elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201706
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: CRQ.Tower, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; High Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class D CRQ
ATC / advisory: Tower CRQ
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Instructor; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Flight Engineer; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: ATC showing a lack of professional decorum; being disrespectful and condescending to inexperienced pilots on tower frequency. This could become distracting and could be yet another link in the chain of events that leads to an accident. Tower getting creative in their expectations of pilots at CRQ; placing expectations that go way beyond those of FAR's or AIM guidance at the time of initial check in for class D arrivals; insisting on initial calls from 6-10 miles from the class D airport.When the CFI onboard the aircraft is asking them to soften their tone with the student; reminding them that 'They are a training tower and we pilots extend grace to their mistakes and that we too are training new pilots and we may need the same considerations'. They abused their position and needlessly imposed a full stop landing while allowing others to initiate and/or continue touch and go's.Tower refusing to acknowledge many requests asking them to 'mark the tape'. Telling the pilot to 'stop talking'; leading to multiple unnecessary requests on tower frequency and confusion as to if the reporting party had been cleared to land.All of this wreaks of Pilot pushing and ATC bullying that has real potential to lead an insecure; or inexperienced pilot that much closer to an unnecessary accident. It is this reporter's desire to recognize ATC's difficult job and to work hand in hand with them to promote the safest and most efficient and consistent procedures for arriving and departing aircraft across the nation. However; I would caution ATC from operating from a position that suggests that their local desires carry the full force and effect of FAR's. It is my further desire that pilots and ATC operate with a heart of courteous cooperation that benefits all participants.




Synopsis: GA instructor pilot reported a lack of professionalism and condescending behavior towards inexperienced pilots on Tower frequency at CRQ.
Date: 201204
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: A319
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Aileron
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: After takeoff I felt there was a little instability to the aircraft turning capability (the turns felt weird) so about 1;500 FT I turned on the autopilot (1) aircraft immediately went into a bank so we pushed the flight control status page sure enough the left aileron was up 7 to 8 degrees. It did not matter if I had autopilots 1 on or 2 on or even in manual (no auto pilots on; it was stuck up out of the neutral position. I could over-ride it and I had control manually. We called Maintenance Control gave them as much info as we could we were told to continue to destination and maintenance would be there upon arrival. My First Officer had checked the ATIS for cross-wind already and I felt ok with the controllability. We took pictures en route of the status pages and forwarded those to Maintenance Control on arrival. Taxiing in we did another flight control check to confirm our suspicions that we saw nothing abnormal on the taxi out flight control check and once again the check was normal. At the gate I called Maintenance Control gave them a little more information and First Officer forwarded pictures of the status page. I don't know what we could have done differently to avoid this. Also after the mechanic did all the checks and signed it off I believe he said it was most likely; ELAC one that may have been the cause. We got no ECAM or any other indications of any malfunctions. Also once again when one has an issue/malfunction with no clear guidance a good First Officer is worth his weight in gold. My First Officer was outstanding he's new at this airline but not to the airplane and with his help and co-ordination we gathered as much info as we could and forwarded that to Maintenance Control.




Synopsis: A319 Captain describes an aileron not returning to the neutral (streamlined) position with the side stick in the neutral (released) position. The flight control page shows the left aileron is up about eight degrees at all times; but the aircraft is controllable. Flight continues the short distance to destination and lands normally. Ground flight control checks reveal no anomalies; but maintenance suspects ELAC 1 to be the cause.
Date: 201710
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: SBD.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Ultralight
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 103
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class E SCT
Second aircraft: Cessna Single Piston Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Sport / Recreational
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was mid-way through my 4th revolution while turning in a weak thermal when I heard the distinct turbine whine of a light aircraft magneto. I looked up and behind me and observed a Cessna 172 or 152 approximately 100 FT above my hang glider on glide with its propeller wind milling. It appeared to be on a 160-degree course heading and proceeded away from me uninterrupted. Because I was in direct sunlight and the large holographic reflective surfaces on my leading edges would have been easily visible for 5 miles I have to assume the pilot was curious and glided toward me intentionally. Obviously; I don't know whether the pilot thought he was seeing a Mylar party balloon or knew it was a hang glider but in any event the incursion looked intentional and at 100 FT proximity was unsafe.




Synopsis: Hang glider pilot reported a near-mid-air-collision with a general aviation aircraft.
Date: 201508
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: CLT.Airport, NC
Light: Night
Aircraft: Large Transport
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class B CLT
ATC / advisory: Tower CLT
Second aircraft: Large Transport
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Local
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Distraction; Training / Qualification; Situational Awareness; Confusion
Second reporter function: Local
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation - Track / Heading 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: Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I was working local control center and cleared Aircraft X for takeoff on runway 18C and instructed them to RNAV to GIRGY. The flight plan I had showed them on the JACAL7 departure. As I saw their right wing dip; I instructed them to contact departure. Immediately after I did that; I looked up at the radar display and noticed Aircraft X in a left hand turn directly into Aircraft Y which had departed Runway 18L. I called out to Aircraft X; but they we no longer on my frequency. I called to east departure but heard them instructing Aircraft Y to turn away from the converging traffic.I believe this is already in the works; but I think that vectors off the ground would be a much safer operation where we could avoid these types of issues.


Second narrative: Cleared Aircraft Y for takeoff off 18L; Aircraft X was cleared for takeoff off 18C. I Switched Aircraft Y to departure just prior to the event. 3 miles south of CLT Aircraft X turned left when the SID was a Right turn. I attempted to turn Aircraft Y to a 100 heading and received no response. Closest they came were 1.5 miles and 500 feet (per the Front Line Manager). Turns off the ground ensure immediate headings for deviation; at CLT there is a waiver to run side by side because of noise. We are going to Optimization Airspace and Procedures in the Metroplex soon but the turns are still after noise. Until the noise issues are corrected these types of events will continue to occur.


Synopsis: CLT controllers reported of an aircraft departing on a RNAV departure that turned towards another aircraft. Aircraft was supposed to turn right but turned left into other departing traffic. Controller called the aircraft but they had switched to departure control.
Date: 201912
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: S56.TRACON, UT
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 170/175 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
ATC / advisory: TRACON S56
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Time Pressure
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Aircraft X was descended in the downwind to 090. As the aircraft was approaching 090; I descended the aircraft to 085 and turned 5-degrees left (they were going to Runway 34R not the west runway). The aircraft read the instruction back appropriately. Shortly later I based the aircraft as they were showing 085. The aircraft read back the instruction and I noticed the tag at 083. I immediately keyed up and verified they were level 085; they said we are leveling right now at 080. They were already in the base turn and turning away from the higher terrain; so I did not issue a low altitude alert or climb and told them to maintain 080. I reviewed the tape and the aircraft did read back 085. They were still in the 085 MVA at 080. With a proper read-back there is nothing to do to stop this from happening. Maybe 500 ft. altitudes are confusing to pilots? I've never had an aircraft bust an altitude with this before; so I don't think I would change anything.




Synopsis: S56 Tracon Controller reported E175 descended below assigned altitude resulting in an MVA violation.
Date: 201703
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: A320
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Gear Extend/Retract Mechanism
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Troubleshooting; Workload
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Procedure
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: While on a visual approach at around 2000 feet I called for gear down and it failed to extend. The First Officer followed the ECAM checklist and recycled the gear handle. The gear still indicated not locked. I decided at that point to go-around and work the situation. We received vectors west of the airport and I gave the aircraft and directions to my First Officer and contacted Maintenance. Maintenance coordinated with Maintenance Control and confirmed that we should continue with a manual extension. I completed the extension and had a good down and locked indication. The FO remained with ATC and flying the aircraft using automation and got us on a downwind. I requested towing assistance before landing. I also briefed the flight attendants and made a PA to the passengers. Once complete I took the aircraft and continued to an uneventful landing. We stayed on the runway and got towed in from there.


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


Synopsis: A320 flight crew reported the gear failed to extend; so they had to use the manual extension procedure.
Date: 201407
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-700
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Turbine Engine
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer
Second reporter function: Captain
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Inflight Shutdown; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: During climb approaching 10;000 FT MSL on the Departure; the Number 2 Engine began to surge. As the Captain and First Officer began to assess the problem and apply the proper procedures; ATC issued a handoff to Center. The First Officer replied that the aircraft would be staying with Approach and returning. Clearance was coordinated and an emergency was declared. The crew completed the associated checklists; shut down the Number 2 Engine; and the Captain executed a single-engine; flaps 15 landing. The crew taxied clear and returned to the original departure gate. After the customers and crew were assured safe; and with the proper customer/crew support personnel; the Captain called to notify Dispatch and the Chief Pilot on call. After reflecting on the events and not knowing the actual damage status of the engine after landing; the Captain and First Officer could have asked the emergency response personnel to make a visual inspection of the engine prior to taxiing to the gate.


Second narrative: Climbing through 10;000 FT the Number 2 Engine started to surge. N1 started fluctuating slightly; increasing to about +/- ten %. As I retarded the thrust lever; N1 spiked to 102%. N1 decreased with thrust lever position however it continued to surge. It stopped surging around 24% N1. I advanced the thrust lever and got an ENG FAIL indication. An Emergency was declared; associated checklists completed and a single engine landing executed to the runway.


Synopsis: B737-700 flight crew experiences the Number Two Engine surging passing through 10;000 FT. The engine is shut down and the flight returns to the departure airport.
Date: 201810
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZZ.ARTCC, FO
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B767-300 and 300 ER
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Cruise
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZZ
Aircraft component: FMS/FMC
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: During cruise flight approximately 50 to 60 miles east of fix and offset 5 NM right of course; as directed by ATC; [Ckeck Pilot] and I were discussing the procedures for approach and runway change going into ZZZ. I had selected the route 2 page; neither of us activated or executed the route 2. During the discussion Control called us and ask our position; and then we immediately noticed the aircraft in a slight left bank; approximately 20 degree bank; and our heading approximately 40 degrees of expected. PF (Pilot Flying) immediately slowed and selected a correction heading back to course. I estimate we erred off course 3 to 4 miles before correcting. I did not notice what the to waypoint was before we were recleared back to ZZZZZ. I am sure that we were in LNAV and correctly proceeding to ZZZZZ before the event.I am not sure if there was a failure of the navigation system but both [Pilot Flying/Check Pilot] and I were heads down too long discussing runway change procedures and not monitoring the aircraft and systems. More diligent aircraft monitoring by both crew members [was needed].




Synopsis: B767 Captain reported that the aircraft was briefly off course causing Center to alert the deviation.
Date: 201506
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: A300
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Hydraulic Main System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: On initial climb out of ZZZ; we received an ECAM indication for Green Hydraulic system Overheat; along with associated ECAM warnings pertaining to the malfunction. After consulting the QRH; we decided to give the system time to cool off during the climb out; and we continued to monitor the situation to the best of our ability (although there is no cockpit indication of the Green system temperature). After reaching our cruise altitude (FL330); and waiting 10 more minutes at that colder temperature; we still had no indication that the system temperature had gone down (the light remained illuminated). We then decided that it would be unwise to continue for 3 more hours under these conditions; and decided to divert the flight to ZZZ1. The light subsequently extinguished as we commenced the approach to ZZZ1; so we reset the affected system switches per ECAM and QRH guidance; and continued to an uneventful approach and landing. Due to our heavy gross weight and the high density altitude of the ZZZ1 airport; moderate braking was required to slow the airplane on landing roll; and one of the tires deflated due to fuse plug meltdown. All maintenance situations were then addressed by the ZZZ1 maintenance personnel.




Synopsis: A300-600 Captain reported they diverted to a nearby airport after receiving a Green Hydraulic System Overheat ECAM.
Date: 201308
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Thunderstorm
Aircraft: MD-80 Series (DC-9-80) Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Fuel Booster Pump
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Time Pressure
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Fuel Issue
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: The non-standard fuel load was noted during review of flight release in the terminal. During completion of before takeoff checklist I moved all (wings and center fuel tank) fuel pump switches to what I believed was the ON position. Later; during the cruise check; I realized the fuel was NOT feeding from center; and wings were down to approximately 5;500 LBS each with approximately 3;800 LBS in the center tank. We were deviating off planned route through scattered thunderstorms and my attention was diverted to outside the cockpit prior to seeing the fuel imbalance. I reconfigured the fuel pump switches and cross feed lever to burn center fuel and continued to destination. Fuel cross feed was terminated on approach with less than 800 LBS remaining in the center tank. The landing was normal and speeds/trim settings were normal.My mistake was in not visually verifying that the center pump switches were in the ON position during completion of the before takeoff checklist. I had unknowingly moved the center pump switches from the AUTO (full aft/up) position to the OFF (one click/notch - forward/down) position. To avoid this in the future I plan to get started with the checklist a little earlier; avoid getting rushed and visually verifying all switch position when selected.




Synopsis: MD-80 Captain reported he failed to properly position the fuel pump switches in a non-standard fuel load situation.