elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201201
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: A319
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: Hydraulic Main System
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Engineer; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Workload; Training / Qualification; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: At cruise altitude received a 'HYD G ENG 1 PUMP LO PRESS' ECAM followed by 'HYD G RSVR LO LVL' ECAM; followed by a 'PTU FAULT' ECAM. We performed the ECAM procedures and determined the landing length requirement at the same time contacted our controlling Dispatcher who also determined that we were able to continue to our destination. We declared an emergency with Approach; asked to have equipment standing by and requested the ILS rather than the usual approach. We manually extended the landing gear; made a normal landing and were able to clear the runway onto Runway XX holding short of Lima. The emergency crew did an aircraft walk around and cleared our company tug to tow us to the gate.




Synopsis: An A310 ECAM alerted HYD G ENG 1 PUMP LO PRESS; HYD G RSVR LO LVL and finally PTU FAULT. The ECAM procedures were completed and the flight continued to it filed destination.
Date: 202101
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: CLT.TRACON, NC
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 B CLT
ATC / advisory: TRACON CLT
Second aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter
Result: Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: We were on approach into CLT  [Runway] 18C; level at 4;000 ft. We encountered wake turbulence which disconnected the auto pilot and caused us to take action to correct the aircraft from an upset state. Once corrected we contacted ATC and were able to continue the approach to landing with no other issues. Hard rolling action which disconnected auto pilot. Wake turbulence.  Corrected the state of the aircraft and corrected back on course after deviation. As we did keep focused on the airplane and be ready for anything.

Callback: Reporter stated the roll rate was sudden and aggressive.



Synopsis: EMB-145 F/irst Officer reported encountering wake turbulence on approach to CLT that caused a 'hard roll' and disconnected the autopilot.
Date: 201305
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: STT.Airport, VI
Aircraft: A319
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower STT
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Rejected Takeoff; Flight Crew Returned To Gate; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Cleared for takeoff; First Officer pilot flying. At approximately 30 knots I became concerned that boxed MAN FLEX had not appeared in FMA. At the same time the chime; master warning; and ECAM message Eng 2 Thrust Lever Disagree illuminated. We aborted takeoff; advised Tower; exited runway; contacted MOC; and returned to the gate for maintenance action.




Synopsis: During takeoff; an A-319-132 crew noticed the absence of 'MAN FLEX' in the FMA by 30 knots accompanied by a warning chime; a master warning; and an ECAM 'Eng 2 Thrust Lever Disagree' indication. A low speed rejected takeoff was accomplished and the aircraft was returned to the gate for maintenance action.
Date: 202109
Aircraft: B737 Next Generation Undifferentiated
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Fuel Quantity-Pressure Indication
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General Work Refused
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Aircraft refused TWICE due to inop fuel gauges and totalizer.




Synopsis: B737NG Captain reported refusing to operate the aircraft due to fuel gauges and fuel totalizer being deferred inoperative.
Date: 201905
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: D10.TRACON, TX
Flight conditions: IMC
Aircraft: Embraer Jet Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B DFW
ATC / advisory: TRACON D10
Second aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Workload; Situational Awareness; Distraction
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter
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: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: As we were cleared to descend to 3000 ft into DFW we encountered moderate wake turbulence around 7500 ft that forced to use TCS [Touch Control Steering] to maintain control of the aircraft. We were giving clearance to level off at 6000 ft and turn to the left. As we were busy maintaining control of the aircraft we forgot to set 6000 ft in the altitude selection and ended up noticing it at 5400 ft. We checked with Approach and were told that we were supposed [to] level at 6000 ft but now level at 5000 ft. After we landed we called ATC to make sure everything was fine and was told it was a nonevent and we shouldn't worry about it. During a high work load of trying to maintain a positive control on the aircraft; we failed to comply with ATC instructions but tried our best to maintain aircraft control. Always cross check and verbalize that the flight crew is following the proper ATC instructions and if any doubt always double check with ATC.


Second narrative: [Report narrative contained no additional information]


Synopsis: EMB flight crew reported overshooting a cleared altitude after encountering wake turbulence on arrival into DFW.
Date: 201502
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: A300
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: Pneumatic Valve/Bleed Valve
Component problem: Design
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
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: # 1 Bleed Value MEL inoperative.  Aircraft limited to FL310.  At FL310 we got a #2 Bleed Valve Fault.  As per ECAM tried to reset it.  It would not reset.  Advised Center that we lost the ability to Pressurize and requested a descent to 10;000 ft.  Flew direct to ZZZ at 9;000 feet to an uneventful landing.#2 Bleed fault with no reset.   #1 Bleed Valve MEL inop.  Fix the Bleed Value when it breaks and do not MEL it.


Second narrative: Started descent; First Officer was pilot flying. We got our O2 mask on! I was coordinating with Center; then started on ECAM items. By the time I finished ECAM and got into QRH we were through 19;000 feet. QRH mentioned starting APU. By this time we were close to 10;000 feet and 124 NM from ZZZ. Did not start APU; and proceeded direct to ZZZ at 9;000 feet. Uneventful landing ZZZ.


Synopsis: A300 flight crew reports being dispatched with the number one bleed valve deferred. At FL310 the number two bleed valve faults and cannot be reset; resulting in an emergency descent and diversion to a suitable airport.
Date: 201505
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: DFW.Airport, TX
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class A ZFW
ATC / advisory: Center ZFW
Aircraft component: MCP
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Human-Machine Interface
Second reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Upon tracking the JOVEM Arrival we received multiple airspeed and altitude changes including cleared to FL240; FL220 then via the JOVEM Arrival to 8000 feet; then back to 11000 feet; 270 knots; 250 knots; 280 knots then back to 250 knots. Theses rapid fire changes even persisted throughout final with two additional airspeed changes up to the final fix; (eight airspeed changes and five altitude changes). We were in level change while making one of the changes to the FMC when we noticed we were below 12000 prior to JOVEM. We promptly returned to 12000 and proceeded on the arrival uneventful.Please reduce the number of airspeed and altitude changes during descents and approaches. Our changes today occurred up to; and including; the final approach fix even though we were cleared a visual.


Second narrative: Arriving expecting the JOVEM Arrival; ATC gave us a different point with crossing restriction and three speed changes before the first crossing restriction point on the arrival. The changes came so quickly and in close that we could not program the FMC fast enough; forcing us to use level change; with the speedbrakes fully extended. ATC then gave us another speed change and 'via the JOVEM Arrival.' We put 8000 in the altitude window as previously briefed; but we were still in level change. We went below 12000 prior to JOVEM. We stopped the descent; climbed back to 12000 in Vertical Speed; and re-engaged VNAV/LNAV with speed intervene. We continued to be taken off the vertical portion of the arrival; and continued to receive speed changes all the way to the marker. Eight speed changes; and 5 altitude changes until being cleared for the visual approach to 35C. ATC cannot give out that many speed and altitude changes on an arrival - it was beyond the capability of the FMC. For myself; I should have reset my thought process from trying to get to VNAV; to all manual much further out.


Synopsis: During arrival procedure; B-737 crew overshot published minimum altitude. Crew had received numerous altitude and airspeed changes from ATC and neglected to engage VNAV.
Date: 201308
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: SMO.Airport, CA
Aircraft: PA-46 Malibu Meridian
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class D SMO
ATC / advisory: Tower SMO
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Local
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: A P46T on GPS approach Runway 21. The hourly weather was right at minimums. SMO has a circling approach but we do not allow them to circle via LOA because of conflict with LAX. We also do not give published missed for same reason. We issue; 'At SMO VOR turn right heading 250 climb to 3;000.' The P46T heard me issue these to the jet he was following. The jet asked to repeat. I repeated and he read back. I issued the jet frequency change; no response. I issued it again. Then at 700 FT; over the approach end; I issued MA instructions to the P46T. No response. I saw his target south of field (left) at 600 FT. I asked if he copied and he said just a second. By now he was turning left towards LAX. I gave instruct again. In the meantime; Ground Control and I were completing mandatory coordination with LAX and SCT. By the time he turned and acknowledged the whole thing had fallen apart. LAX told Ground Control we had to give more of a turn and to call SCT. SCT responded they were really busy when she tried to call so she told him we would give 270. The pilot was so overwhelmed; or disorientated; or whatever; when I gave him 270. I issued altitude again and a frequency and he only read back the frequency I switched him without noticing he never read back altitude because there was so much going on over speaker with co-ordination. This problem has been identified on several occasions. We all know that until we get a straight in procedure this approach has potential for very serious problems. SMO is in constant conflict with LAX; one of the busiest airports and tiniest airspace footprint.




Synopsis: SMO Controller voiced concern regarding the GPS Approach procedure to Runway 21 describing a recent event that included a missed approach and potential conflict with LAX traffic.
Date: 202104
Location: ZID.ARTCC, IN
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class E ZID
ATC / advisory: CTAF BFR
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Human factors: Distraction
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Chart Or Publication
Primary problem: Chart Or Publication

Narrative: BFR VOR 13 Approach has an uncharted tower approx 17.4 DME [on] Radial159 [off the] OOM [VOR].  Right of course approximately 2 miles from runway.  VFR practice approach; saw a tower which seemed way too close for separation and was uncharted on all charts and sectionals. I would no longer do this approach in IMC due to this obstruction.




Synopsis: Pilot conducting a practice VOR Approach to a non towered airport reported a tower near the final approach course two miles from the runway is not depicted on any charts.
Date: 201209
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: FLL.Airport, FL
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground FLL
Second aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Confusion; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors; Environment - Non Weather Related; Airport
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: We called for push back Clearance from Ramp Control. We were told to 'push to spot T on Taxiway C.' We were not told to remain on Ramp Control frequency after engine start and established on C we called Ground Control for taxi instructions. The FAA Ground Controller gave us instructions to 'taxi to Runway 9L via C cross [Runway] 13.' I turned on the aircraft taxi light and started to move the aircraft forward. I noticed another Air Carrier on Taxiway B moving at a very high rate of speed. I commented to the First Officer 'boy look how fast he is going.' As we started to move I could see that the other Air Carrier was not going to stop or was not going to pass behind us. I applied full breaking and came to a stop. The other Air Carrier passed within 5 feet of our nose. The pilot of the other Air Carrier never turned his head to look for traffic! I asked the Ground Controller who was talking the other Air Carrier. He said the county Ramp Control. I asked if Taxiway B was his movement area. 'Yes sir it is.' I then said 'you have 2 different controllers on 2 different frequencies controlling the same movement area.' 'Yes sir that's the way the county set it up.' When I talked to the Supervisor he told me that the county put the Ramp Control in to expedite the other air carrier aircraft to their gate. It would appear at all cost. Safety is not a consideration.

Callback: The Reporter stated that Ramp Control was located in a temporary ground level mobile structure north of Runway 9L/27R and probably did not have a perspective of the aircraft on the ramp which an elevated Tower would provide. The relationship between the FAA Tower and the County Government Ramp Control was a concession to an air carrier which wanted expedited handling to and from their gate. However; the lack of coordination has created a potential conflict; particularly with aircraft taxiing at high speed.



Synopsis: A Captain under FLL FAA Ground Control clearance took evasive action because another Air Carrier under Ramp Control was given clearance to it gate and was taxiing at a high speed without concern for other aircraft.
Date: 201302
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Flap Control (Trailing & Leading Edge)
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach; General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Flaps split while configuring for landing [somewhere] less than 30 degrees. Executed a missed approach and declared an emergency with ATC; and diverted and landed uneventfully. Unable to retract flaps on missed approach.It was a repeated item in the logbook and signed off.




Synopsis: B737-800 flight crew experienced a flap asymmetry during approach; flaps would not retract during go-around. Eventually diverted and landed in emergency condition.
Date: 201811
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: FMS/FMC
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Distraction; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Undershoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We were climbing from FL 330 given a clearance to FL 360. Aircraft briefly leveled at initial cruise altitude FL 340 before Aircrew intervention. [Center] queried if we received the clearance to FL 360. As a result of the brief delay [Center] issued brief off course vectors to both us and converging traffic. Causal factors were equipment: not much experience in MAX-800; as a result; still have to search for everything. Automation: Upon receipt of FL 360 clearance and after the Captain dialed the MCP Altitude 36;000 FT; I should have; but failed to; ensured the cruise altitude reflected FL 360. Engaging the ALT INTV button would have facilitated the process. The solution is to Verify/Verbalize/Monitor. Verifying the CDU cruise altitude (NAV 2/3) would have prevented the temporary level off. Monitoring would have mitigated the delay at FL 340 but could have been timelier. As a relatively new First Officer; I had not seen this issue. However; I could have done a better job with VVM (Verbalize; Verify; Monitor) to back up the Captain with his duties while flying. Had I seen the momentary level off; I might have been able to alert ATC of it; avoiding any confusion or deviation of what the expectations were.




Synopsis: B737 MAX8 First Officer reported an altitude deviation due to an intermediate level off by the aircraft automation.