elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201502
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Other / Unknown; Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation - Altitude Crossing Restriction Not Met; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: I was flying the leg to ZZZ. We were given the clearance to descend via the Arrival and I set 10;000 feet in the altitude window. (Not sure what altitude we are at when given the clearance.) I selected the 'alt intervention' button to start the descent. The machine did not respond so I selected the 'alt intervention' button once again; not realizing/recognizing I was in Alt Hold and not VNAV. The effect of selecting alt intervention a second time was to delete the crossing restriction of FL240A (at or above FL 240) at Fix ZZZZZ. The ultimate result was crossing Fix ZZZZZ at approximately FL 230; 1;000 feet below the restriction.I've flown this arrival 100;000;000 times with no deviations; which; of course; counts for diddly squat if your not paying attention that one complacent moment!




Synopsis: A B737-800 Captain upon receiving a descent clearance pushed the alt intervene button which deleted the first crossing restriction and caused the aircraft to cross that fix 1;000 feet low.
Date: 202005
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 145 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Check Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness; Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Environment - Non Weather Related; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: On our approach into ZZZ we got a landing gear GPWS message. We were established on the Localizer at 2;100 feet which is the segment between ZZZZZ and ZZZZZ1 (the final approach fix). We were probably 4 miles from ZZZZZ1 when we got the Landing gear message. As we were just about to get in the landing configuration we dropped the gear and put flaps to 22 which silenced the message.  We maintained vigilance while going over the hills there and landed normally. The warning from the plane. We also discussed that this approach seemed to be lower to the ground than normal but since we expected the localizer to be in a protected area we did not think we would get a landing gear message. The GPWS system has certain parameters that set off the landing gear warning. In some areas on that approach the hills must have penetrated the protected area. We also were trying to slow down to get configured for the approach; so while we had plenty of speed our thrust lever angle was low. We were just about to configure for landing so that's what we did; put the gear down and landing flaps. While Verifying that there was no actual conflict. Then landed normally. Try to be configured earlier on this approach so that we do not get this message again.




Synopsis: EMB 145 Check Captain reported a gear not down warning while on approach at this airport.
Date: 202103
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: AVQ.Airport, AZ
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Taxi
Airspace: Class G AVQ
ATC / advisory: CTAF AVQ
Second aircraft: Stearman
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I was taxiing to Runway 12 via taxiway alpha and witnessed a near midair collision. The runway in use at the time was Runway 12 as there was a [Cessna] 172 on final approach and another aircraft at the run up area near Runway 12. A Cessna 172 was on final approach for [Runway] 12 and a Stearnman was taking off on the opposite end of the runway (Runway 30). I witnessed the two aircraft flying right at each other and the Stearnman flew right over the Cessna 172 at approximately 200 feet and then banked to the right. There was an argument over Unicom that occurred between the Cessna pilot and Stearnman pilot. The Cessna pilot was an Instructor Pilot and basically told him the runway in use was 12. The Stearnman pilot was argumentative and suggested he is also an Instructor Pilot and that the pilot determines the runway in use at an uncontrolled airport.I am reporting this because of the safety implications. The Stearnman pilot was clearly in the wrong; but expressed that he was right over radio chatter. My goal here is to initiate the required actions to ensure this never happens again as I do not want to see someone get killed because of an unsafe pilot.




Synopsis: C172 pilot reported a NMAC; witnessing a Cessna landing on runway in use; while a Stearman took off opposite direction.
Date: 201205
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Eurocopter AS 350/355/EC130 - Astar/Twinstar/Ecureuil
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Mission: Ambulance
Flight phase: Parked
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Rotorcraft
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Security
Detector: Person Other Person
When detected: Other At destination
Result: General Police / Security Involved
Contributing factors: Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: We arrived on scene of a MVA [Motor Vehicle Accident]. Upon arrival the helicopter medical crew approached the patient who was still in the ambulance and had already been packaged and immobilized by the first responders. They proceeded to move the patient from the ambulance onto the aircraft. Due to the condition of the patient we decided to execute a rapid offload at the hospital. While doing so a Hospital Medical employee found a small semi-automatic pistol in the patient's back pocket. Hospital security was called. I suggest that during shift briefings we talk about being more vigilant in ensuring crew safety and preventing weapons from being carried onboard.




Synopsis: A medical helicopter flew a severely injured accident victim to the hospital where; upon removing the victim from the helicopter; they discovered he was carrying a handgun in his back pocket.
Date: 201201
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: MYF.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: M-20 L
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class D MYF
ATC / advisory: Tower MYF
Second aircraft: Cirrus Aircraft Undifferentiated
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private; Flight Crew Instrument
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was cleared for takeoff on Runway 28R for an eastbound VFR departure. (This departure calls for a westbound takeoff followed by a climbing right turn to the downwind; remaining south of California Route 52; and exiting the pattern eastbound.) On takeoff; I began my climb; maintaining visual separation from a slower airplane in the upwind from Runway 28L. Upon reaching California Route 163; I began a climbing right turn. At approximately the crosswind point of the turn; a Cirrus crossed my flight path from my left to right (east to west); approximately 300 FT horizontally and between 50 and 100 FT vertically from me; requiring me to take evasive action to avoid what appeared to be a collision course with that airplane. No traffic advisories were reported from the Tower prior to; or during; the takeoff; and it's possible the Tower was not aware the aircraft was there. (During my run-up; my wife; also a pilot; recalled hearing the Tower clear a Cirrus over Mt. Soledad for landing on Runway 28L. If that's correct and the subject plane was that Cirrus; then he would have entered the pattern from the incorrect side of the field; and north of the Tower. The controllers would have been looking for him to pass south of the Tower from the Controllers' right to left.) Once clear of the Cirrus; I returned to my climbing turn and continued downwind in the pattern; maintaining visual separation from that airplane. As I cleared the pattern eastbound; I observed him descend; and it appeared he began to cross over the runway environment at which point I lost sight of him. I reported the event to the Tower and continued my flight with no further issues.




Synopsis: M20 pilot departing MYF reports a NMAC with a Cirrus entering the pattern. Evasive action is taken and the event reported to the Tower.
Date: 201307
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Aircraft: MD-82
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: Pressurization System
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: After leveling off at FL310 the 'cabin altitude' light illuminated and the aural warning sounded. [We] accomplished the immediate action items of 'Cabin Altitude Warning/Rapid Depressurization' checklist. Cabin altitude was over 10;000 FT and initially did not appear to be decreasing. Declared emergency and started emergency descent. During descent to 10;000 FT verified that cabin was not exceeding 14;000 FT. We did not deploy the cabin oxygen masks and they did not automatically deploy as cabin altitude remained less than 14;000 FT. Returned to our departure airport and accomplished an uneventful overweight landing. [It] appears that the automatic pressurization system failed.


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


Synopsis: After experiencing an uncontrollable increase in cabin altitude; an MD-82 flight crew declared an emergency; performed an emergency descent to 10;000 MSL and returned to their departure airport where they completed an overweight but uneventful landing.
Date: 201310
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: SCT.TRACON, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Citationjet (C525/C526) - CJ I / II / III / IV
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class E SCT
ATC / advisory: TRACON SCT
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown
Second reporter function: Departure; Approach
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We had just started a descent out of nine thousand feet for descent into SMO. Going through seven thousand; ATC instructed us to start an immediate climb and turn left to avoid traffic. We had set 6 thousand in altitude alerter; and both of us recall that was the altitude assigned and read back. After complying with ATC instructions; ATC told us we were assigned seven thousand. We informed ATC we thought six thousand was assigned and that is what we recalled reading back. ATC did not dispute our readback; only that we were assigned seven thousand. All other communications with ATC were normal. Corrective actions from this experience are to be better disciplined about both pilots confirming altitude changes and reading them aloud. Also both pilots need to confirm what is set in the altitude selector. This will ensure that correct altitudes are put in the altitude selector and help avoid traffic conflicts.


Second narrative: I issued Aircraft X 060 and meant 070. I noticed Aircraft Y at 060 and thought that I will needed to issue traffic as they got closer; but mistakenly issued 060. I observed Aircraft X descending out of 068 and issued climb; turn; and traffic. It happened because I screwed up! Pay more attention; actively listen to readback; state altitude of traffic instead of 'restricted 1;000 FT below you'; maybe the pilot would have caught the mistake.


Synopsis: Corporate aircraft landing SMO with SCT described a conflict event when ATC mistakenly issued the wrong altitude assignment; ATC acknowledging the error.
Date: 201909
Aircraft: B767 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Cabin Entertainment
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Technician
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Airframe; Maintenance Powerplant
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate; Pre-flight
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Aircraft arrived at station with [inflight entertainment] inoperative. Using B767 MEL 44-XX-X; [I] attempted to trouble shoot problem by re-installing circuit breakers that were pulled and collared. [Inflight entertainment] screen would light up but still had no access to system; therefore no help. Attempted to place aircraft back in original configuration i.e. with MEL 44-XX-X applied by pulling and collaring the required circuit breakers. Was then informed after end of shift that one of the 4 required circuit breakers I had pulled and safe tied was incorrect circuit breakers - 115 vac bus r sect 4 instead of [inflight entertainment] r bus sect 4 on the same panel P32 and the same row. All others circuit breakers were correct.




Synopsis: Maintenance Technician reported pulling and collaring wrong circuit breaker while troubleshooting a problem with the inflight entertainment system.
Date: 202008
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: PGV.Airport, NC
Aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: CTAF PGV
Reporter function: Dispatcher
Reporter qualification: Dispatch Dispatcher
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types
Detector: Person Dispatch
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings
Primary problem: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings

Narrative: PGV weather had low ceilings and some fog.  I was watching the field's METARs to make sure the flight would be able to take off.  However; I noticed that the METAR contained a precipitation entry for heavy rain (+RA); yet there was no precipitation showing at or anywhere near PGV on my weather map.  I then called the station to ask them if they were getting heavy rain and they said; 'no.'  They just had some fog and low clouds and that it had not rained there recently.  Right after that the flight had taken off safely. Verified with Ops at PGV that there was indeed no recent or current precipitation at the airport. Automated weather observation system was reporting precipitation at the field when there was none. At that point the flight had safely taken off.  My response is to file this report regarding the problems with the PGV automated weather equipment and its reporting inaccurate information. We have often had problems with the automated weather in PGV; which has usually been the weather not being reported at all.  This situation concerned me because it was reporting; but was showing incorrect meteorological conditions.  And with this airport being unmanned at times; this is a serious safety issue if the automated weather system there is either not reporting at all; or even worse; reporting incorrect weather information which could put a flight in an unsafe or even dangerous situation if the weather information being generated is not accurate.




Synopsis: Dispatcher reported noticing that the PGV airport AWOS was transmitting incorrect information. Dispatcher stated the PGV AWOS is frequently unreliable.
Date: 201503
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: MFR.Airport, OR
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: Regional Jet 200 ER/LR (CRJ200)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class E ZSE
ATC / advisory: Center ZSE
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Automation Aircraft Terrain Warning
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: On a visual approach in to MFR runway 32; we received an EGPWS warning of Terrain; Terrain; Pull Up.  We were around YIPUG intersection intercepting the LOC BC approach at 7;800 when the warning was received.  We complied with the warning and climbed up to 9;000.  With no further warnings; we proceed to complete a visual approach to runway 14.The root cause of the event was the high terrain south of the airport and restricted visibility of said terrain due to it being night time.  We had the airport in sight throughout the entire event and were adhering to the stepdown altitudes on the LOC BC approach.  However; prior to YIPUG; we were not on the LOC BC final approach course; so terrain to the west of the approach may have triggered the warning.Prior to the visual approach; we had been cleared to YIPUG and planned on intercepting final there.  Perhaps if we had proceeded to ASHIE (IAF 5 miles prior to YIPUG) instead; and complied with the LOC BC minimum altitudes from that point; we would not have gotten the EGPWS warning.  Weather permitting; landing on 14 may also be desirable when terrain clearance can't be accurately determined visually.




Synopsis: CRJ-200 First Officer reported receiving a GPWS terrain warning on a night visual approach to MFR runway 32.
Date: 201701
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: MIA.Airport, FL
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground MIA
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Illness / Injury
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; General Physical Injury / Incapacitation
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Ground control issued us a clearance to taxi from spot 8 to runway 8R in MIA. The instruction was to follow an Airbus on taxiway M. I confirmed clear right as we began to taxi. I had the Airbus insight and relayed this information to the captain since it was out of his field of vision. As we continued the taxi I verified that the captain did obtain visual contact with the Airbus on taxiway M; and that was the traffic to follow. I looked again to the right to clear for traffic; this is when I saw a fire truck moving at pretty fast speed with the emergency lights flashing. The truck was moving much faster than an aircraft would normally taxi. I told the captain to stop; stop; since he could not see the rapidly approaching fire truck from the right. The captain stopped expeditiously and allowed the fire truck to pass in front of us on taxiway N. There was never a mention of the emergency vehicle from ground at any time; before or after the truck passed. Almost immediately a flight attendant called from the back and said she needed time to clean up the galley from some items that spilled from the braking. We continued a slow taxi to 8R and proceeded with normal duties. The flight attendant called back and stated she was ready. I asked if everything okay and if everything is all set; and the answer was yes. The flight continued to the destination as planned and uneventful. After the passengers deplaned; a flight attendant informed the captain that she was injured in the galley as a result of the aircraft stopping during the taxi out.Emergency vehicle traffic advisories should be given to all aircraft; when they responding to an emergency. As an example: From ground control 'all aircraft use caution rescue vehicles are responding to an emergency.' A message transmitted that would be similar for windshear or new ATIS.


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


Synopsis: B737-800 flight crew reported having to stop abruptly to avoid an emergency vehicle during taxi out. After arrival a Flight Attendant reported being injured caused by the abrupt stop.