elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201209
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: BWI.Airport, MD
Light: Night
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B BWI
ATC / advisory: TRACON PCT
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Inflight Event / Encounter Bird / Animal
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: While on Approach to BWI approximately 8 miles to the east and on vectors for Runway 33L; approximately 8;000 FT MSL; and 250 KTS assigned; we heard a loud bang from the nose area. I immediately recognized the sound as a probable Bird Strike. We scanned the engine instruments right after; and noticed the Left N2 Vibration Monitor jumped to around 4.0 then settled down to around 3.0. We notified ATC; who then gave us a more immediate vector towards the final for 33L; and cleared us for the visual approach; and to land. Upon inspection at the Gate; the mechanics and we found evidence of a relatively large bird strike on aircraft right nose area slightly aft of the radome; with No structural damage noted at the time. Further inspection revealed blood on the leading edge of the right wing; and what appeared to be blood evidence on the leading edge of the right engine intake cowl. We also noted; with the mechanics as the left engine N1 fan was spooling down; what appeared to be a dark area on a couple of the fan blades. An entry was made in the logbook; and aircraft was taken out of service; pending a borescope inspection. We were given another aircraft; and completed our next flight; without incident.




Synopsis: Captain experiences a bird strike at 8;000 FT 8 NM east of BWI on vectors for approach causing an elevated N1 vibration reading for the right engine. After landing evidence of a relative large bird strike is found on the right side of the nose; right wing root; and right engine cowl and fan blades. Aircraft is taken out of service.
Date: 202105
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Tower, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Dawn
Aircraft: B737-400
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Climb; Initial Climb
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Elevator
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; 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 Returned To Gate; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Immediately after lift off; we experienced a continuous light shudder. Gear and flaps were retracted on scheduled. The unidentifiable shudder continued to increase as airspeed increased. No shudder was felt at the control column. We requested an immediate  return to ZZZ. Following an uneventful return to land; taxi in; and shutdown at the designated parking position; it was discovered that the aircraft had a detached elevator balance tab. During the previous flight; when flaps were partially extended; a similar shudder was felt. The shudder ceased when landing gear was extended; and flaps were extended to the 30 position. During a detailed post flight inspection of flaps and gear doors; nothing was detected. The shudder was first felt in the previous approach; when flaps where partially extended. It then disappeared when landing gear was extended; and final flaps were selected. As a result; the post flight inspection was heavily focused on those two main components; flaps and landing gear doors. The balance tab; although included in the post flight inspection; did not appear to be completely loose. A more detailed inspection of all secondary flight control surfaces may have exposed the potentially damaged balance tab.




Synopsis: Captain reported an air turn back due to aircraft shudder.
Date: 201606
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Medium Transport; High Wing; 2 Turboprop Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
Second aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Time Pressure; Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Ground Conflict; Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: We were cleared to line up and wait; and then told cleared for takeoff. While an aircraft was on final. After we had already crossed the hold short line by about 10 feet ATC said cancel takeoff clearance. We read back twice that we had already crossed the hold short line. The aircraft then continued to land. There was plenty of space and never any real danger of an aircraft collision; but we were over the hold short line.ATC cancelled are takeoff clearance after we had already crossed the hold short line.


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


Synopsis: Air carrier pilot reported being cleared to lineup and wait; then cleared for takeoff with an aircraft on final. ATC then ordered to crew to hold short but they stated the Hold Short line had been crossed by 10 feet. The traffic landed anyway.
Date: 201404
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: EWR.Airport, NJ
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: A319
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class B EWR
ATC / advisory: Tower EWR
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Human factors: Distraction; Workload; Confusion
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Crossing Restriction Not Met; Deviation - Altitude Undershoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Unstabilized Approach; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Clearance; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Procedure; Chart Or Publication; Airport; Weather
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: I have never flown a visual to Runway 29 at EWR; so I was unfamiliar with these procedures. We thoroughly briefed the RNAV Visual Runway 29 from DOOIN. As per the Ops Alert for EWR Runway 29 visual approach procedures; we loaded the RNAV 29Z via DOOIN in the secondary. Once on a vector off the arrival; we activated the secondary with this approach. All altitudes in the database made sense according to the chart. We were cleared direct GRITY and cleared for the visual approach. We crossed GRITY at 2;800 FT; [and] then descended to cross DOOIN at 1;700 FT. We were on autopilot; in NAV; and followed the FINAL APCH brick for vertical reference. By DOOIN we were fully configured with gear down and Final Flaps 3 (for the LLWS and gusty crosswinds on the Runway 29). After DOOIN at 1;700 FT; the plane descended on the brick; and we found ourselves [just before the Turnpike Bridge] approaching 500 FT. I told the First Officer (pilot not flying) that we seemed too low and the visuals weren't right. We were too close to a bridge; and further ahead a windmill. I immediately climbed to 700 FT and leveled-off while making the turn to CHUMR. At the same time; ATC advised us we had a low altitude alert. During this time; the 'brick' kept indicating we were too high. The plane in front of us was doing S-turns to descend; so ATC advised us to do S-turns also to make more space. I circled wider than the published course at 700 FT; then re-intercepted the final approach and descended at a normal descent rate with the PAPI for guidance. Throughout this approach we encountered moderate turbulence; and the winds were 330/24 at the surface; and stronger aloft.




Synopsis: An A319 on the EWR Bridge Visual to Runway 29 descended to 500 FT after DOOIN in gusty; turbulent conditions. The crew realized they were low and climbed to 700 FT while turning to CHUMR as ATC issued a low altitude alert.
Date: 201907
Location: EWR.Airport, NJ
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Thunderstorm; Fog; Rain
Aircraft: Light Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turboprop Eng
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B EWR; Class E N90
ATC / advisory: TRACON N90
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Equipment / Tooling; Weather
Primary problem: Equipment / Tooling

Narrative: While being vectored for the 22Left approach at EWR airport we were cleared for the approach; while initially getting a good signal from the ILS (instrument landing System) it became unreliable and unreadable.  We were told by New York approach to contact Newark Tower.  When we contacted the Tower we were told that we were right of course and just a few minutes we were told that the Tower had received a low altitude warning and were told to execute a missed approach.  We executed the missed approach and contacted New York Departure then were vectored for another approach.  We received a good signal and completed the approach and landed safely.




Synopsis: Corporate First Officer reported encountering intermittent ILS (Instrument landing System) anomaly.
Date: 201910
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ODO.Airport, TX
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Amateur/Home Built/Experimental
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class G ODO
ATC / advisory: CTAF ODO
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Sea; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Confusion; Training / Qualification; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Airport
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was taking off of Runway 16 at ODO and had been announcing position as I taxied to run up area and eventually took the runway. The wind was blowing 160 at about 10 kts. The approach end of Runway 20 is not visible from the ground at the approach end of Runway 16 due to brush and a low rise. As I made the 1;000 ft. markers at about 15 ft. AGL; I saw a Aircraft Y landing Runway 20. I initiated a steep climb and crossed over the aircraft at 200 ft. AGL. During my time on frequency; I did not hear a call from the aircraft. I asked over the CTAF if the Aircraft Y was on frequency and did not receive a response. It is not an aircraft I recognize. I do not know if the other pilot realized that a conflict existed.Causes for the conflict; lack of visibility due to terrain; an airplane not using the favored runway while not using radio communication to announce intentions.




Synopsis: Pilot reported that obstructed visibility and a communication breakdown at a non-towered field resulted in a NMAC.
Date: 201903
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: A80.TRACON, GA
Aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class B A80
ATC / advisory: TRACON A80
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach; Handoff / Assist
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness; Troubleshooting
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Human Factors
Primary problem: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings

Narrative: A80 has been having persistent issues with various frequencies for weeks. I was working TAR-H feeding AR-A in a triple arrival operation. The AR-A controller; who is training a CPC/IT at the time; tells the Supervisor that he is having radio issues on 118.35 with aircraft receiving feedback not being able to hear him. It was suggested that he switch to 124.72 as an alternate frequency. However; AR-V was currently using 124.72 because 127.25 was already out of service. With the 'go to' backup frequency already in use; the Supervisor on the wall had the AR-A controller continue to use 118.35 on the orange emergency jack because aircraft said it was a little better but still receiving feedback. With no alternate frequency being used; I suggested that maybe we should lower the rate and go back to a dual operation and got a chuckle from the Supervisor. The AR-A Controller was being forced to work with a questionably bad frequency with an increased traffic volume due to weather pushing arrivals to the south and haze obscuring the field making visual approaches more work to achieve.Some of our Supervisors need more training on the equipment at A80 and need to adjust the operation if safety is becoming an issue. When someone has been placed on a wall to supervise the operation; we should be able to count on them to resolve potentially dangerous issues with the operation instead of telling everyone to press on and continue like the operation is normal. Watching the Supervisor yesterday 'poke' around on the RDVS [Rapid Deployment Voice Switch] asking people what different frequencies were used for was a complete joke. Then; to watch him give up and just tell the AR-A controller to continue with a bad frequency was an outrage. The operation should have been slowed on account of equipment issues until a safe solution was found and AR-A should not have been open until we had three reliable frequencies.




Synopsis: A80 TRACON Controller reported radio issues and a back up frequency that was not available for use.
Date: 201906
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: A321
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Pilot Seat
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Procedure; Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: While preflighting the cockpit; I noticed a wiring bundle had migrated out of the captain's seat control unit. All of the wires had been pinched and multiple portions of the wiring insulation had eroded; exposing bare wire. After contacting [Maintenance Control]; local maintenance arrived; and after communicating my concerns with the bare wires; the mechanic tucked the wires back into the unit without any repair whatsoever. This left the opportunity for an electrical short to occur in the captain's seat while the seat motors were operating. I explained to the mechanic that I could not accept the aircraft with the wiring in that condition unless power to the seat was deactivated and a deferral applied. He accepted my decision without argument and called in the local Airbus rep to assess repairs; grounding the aircraft.




Synopsis: A321 Captain reported discovering bare wiring on the Captain's seat control; which resulted in maintenance cancelling the flight.
Date: 201510
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: A320
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Person / Animal / Bird
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Obvious lack of training on pushback could have caused serious injury or worse. Left both Captain and First Officer (FO) shaken after event.1. Pushback crew not at aircraft at time of push although buttoned up and ready to go. Possibly at aircraft but confused as to how interphone to cockpit worked.2. Obvious confusion with push back crew on equipment operation on disconnect of tug.3. Lack of proper phraseology on communication with push crew.4. After salute and release; tug crew visibly back in gate area for approximately 5 min or more; after start checklist completed; ATC taxi clearance requested; taxi clearance given; and Captain beginning to taxi; the VIGILANT FO noticed a member of the push crew between nose of right side of aircraft and running engine walking back to the terminal.5. Captain immediately stopped aircraft; called station operations to explain the dangerous situation. Operations explained it was the individual's first day on the job. I explained this is how people get killed.6. Once in flight FO called operations to reiterate our concerns and we were told they would conduct a safety investigation.




Synopsis: An A320 flight crew reported ground personnel's failure to observe SOP's during pushback and taxi out which almost resulted in serious injury.
Date: 201601
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: MSP.Airport, MN
Flight conditions: IMC
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: Regional Jet 900 (CRJ900)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class B MSP
ATC / advisory: Tower MSP
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: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; 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: On taxi out; tower sequenced our airplane behind a Boeing 757 for departure. The 757 was cleared for takeoff and we were instructed line up and wait. I asked the first officer if there was a crosswind for wake turbulence avoidance. He told me the winds were from the right at 3 knots. Tower wanted us off the ground quickly because an aircraft behind us was on short final for the same runway. The controller cleared us for takeoff just as the Boeing 757 rotated off the runway in front of us. On climb out at 700 AGL; we hit the wake turbulence from the Boeing 757 while in IMC. I pitched the nose down and stopped the climb to get out of the vortex. Once control of the aircraft was stabilized; I notified air traffic control of the event. There were no further disruptions for the remainder of the flight. Several threats came about during this event. The first was the close departure proximity behind a heavy aircraft. The second was the tower controller's goal to get as many airplanes off the ground in a short span of time to make the departures more efficient. And third was the aircraft behind us on short final pressuring us to takeoff immediately. My intuition told [me] this may happen when I asked the first officer if there was any crosswind to push the vortex out of our path; but I took the chance anyway to appease the controller and hoped for the best. Next time I will hold short of the runway and tell the controller I need more distance from the heavy aircraft. I will deny the takeoff clearance.




Synopsis: CRJ-900 Captain reported a wake vortex encounter at 700 feet AGL departing MSP when he was sequenced closely behind a departing B757.