elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201304
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Tower, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skylane 182/RG Turbo Skylane/RG
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Oil Filler Cap
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness; Time Pressure; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Excursion Runway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I had flown...with a pilot friend to pick up a plane from an A&P Mechanic. When I arrived; I checked the oil level since I had just performed an oil and filter change the day before. This was its first flight since. The oil appeared to be a quart low and I added a quart. The other pilot had departed in his plane. I received clearance for departure and taxied.... There was no evidence of a mechanical problem during this time. I took off under normal conditions with full power. Seconds after lift off; the windshield become obscured with fluid and I realized the oil cap was not secured. I immediately told Tower that I was aborting the takeoff and descended to the runway. I landed before the threshold at the end of [the runway]; but had too much speed to stop and continued onto the grass for about 100 yards or less. There was no damage to the plane and I entered Taxiway Sierra and shut down the engine. The oil cap was not put on the engine. I clearly realize now that I was rushing because my friend had left and should have made a final walk around before entering the plane.




Synopsis: C182 pilot took off without securing the oil filler cap; descended back to the runway when oil covered the windscreen; and ran off the end of the runway onto a grass overrun.
Date: 201407
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: SFO.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class B SFO
ATC / advisory: TRACON NCT; Tower SFO
Aircraft component: MCP
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Confusion
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Aircraft
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Out of 8;000 for 6;000 (set in MCP) Captain was given approach clearance.  He tried to begin the descent with the autopilot coupled but was unable to get the FMA out of altitude hold.  Captain tried to enter Vertical Speed (V/S) and I think another mode.  The Captain disengaged the autopilot; began descent; and asked me to get the MCP/FMA into V/S.  I rolled the MCP to 5;700 and engaged V/S.  I believe it went to 1;300 because he was descending at that rate manually when V/S was engaged.  While this was happening the Captain lost sight of traffic we were following.  I was trying to look ahead left to find the traffic.  Captain asked me to arm the approach.  I armed the approach mode and queried about MCP altitude.  We set 0.  I tried again to find traffic and while looking we got a low altitude advisory from Tower.  Captain had leveled the plane and I reported level to Tower.  Captain joined the glidepath and recovered to safe operation.  The remainder of the approach and landing were uneventful.




Synopsis: B737 First Officer reports as pilot not flying; the inability of the Captain to initiate descent with the autopilot engaged during the FMS Bridge Visual to SFO. The MCP altitude is set to zero and the autopilot engaged to continue descent. Descent below charted altitude results in a low altitude alert from the Tower.
Date: 201206
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B757-200
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Escape Slide
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
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; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Just after rotation we got EICAS message 'emerg doors'; underneath it were two additional messages that appeared to indicate 'over wing slides'. They were only illuminated for two to three seconds. Due to the critical nature of this phase of flight and short duration of EICAS lights; we were not able to confirm which doors were indicated. Emergency doors checklist was accomplished and return to [departure airport]. We landed overweight (208;000 LBS) as we could not be certain that overwing slides would not deploy in flight.




Synopsis: A B757-200 Captain reported receiving an EICAS alert for cabin over wing doors and associated slides shortly after takeoff. They returned to departure airport for maintenance attention.
Date: 201202
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: BVY.Airport, MA
Flight conditions: IMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Citation X (C750)
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class D BVY
ATC / advisory: Tower BVY
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Other / Unknown
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Chart Or Publication
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We were set up for the LOC 16 at BVY; and at approximately 15 miles from the approach course the Controller announced a new ATIS; and that BVY was 'advertising' the RNAV 16; which we accepted. Inside the final approach fix Beverly Tower called us with a 'low altitude alert'; followed by an EGPWS 'too low; terrain' warning. We immediately executed a missed approach. We then requested; and were given; the LOC 16 approach. Again inside the final approach fix Beverly Tower announced a 'low altitude alert'; but no EGPWS alert. We landed normally from that approach. After landing and deplaning our passenger we realized that we had set minimums of 580 FT for the LOC16 approach; and during a time compressed briefing for the RNAV16 we set LPV minimums of 360 FT instead of LNAV minimums of 600 FT. We're use to looking at the minimums to the left of the approach for ILS's since we mostly do those approaches. The LNAV minimums are located to the right for the RNAV approaches. In the future we need to do a more thorough briefing of the RNAV approaches; and be sure to use the LNAV minimums. After landing we asked the Tower about the second low altitude warning and they said that happens frequently for the approaches to Runway 16.


Second narrative: [Narrative #2 contained no additional information.]


Synopsis: A CE-750 flight crew executed a missed approach due to a low altitude alert from the Tower and an EGPWS terrain warning while on the RNAV 16 approach to BVY. A second approach was successful utilizing the LOC 16 IAP although a second low altitude alert was issued by the Tower. During a debriefing the flight crew determined they had utilized the lower MDA for an LPV vice LNAV equipped aircraft.
Date: 201710
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZNY.ARTCC, NY
Aircraft: No Aircraft
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: Routine Inspection
Contributing factors: Staffing; Manuals; Company Policy
Primary problem: Company Policy

Narrative: I was required to work a shift that went past 10 hours. I was made aware today that the Supervisor rolled back my sign out to show that it looked as I did not work more then 10 hours. I recommend the Supervisor should manage the shift properly. I should be paid properly for the shift worked.




Synopsis: ZNY Center Controller reported they were required to work more than 10 hours which is a violation of work rules.
Date: 201205
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: 72S.Airport, WA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: Helicopter
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZSE
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: No Specific Anomaly Occurred All Types
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Chart Or Publication; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: There are four fairly new towers in the area of N 47 degrees 09' 23'; W 117 degrees 20' 50' that are approximately 3;150 FT MSL and 350 FT AGL. They are lighted and aligned east to west; but the western most tower did not have a light on the top; only half way up. These towers are not charted on the Seattle VFR Sectional and no reference to them could be found in NOTAMS.




Synopsis: A helicopter pilot reported a line of four fairly new uncharted towers near 47' 09' 23'N 117 20' 30'W oriented east/west at about 3;150 FT MSL; about 350 FT AGL. All but the western most towers are correctly lighted.
Date: 201209
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Thunderstorm
Aircraft: A320
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
Aircraft component: Hydraulic System Lines; Connectors; Fittings
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; General Declared Emergency; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Approximately 45 minutes into flight; ECAM appeared for Green Hydraulic system low pressure. We had lost all hydraulic fluid and performed the ECAM then the FM. The Captain gave me the airplane and ATC while he talked to Dispatch and Maintenance Control. The decision was made to declare an emergency and divert. The flight attendants were briefed and we reviewed the manual gear extension and performance problems for loss of Green system. Captain took control of the airplane for a normal descent and approach. [The Captain] configured the aircraft early for a visual approach. Smooth touchdown as we were at max landing weight; with a roll off the runway at the high speed. We were met by Crash Fire Rescue equipment and Maintenance with a tug. Gear pins were installed and we were towed to the gate under escort.




Synopsis: A320 First Officer experiences a Green Hydraulic system failure in cruise due to loss of fluid. Maintenance is contacted and the decision is made to divert to a suitable alternate. Uneventful landing and tow to the gate.
Date: 201205
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Night
Aircraft: B767 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Oxygen System/Crew
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
Detector: Person Ground Personnel
When detected: Other During Maintenance
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Manuals; Human Factors; Company Policy; Chart Or Publication
Primary problem: Manuals

Narrative: I am filing this report as an informational item. An Aircraft Maintenance Technician (AMT) was assigned to change an oxygen (O2) bottle on a B767 aircraft on Overnight Maintenance. He went to the Illustrated Parts Catalog (IPC) and O2 BOTTLE XX12 was listed as a replacement bottle. The AMT then returned the bottle to Stores; at which time he was told that BOTTLE XX12 was a B737 [NextGen] aircraft only use bottle; per Maintenance Control. The AMT stated he used the IPC and the replacement bottle was the proper Company Part Number (CPN). Maintenance Control needs to be corrected to show either it can be used on B767's and; or; make the BOTTLE XX12 a B737 aircraft only bottle.

Callback: Reporter stated his Air Carrier had three different Part Numbers (P/N) for oxygen (O2) bottles used on their B767 aircraft. The replacement O2 bottle installed by the Technician was the first number showing on their Illustrated Parts Catalog (IPC) list as 'Effective' for a replacement bottle on their B767s. However; the replacement O2 Bottle is a carbon composite type oxygen bottle; also used on their NextGen B737s; is six inches shorter than the original B767 steel O2 bottles and the cylinder mounts for the composite bottles are different. Reporter stated they have more steel O2 bottles at their Station than carbon composite O2 bottles; but since the first Part Number (P/N) listed as 'Effective' was the composite bottle; Mechanics have been using them as replacements. Their Engineering Department noted that was not the intent and changed the listing priority of 'Effective' P/Ns in their IPC to have the steel bottles used first; if available.Reporter stated he did not know if the shorter; composite crew O2 bottle had equivalent capacity as the steel type that was the original type bottle installed.



Synopsis: A Line Mechanic reports about the confusion involving replacement of B767 crew oxygen (O2) steel bottles with B737 NextGen carbon composite bottles that are also listed in their Illustrated Parts Catalog (IPC) as 'Effective' replacement bottles.
Date: 201208
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: SFO.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-700
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ramp SFO
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Confusion; Communication Breakdown
Second reporter function: First Officer
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Ground Incursion Taxiway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: On push back in SFO we received clearance to push from Ramp Control. Our ramp agents started pushing us all the way onto an active taxiway. We questioned the Ramp Agent; who was hard to hear; the reason for pushing us on the taxiway and he advised us it was because of an aircraft trying to come in the alley. We had no clearance to push on the active taxiway. We switched to Ground and apologized for the push. No conflict with another aircraft except Company airplane had to wait for a minute.


Second narrative: We were ready for push out of gate at SFO. We contacted Ramp Control and were told we were cleared to push. The Ramp Controller never mentioned anything about traffic behind us or which way to push. Captain told Push Crew that they were cleared to push and push began. Tug Driver mentioned there was another carrier's jet behind us and then began to push us. We never told him to push in that direction; he just did it to avoid traffic. We figured he knew what he was doing. He kept pushing us and the next thing we knew we were past the non-movement area and being pushed onto an active taxiway. I mentioned this to the Captain and he asked the Tug Driver something. I did not hear that conversation; and Captain said he did not understand Tug Driver either. Knowing this; on radio two I switched to SFO Ground and we had created a jam. I called Ground and apologized to them telling them we had no idea we would end up on this taxiway. She told us to hurry since Company and other aircraft were waiting for us to move. I don't know what kind of instruction is given to Push Crews at SFO; but we can't cross into a movement area out of the gate; and we assumed they knew that. We let the Tug Driver get us into a bad position and by the time we realized what was going on; we were halfway onto the active taxiway. Ramp Control might have been confused; busy; or something since they cleared us to push.


Synopsis: Air Carrier being pushed back by 'Ramp Control' inadvertently entered an active taxiway without ATC approval.
Date: 201409
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Aircraft: B767 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Hydraulic System Lines; Connectors; Fittings
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Illness / Injury
Detector: Person Flight Attendant; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; General Physical Injury / Incapacitation
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Flight was delayed approximately two hours for an engine change.  This was an ETOPS flight that required an in flight verification.  At top of climb; crew noticed that the left hydraulic system quantity was .71rf.  It appeared to be losing .01 every 2-3 minutes.  Crew contacted Dispatch and Maintenance Control.  Maintenance Control became aware that this was an ETOPS verification flight and agreed that the aircraft did not pass verification and would not be released ETOPS.  The quantity continued to slowly decrease albeit at a decreased rate.  The lowest reading in the left system was .56rf. Coordination between Maintenance and Dispatch resulted in a decision to land at ZZZ because it was the optimum station to take care of crew; passengers; and airplane.   After coordinating with ATC; diversion to ZZZ was commenced.  The flight crew then became aware of a flight attendant injured by a cart and a flight attendant who had a history of DVT and was complaining of possible blood clots.  As a precaution paramedics were advised to meet the flight in ZZZ for the two flight attendants.  During divert the Diversion guide was consulted and since we would be landing overweight we dumped remaining 6000 lbs from the center wing.  All checklists were accomplished and aircraft was recovered into ZZZ with normal approach and landing.  Aircraft landed approximately 2500 lbs over structural landing weight.




Synopsis: B767 First Officer reports being delayed for an engine change and once enroute the left hydraulic system is found to be losing fluid and not suitable for an ETOPS flight. A diversion is planned for the hydraulic issues and due to one Flight Attendant being injured by meal cart and another with blood clots.
Date: 201907
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 145 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Second aircraft: Citation X (C750)
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Ground Conflict; Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure; Airport
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Visual approach XXR; our Vapp was 125kts and we checked in with tower and were informed traffic landing XY (intersecting runway) will go behind us. We see the aircraft; Aircraft Y doing S-turns. The TCAS in our airplane showed they were 100' below us when we were around 700'. Tower was being quite standoffish about how the spacing was developing. At this point; Aircraft Y asked how the spacing looked. Tower said 'It should work' and Aircraft Y started doing more S-turns as it crossed the river at an estimated 500'. As they made their turn back to the runway they appeared to be at the same altitude as us and their airplane wasn't moving in relation to us; the telltale sign of being on converging courses. At 200' I called for and initiated the go-around. Aircraft Y landed below us. We resequenced back for XXR. When we checked in with tower; we heard them telling another [company] plane that s-turns were recommended for landing behind company on XXR. On the TCAS; they were 200' below us. Tower told us that they will resequence if needed. At 400';they initiated their go-around and we landed XXR.ATC advised of conflicting traffic then the crew initiated the go-around. Tight spacing from ATC on intersecting runways and our abnormally low Vref of 120 kts; maybe not expected by ATC.There is a big risk running these intersecting arrivals. If both planes go-around; they will be on a collision course airborne with no time to react. Tower should be sending planes around by 500-1000' so that if one plane is instructed to go-around and the other one is beginning its own go-around; there will be a conflict. By having one go-around early; this is prevented.




Synopsis: E145 Captain reported a go around due to conflicting traffic landing on an intersecting runway.