elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201710
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ATL.Airport, GA
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class B ATL
ATC / advisory: TRACON A80
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Time Pressure; Situational Awareness; Distraction; Communication Breakdown
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Speed All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Airport; Company Policy; Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Company Policy

Narrative: We were on downwind at an assigned speed of 210 knots while in the descent to 7;000 feet. Speed brake was already out. ATC asked for best rate of descent. We slowed to 200 knots and put out flaps 10. Speed fluctuation was too close to flaps 10 limit for me; so I slowed to 190 for flap 10 speed buffer. At the same time; we are hearing on the busy radios of Precision Runway Monitoring (PRM) Approaches being conducted. We hadn't previously briefed PRM Approaches and confirmed that wasn't on the ATIS; so we were working on that now as well. Passing somewhere around 5;000 feet; we were queried on what the airspeed was. We responded with speed of 185 and were subsequently scolded for slowing down without permission and given a phone number to call.I think the combination of busy radios; probable PRM Approach clearance coming; slow to 210 knots; and go down faster resulted in non-compliance with speed clearance. Upon landing I called the company FAA representative who called ATL ATC and said he had talked to the Controller about the above situation who understood our concern.


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


Synopsis: B737-800 flight crew reported they did not comply with an ATC assigned speed.
Date: 201511
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZZ.Airport, FO
Flight conditions: IMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: A330
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZZ
Aircraft component: Oil Cooler
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Workload; Situational Awareness; Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; Flight Crew Inflight Shutdown; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Approximately 2 hours into our flight from ZZZZ to ZZZ I noticed the Number 1 engine oil quantity decreasing and notified my Captain who was the Pilot Flying. We complied with the QRH non annunciated checklist for decreasing/low oil quantity which basically says to monitor and look for other indications and or an ECAM warnings. When the oil quantity dropped below 3 quarts we made SATCOM communications with maintenance and dispatch and concurrently made the decision to return to ZZZZ because the plane had just come out of a Heavy Check and the oil quantity showed a slow; methodical decrease in quantity. We [advised ATC] on the turn back as the oil quantity was now reading 0 (zero). We decided; with concurrence of maintenance and dispatch; to run the engine at a minimum power setting; which also complies with the QRH. Approximately an hour and a half later and an hour from ZZZZ the oil pressure began to fluctuate and fall to the top of the red line band on the oil pressure indicator (approximately 70 psi). With the concurrence of Maintenance Control; we shut the engine down to prevent any impending damage. We returned to ZZZZ for an uneventful overweight and auto-land to Runway XXR. Post flight inspection of the number 1 engine did reveal a crack in a repair weld to the fuel/oil cooler and no oil left in the number 1 engine reservoir. We flew the same aircraft the following day after repairs were made by ZZZZ mechanics and returned to ZZZ uneventfully.




Synopsis: A330 First Officer reported observing the oil quantity decreasing on one engine and completed the appropriate troubleshooting checklists. The oil quantity continued to decrease and when it reached a level which affected the oil pressure they shut down the engine; returned to the departure airport; and made an uneventful landing.
Date: 201404
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Dash 8 Series Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Wheels/Tires/Brakes
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Confusion; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General Maintenance Action; General Declared Emergency; General Evacuated; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors; Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Upon arrival at the Gate in ZZZ1; during normal deplaning; I discovered that a Left brake was creating smoke (there was no flames observed). I immediately notifed my Crew and ordered an emergency evacuation of the remaining passengers through the Main Cabin Door (Normal Expeditious Deplaning). I instructed the First Officer to contact mainline cOMPANYOperations and request that the Fire Department show up at the scene with the fire fighting equipment. Performed the Action Items for emergency evacuation. All passengers and crew deplaned without an incident or injury. I notified Company Dispatch and Maintenance of this issue. Upon Maintenance inspection; it was determined that the Brake Wear Indicator pin was stuck in the position where it was indicating that brake pad wear was within acceptable limits; but in actuality it was severly worn down. During the preflight inspection in ZZZ; the First Officer observed the Brake Wear Indicator in the appropriate position and assumed and relied; based on that indication; that the brake pad was within acceptable limits.




Synopsis: During normal deplaning of a DHC-8 aircraft; a Captain notices the left brake was creating smoke; resulting in an emergency evacuation of remaining passengers. Maintenance inspection determined the Brake Wear Indicator Pin was stuck and had been indicating the brake was within acceptable wear limits; even though the brake had exceeded operational wear.
Date: 201311
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 8
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-400
Operator: Other Contract Flight Crew
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Test Flight / Demonstration
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Turbine Engine
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Contracted Service
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: We are performing flight testing of a new concept in-flight system (not related to power-plant or failure experienced). The mission required us to perform low level passes at various aircraft configurations over [the runway] at 200 FT AGL. Prior Tower coordination occurred and the operations were authorized. We were operating VFR in left closed traffic at the time of the incident. On downwind turning base; (190 KIAS; Gear UP; Flaps 1) we experienced an N1 and N2 Rollback on Engine 1 accompanied by a high EGT (Approximately 900-996 degrees C). We shut down and secured ENG 1; configured to GEAR DOWN; Flaps 15; notified the Tower of the situation; and performed a visual single engine landing to a full stop and exited the runway. We were met by ARFF equipment on the parallel taxiway and shut down the engines. Upon visual inspection; no external defects and no fire was noted to the engines or airframe. The aircraft was towed back to the hangar for inspection and maintenance. There were no injuries and no damage to equipment or property nor was there any closure to the runway; taxiways; or facilities.




Synopsis: B737-400 Captain reports an engine failure in the traffic pattern while conducting flight testing of in flight systems not related to the engine failure. The failed engine is secured and a single engine approach and landing ensues.
Date: 202107
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: A321
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: None
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Engine Temperature Indication
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Technician
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Airframe; Maintenance Powerplant
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Maintenance
When detected: Routine Inspection
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Aircraft; Human Factors; Software and Automation; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Left off email list from [Manufacturer's] EHM (Engine Health Monitoring) engine notification of potential EGT (Exhaust Gas Temperature gauge) error. The EGT thermocouple leads were found to be loose on all four probes causing erratic readings. No ready visibility on this modification. The desktop was acting up beyond being slow; multiple windows opening and some closing or moving resulting in very slow response with any usable information. The cause was found to be a screen saver disable function that had to be shut down by IT.




Synopsis: Technician reported not receiving email notifications for engine inspections because the station was left off an email list.
Date: 202105
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 145 ER/LR
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 Conditioning and Pressurization Pack
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Diverted
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Cruising at FL250 due to limitation of PACK 2 deferred. CA (Captain) noticed smoke in cockpit and we ran smoke in cockpit procedure backed up by checklist. Informed flight attendant and she said no smoke in cabin.  Performed an immediate descent to 3;500 feet as directed by ATC for visual to Runway X at ZZZ. Vehicles escorted us to Gate X. Fire services performed a sweep for hotspots and found none. Deplaned aircraft and a ferry flight was sent to retrieve passengers.Not sure [of cause] at this time. Could have been avionics or a PACK leak.To make it easier for crew to hear each other and ATC; microphone and oxygen masks should be improved to reduce oxygen noise over ICS (Inter Communication System) and reduce workload due to excess noise.




Synopsis: EMB-145 flight crew reported smoke in cockpit during cruise resulting in a diversion.
Date: 201202
Location: I39.Airport, KY
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Transport; Low Wing; 2 Recip Eng
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Second aircraft: Small Aircraft; High Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Aircraft
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged
Contributing factors: Airport; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: After landing at I39 we parked our aircraft at the fuel pumps. Another aircraft had just refueled and moved to the north side of the pump pad. I went into the FBO to utilize the rest room facilities and my aircraft rolled across the fuel pad and struck the other aircraft in the tail tie down hook. The damage to both aircraft was only cosmetic in nature however the incident could have very easily caused major damage or injury. I did not realize that the fuel pad was constructed on a slope steep enough to allow a 10;000 LBS aircraft to begin to roll across it. My aircraft should have had the wheels blocked and or the parking brake set. The FBO Manager told me another aircraft rolled across the pad one day and went down over the hill causing substantial damage. While the cause of the incident was my failure to block the wheels of the aircraft; the contributing causes are the slope of the fuel pad at I39 and my failure to maintain an attitude of 'pilot in command' after the engine were shut down and I exited the aircraft.




Synopsis: A light twin aircraft's parking brake was not set after fueling at I39; which has a slightly sloped ramp. The aircraft rolled across the ramp and struck a Cessna; causing only superficial damage.
Date: 202201
Location: PSP.Tower, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class D PSP
ATC / advisory: Tower PSP
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Second reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Airport; Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: Due to traffic I was unable to request RNAV visual; on the base to final (which is challenging due to rising terrain) I failed to maintain good situational awareness to the tight turn to final. The gusty wind off the terrain created a lot of my attention to airspeed management and the turn on to see the VASI was difficult due to sun glare. As a result my turn on [final] was four red; I promptly corrected for a normal landing.


Second narrative: We had briefed the RNAV visual; landing NW; into PSP and I had planned on asking for it as soon as we checked in. On the initial call to PSP we were given immediate vectors away from the RNAV visual/arrival due to ATC wanting better traffic situation. The turn was such that the sun light made it difficult to see the airport and I was looking farther north than I should've. The winds coming across the mountains caused some gusts and the FO (First Officer) elected to hand fly. ATC gave us another vector and asked if we had the field for the visual approach; I replied no. A few seconds later we saw the field; confirmed it; and made a turn to put us on a 3 mile final.I was solely concentrating on the terrain and making sure we kept our clearance from it. In my mind I was calculating a 3:1 ratio; and looking for the PAPI. I noticed the FO had 4 reds; called it out and the FO immediately corrected. We flew a normal approach from there out. There were no GPWS triggered. We debriefed at the gate for about 15 minutes on what we could have done better.


Synopsis: A320 flight crew reported not being set up correctly into PSP; and correcting for a safe landing.
Date: 201404
Local time of day: 1201-1800
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: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground ORD
Second aircraft: Embraer Jet Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness; Time Pressure; Confusion
Second reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Procedure; Airport; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: [We were] leaving the ramp after having coordinated with Metering; then Ground. Given Instructions to follow two RJ's from the left; taxing north on [Taxiway] A; left on [Taxiway] A-7 to [Taxiway] T for a [Runway] 32L [Intersection] T-10 Departure. While northbound on [Taxiway] A; [we] switched to monitor Tower. As we made our left turn on [Taxiway] A-7 a VERY high speed; unidentified RJ from the right came around the corner; southbound on [Taxiway] B. His taxi light was on and his speed precluded his yielding to our crossing at [Taxiway] A-7. We queried Tower; but he didn't have the RJ on his strip. My Captain had to hit the brakes abruptly to avoid a ground collision to the speeding; non-yielding RJ from the right. After the near-collision; we reported the incident to Tower; informed them we would be making a report; [we] then taxied as cleared and departed on [Runway] 32L at T-10 as planned.


Second narrative: ORD Ground Control consistently shock me at the lack of professionalism and overall disregard for safety. On FOUR occasions I've had to take action contrary to a clearance to avoid a ground collision. Lack of standardized practice such as waiting for a readback to confirm a complex taxi instruction is the norm. The phrase Normalization of Deviation was coined following the NASA Challenger disaster. Well that same term applies to the manner ORD Ground Control operates. I only hope it doesn't take such a dramatic tragedy to precipitate change to the manner ORD Ground Control operates. I feel if one observed the manner they simply 'move the metal' in a complex environment the same conclusion would be reached. Something has to change in the manner they operate. I've been a professional airline pilot for nearly 20 years; operating at airports from Bangkok and Sydney to Heathrow and Rio; and of all airports I've operated to ORD Ground Control; in my opinion; consistently is the least safe environment.


Synopsis: A B737 took evasive action from a RJ taxiing at a very high speed which ORD Ground Control and Tower were not coordinating with other traffic.
Date: 201207
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: P180 Avanti
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Aircraft component: Elevator
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Technician
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Airframe; Maintenance Powerplant
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Maintenance
When detected: Other Post Flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Incorrect / Not Installed / Unavailable Part; Procedure; Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Left-hand elevator found missing [during] post walk around inspection.  Suspected nuts backoff caused elevator to depart from horizontal stabilizer in flight.




Synopsis: Line Mechanic reports noticing the left-hand elevator was missing during a post flight walk around inspection on a Piaggio-180 aircraft. Mechanic suspects nuts backed-off. Hardware configuration issue.
Date: 201602
Location: ZZZZ.ARTCC, FO
Aircraft: B767-300 and 300 ER
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Cruise
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZZ
Aircraft component: HF SSB
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Dispatcher
Reporter qualification: Dispatch Dispatcher
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Dispatch
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Company Policy
Primary problem: Company Policy

Narrative: Unable to establish communications with aircraft for period of time exceeding 20 min enroute; followed by a second instance still ongoing. Flight was in area over South China Sea out of VHF datalink range; unable to transmit ACARs message via HF data link. No fault of dispatcher or crew; problem caused by placing insufficiently equipped aircraft (i.e; SATCOM; reliable HF data link) on overwater routes. Company in violation of FAR 121.99 for not providing means to maintain rapid and reliable communications.[Suggest a removal of] 767 fleet from [this regions'] routes until such time as they can be equipped appropriately for the mission. Otherwise; only flight plan them to stay within guaranteed VHF datalink range and spend the extra money on time/fuel for the resulting longer routings.




Synopsis: Dispatcher was unable to maintain High Frequency data link contact with crew during a trans-oceanic flight and recommends that the company discontinue the use of this type of aircraft on these routes until better data link radios are installed.