface; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was on an IFR flight plan to KBUR. Weather at the time was a typical Southern California marine layer day; with ceilings of roughly 1700 feet and tops around 4300 feet. I was using the autopilot at 4000 feet in IMC and was being vectored by So Cal Approach. I was cleared for the KBUR ILS Runway 8 inside of SILEX intersection but my autopilot did not capture the approach. I was slow to react to this and it was not until I crossed the final approach course that I disconnected the autopilot and tried to turn back on glideslope. I was above and left of the glideslope and made some strong corrections back on course. During this transition to hand flying; I glanced down at the autopilot and wondered why it hadn't captured. The aircraft briefly entered into an unusual attitude (pitching down and rolling right). I quickly recovered but at that point I had turned significantly off course to the south. So Cal Approach vectored me around again and I hand flew an uneventful approach.




Synopsis: Small aircraft pilot momentarily entered an unusual attitude while trying to correct to the BUR ILS Runway 8 after the autopilot failed to capture the approach.
Date: 201301
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: BAe 125 Series 800
Operator: Fractional
Operating under: Part 91
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Pressurization Control System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: During initial climb out and normal power changes we observed large fluctuations between 1;500 and 2;000 FT per minute on the Cabin Rate indicator. We also felt and heard abnormal changes in the cabin pressurization. After a brief ATC level off at 6;000 FT we were given further climb to 17;000. Upon advancing the power the main air valve 2 annunciator illuminated. We then accomplished the abnormal checklist which resolved the annunciator. We then manipulated the throttles and illuminated the same annunciator. We were unable to control the cabin rate with the cabin rate control knob throughout the event. The decision was made to return to the point of departure with a hold first to assure an under weight landing. The flight was completed without further events or complications. I do not believe that this event was preventable due to the nature of a mechanical failure. We reached a safe and positive outcome with good CRM; positive discussion; and coordination though crew and ATC.




Synopsis: Hawker 800 experiences erratic cabin pressurization during initial climb. Attempts to control pressurization manually are unsuccessful and the crew elects to return to the departure airport.
Date: 202110
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Helicopter
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Other Documentation
Component problem: Improperly Operated; Design
Reporter organization: Contracted Service
Reporter function: Technician
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Airframe; Maintenance Inspection Authority; Maintenance Powerplant
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR
Detector: Person Maintenance
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Procedure; Company Policy; Human Factors; Chart Or Publication; Aircraft
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: In preparation for an FAA 337 field approval; it was found that this rotorcraft did not have a document package completed prior to entering service as [it's new purpose] rotorcraft. The document package did not have the following: any record of airworthiness directive compliance; air-frame and engine service bulletin compliance and current engine life limited parts usage and remaining service hrs/cycles. As part of the crews pre-flight action; there is a ' daily ' form completed by the repair station with aircraft specific daily engine; air-frame and any installed items with an 'ICA' inspections. The crew will perform the inspections and then initial the form showing completion of the task. I found a form being used that was developed for a different aircraft with the 'N' number crossed off and the inspected aircraft's registration number hand written next to the crossed off number. The listed daily inspections did not apply and this form has been in use since the aircraft entered service. A daily Airworthiness Directive (AD) XXXX-XX-XX detailing a visual inspection of an engine drain valve for presence of external fuel leaks was never complied with or recorded in the aircraft records. The prior Director of maintenance had put the aircraft into service without researching the aircraft status regarding inspections and AD/SB compliance. A new form was completed detailing the specific aircraft configuration and required daily inspections. This was placed in the crews aircraft flight tin for their pre-flight use. The crews were instructed by demonstration and service bulletin illustrations on how to perform the inspection. The daily AD and SB inspection will now be performed and recorded.




Synopsis: Technician/Inspector reported that a required document package was completed prior to the aircraft's entry into service as required by FARs; making the aircraft non airworthy and not ready for service.
Date: 201506
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZZ.Airport, FO
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B767-300 and 300 ER
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: During detailed reading of my NOTAMs I noticed that we were receiving destination NOTAMs in Spanish.  During the first leg we were very busy working with the dispatcher on weather issues down range and I forgot to ask them about the NOTAM.  One crewmember on the flight is fluent in Spanish and I requested that he translate for us and they were determined to not affect our flight.On the return leg we were again issued the same NOTAMs in Spanish.  During the flight back I called my new dispatcher and advised them of the issue.  They were unaware of the NOTAMs but were aware that this does occur on occasion.  They advised that they cannot read Spanish but have translator that gets most of it right. This is the same old issue:1. Too many pages of superfluous information. 2. NOTAMs not in plain English.3. Dispatchers too busy to adequately review the information.Automate the NOTAMs like all of the other carriers? Hire more dispatchers so they actually have the time to read what they print; not just email it to us?




Synopsis: B-767 Captain received NOTAMs for destination airport in Spanish. Another crewmember was able to translate.
Date: 201507
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skylane 182/RG Turbo Skylane/RG
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Engine
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Time Pressure; Troubleshooting; Workload
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Flying toward airport engine stopped; tried a restart; set best glide; picked a field; and set up for off airport landing.




Synopsis: A C182 Pilot reported landing off airport after the engine stopped and would not restart.
Date: 201909
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 170/175 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Ground Personnel
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Airport
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: When coming in to start my shift today; there were two ERJ-145 aircraft parked on spots and instead of the portable stairs attached to the aircraft; they had the ramps that are used to assist people with mobility issues. Each of the five parking spots on the hardstand has both stairs and ramps available. It seemed to me that the ramp is a much safer way to get passengers on and off the aircraft; especially at night when the lighting around the hardstand is not the greatest. Using the ramp on every flight instead of the stairs and the need to store both outside the Operational Safety Zone would free up room to better stage other equipment.




Synopsis: Ground personnel reported that the use of boarding ramps instead of stairs improves efficiency.