elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201305
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: DC-9 30
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Powerplant Lubrication System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Human factors: Confusion; Distraction; Human-Machine Interface; Situational Awareness; Troubleshooting; Workload
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Just as we rotated the 'Master Caution' illuminated in association with the 'L Oil Pressure Low' annunciator.  After we achieved a positive rate we decided to leave the gear down; so as to not reconfigure the aircraft in the climb; and return immediately to the airport.  After acceleration height was reached we advised Departure we wanted to return.  As we turned downwind all associated normal checklists were called for.  The Oil Pressure Low and Oil Quantity Decreasing Procedures were started in the downwind.  The Tower asked if we were declaring an emergency but; at that time; we elected not to.  On downwind; abeam the numbers for XXR; the oil quantity had almost reached zero; and we decided not to extend the downwind but to land the aircraft as soon as possible.  By this time all normal checklists had been completed.  The abnormal checklists were beginning to lead us to perform a precautionary shutdown of the engine.  At that time and due to the close proximity of the airport we elected to continue to land and perform the shutdown on the ground.  On final we determined that the autospoilers would not arm and the one left antiskid light; whose warning had just illuminated; were not going to function upon touchdown.  With manual spoilers; our max landing weight was approximately 92;000 pounds with zero head wind.  We then made a 'no-go-around' decision due to lack of oil quantity.  After landing the thrust reversers were deployed but no power was used on the left engine.  After reversers were stowed the left engine was immediately shutdown. Ops was then contacted during taxi.  VFR was maintained for the duration of the flight.


Second narrative: No additional information was provided in the secondary narrative.


Synopsis: When they received a Master Caution and 'L Engine Oil Pressure Low' warning at rotation the flight crew of a DC-9-30 continued the takeoff and returned to the airport.  While flying the pattern to land the left engine oil quantity approached zero; the autospoiler system failed to arm and one left antiskid light illuminated. They elected not to declare an emergency and to not to shut down the engine until after landing.
Date: 201904
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: B737-700
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant In Charge
Reporter qualification: Flight Attendant Current
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Hazardous Material Violation; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: During the pre-boarding phase of boarding a man comes on with a foldable mobility scooter and asks if he is able to stow it in the wheelchair compartment. I tell him yes; and then ask him if his mobility scooter has a lithium battery. The passenger tells me yes; so I asked him if it was removable; and he says yes. I call the B Flight Attendant who refers to the manual which says the battery must be stowed separately from the device. The passenger removes the battery; and stows the scooter in the wheelchair stowage compartment. I inform the Captain of what is going on and they refer to their manual; which appears to say that the lithium battery device should be stowed as checked baggage; so they call headquarters for clarification and [are] told that the battery should be separated and also taped on either side to avoid short circuiting. When the Operations Agent comes down I inform them of what is going on with the lithium battery and what headquarters said; and they call a Ramp Supervisor to come and look at the battery. The Ramp Supervisor approves of the stowage of the battery. I inform the Captain; who also agrees.I think a universal procedure between different work groups to identify and understand the proper stowage of lithium batteries would help to prevent this confusion and misunderstanding. Having the Operations Agent alert cabin crew to the presence and type of lithium battery prior to boarding could ensure that all departments are on the same page about procedures for lithium batteries; and that these procedures are being upheld consistently. Also; the wording in the manual about the different types of lithium batteries could be made more clear as to avoid the confusion about which devices are to be stowed where.




Synopsis: B737-700 Flight Attendant reported widespread misunderstanding between departments regarding the procedures for safe transport of Lithium Ion Batteries.
Date: 201305
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Citation II S2/Bravo (C550)
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Confusion; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: Taxi
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We were given taxi instructions; which I wrote down and readback; and then received confirmation. The Captain proceeded to taxi; [on what] we both thought was the correct route. The Ground Controller then called us and asked that we call the Tower when we arrived at our destination. I asked what the problem was; and she said we caused a pilot [deviation]. The Captain called and was explained the situation; and told the tapes would be reviewed; and we would be contacted. We had crossed an active runway and caused an aircraft to go around. This airport has 11 hotspots; which for a 5;000 foot runway seems excessive. I was not aware that there is a time limit for reporting.




Synopsis: A C550 crew inadvertently crossed an active runway forcing another aircraft's go around because; after reading back their taxi clearance; they followed what they believed was the cleared route for takeoff.
Date: 201212
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Scout 8GCBC
Operator: Other Pipeline Patrol
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Utility / Infrastructure
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class G ZZZ
ATC / advisory: UNICOM ZZZ
Second aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Reporter organization: Other Pipeline Patrol
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC; Inflight Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I am a pipeline patrol pilot and was starting on a patrol. I was departing from my private airstrip making a normal left hand pattern departure. Under the crosswind part was an auto accident. I took a couple photos as I was climbing out and continued left turn until I was on a 040 degree heading toward an airport where I top off my fuel. It is a little used uncontrolled airport and I was monitoring UNICOM. It was a perfect weather day where visibility was forever. I saw or heard no other traffic. On downwind; I radioed; 'On left downwind for two'. Then the radio cracked with something I didn't understand; except I did hear [the airport name and a broken call sign]. So I radioed; what is your position? The State Trooper radioed that he was at my two o'clock and would see me on the ramp. I looked over and he was about 200 FT horizontal and 50 FT vertical on my right side. That scared me to death because he wasn't there a second or two earlier. I told him that since I was inside him in the pattern; I would go ahead and land. Once again he said something about seeing me on the ramp. The fuel truck met me as I got to the ramp as usual. I was up on the ladder fueling when the trooper came over and said; 'step down from that ladder.' I told him I would be finished in a few seconds. He said once again; 'step down from that ladder NOW!' I turned around and it looked like his right hand was where the gun should be. I had to stop and hand the hose to the fuel driver. He asked me if my name was Mr X; so I was already checked out. Then he asked if I had any weapons. I told him I didn't have any. He said; 'you sure you don't have any weapons?' I again told him no. Then he asked if I had any knives. I said yes and handed him my Swiss Army knife; which he didn't take. I was being bullied. I handed him my medical and commercial license after he demanded them. He wanted to know how long I have been flying. He said I was flying low. I said yes; I was; I told him I have a low level waiver for my work and I had just departed my strip and flew to [this airport] at a safe altitude. He made me nervous and I think whatever his job is; he should not be chasing other airplanes like that.




Synopsis: Scout pilot reports being intercepted and followed to his destination by a State Trooper. On the ground the reporter is accused of flying too low.
Date: 201405
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ONT.Tower, CA
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Helicopter
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Tactical
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class C ONT
ATC / advisory: Tower ONT
Second aircraft: Medium Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Local
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Separated Traffic
Contributing factors: Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I was working Local Control.  Runway 26L and 26R were in use.  I had Aircraft X in the airspace maneuvering 2 miles northwest ONT departure end and 017.  I received the departure strip for an Aircraft Y on a Pomona7 departure SID; a westbound departure.  I first called traffic to Aircraft X about the traffic to depart ONT westbound and gave a cautionary wake turbulence call.  Aircraft X responded he was looking for traffic.  I flashed the departure and received a release from the Pomona sector at SoCal.  I then reached out to my departure and gave the traffic on Aircraft X; but the departure wasn't ready yet.  Meanwhile Aircraft X asked to climb to 045 and switch communications to SoCal for surveillance work.  I performed the necessary scratch pad tasks and handed off Aircraft X to SoCal Pomona sector.  Once SoCal accepted the handoff I switched communications on Aircraft X to SoCal.My departure called ready; so I looked at where Aircraft X was and the aircraft was still northwest 2 miles climbing and now talking to the Pomona sector; the same sector that released my departure.  I then cleared the departure for takeoff because Aircraft X at his present location was not a factor for the departure.  In scanning as my departure is on takeoff roll I recognized Aircraft X has flown south into the departure corridor so as soon as my departure was airborne climbing out of approximately 014 feet I radar contacted Aircraft Y and called traffic on the Aircraft X.  The traffic call was 'traffic 12 o'clock two miles maneuvering; 031 climbing.'  Aircraft Y said he was looking for the traffic.In this instance; SoCal normally will not allow aircraft into the departure part of an aircraft they released or they would assign an altitude for the departing aircraft which they did not.  Maybe the release should have been canceled if they were going to allow Aircraft X to utilize the departure corridor or kept Aircraft X climbing north of the departure corridor until he was high enough to not be a factor for departing traffic.




Synopsis: ONT Local Controller departs IFR traffic and a previous helicopter the Tower handed off to the TRACON is traffic for the departure.
Date: 201201
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: PHL.Airport, PA
Aircraft: Regional Jet 200 ER/LR (CRJ200)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Tower PHL
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Local
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Confusion
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: We had another aircraft that; after his flight plan was filed; needed to depart non-RNAV. Again; although we knew what the non-RNAV routing should have been; we were unable to remove the PDR with the RNAV routing. After amendment (revision 3); his route showed +..OOD..TEBEE..HAYDO..SBY.+ .+OOD.OOD198..SBY018.SBY.V1.CCV... At that point; his equipment suffix had been changed to /A; but still the PDR appeared. The full readout of his ICAO flight plan information after the 3rd amendment showed as follows: ...FLR I FLT S WAK M EQP DOV SRV C ALA KIAD OTH...RNA 1 RND 1 RNE 2. Because we were unable to remove the RNAV PDR; Tower had to advise the Departure Sector; who then had to advise the Center Sector. Minor problem; and since the non-RNAV underlays the RNAV route; a lack of this communication occurring would not be problematic. Still; the fix should be able to occur while the aircraft is on the ground; not be reliant on Local and Departure remembering to coordinate with the next sectors. I do not know who can answer the basic question: how do I change an ICAO flight plan from RNAV to non-RNAV? I suspect that the 'RNA 1 RND 1 RNE 2' has to be removed somehow; since that has to be there regardless of what's under EQP if you want to get the RNAV routing; but no one knows how to do it. My recommendation is exactly the same: a manual. Some better-informed support personnel would be nice too; but I'm happy to learn on my own since that seems unlikely.




Synopsis: PHL Controller described a confused routing event when attempting to change an ICAO flight plan from a RNAV departure to a conventional procedure; the reporter indicating more training is needed for clarity.
Date: 201305
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ORD.Airport, IL
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Thunderstorm
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class E C90
ATC / advisory: TRACON C90
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Human factors: Confusion; Distraction; Workload
Anomaly: Deviation - Speed All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Chart Or Publication; Weather; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: While climbing out on the O'Hare 7 Departure 30 south of ORD and deviating for thunderstorms; we were handed off from Chicago Departure to the Center Controller. Center Controller asked us if we were given normal speed; to which we replied we thought so. The departure states maintain 250 KTS until advised; and our airspeed was at 285 KTS. He said he was just checking to make sure the Departure Controller gave us normal speed. On the ground we were dealing with 3 reroutes; maintenance problem; fuel; and thunderstorm issues. Prior to the departure the O'Hare 7 was briefed and the altitude and speed restrictions were briefed. We were extremely busy and cannot definitively recall if the airspeed limitation of 250 KTS was released.




Synopsis: ORD Departure Control asked a B737 if the O'HARE 7 250 KT restriction had been removed and the First Officer responded 'We thought so;' but because of weather and a busy departure he could not actually remember.
Date: 201205
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: CLE.Airport, OH
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 145 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B CLE
ATC / advisory: TRACON CLE
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude
Detector: Automation Aircraft TA; Automation Aircraft RA
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Airspace Structure; Airport
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: We were cleared to descend to 3;000 MSL and to intercept the 24R localizer. In the descent around 3;400 FT we received a TA for traffic below us about 2;200 FT and climbing. We didn't see the traffic; as it was directly below us. While leveling off at 3;000 and intercepting the localizer we received a monitor vertical speed RA immediately followed by another command to adjust vertical speed. Within seconds we received another command directing climb at a rate of about 1;500 FPM. I disconnected the autopilot and immediately initiated a climb. Climbing through 3;200 we received the 'clear of conflict message.' At that time we notified ATC of our RA and received a nonchalant reply of 'oh; yeah; that was traffic departing Burke Lakefront.' ATC asked whether we would be able to continue the approach; which we answered in the affirmative.I would act/react the same way. The company can't do anything about it. ATC needs to be more vigilant and cognizant of the traffic it is controlling.


Second narrative: I'm not sure there is anything that could be done to fix this situation other than to have a departure procedure for aircraft departing from Burke Lakefront to keep traffic separated arriving/departing from CLE.


Synopsis: An EMB-145LR flight crew intercepting the localizer inbound to CLE responded to TCAS Traffic and Resolution advisories with respect to an unknown aircraft departing from BKL.
Date: 201905
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: GMU.Airport, SC
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Baron 58/58TC
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class D GMU
ATC / advisory: TRACON GSP
Aircraft component: Landing Gear
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Airspace Structure; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I received a briefing for the radar position. In the briefing; I was told that Aircraft X was landing at GMU and was already talking to GMU Tower and a King Air was also on their frequency. A minute or two later GMU calls and informs me that Aircraft X was having gear issues; but did not want to cancel his IFR. He just wanted to go out and try to hand crank his landing gear in an attempt to make it work. I then asked if the aircraft wanted to come back out to Approach or stay with the Tower. GMU advised that the aircraft didn't really want to go back out to Approach frequency so I said that he was their control for anything that they needed. At that point the previous Controller coordinated with GMU that the King Air had never been IFR that he was VFR the whole time he had worked him. I heard the coordination and assumed he was referencing Aircraft X since there was no reason to be talking about the King Air. Aircraft X eventually started going west bound into a 3500 foot Minimum Vectoring Altitude at 3000 feet. I did not believe this was an issue since I thought he was VFR and GMU was just confused about his status earlier. The aircraft eventually landed without incident. Upon arriving to work the next morning I was told that the aircraft was not VFR; but was IFR during the entire emergency. I have no real recommendations as it was just a very unique situation with the emergency and confusion about the IFR/VFR status of the plane. I should have verified if there was ever any question of his status.




Synopsis: GSP TRACON Controller reported they allowed an IFR emergency aircraft to fly below the Minimum Vectoring Altitude because they believed the aircraft was VFR.