elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201302
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: A320
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Landing Gear
Component problem: Malfunctioning
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
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; General Declared Emergency; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: After liftoff I tried to raise the landing gear. The gear handle would not move and ECAM message L/G SHOCK ABSORBER FAULT was displayed. Other faults such as WINDSHEAR DET FAULT; ANTI-ICE FO FAULT; ATO FLT A/THR OFF; BRAKES AUTO BRK FAULT; BRAKES A/SKID N/WS FAULT were also displayed. We advised ATC; Company Maintenance; and Airport Operations of our intended return to our departure airport. We declared an emergency with ATC and were vectored while we accomplished the related abnormal procedures. We were able to get nose wheel steering and normal brakes back through ECAM follow-up using the QRH. We briefed the flight attendants for a precautionary landing and made a PA to the passengers to explain our return. Finally; we advised ATC we would be able to land with normal braking; clear the runway and taxi to the gate.




Synopsis: When the A320's landing gear lever failed to move after takeoff and numerous ECAM messages were presented the flight crew followed the appropriate QRH and ECAM procedures returning many of the lost functions; diverted back to their departure airport and landed without further incident.
Date: 201905
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: DEN.Airport, CO
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B737 Next Generation Undifferentiated
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class B DEN
ATC / advisory: TRACON D01
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Workload
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Inbound Denver and prior to the approach Denver Center re-issued new approach procedure. Shortly after that time we were advised to expect holding due to the airport was closed due to wind shear micro-burst. Released early from the holding and told to expect no additional delay is inbound. Shortly after; approach changed the arrival again; told [us] to expect landing to the north; third approach procedure change. Then we were told to expect RNAV Z 34L. We started to set up for the multiple changes and then started to question the very unusual 34L Arrival. First Officer inquired with approach and they said to expect 34R! Once again re-loaded re-briefed in a hurry for the 34R Approach RNAV Zulu. Shortly after we realized that we had not connected the RNAV approach with the arrival. We overflew first fix and advised approach shortly after that we would not be turning inbound and continued the downwind. There was no loss of separation. They quickly advised altitude heading and turned us back shortly [after] for an ILS Approach 34R.




Synopsis: B737NG Captain reported a track deviation occurred on arrival into DEN following multiple clearance changes.
Date: 201507
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Q400
Operator: Air Carrier
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
Second aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors; Airport
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: We were facing South on [the] taxiway . When we called Ground for taxi; they said; 'Taxi to Runway 34'. I read it back; looked to the right to make sure it was clear; and then said 'clear right'. The Captain started his taxi and started turning right to join taxiway B. I looked over the right to double check that it was clear and an B737 jet was right in front of us on taxiway B. I immediately yelled; 'Stop'. When the Captain was slow to react; I got on the brakes as well. The Captain couldn't see the B737 until we were already nose to wingtip. When we stopped we were probably within 15 or 20 feet of the B737's wingtip. The B737 didn't stop and as far as I could tell didn't even slowdown. Ground didn't say anything else to us; so when Ground transferred us to Tower; the Captain told Ground that they should have given us a heads up about the B737 and that we got pretty close to them.




Synopsis: Q400 First Officer describes a near ground collision with a B737. The Q400; facing South; called for taxi and was cleared to 'Taxi to Runway 34'. The Captain begins a right turn to transition to the taxiway and the First Officer detects the South bound B737. The traffic is called out then the First Officer applies brakes when the Captain is slow to respond; narrowly avoiding a collision.
Date: 202003
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: B757-200
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
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 Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: On [arrival] on a VFR day at 9000 feet I called for Flaps 1 at 210 knots. We got a leading edge disagree. I said 'my aircraft 'and directed FO (First Officer) to do the QRH. I handed FO my iPad with QRH ready while the FO's [troubleshooting app] was loading. Training department does not teach our pilots to have [the troubleshooting app] up and running for every flight. I always do; but many of my copilots don't. This is a fundamental training failure/issue as many of us go to the iPad for emergencies. FO did a great job of working through a somewhat elaborate flight control checklist with a re-direct to asymmetry checklist. We reviewed QRH steps twice because I was overly cautious. All steps were accomplished properly. We coordinated everything with ATC; including a request to notify company. However; ATC did not call [central operations]; but instead called the Local Operations who failed to pass the info to [central ops]/Dispatch. As pilots we were both concerned about the min maneuvering hook being so close to our airspeed. A note in the QRH would've been helpful. Also; despite the fact that flap override was selected and all checklist steps were followed; we got numerous EGPWS terrain warnings below 200 feet while landing. The checklist should have you turn off [the EGPWS] also; very distracting! Smooth landing and ARFF (Airport Rescue Fire Fighting) was great! ATC other than calling Ops versus [central operations] was excellent. We taxied to the gate. Repeat Mx (maintenance) write up. They didn't find the cause of the first failure of slats to extend or trouble shoot enough to confirm proper operation. Maintenance should have done a more thorough job after the first occurrence. Also; deselecting EPGWS should be part of the leading edge flap asymmetry checklist.




Synopsis: B757 Captain reported landing safely after experiencing a leading edge flap disagree alert.
Date: 201711
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: Regional Jet 900 (CRJ900)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi; Parked
ATC / advisory: Ramp ZZZ
Aircraft component: Winglet
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Ground Event / Encounter Vehicle
Detector: Person Gate Agent / CSR
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors; Airport
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Arrived at assigned gate. Marshallers signaled area clear to park at gate and deplane. Marshallers guided aircraft on wrong line for CRJ-900. Left winglet contacted ground equipment.Improve ground personnel training - close monitoring of new ground personnel; especially during night ops. Improve situational awareness among all parties involved.


Second narrative: Taxi in. Ground crew guided aircraft in on wrong line at gate. Wing walker was standing in front of object when aircraft impacted. At no point was a stop signal given. Aircraft struck something. Capt. stopped aircraft. At no point did anyone give the stop signal. Even after hitting something. Wing walkers and guide personnel need to do the job they are standing there to do. Multiple lines need to be color coded according to aircraft size if more than one lead in line is to be used at the gate.


Synopsis: CRJ-900 flight crew reported that they taxied in on the wrong line and the winglet made contact with ground equipment.
Date: 201904
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZBW.ARTCC, NH
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 145 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZBW
ATC / advisory: Center ZBW
Second aircraft: B777 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: While in cruise flight at FL330; ATC had sped up a B777 behind us to M.85 2;000 feet above our flight level; as it passed us overhead; we then encountered its wake. At the time it passed us; we were in a high layer of cloud cover and had no visual reference to this aircraft. Once we had encountered its wake; our autopilot failed and the Pilot Flying; (the First Officer); hand flew from that point on. ATC was advised; we turned to avoid any further turbulence from the aircraft and given a lower flight level due to no longer being RVSM capable. [We ran] the QRH for autopilot fail on the EICAS. The cabin was contacted and the report from our flight attendant was that no one was injured. During this event; the fasten belt sign was on. Company was sent a maintenance request via ACARS and we landed without any further incidents.




Synopsis: EMB-145 Captain reported encountering wake turbulence from a B777 2;000 feet above them in cruise flight that resulted in loss of their autopilot.
Date: 201312
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: M-20 M Bravo
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Landing
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Gear Extend/Retract Mechanism
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Distraction
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Gear Up Landing
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Other Impact of prop with runway
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was asked to keep my base for Runway 17 within a mile and keep the speed up because of an MD-80 on a nine mile final. I kept 140K until a one mile left base; and upon reaching 1;100 feet; I reduced the power to 12 inches of manifold and used the speed brakes to slow down. Below 140K I put the gear handle down; felt the gear move; and went to finish the rest of my before landing checklist. After I put the flaps down. I was around 1;000 feet from the numbers and I had 4 whites on the PAPI; so I reduced power to idle. There was no audible gear warning horn. I quickly ran a GUMPS check; and I believed the airplane was configured. Smoothly entering ground effect; I allowed it to make contact with the runway and heard a metallic sound. Soon after; the propeller stopped and the aircraft came to a stop on the runway. The only thing I could think of was the MD80 on short final so I prompted them to go around. After securing the airplane; the gear handle was down but the gear actuator circuit breaker was out.Contributing factors are the fact the plane had been in maintenance for four weeks; the landing was night time; and I was asked to keep it fast and close to the runway. I feel if I had rejected the clearance and extended downwind behind the MD80 I would [have] had more time to notice the gear was not fully down. Although the checklist was completed; I had a detection error of not noticing the gear was not fully down; due to the time constraint from configuring to landing. Night time also made it a factor as I could not physically see the circuit breaker had popped out. The fact that the gear warning horn did not sound; further contributed to the error.




Synopsis: Expediting his arrival to help sequence a following MD80 landing the pilot of an M20-M failed to note his landing gear had failed to extend completely and landed gear up and disabled on the runway. The pilot made a transmission to the MD-80 advising of the predicament.
Date: 201505
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: STL.Airport, MO
Aircraft: Medium Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground STL
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Pushing back we were told to push to 'the 16 spot' by ground.  I told the ground crew 'brakes released; cleared to push 16 spot' and they acknowledged and began the push.  We were cleared to start one and did so.  They pushed us back only just off the gate and asked me to set the brake.  I depressed the toe brakes and said 'brakes set'; but before I set the parking brake I asked right away if they were going to push (much) farther to 16 spot.  They said this is where they always push us.  I never said 'cleared to disconnect' and they had removed the tow bar right when I initially said 'brakes set'.  I realized we were starting to roll and they asked again if we could set brakes because we were starting to roll.  I did; and then asked ground if we could just disconnect there because the crew was already disconnected and they said that would be fine.  There were no further issues and we were waved off and on our way.It would help if the ground crew received the 'clear to disconnect' first before disconnecting.  It would also help if they didn't know where spot 16 was; that they ask instead of just pushing where they always push.   I wasn't sure why they asked me to set brakes initially since we were nowhere near '16 spot' which is why I just got on the toe brakes assuming we would continue; and that we were still connected to the tug.  I probably should have just set the parking brake so we would all be on the same page and then figure out the confusion.




Synopsis: During pushback; a tug crew failed to push the aircraft to the proper location and disconnected the tow bar before obtaining clearance from the flight crew. The aircraft momentarily began to roll before the flight crew applied brakes.
Date: 202102
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ2.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ2
Aircraft component: Service/Access Door
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Diverted; General Maintenance Action; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: At FL210 master warning fuselage doors illuminated. Ran appropriate checklists; and talked to the flight attendants. It was deemed that the aft passenger door was not properly seated. We advised ATC and decided to divert to the nearest suitable airport (ZZZ). Safe outcome of flight.We eventually got on call maintenance to the aircraft; without having a definitive answer; it was decided the most likely issue was that the door may have never been closed and latched properly. The aft passenger door was opened and closed in ZZZ1.After maintenance ops check good; and getting refueled we continued to ZZZ2.I do feel as though our crew handled the situation well. I think some take aways are that while we were closest to ZZZ; there was a thought in the back of my head thinking that turning back to ZZZ1; or continuing to ZZZ3 were also good options; however the checklists drove us to nearest suitable which was ZZZ. In the future I would probably make the same decision; but it has given me thought. I also wonder if it would be good procedure to have the flight attendants just push on the door handle prior to departure to have one more check on the door security. One of our flight attendants had this exact same experience on this airplane approximately 1 week prior so there seems to be a systemic issue to address here.




Synopsis: Captain reported a diversion after the aft entry door triggered the Master Warning Doors Light.
Date: 201202
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: B737-700
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Escape Slide
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant In Charge; Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: During preflight safety checks; my forward entry slide gauge was in the red. I notified the Captain; who verified with my flashlight that it was in the red. A call was made to Dispatch to arrange for a swap in a down line station. During the 20 minutes it took the Captain to speak with Dispatch; the outside temperature did cause the pressure gauge to move up slightly on the red/green line. The Captain decided it would be fixed later and we departed. We were told that we would be having a swap of aircraft or the slide would be replaced. Upon arrival; I noticed the gauge was back in the red. Maintenance was called to look at it and signed off the gauge was reading on the red/green line. I was told by the Captain that if I felt uncomfortable; I was free to leave and that he would find a different crew to work the trip. The aircraft was dispatched with a potentially inoperative slide for the sake of not taking a delay. Flight attendants must pay more attention to slide gauges during their preflight safety checks. If there is a window of temperature differentials; that needs to be shared with the Flight Attendant work group. Our procedures for handling slides in the RED or RED/GREEN line need to be clearly defined and shared with the respective work groups.




Synopsis: A B737 Flight Attendant discovered an entry slide gauge in the red during preflight and informed the Captain. During the time it took to discuss the situation with Maintenance ambient temperatures and the gauge pressure rose to be on the red/green line allowing the flight to depart.
Date: 201308
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B767 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Aircraft component: Electronic Flt Bag (EFB)
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Manuals
Primary problem: Manuals

Narrative: My company issued EFB continually dumps; resulting in loss of display of the selected document and kicking the EFB back to a state where it needs to be reopened with a password. This happens when changing documents or just displaying any document or paging through a document. This is very disheartening when it happens in the middle of an emergency or irregular procedure.




Synopsis: B767 First Officer reports EFB difficulties requiring a password login any time a page is changed.
Date: 201705
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Ramp
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew; Person Ground Personnel
When detected: Taxi
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Airport
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: There is a depression where the tarmac and the concrete meet causing aircraft to get stuck. They do not have enough speed to make it over the bump. Pilots are throttling up trying to make it over causing dangerous situations. This results in the gate crew telling pilots to shut down engines and towing aircraft into gate. Pushbacks also struggle to pull through the depression.




Synopsis: A ramp employee reported a tarmac depression causes flight crew to add power during taxi-in and creates and more dangerous ramp environment.