elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201302
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZMA.ARTCC, FL
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: A320
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class A ZMA
ATC / advisory: Center ZMA
Aircraft component: Autopilot
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation - Speed All Types; Inflight Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: In open descent; the aircraft pitched over too far resulting in rapid build up of airspeed. About a 5 knot overspeed with bells and alarms. The First Officer recognized the problem but turned off the autopilot too late to prevent the overspeed.




Synopsis: An A320 in Open Descent mode pitched over too aggressively and an approximate five knot overspeed resulted.
Date: 201304
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Night
Aircraft: Regional Jet 200 ER/LR (CRJ200)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Fuel Line; Fittings; & Connectors
Component problem: Design
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Technician
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Airframe; Maintenance Powerplant
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural MEL / CDL; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Maintenance
When detected: Other Paperwork Audit
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Chart Or Publication; Human Factors; Incorrect / Not Installed / Unavailable Part; Manuals
Primary problem: Manuals

Narrative: My response to the investigation for how I installed the incorrect APU Fuel Feed line is that I was confused by the Illustrated Parts Catalog (IPC) and what Part Number (P/N) was interchangeable.  When researching the IPC; I found that there was no Check Valve P/N 2950001-101 in stock in ZZZ.  Upon looking further for an Alternate Part Number I found that P/N 2920030-103 was a qualified interchange (IPC 28-24-00; Item 61C). My mistake came when I didn't realize that by installing this superseded valve; it would negate the intent of Service Bulletin (S/B) 601R-28-008 that the P/N 2950001-101 [Check Valve] was installed against.  Other than by the P/N of the check valve that came off; I am still not sure if this aircraft is 'Pre' or 'Post' Service Bulletin because as part of the SB; there was to be a Logbook entry that the S/B was incorporated; to which I cannot find in Maintenance Records. There should be documentation stating that P/N 2950001-101 [S/B Check Valve] can only be installed as an APU Fuel Feed Check valve; without any possibility of an interchange.  I would like to see at least a Master Inventory List (MIL) or a Company Aircraft Supplement to the IPC showing Service Bulletin (S/B) 601R-28-008C pictures for each valve and their part number. Clearing a [fuel] MEL.




Synopsis: An Aircraft Maintenance Technician (AMT) describes how an inadequate Illustrated Parts Catalog (IPC) and lack of a Logbook reference to a Service Bulletin; contributed to his installing an incorrect APU Fuel Feed line Check Valve on a CRJ-200 aircraft.
Date: 202111
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZZ.Airport, FO
Aircraft: A320
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground ZZZZ
Aircraft component: Coalescer Bag
Component problem: Malfunctioning
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: Physiological - Other
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Illness / Injury; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate; Taxi
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: After a normal landing in ZZZZ I started the APU and proceeded to the gate. Shut down the aircraft as normal procedures. As we were deplaning I was told that the aft Flight Attendants experienced a fume event after we landed. Our Flight Attendant number 3 became sick and vomited. After deplaning we walked to the aft of the aircraft and there was still an odor present.




Synopsis: A320 First Officer reported flight attendant notification of a fume event after landing.
Date: 201904
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 145 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Air Conditioning and Pressurization Pack
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Environment - Non Weather Related; Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: During climb the Captain noticed an odd smell in the cockpit and suspected it was coming from the #1 pack. Upon de-selecting the pack the smell immediately dissipated. We requested a level off at FL240. We called Dispatch and Maintenance and jointly decided we could continue on the remaining pack during this reposition flight to ZZZ1. We received our amended release for FL240 and continued the flight with no issues.




Synopsis: EMB-145 First Officer reported odor in cockpit and process to overcome the fume event.
Date: 201812
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ORD.Airport, IL
Flight conditions: IMC
Light: Dawn
Aircraft: Regional Jet 700 ER/LR (CRJ700)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B ORD
ATC / advisory: TRACON C90
Aircraft component: Integrated Audio System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We were in IMC conditions on a heading to intercept the localizer for the ILS 27R into ORD. During this time; the First Officer noticed that the number 1 Radio Tuning Unit was not displaying normally. The RTU was only displaying the active frequency and not showing the standby frequency or the active and standby navigation frequencies. We had already deferred RTU number two prior to departure; leaving us the Backup Tuning Unit as our primary means of backup communication. As we approached the localizer; we still had not received a final clearance from ATC. Positive course guidance was received; in which we interpreted that we were going to overshoot the localizer. As we flew past the course; I decided to make a turn back toward the localizer and instructed my First Officer to change our squawk code to 7600. I chose to turn the aircraft back without a clearance due to the possibility of flying in close proximity of other traffic on intersecting runways. I also chose to continue flying the aircraft on the approach and delegated my First Officer the task of troubleshooting the issue. She switched to the approach frequency on the chart on the back up tuning unit; and we were able to confirm a landing clearance from ATC to land on [Runway] 27R. The failure of the RTU 2 had a significant effect on our ability to properly communicate with Air Traffic Control. RTU 1 not showing all of the frequencies contributed to this event as well.I personally would like to practice different scenarios of communication failures to be able to better handle the situation in a timely fashion. Due to the timing of this event in a critical phase of flight; I still should have given better instructions to my First Officer on what actions we could have taken to better handle the situation. I commend her for ability to quickly solve the issue while I maintained positive aircraft control which was primary.




Synopsis: CRJ-700 Captain reported communication difficulties related to deferred radio tuning units resulted in a track deviation.
Date: 201501
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZSE.ARTCC, WA
Light: Night
Aircraft: Light Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class B SEA; Class D BFI
ATC / advisory: Center ZSE
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Other / Unknown
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Workload; Troubleshooting; Training / Qualification; Situational Awareness; Distraction; Communication Breakdown; Confusion
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Airspace Violation 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: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: The incident occurred on the midnight shift. I was in the control room at the time; but not officially on position; I was on break. I heard the R-Side working the A-Area say that Seattle Approach (S46) was not taking their handoff of Aircraft X. I began trying to assist by calling Seattle Approach on shout and land lines and calling neighboring facilities to have them try as well; but to no luck; we were unable to reach Seattle Approach. During this time; the aircraft descended into Seattle Approach airspace without a handoff. Realizing that something was wrong at Seattle Approach; the controller turned the aircraft away from the airspace so as to cease violating their airspace as quickly as possible. After about 10 minutes of holding the aircraft out; the OMIC declared Seattle Approach ATC Zero and Seattle Center assumed their airspace. At this time; the controller vectored the aircraft towards the Boeing Field ILS13 as requested and I assisted by calling an inbound to the tower. I later learned that this was an incorrect procedure as during Seattle Approach ATC Zero. Seattle Tower actually assumes 10 NM of Seattle Approach airspace up to 5000 MSL. This means that vectoring for the ILS and calling the inbound violated Seattle Tower's airspace because he went through their airspace without a point out or handoff. At the time this was not clear from our brief review of the contingency binder and communication with the OMIC and Seattle Tower.Better briefings on Seattle Approach contingency plans and a much easier checklist for the transition to assuming their airspace. Also some changes at Seattle Approach to prevent controllers from getting locked out of the facility.




Synopsis: ZSE Controller describes a situation where Seattle TRACON (S46) doesn't answer landlines and an aircraft is inbound to Boeing Field (BFI). ZLA assumes S46 is ATC - Zero and vectors the aircraft for the ILS Runway 13. Controller finds out late that Seattle Tower assumes the airspace that they had the aircraft in and ZSE violated the contingency plan and airspace.
Date: 201410
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: AUN.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: SR22
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class E ZOA; TFR FIREFIGHTING
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Airspace Violation All Types
Detector: Person Flight Crew
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors; Aircraft; Airspace Structure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: There was a firefighting TFR in the vicinity of Colfax; CA that had been in effect [for several days]. The western edge of the TFR was just off the eastern end of runway 25 at AUN; necessitating landing on runway 7; even though the winds favored 25. I confirmed the TFR was still in effect using a ground-based PC prior to takeoff. In the air; however; it wasn't visible on my MFD even though other TFRs in the area were; (the MFD uses XM satellite weather as its TFR data source). I contacted FSS in the air and they confirmed the TFR was still in effect; though we didn't discuss the precise boundaries. As I approached AUN I monitored traffic on the CTAF and everyone was using 25. When I asked about the TFR I was told it had moved far enough away from 25 to allow its use. Because of this; and because other traffic was using 25; I chose to land on 25. Because I couldn't see the TFR; though; it's possible I briefly penetrated it while on my base and final approach legs.




Synopsis: SR22 pilot believes he may have entered a firefighting TFR while on base and final for Runway 25 at AUN. The existence of the TFR was confirmed with FSS but the TFR would not display on the aircraft MFD.
Date: 201704
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 20
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: PA-30 Twin Comanche
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Landing
ATC / advisory: CTAF ZZZ
Aircraft component: Main Gear
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Commercial
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Ground Event / Encounter Ground Strike - Aircraft
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: The landing gear of the Piper PA-30 collapsed upon landing. Upon gear extension while on a five (5) mile final; the green gear down light was observed. At the one (1) mile mark on the final approach I again observed the green gear down light. Once over the threshold I again observed the green gear down light and visually checked the nose gear via a mirror mounted on the left engine inboard cowling. Upon executing the landing in mildly rough air; the airplane touched down; bounced slightly; then settled softly back on the runway at which point the gear collapsed. Upon exiting the airplane; I briefly looked at the gear motor assembly beneath the floor between the front two seats and noticed that a portion of the airframe supporting the gear motor assembly appeared to have been torn away.




Synopsis: PA-30 pilot reported the landing gear collapsed during the landing roll even though the green light indicated gear down and locked.
Date: 202008
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Q400
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Hydraulic System
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: During initial descent into ZZZ from ZZZ1; the #1 HYD ISO VLV and Inboard Roll Spoilers caution lights illuminated. We then began running the #1 HYD ISO VLV E&A checklist while the Captain assumed the radios. While running the checklist; the #1 HYD QTY dropped down to 20% and slowly ran down to zero; but the HYD pressure remained adequate. We requested a hold with ATC and decided to request priority handling. When the caution lights extinguished; we then ran the #1 HYD QTY LOW Checklist in the E&A checklist. Once all checklists were completed and all parties were informed; we then proceeded to ZZZ to land. We opened up the Flap Power caution checklist in case our flaps did not extend. We made sure to configure early; in case the flaps did not deploy; and because the flaps were going to operate slower than usual. We were able to land without incident; and taxi to the gate with minimal normal breaking and the use of the emergency break. We had crash fire rescue and a tug standing by in case we needed any assistance.  As stated in event narrative.




Synopsis: Q400 First Officer reported loss of Hydraulic System 1 Fluid Quantity resulted in a precautionary landing.
Date: 201701
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: SDL.Airport, AZ
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Embraer Legacy 450/500
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B PHX
ATC / advisory: TRACON P50
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Check Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict Airborne Conflict
Detector: Automation Aircraft RA
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure
Primary problem: Airspace Structure

Narrative: We were clear to maintain 5;000 ft due to a visual airplane restricted to 4;000 ft. That traffic continued climbing to 4;800 ft and we had an RA. We climbed and advised ATC of the evasive maneuver.




Synopsis: Embraer Legacy pilot reported a traffic conflict on approach to SDL which resulted in an RA. They took evasive action and notified ATC.
Date: 201404
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Icing; Thunderstorm
Light: Night
Aircraft: Regional Jet 700 ER/LR (CRJ700)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Air Data Computer
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation - Speed All Types
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Aircraft Equipment Problem Dissipated; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; Flight Crew Diverted; General Declared Emergency; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors; Weather
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: At FL370 cruise received 'EFIS Comp Mon' caution with IAS and ALT flags on both left and right PFD's. Airspeed was indicating a decrease in speed approaching 200 knots. At this time left PFD did not have high speed or low speed 'tapes' present. Right PFD had both high and low speed 'tapes' displayed and converging. We began a descent and the airspeed continued to decrease with climb power set. The stick shaker activated in the descent with climb power set. The 'standby' instrument was also flagged and unreliable. During this event we encountered autopilot disconnect; rudder limit fault; mach trim disconnect; stall fail; and an anti-ice duct warning followed by an anti-ice caution.   Company Dispatch was contacted via SELCAL; emergency declared and we diverted to ZZZ without further issue.   1). The left and right PFD IAS and ALT flags cleared themselves while in the descent approximately at FL200 and appeared to be reliable at that time. The Standby instrument IAS flag never cleared and was present upon landing.  2). The QRH did not contain any solutions/guidance to the IAS/ALT situation since all three pitot systems were affected.  3). Upon landing; a contract Mechanic inspected the pitot system water traps and reported verbally to me that no water was present. The following day he stated that water was found; purged; and the system was signed off in the AML.

Callback: The reporter indicates that pitch and power were used to descend and maintain a safe flying speed. He does not recall if this procedure was taught at his current employer or a previous company.



Synopsis: CRJ700 Captain experiences an 'EFIS Comp Mon' caution with IAS and ALT flags on both left and right PFD's at FL370. In a descent with climb power set; stick shaker is activated and at the same time the standby instrument is noted to be flagged. Numerous other failures are indicated during the descent. Passing FL200 the left and right pitot static systems return to normal and the flight diverts to a suitable airport.
Date: 202106
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: PA-28 Cherokee/Archer/Dakota/Pillan/Warrior
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class G ZZZ
Second aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Distraction
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Flight Crew
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Weather was very good; a few scattered clouds at 6;000 feet with no real ceiling; visibility was over 6 miles. I was north of the field and called my position at 10 miles. I heard some aircraft that were landing and taking off and was looking for them. About 2 miles north I think I recall one of the aircraft declaring crosswind for [Runway] XX and was still looking for him. I got a little distracted with setting up for the downwind and my visual search was a little interrupted. I still could not make visual contact and thought maybe the other aircraft was close to base or had left the pattern. I called entering downwind [Runway] XX and the other aircraft responded that they were on downwind as well. At that point I responded that I would leave the pattern and circle and re-enter. It turns out the other aircraft was just below me and I couldn't see them. A later conversation with the pilot after we landed was that he saw me just above him probably less than 100 feet and pitched his plane down just as I turned out. I normally won't enter the pattern or will leave the pattern if I don't have visual contact with other known aircraft; but maybe cause of other distraction I did not this time.




Synopsis: PA-28 pilot reported taking evasive action to avoid a mid air collision with an undetected aircraft during approach to a non-towered airport.