elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201203
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: TEB.Airport, NJ
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 15
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Challenger 300
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class E N90
ATC / advisory: TRACON N90
Second aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude
Detector: Automation Aircraft RA
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure; Airspace Structure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: New York Approach Control cleared us to turn to the initial approach fix for the VOR Runway 24 approach in TEB as well as a descent to 4;000 FT. The crew started the left turn and descent towards the fix; mid way through the turn the Controller advised the crew of 'unverified VFR' traffic at twelve to one o'clock. Within a few seconds of the ATC warning; the aircraft TCAS sounded the initial traffic advisory. The crew began leveling the aircraft's descent however the VFR target keep climbing and turning towards us. Seconds after the initial advisory the TCAS sounded a RA climb command. The crew applied max thrust and began a RA climb to 5;400 FT. During this time the crew informed ATC of the RA and associated climb. The Controller then issued a descent clearance to 3;000 FT. The crew again informed ATC of the RA climb and then complied with the ATC clearance to 3;000 FT. A visual approach was completed to Runway 24 in TEB without further incident. It is the opinion of the crew that the problem was caused by the VFR flight climbing into busy airspace used by countless aircraft in the New York area without first making contact with ATC. The problem was further compounded by the controller on duty issuing a late traffic advisory. It is clear that the Controller had lost his situational awareness. This resulted in two aircraft on the same frequency responding to RA's in separate events within a few seconds of each other.




Synopsis: CL30 Captain experiences a TCAS RA while being vectored for a visual approach at TEB. ATC had reported the traffic just prior to the TA. An evasive climb is initiated until clear of conflict. A separate TCAS event was heard on the same frequency prior to switching; indicating to the reporter that the Controller was not paying attention.
Date: 201204
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: BWI.Airport, MD
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: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: We were filed via the SWANN3 departure; DQO transition. As is commonly the case; BWI was departing on Runway 28. I selected Runway 28 and the SWANN3 departure; DQO transition in the MCDU but noticed that it was entered into the MCDU flight plan as merely Runway 28; a discontinuity; and then DQO and the rest of our filed route. However; the SWANN3 departure for JETS requires a left turn to a heading of 150 degrees at the BAL 3 DME. The A319 is generally considered to be a turbojet; so that is how the departure should be coded in the navigation database. Instead; the departure is coded for the PROPS departure; which is just to fly runway heading. We worked around it by entering the BAL/285/3 fix as the first fix after the runway; and then flew the departure in HDG mode; using the PDB01 place/bearing/distance pseudo-waypoint as a marker to remind us to make the turn. We also entered BAL as in the RAD NAV page; and monitored the DME on the ND to identify exactly when to turn. The reason I'm making this report is because if a pilot trusts the navigation database to be correctly coded (as it usually is) and fails to review the paper or EFB version of the departure; he or she will be unaware of the incorrect coding; and is likely to continue straight ahead past the three DME point; potentially infringing on the restricted airspace off the departure end of the runway (as often happens to those flying the TERPZ departure; HAFNR transition; who fail to select the transition correctly). This is 'a violation waiting to happen'. I presume an error was made in the coding of the navigation database; where the engineer doing the coding incorrectly entered the PROP departure instructions rather than the JET instructions.




Synopsis: An A319 First Officer discovered that the SWANN3 departure from Runway 28 at BWI does not include the turn to 150 degrees at three DME when inserted into the MCDU.
Date: 201405
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ORD.Airport, IL
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class B ORD
ATC / advisory: TRACON C90
Aircraft component: Altitude Hold/Capture
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Human factors: Distraction; Confusion
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Undershoot; Deviation - Altitude Crossing Restriction Not Met; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: At the gate we set the wrong altitude for our departure clearance. It should have been 5;000. 4;000 was set for our initial altitude and neither myself or the First Officer caught the error. No excuse. We simply made a mistake. After takeoff the First Officer checked in with Departure and told him we were climbing to 4;000. The Departure Controller read back our clearance to 4;000. When we leveled off at 4;000; the Controller asked who gave us that clearance and we replied it was entered in error. He cleared us to climb to 5;000. Our time at 4;000 was minimal (less than 30 seconds).




Synopsis: A B737 departed on the ORD8 and leveled at 4;000 FT instead of 5;000 FT because the neither pilot realized 4;000 FT was set as the initial level off altitude when it really was a crossing restriction.
Date: 201606
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZME.ARTCC, TN
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Widebody; Low Wing; 3 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class B MEM
Second aircraft: Widebody; Low Wing; 3 Turbojet Eng
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Descending on the BLUZZ1 RNAV arrival approx 10MN West of AXXEL encountered Wake Turbulence (Wing Tip) off a Widebody Transport ahead of us on the arrival. Aircraft rolled 20 deg right then 40 degs left; autopilot disconnected itself. Manually lowered nose recovered wings level and expedited descent to exit vorticies. Winds were 260/50 at altitude pretty much on the nose. Our Aircraft weighed approx 305K. Visually appeared other Aircraft was 10-15 miles ahead on the approach. Appeared to be a one-off incident. [In many] years of flying arrivals [I] have never seen a wake turbulence incident of this magnitude; all factors and rules seemed to have been complied with but still experienced vorticies and Aircraft upset. [Suggest] Greater spacing.


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


Synopsis: Widebody transport flight crew reported the aircraft rolled up to 40 degrees after encountering wake turbulence on arrival to MEM in trail of another wide body aircraft.
Date: 202011
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: A319
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Turbine Engine
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Rejected Takeoff; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Engine Fail/RTO (Rejected Takeoff) I was PF (Pilot Flying) holding short. After receiving a TO (takeoff) clearance from Tower; I taxied onto and began aligning with centerline. I advanced thrust levers to 1.05 EPR and slightly more before advancing TLs (throttle levers) to FLEX TO setting. As both engines spooled up and simultaneously the aircraft lurched hard to the left of the centerline; I noted an ECAS message accompanied with a ding. In Box 1 of EWD I saw ENG 1 Overspeed and immediately after I noted ENG 1 Fail. I rejected the TO and called 'My aircraft' bringing the aircraft to a stop on the runway. I immediately made a PA to remain seated; while assessing what condition the engine was in. My FO (First Officer) immediately made a call to ATC and had already retrieved the QRC. Together while determining what condition the engine was in; the FADEC started to attempt a relight and I decided to command my FO to select off on the Engine 1 master switch. Afterwards we completed the ECAM. With the engine shutdown and no indication of fire or severe damage I cleared the runway. After clearing the runway and brake set my FO reported the engine failure to the Tower Controller and I briefed the FAs (Flight Attendants). With the engine secure; no fire or severe damage; and a low speed RTO in my judgement I did not request ARF (Airport Rescue and Fire Fighting). After notifying the company and getting a gate we interrupted the flight and returned. At gate arrival my FO contacted Maintenance and I made a logbook entry. I would like to recognize FO for his proficiency and calm reaction to the event. Also my FAs remained calm and professional which I believe reassured our customers that their pilots had an unusual event fully under control. We made an aircraft swap and continued the flight [losing] not one passenger. Mechanical failure.


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


Synopsis: A319 flight crew experience an engine failure at beginning of takeoff roll; resulted in a low speed rejected takeoff.
Date: 201207
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Commander 114/A/B/TC
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Gear Extend/Retract Mechanism
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: [I] had a landing gear extension problem. No green or in transit light. Asked ATC to see if gear was down and they advised low pass and I complied. ATC said they could not see gear down. I departed the pattern to work on the issue. Despite efforts to lower gear no green lights or in transit light would come on. [I] used my emergency landing gear checklist and gear extended per the checklist. Heard the gear thumps and had 2 green for the mains. [I] slowed the airplane per checklist and around 85 KTS felt and heard nose gear drop. Had 3 green. On final called ATC and asked for visual on the gear. Was advised all three were down. Landed as slow as possible and it was a normal landing.After discussing the problem with maintenance personnel and knowing the gear issue was isolated by the circuit breaker I placarded the gear lever and the circuit breaker in case I got distracted during takeoff or landing and flew the airplane with the wheels down direct to my airport and landed normally.




Synopsis: When the normal landing gear extension system failed the pilot of a Commander 114 utilized the emergency extension procedure; was rewarded with three green lights; and landed safely.
Date: 202008
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Attendant; Person Flight Crew
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I removed my mask/facial covering upon boarding an empty aircraft and stowed my personal belongings in the cockpit. The B Flight Attendant asked why I wasn't wearing a mask in the cabin. (Again; the aircraft was empty; except for the six-person crew.) I stated it was not required when not in view of customers.  She said it was. I checked my manual updates and sure enough she was correct. I notified the Flight Attendant that I had seen the [update]. Flight departed on time and landed safely in ZZZ.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain self reported not following the latest update regarding face mask policy.
Date: 201502
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Night
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: CTAF ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: After pushback we had completed the after start checklist; I had just turned on the taxi light; along with the runway turnoff lights and called for 'Flaps 25'. As I was pushing the throttles up to move the jet for taxi and the jet was just starting to move; I noticed the tug that was used for pushback approaching the jet a high rate of speed. My first officer also noticed and I stopped the jet. Apparently the pushback crew was concerned that they had left the access panel open and they were coming back to verify that it was closed. Unfortunately we were in the process of taxiing for takeoff and were not expecting them to approach the jet while we were moving. This could have resulted in a serious accident had we both not been as vigilant as we were. We learned that operations had been trying to contact us so that the ramp crew could come out and verify that the access panel was closed; but due to non-tower operations we had one radio selected to ZZZ and the other radio selected to CTAF so we weren't monitoring company frequency as we normally would. In my opinion this event was caused solely by the ramp crew rushing to push us back so that they could go home. I've recently observed a pattern of unsafe activity by ramp personnel at this station. Last week we were approximately 40 minutes late pushing due to a late inbound airplane. During pushback the ramp crew was absolutely reckless in their pushback and they pushed us back at a very high rate of speed. I asked them to slow down but they continued a fast push and I was afraid they were going to jackknife the pushback tug at the end of they push they turned the jet so quickly with the tug just prior to the termination of the push back. This pattern of behavior is going to result in a serious; if not fatal accident if something is not done to slow these guys down and emphasize safe push backs. This issue was immediately brought to the attention of [station] operations right after it took place and I also notified my supervisor of the unsafe operation as well.




Synopsis: A B737 Captain reported improper and unsafe ground handling by ramp personnel.
Date: 201204
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: MDT.Airport, PA
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: MU-2B 60 Marquise
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class E MDT
ATC / advisory: TRACON MDT
Aircraft component: Transponder
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Transponder went off line after entering the IFR flight/system. Lost transponder 100% and was told to descend to 8;000 FT for a 'Tower to Tower' clearance. Clearance for us was FL220 and I queried why we could not go on at altitude. Harrisburg Controller said New York Center would not accept and required us thereafter to descend to 8;000 FT (from 9;000 FT) for remainder of the trip. I felt this would impede the trip and cancelled IFR at that point. Transponder remained intermittent for the remainder of the flight. We preceded VFR; with intermittent transponder on 1200 for remainder of trip. We remained clear of Airspace B; C; and D (including overflight); as well as special use airspace for remainder of trip with our intermittent transponder. Note that we have it now at an avionics shop for repair. I feel that; with an intermittent transponder and our being available as a primary target on an IFR flight plan; we should have been allowed to proceed on our IFR flight at altitude; with reporting of altitudes and distances as required by ATC for the route. Requiring turbine flights to go low because ATC does not want the extra workload could be a possible safety concern with fuel; speed of aircraft in low airspace; etc.




Synopsis: IFR MU2 with failed transponder was refused ATC service by ZNY at FL220; the pilot questioning ATC services.
Date: 201203
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 145 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Main Gear Tire
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; General Maintenance Action; General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Upon rotation; [we heard a] massive loud vibration that continued for awhile. Captain looks at me and says; 'That was probably a blown tire. We kept the gear down but completed after takeoff checklist and contacted Departure. Departure greeted us with a new altitude clearance and vector to the west. Captain informed them of the blown tire and requested vectors for flyby and return. We ran the QRH for blown tire; changed destination; sent ACARS message to Dispatch. On the flyby; Tower informed us the right inboard main was the blown tire. We informed them we would like to burn some fuel to lighten up. Further information received from ground operations inspecting the runway; led us to believe that we may have blown both right mains as well as had a brake lockup. We decided to call Maintenance with this information to see if they could offer any further guidance but were unable to reach them at 4;000 MSL. Dispatch informed us that SELCAL frequency was unmonitored so we requested a climb to contact Maintenance Control. Captain and I both agreed we wanted light; slow; and small amount of fuel for landing and agreed upon 1;000 LBS. After conversing with Maintenance; Tower; and ARF personnel; we commenced the final approach. Captain and I both agreed he should make the landing. Landing was executed perfectly and smoothly. Upon stopping the aircraft; we made sure the ARF personnel were at the plane; and evacuated with them helping the passengers off the aircraft. We; the crew; were the last off the plane. There was only one minor injury; that we only found out about later from the Flight Attendant. One lady slightly twisted her ankle while leaving the aircraft.




Synopsis: EMB145 First Officer describes a blown tire event at rotation and the subsequent return to their departure airport.