elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201408
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Cessna Citation Mustang (C510)
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Turbine Engine
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Inflight Shutdown; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: I was cruising at FL400 approximately 40 miles west of ZZZ; lost the #1 engine. Excessive vibration and noise and lost power. Shut the engine down and reported to Center that I had lost an engine and need to descend from FL400. They immediately cleared me to FL240. I then secured the affected engine. I was then asked where I would like to go; whether on to destination or elsewhere. We identified ZZZ as the best choice and I was cleared there. I was given a choice of runways by Approach. I landed with no problems and taxied to the ramp. I did; however begin taxiing without calling ground for the first few seconds. I then contacted ground on [the] taxiway. No physical damage was observed on the #1 engine. When Cessna Service truck arrived; they removed the cowling and observed no damage. The thought at first was that the bearings in the starter/generator had failed; but once we spun the starter; it was obvious something had come loose in the compressor section. They then pulled the drain plug and found metal shavings on the magnet. It was determined that the engine needed to be removed and sent to Pratt & Whitney for overhaul.




Synopsis: CE510 pilot experiences an engine failure at FL400. The engine is shut down and the flight diverts to a suitable airport. Maintenance discovers metal shavings in the engine oil and grinding noises are heard when the engine is rotated with the starter.
Date: 201204
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B757-200
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: Indicating and Warning - Hydraulics
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Troubleshooting; Training / Qualification; Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; General Maintenance Action; General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Center Hydraulic Low Quantity indication down to .23; accomplished QRH resulting in turning off Center pumps. Later R-Yaw Damper light came on. QRH had us turn OFF R-Yaw Damper. Declared Emergency as per FOM and had emergency equipment standing by. Short final turned Center Hydraulic back on as per QRH. Landing normal; rollout normal; released emergency trucks and taxied to gate with a truck to follow. Inspection found no leak a potential transmitter or indication problem.




Synopsis: A B757's Center Hydraulic Quantity gauge dropped to .23 so the QRH was completed; an emergency declared and the flight diverted. A faulty Quantity Gauge was found.
Date: 202012
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Other / Unknown
Reporter qualification: Other Load Controller
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Hazardous Material Violation; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Ground Personnel
When detected: Pre-flight; Routine Inspection
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: The cargo shipment 016-62127472 for Aircraft X was found with one box out of ninety-nine (slac count) containing Lithium Ion Battery with UN3481 sticker attached. The shipment was not declared on the MAWB (Master Airway Bill) as per PI-967 with the language 'Lithium ion batteries in compliance with section II of PI 967' in the 'Nature and Quantity of Goods' section of the MAWB (Master Airway Bill). As per the packing list attached to the outside of the package; this shipment is a wireless Bluetooth headset from; model RLN6490B. I tried looking for the owner manual to get the battery type and voltage; but could not fine it on line.The entire shipment has been placed on hold until this is resolved.




Synopsis: Air Carrier Loading personnel reported Hazmat cargo of ninety-nine Lithium Ion batteries scheduled for transport removed from flight due to incomplete DG documentation provided by shipper.
Date: 201412
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: A319
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: FMS/FMC
Component problem: Design
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: MCDU indicated flight plans and winds were auto loading for unknown reasons. While loading the flight plan I noticed the secondary [route] had a company route that had somehow auto loaded. The winds uplink had also auto loaded. I called Dispatch to see if there was a policy or procedural change that we had not been told about. Our dispatcher and the supervisor were not aware of any changes and could not explain why this was happening to our aircraft. We were conferenced with a chief pilot and it was revealed by him that a test program was being conducted to auto load the flight plan and winds when the PDC is received. However it was not yet released; he didn't know why this was happening prematurely. Another concern was; had the company flight plan 'auto loaded' in the secondary on the previous leg and bumped out our single-engine return procedure without us knowing; could have created more problems for a crew dealing with and emergency. We loaded the MCDU with no more problems. Any kind of new procedure; even in the test phase; needs to be communicated and staffed thoroughly with all the concerned or potentially affected departments. A 'Heads up' was all we needed to deal with this situation instead of seeing the aircraft do something unusual and utter the proverbial airbus phrase 'why is it doing this'; waking up a chief pilot [early in the morning] and causing a delay.




Synopsis: While loading the FMGC during preflight; an A319 Captain noticed the secondary flight plan had a company route that had somehow auto loaded. The winds uplink had also auto loaded. A call to the Duty manager indicates that a test program to perform automatic uplinks when the PDC is requested was in the planning stages; but should not be occurring at this time.
Date: 201203
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Dash 8-300
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: Hydraulic System Lines; Connectors; Fittings
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Distraction; Time Pressure; Training / Qualification; Workload
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; General Declared Emergency; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: We experienced a complete loss of the #2 hydraulic system quantity in cruise flight. This occurred at FL190 shortly after leveling. We observed the master caution light illuminate; and an associated #2 ENG HYD PUMP caution light was illuminated. I looked at the hydraulic gauges and noticed zero #2 hydraulic pressure; and zero #2 hydraulic quantity. Shortly thereafter; the #2 RUD HYD; RUD PRESS; and RUD FULL PRESS caution lights also illuminated. I instructed the pilot flying to remain below 200 KIAS. I then ran the #2 HYDRAULIC SYSTEM FAILURE CHECKLIST with a quantity of zero. I then contacted my Dispatcher; and we agreed to return to the departure airport. I declared an emergency with ATC; and we received our new clearance to return to the departure airport. At this time; I spoke to the Flight Attendant and informed her of our condition; and that we'd be returning to the departure airport. I told her it would be normal landing; but the Airfield Rescue and Fire Fighters (ARFF) vehicles would be escorting our plane to the gate. I made a PA to the passengers. After all communications were complete; the First Officer transferred the flight controls to me so he could review the ALTERNATE LANDING GEAR EXTENSION checklist that he would be performing. I remained pilot flying for the remainder of the flight. We landed uneventfully. Once clear of the runway; we terminated the Emergency condition with ATC. The ARFF vehicles followed us to the gate; found no hazards after engine shutdown; and I told them they could clear. Maintenance informed me there was a blown o-ring on a hydraulic line.




Synopsis: An 'O' ring on a DHC8-300's Number Two Hydraulic system failed in flight causing the loss of all hydraulic fluid and system pressure so an emergency was declared and the flight returned to the departure airport.
Date: 201408
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: SAN.Airport, CA
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 170/175 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class B SAN
ATC / advisory: Tower SAN
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Bird / Animal
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: A few seconds after takeoff while climbing through approximately 500-800 FT AGL the First Officer and I saw a flock of birds right in our path. I quickly determined that the birds were very large seagulls and we needed to deviate from our standard climb path. In my opinion the size of these birds warranted a relatively aggressive maneuver to avoid severe damage to the aircraft. Both altitude and speed permitted; so I banked the aircraft to the right. The flock split; 2 seagulls went low left 2 or 3 went high right. In the initial bank we did get an oral warning 'Bank Angle' from the aircraft. Once we were clear of the flock I rolled wings level and returned to a standard climb profile. Both the First Officer and I agreed that we did avoid the birds and that continuing was acceptable and safe.




Synopsis: EMB-170 Captain reports taking evasive action shortly after takeoff to avoid a flock of seagulls. No bird strikes occur and the flight continues to destination.
Date: 201702
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Hercules (C-130)/L100/382
Operator: Military
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Landing
Aircraft component: Compass (HSI/ETC)
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Military
Reporter function: Instructor; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Landing Without Clearance; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: I was the Aircraft Commander Pilot in Command (PIC) observing a student instructor pilot provide training to another pilot. We had a dual compass malfunction that led to the crew landing on the wrong runway.En route we noticed a heading error. Our aircraft has two compasses. In the normal position #1 feeds the Pilot HSI and the #2 feeds the Copilot side. Both were malfunctioning but we finally determined that #2 had completely failed; and #1 needed to be adjusted. The compasses are easily adjusted in flight once a known heading is determined. We corrected the heading issue on #1 and switched to where both HSI's were fed from the #1 compass. Our problem appeared to be resolved and we continued the training flight.Over the next 45 minutes to an hour the #1 compass began to slowly drift. During a visual to Runway XY is where we had our issue. Thinking we were set up for Runway XY with confirmation from both pilot and copilot instrumentation (both were selected to the #1 compass) we mistakenly setup for Runway XZ. The pilots called tower requesting touch and go on Runway XY. Tower cleared us 'for the option' on Runway XY. Thinking we were on Runway XY we actually landed on Runway XZ. Shortly after takeoff tower called and asked which runway we were wanting to work on today because they had cleared us for Runway XY; not Runway XZ. At the time we were climbing out on runway heading with both HSI's showing a heading near 250. After some initial confusion we compared the HSI's to the backup magnetic compass and realized what happened.Fortunately we were the only ones training [there] that day; and there were no issues preventing a safe landing on Runway XZ. Tower was willing to give us either runway for touch and go practice; they simply wanted to know which one we were requesting. After we realized the #1 compass was drifting continued to update it on a regular basis. Had it not been a nice VMC day our situation could have been much worse.




Synopsis: C130 Instructor Pilot reported they landed on the wrong runway when they experienced dual compass malfunction.
Date: 201908
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: LTAA.ARTCC, FO
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B777 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Cruise
Aircraft component: GPS & Other Satellite Navigation
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Confusion
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Inflight Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Airspace Structure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: No GPS position and ADS-B OUT L.




Synopsis: B-777 Captain reported experiencing GPS jamming resulting in loss of ADS-B and GPS positioning information.
Date: 201506
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: PSP.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class D PSP
ATC / advisory: Tower PSP
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Situational Awareness; Fatigue
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter Unstabilized Approach
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure; Airport; Chart Or Publication
Primary problem: Chart Or Publication

Narrative: I (Captain) had previously flown this approach to 13R with no issues or runway closures. The First Officer (FO) was flying and we briefed and set up the 13R visual approach. We noticed the temporary runway; which is taxiway C; however; the chart says that pilots mistake taxiway C for runway 13R. So we were obviously confused. On the downwind leg we were cleared for a visual approach. Rolling out on final and looking at 13R we see a lighted 'X' and look left at 13L and see a lighted 'X'. We had to aggressively maneuver to land on the correct runway (taxiway C). This was the 2nd leg of day 3 on a 4 day trip with 2 legs a day. It was late and we were tired and went to the hotel. That night there was an iPad update that we both downloaded. The 1st flight out in the morning I found the F4 message about the temporary runway; The FO and I discussed this and we both agreed this info was not on our flight plan the day before. We also don't remember the ATIS detailing the closure. The airport diagram change was [two days prior].This is an unusual situation that needs added information to the flight plan; or dispatch contact; or tower controller input. Both of us are Southern California flyers and were very familiar with PSP.




Synopsis: Captain reported contradictory and confusing information contained in the PSP approach charts and the airport diagram regarding the use of Taxiway C as temporary Runway 13R. This resulted in an unstable approach while correcting to the temporary runway.
Date: 201311
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: MEM.Airport, TN
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Turbulence
Aircraft: MD-11
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class E M03
ATC / advisory: TRACON M03
Second aircraft: Heavy Transport
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Speed All Types; Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: Minimum spacing takeoff behind company aircraft; they were assigned a heading and we were assigned the BBKNG RNAV. Encountered wake turbulence and airspeed fluctuated above and below 250 KTS while below 10;000 FT. Took immediate corrective action; ATC turned us to a heading of 180.


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


Synopsis: MD-11 flight crew reported wake turbulence encounter on departure that resulted in airspeed fluctuations above 250 KTS.
Date: 202106
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: LCI.Airport, NH
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Light Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class G ZBW
ATC / advisory: CTAF ZZZ
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Other unknown
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Chart Or Publication; Procedure; Airport
Primary problem: Chart Or Publication

Narrative: I was assigned this hazard report. This unidentified report brought to light a dangerous change in procedures at the LCI (Laconia; New Hampshire) airport. Pilot report: At LCI; Jeppsen airport diagram stipulates right-hand traffic for Runway 26; while permanent NOTAM for the airport states left-hand traffic for that Runway. The published pattern altitude for turbine aircraft is 2045 [feet] MSL - an unsafe altitude to clear rising terrain south of Runway 26 on a left downwind. 3;000 feet is a much better altitude - but be advised that after clearing the last of the terrain; you must fly a 5-mile final to descend the 2;500 feet to the Runway. The Runway 26 PAPI has a 3.08% inclination. The Jeppsen chart is incorrect. We contacted the FBO over the radio during arrival to ask what the REAL traffic pattern to fly for Runway 26 is; and they confirmed it is left traffic. I called the airport manager and he explained that he inquired with the FAA about changing Runway 26 to left traffic pattern. The FAA took it as a request to change and ended up changing Runway 26 to left traffic. After communicating this with the FAA; they are requesting a different form to be filled out by the manager. In the meantime; a NOTAM has been issued for left traffic for Runway 26. A NOTAM shows until permanent and at a normal traffic pattern altitude of 2;045 feet on a left pattern for Runway 26; you would fly extremely close to a ski hill at 2;382 feet. After noting this; we have put a note into our flight ops manual that will notify any crew that right traffic or a higher traffic pattern altitude for left traffic is authorized by the airport manager. I filed a report on the FAA safety hotline.I believe the traffic pattern should be switched back to right traffic.




Synopsis: Twin Engine Turbojet Captain reported the Jeppsen chart traffic pattern direction for Runway 26 does not agree with the permanent Notam; R vs L. The Captain also states the traffic pattern altitude is too low for a jet aircraft using the NOTAM pattern; Left.