elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201508
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: MD-11
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Electrical Distribution Relay
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Relief Pilot; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Troubleshooting
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: I was the relief pilot. Approximately 1 hour and 30 minutes into the flight a level 1 'EMER PWR ON' alert displayed on the EAD. The First Officer and I referenced the QRH for the alert. The QRH says Consequences: NONE and states that the emergency power has been automatically or manually turned on. The emergency power switch was still in the arm position so we knew that the system had been automatically turned on. After the QRH was referenced; I went to the back and got the Captain; as he was on break. The FO and I informed him of the problem. When we first displayed the electrical system; components were operating normally and the battery was showing 29 volts and -39 amps. Approximately 10 minutes later the battery displayed 26 volts and -49 amps. We talked with the company; maintenance; and the MD11 subject matter expert and as a crew we decided to monitor the problem. After about another 20 minutes the battery voltage started rapidly dropping and reached 21 volts with an amperage draw of -60. We contacted ATC via CPDLC; SATCOM and eventually HF and [advised them] and initiated a return. We also coordinated with the company on the return. Shortly after starting the return; we were concerned about completely losing the aircraft battery and possibly having a fire due to a thermal runaway. Due to this; we turned the emergency power switch to off. I would like for there to be more information and guidance in the AOM referring to a battery discharge when the emergency power is on and all other electrical system components are displayed as operating normally.


Second narrative: [Report Narrative Contained No Additional Information.]


Synopsis: An MD-11 crew returned to the departure airport after experiencing an 'EMER PWR ON' event with an associated battery discharge.
Date: 201408
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: FIT.Airport, MA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Cessna Single Piston Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: CTAF ZZZ
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Sport / Recreational
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Other / Unknown
Anomaly: No Specific Anomaly Occurred All Types
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: I was planning a visual approach to the runway to descend to pattern altitude. I circled at an area 10 miles northwest of the field and then commenced a 10 mile 45 degree approach to left downwind of the runway. I noticed at the time that after descending to pattern altitude; the hills northwest of the field blocked my line of sight to the area corresponding to left crosswind and the first half of the downwind leg for the pattern of the runway. I announced my intentions on the CTAF at 10; 5; and 3 miles from the field. I heard radio transmissions from an aircraft approximately 5 miles behind me also approaching the field; but was unsure as to whether there were any other aircraft in the pattern at the time. As it turned out; there was another aircraft in the pattern that had just turned from crosswind to downwind at the time I entered the pattern. I had not heard or seen the aircraft already in the pattern; and transmissions from this aircraft suggested that the pilot had not heard any of my transmissions and was not aware of my presence until I joined the pattern. There was no risk of collision in this particular incident. I believe that the pilot already in the pattern slowed his aircraft and then extended his downwind to ensure separation was maintained. The hills to the northwest of the airport appear to interfere with the ability of aircraft on a 45 degree approach to left downwind for the runway and aircraft on left crosswind for the runway to see each other and hear each others' radio transmissions. I think that it would be much better for safety if this runway had a right-hand pattern to avoid interference to vision and radio propagation from the hills to the northwest of the airport.




Synopsis: This light aircraft pilot reported that because of terrain on the downwind side of the left hand traffic pattern it is difficult to acquire and maintain visual contact with other aircraft in the traffic pattern. It is additionally stated that the hills possibly block or hinder radio transmissions.
Date: 201412
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: SCT.TRACON, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class E SCT
ATC / advisory: Tower ONT
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Distraction
Second reporter function: First Officer
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Crossing Restriction Not Met; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Chart Or Publication; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Our PDC clearance included 'Climb Via the POMONA 7 Departure except maintain 14;000'.'  My First Officer and I both understood this to be a deletion of the published hold down altitude over POMONA of 7000'.  As we approached 7000'; departure control transmitted that we were still expected to comply with the hold down.  He issued another clearance before a deviation occurred but this highlighted a discrepancy in our interpretation of the PDC clearance.


Second narrative: Received PDC clearance 'Cleared POM7 Departure; Climb Via SID; except maintain 14;000'.' We reviewed PDC in clearance brief and deleted the POMONA 7000' 'at or below' hold down during clearance brief while at the gate.  The POM7 does not specify a maintain altitude under the routing section of the SID.  We concluded that the 'Except' provision in the 'Climb Via' must apply to the only hold down so it was deleted. If the word 'Except' was deleted; e.g; 'Climb Via SID; maintain 14;000';' there would have been no doubt that the hold down applied.  I was looking for the literal reason for the 'Except maintain 14;000';' and we concluded that the only thing it could apply to was the only hold down.  Near POMONA at or close to 7000'; the SoCal Controller commented the hold down applied and cleared us to next fix.


Synopsis: Pilots departing ONT airport receive PDC of Climb via except maintain 14;000 FT.  Pilots do not make crossing restrictions prior to reaching 14;000 FT.
Date: 201909
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-700
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Generator Drive
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural MEL / CDL
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; MEL; Manuals; Aircraft; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: MEL 24-X-XX was applied to our aircraft. During review of the paperwork; the Captain noted that the #1 generator was or should be disconnected. The Captain and I observed that the safety wire of the red guarded switch was broken; but that there was no other indication that the generator was actually disconnected. The Captain contacted Dispatch and Maintenance Control to query if the generator had been disconnected or not. The Captain was informed that steps of the MEL had been complied with based on the brief writeup in the logbook. During the Before Takeoff Checklist and the Descent Checklist; we noticed that 'ELEC' did not remain illuminated when pressing the Master Caution recall. During flight I observed a couple of light bulbs laying on the center control pedestal that we determined were from the number 1 GEN OFF BUS light. According to the MEL the bulbs were to be removed from the GEN OFF BUS and the DRIVE lights; but the bulbs were still in the DRIVE light. Based on these discrepancies; we contacted local Company Maintenance once we landed in ZZZ. The Maintenance Representative had us conduct an engine run and attempt to bring the generator online. The generator connected and indicated normal parameters.A review of the MEL language and possible rewrite to make it easier to follow and comply with. The MEL referenced pushing a button to disconnect the generator; when on this aircraft it is a toggle switch. There should be a simple method for Maintenance and or the [flight crew] to verify that a generator is truly disconnected when it is supposed to be. In this case here; my concern during the flight was that we had a bad generator (based on the logbook writeup and the MEL) still connected to the engine with the potential to cause more harm.




Synopsis: B737 flight crew reported discovering an improperly deferred maintenance item; resulting in maintenance action upon arrival.
Date: 201605
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: DFW.Airport, TX
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class B DFW
ATC / advisory: Tower DFW
Second aircraft: B757 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: We experienced a severe rolling motion due to wake turbulence behind a B-757 on takeoff from DFW 36R. I was cleared for takeoff immediately after tower cleared the B-757 for takeoff. I started my takeoff roll about 1:25 after the B-757. I encountered the wake turbulence approximately 250-300 AGL and had to use approximately 60 degrees of aileron to counter the wake upset. This is the first time I did not use a two minute separation behind a B-757. I notified tower of the encounter with the wake turbulence. I will now accept only a 2 minute interval behind B-757 per my option from AIM 7-3-9 and Part 1; 5..7.2.B.

Callback: Reporter stated he sometimes feels pressure from Tower to waive the two minute separation option.



Synopsis: B737-800 Captain reported experiencing a 'severe rolling motion' shortly after takeoff from DFW from wake turbulence in trail of a B757.
Date: 201504
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: BGM.Airport, NY
Aircraft: Cessna Twin Piston Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Flight phase: Other VFR Traffic Pattern
Airspace: Class D BGM
ATC / advisory: Tower BGM
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Other / Unknown
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; 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: A C303 in the VFR traffic pattern; on a right base to runway 34 at approximately 3;000 feet; reported sighting a 'UAV' approximately 500-1;000 feet below him.  This was reported to the control tower on tower frequency.  The tower controller reported this to the OCIC.  The OCIC failed to log the incident or file an MOR.  No record of contacting anyone else; including law enforcement. Training on 'drone' procedures/reporting requirements.




Synopsis: BGM Tower is informed of a UAV in the traffic pattern by a C303 pilot. Unfortunately the OCIC failed to log the incident or file an MOR.
Date: 201907
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Dawn
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Chart Or Publication
Primary problem: Chart Or Publication

Narrative: CHARTS+ software crashed multiple times during preflight and while taxiing out  to active runway.  Switched back to Jeppesen PRO X and continued flight safely back to ZZZ.  Also inaccurate information on Tower hours of operation in Charts +. After following instructions in company email to delete and reinstall Charts + and continue to use; Charts + is still very unstable and not reliable.  Will continue to use Jeppesen in all phases of flight.




Synopsis: Air carrier First Officer reported Chart+ software crashing and inaccurate information on the charts.
Date: 201705
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: MSP.Airport, MN
Flight conditions: Mixed
Weather elements / visibility: Windshear; 7
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower MSP
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Troubleshooting; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Weather
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: After pushing from the gate; weather began to move in; necessitating several runway changes from Ground. After finally commencing taxi to 30L; we went down the west taxiway; and saw approximately four to five (other carrier) aircraft lined up on the east taxiway for the same runway. We taxied into number one for our side (checklists complete) when Tower gave us a precipitation advisory for departure; and said 'Tell us what you want to do'. The FO and I both agreed that it was acceptable for departure; requested a left turn; and accepted the takeoff clearance. Takeoff was uneventful until approximately 100 KIAS; when over Tower frequency we heard 'Windshear warning for departure end 30L; approximately 15 knot gain'; due to our speed; no indicators inside the aircraft were received. Immediately following Tower's call; as we neared V1; someone came on the radio and said; 'that's why no one else is taking off'; a very inappropriate time regarding the phase of flight we were in; trying to deal with a rapidly changing situation; we didn't need snarky comments congesting the radios. I quickly verbalized to the FO upon rotation 'Let's stay configured' just in case we encountered windshear. We gained approximately 10 knots; but the ride was not too rough; and we cleaned up at approximately 1000 AGL. I reported this back to Tower before switching to Departure Control. The rest of the flight was uneventful.We should have recognized the potential for windshear; and despite nothing being reported by ATC or ATIS; should have planned on the predictive windshear profile. More importantly; when someone is on takeoff roll with windshear reported; we do not need to be jamming up the radios with ancillary; snide comments. It was distracting; unnecessary; and wholly unprofessional. I don't know if Tower said anything about it to the aircraft waiting; we were a little busy.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported a windshear warning from the tower during takeoff and commented about distracting radio communications.
Date: 201207
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Regional Jet 700 ER/LR (CRJ700)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Powerplant Lubrication System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
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; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Somewhere between 7;000 FT and 8;000 FT the Captain noticed the right engine oil temperature was in the red. I confirmed this; it was reading around 167 degrees and climbing. The Captain asked me to run the 'High Oil Temp' QRH checklist and stated that he would talk to ATC. The QRH was preformed and the oil temperature did not decrease; in fact it was increasing and I saw a maximum temperature of around 178. Sometime around the end of the High Oil Temp checklist; the Flight Attendants called us to ask if they could get out of their seats and I informed them of our situation and let them know that we might have to shut down an engine and return. By this time the Captain had already declared the emergency and notified ATC. I informed the flight attendants that we were indeed shutting down an engine and returning. With everybody notified; I began to run the Single Engine Procedure. The Captain; in-between answering ATC's questions and setting up navigation radios; was able to confirm the steps in the engine shutdown procedure. After the QRH procedure was complete; I noticed ATC had turned us north to help lose more altitude; so I made a quick PA to the passengers to explain the situation. I ran some numbers in the ACARS to get the landing data; I entered the QRH factor; but forgot to change the fuel so I ran it again. By this time we were very close to landing and the Captain called for gear down and the before landing check. After and out of order; I ran the arrival checklist and reset the pressurization. We were now at about 500 FT and I began to give the Captain airspeed and decent rate callouts. We touched down very smoothly at 200 FPM and rolled down the runway. When we got to the gate and attached the jetway; I made a quick walk around to check for oil leaks and notice a little smoke from the warm brakes. With over 29;000 hours of combined flight experience; this was the first engine shutdown for either crewmember. I thought it went very well. Some things happened a little out of order; but very step was accomplished. I don't feel there is anything in procedures or training that would need to be changed.




Synopsis: CRJ700 First Officer describes an in-flight engine shut down for high oil temperature and return to the departure airport.
Date: 202108
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Robinson R44
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: UNICOM ZZZ
Second aircraft: Helicopter
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Human-Machine Interface; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: After a near miss from a single-pilot 135 operator; Company Helicopters; I went over to discuss the events that had just unfolded. The pilot refused to talk to me and get out of the aircraft. He later exited the aircraft and proceeded to lie to me; law enforcement; and the FAA.




Synopsis: R44 pilot reported taking evasive action to avoid another helicopter and after landing; the other pilot refused to communicate to the reporting pilot and was inaccurate with their statements to officials.