elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 202001
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 170/175 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
Aircraft component: Integrated Audio System
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Technician
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Airframe; Maintenance Powerplant
Human factors: Training / Qualification; Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural MEL / CDL
Detector: Person Maintenance
When detected: Other After Departure
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Procedure; Manuals; Incorrect / Not Installed / Unavailable Part
Primary problem: Incorrect / Not Installed / Unavailable Part

Narrative: We had plane XXXX that had been placed on a Grounded status due to the FO (First Officer) having communication errors. The Captain could hear the FO but the FO could not hear the Captain. This issue was happening across VHF 1; 2 and 3. We 1st tried to re-stow the FO's oxygen mask which did not correct the problem. Then we swapped headsets; the Digital Audio Panel; and the mic jacks with no luck. Maintenance Control decided that we needed to try swapping COMM 1 and 2. That swap did not work as well; so Maintenance Control decided that we needed to replace NIM II. The network interface module was looked up in the maintenance manual doing a aircraft specific search and verifying it in Maintenance Software under component replacement. The search came up which we did not have at our station but it had an alternate which we did have at our station. So with time constraints upon us we chose the NIM and proceeded to change NIM II. The NIM was installed and target load was completed without an issue. Replacing the NIM II did not fix the FO's comm issue. I decided to leave the newly installed NIM on the plane and place the NIM that was taken off the plane in the SAVE program. When we returned to the office the 1st shift had arrived; so we turned over the Grounded plane to the next shift to further troubleshoot. Upon the next shift trying to return the NIM they found that they could not due to the NIM not being applicable to the plane even though it could be used for an alternate. We found that the NIM was to be used with a Pentium M processor and on plane it uses a Pentium II processor. I immediately contacted ZZZ where the plane was to land that night to be a RON and advised them that the wrong network interface module was replaced on Aircraft and if they could change it once the plane arrived. They advised me that they would and the NIM II was replaced with the correct pin which was for a Pentium II.




Synopsis: Technician reported installing the incorrect part on aircraft due to misreading the manual.
Date: 201412
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: MEM.Airport, TN
Light: Dawn
Aircraft: Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Tower MEM
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Confusion; Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Airport; Chart Or Publication; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Aircraft X landed runway 18R and taxied northbound via N to hold short of M9 (the taxiway that leads to the end of runway 18R). We were told to hold short of M9; but were not given a reason. Upon seeing the next arriving airplane on final approach come out of the clouds; the Ground Controller told us to 'Taxi via N and cross runway 27 to the ramp.' I asked why we were delayed in our taxi northbound past M9 and the Ground Controller said that he had to wait until he saw the next airplane due to the ILS Critical Zone. Problem 1: There is no ILS Critical Zone depicted on the 10-9 Airport Taxi chart (nor the low visibility charts) for runway 18R. If there really is a ILS Critical Zone; it should be depicted on the 10-9 Chart.Problem 2: There is no ILS Critical Zone depicted on any taxi way near runway 18R. If there really is an ILS Critical Zone for runway 18R; it should be painted on taxi way N or on M9 as appropriate. I have been at [this airport] for many years and I have never seen or been told about at ILS Critical Zone for runway 18R. Not knowing either by the MEM 10-9 or taxiway markings that there is an ILS Critical Zone for runway 18R.Publish the ILS Critical Zone in the MEM 10-9 and paint taxiway N or M9 as appropriate.




Synopsis: Pilot reports of being told to hold at a particular intersection on the airport. Pilot after receiving next instructions asks Ground Control why they held where they did. Controller responds to protect ILS Critical area. Pilot reports no ILS critical area depicted on the Airport Diagram Page for the runway on Taxiway Mike or November for Runway 18R.
Date: 202201
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ORD.Airport, IL
Weather elements / visibility: Icing; Rain
Light: Night
Aircraft: Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground ORD
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Confusion; Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Ground Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Airport; Weather
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: ORD had experienced FZDZ. At our arrival time; temperature was 1 degree with DZ. We landed [Runway] 28C with braking action good. Surface conditions were wet; with patchy slush. I exited the runway and taxied on the parallel taxiway with no braking problems. The Controller instructed us to take Taxiway GG and cross Runway 28R. Taxiway GG has two 45-degree bends. On the first bend; I took the turn at around 8-10 knots; with no directional or control problems. Slowing further; to take the next bend and to look to the left to ensure that [Runway] 28R was clear to cross; I turned the tiller but the nose did not turn. It was obvious that the aircraft was suddenly sliding on ice. I applied maximum braking and the aircraft continued to slide for 10 to 20 feet. I attempted to apply reverse thrust to stop the aircraft; but was unable to do so. The aircraft stopped prior to the edge of the taxiway; but I could see that we were still on the taxiway and that we still had adequate clearance from the taxiway lights. I called Ground and declared braking action NIL on Taxiway GG. From there; I taxied at 5 knots or less to the gate. After landing; I called Dispatch and did a patch to Maintenance Control to inform them of the NIL braking action. The First Officer did a thorough post-flight inspection and found no damage to the aircraft anywhere. We debriefed the event and determined that the ice at Taxiway GG was not visible.




Synopsis: Airline Captain reported momentary loss of aircraft directional control after encountering non-visible taxiway ice during night taxi following a landing in freezing drizzle conditions at ORD.
Date: 202007
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Reporter qualification: Flight Attendant Current
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness; Training / Qualification; Workload
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Only served sealed beverages during service and no coffee. I did not feel safe serving coffee at this point in the COVID-19 pandemic and was advised by the A Flight Attendant that they fought against extending inflight service. No additional information. Will continue to own safety during these trying times.




Synopsis: Flight Attendant reported only serving sealed drinks and no coffee during flight.  Flight Attendant did not feel safe serving coffee.
Date: 201702
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 20
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: Beechjet 400
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: UNICOM ZZZ
Aircraft component: Turbine Engine
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Workload
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Inflight Event / Encounter Bird / Animal
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Had just crossed over midfield getting ready to enter left downwind for at ZZZ (uncontrolled field). Aircraft was level at 1500ft; flaps 20deg; 160kts IAS. Just as I was getting ready to turn downwind I saw a flash go by the left window (what appeared to be a goose from surrounding birds). The bird flew into the left engine causing the N1 to start rolling back. There were no warning lights (oil pressure; hydraulic; etc) as at that time the core of the engine was still running. However due to a bad vibration caused from the strike we had to shut the engine down. We continued in the pattern and landed safely with no issues. Did not declare an emergency (was on Unicom with no other traffic) and didn't roll the trucks as there was no fire (just single engine landing).




Synopsis: BE40 Captain reported a bird strike in the number 1 engine while on downwind at an uncontrolled airport. Landing on one engine was accomplished shortly after.
Date: 201303
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Snow; 10
Light: Night
Aircraft: Citation II S2/Bravo (C550)
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: AC Generator/Alternator
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight; Taxi
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Diverted
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Chart Or Publication; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: When our left generator appeared to have failed mechanically while enroute; we elected to divert to a nearby airport. We shot the ILS to Runway XX and everything went as planned; good CRM all the way to the ground. After landing we cleared the runway and ATC gave us taxi instructions to our selected FBO. As we approached Runway XX at Taxiway Delta we asked if we were cleared to cross. ATC's response was partially blocked but I thought I heard that we were cleared to cross Runway XX at Delta. I read back; '...cleared to cross Runway XX at Delta'.  There was no response from ATC. We cleared the runway left and right before proceeding across the runway. As we crossed ATC stated that we were not cleared to cross. At that point we were already across the runway.We were using NOS charts which were very difficult to use versus the commercially published charts which we are planning on using from now on.Although there seemed to be good communications going on I believe we must have been blocked by another aircraft. This possibility was increased because ATC was using the Tower frequency for both Ground and Tower operations.


Second narrative: After we cleared the runway; Tower asked us for our intentions. Because this was not part of the original plan; we were unsure of the location of the FBOs. They told us about the FBO options and we picked one....As we were rolling; Tower came back and told us to stop because he had told us to hold short. I immediately applied breaks and stopped the aircraft. As soon as we were stopped Tower told us that we were cleared to cross and then we proceeded with the taxi to the ramp.


Synopsis: After diverting to an enroute airport due to the failure of their left generator the flight crew of a C-550 began to cross a runway--believing they had been cleared to do so--but were stopped by Ground/Tower advising they had not been cleared. The pertinent transmission may have been partially blocked.
Date: 201306
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: HTS.Airport, WV
Aircraft: Citation I/SP (C501)
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class D HTS
ATC / advisory: Tower HTS
Second aircraft: SR22
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach; Departure
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Human Factors
Primary problem: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings

Narrative: HTS had transitioned to a full CENRAP operation approximately 30 minutes prior to the event for TECH-OPS. CENRAP provides severely limited RADAR coverage below 020 in the HTS/HTW vicinity. HTW is located 5 miles northeast of HTS. In addition; a SCT-BKN020 cloud base apparently had been developing. A C501 was south of HTS descending northbound expecting a visual approach Runway 30. An SR22 called airborne off the HTW Airport requesting a southbound IFR clearance. He was maintaining VFR level at 015 unable to climb due to the cloud base. Because of his low altitude I was unable to ascertain the position of a SR22. I then suggested that the SR22 fly an east or southeasterly heading until I could RADAR identify him in order to stay away from the Runway 30 final that the C501 was rapidly approaching. At this time; the C501 stated that he would be unable to accept the visual approach to Runway 30 due to the clouds. He then requested a visual approach to the opposite Runway 12 as this end of the airport was without the cloud base. Coordination with Local Control was then completed. I then asked the SR22 to give me an updated position report from HTW He stated that he was now inexplicably west of HTW. I then suggested he fly a northbound heading in order to stay away from the Runway 12 final that the C501 was now approaching. A few minutes later; the SR22's squawk code was observed approximately 15 miles east-northeast of HTS at 015 about 2-3 miles from a complex of large antennas. I immediately took action to RADAR identify; turn and issue an IFR clearance to the aircraft. Given the position reports from the pilot; I did not expect the aircraft to be near that location! This event definitely has reminded me of the specific limitations of working with CENRAP. The unexpected cloud base hampered operations unexpectedly as did the inaccurate/confusing pilot position reports given. I could have transitioned back to normal RADAR for a short time in order to locate the SR22 and issue his IFR clearance. In hindsight; because of the low clouds; I think this would have been the appropriate solution.




Synopsis: HTS TRACON Controller described a MVA event when trying to identify a VFR aircraft operating at low altitudes due to low ceiling. The reporter listed CENRAP equipment/operations as a contributing factor.
Date: 201406
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: MD-82
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: Galley Furnishing
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial
Second reporter function: Captain
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Attendant; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Weather
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: While in cruise at FL320 we began to smell a burning electrical type odor. Seconds later; the cabin crew called the cockpit to inform us that they smelled it. We ran the Smoke/Fire/Fumes Checklist; and turning off the galley switch instantly stopped the odor. The galley switch remained 'OFF' the remainder of the flight. [Given marginal enroute airport] weather and with the odor gone; the Captain chose to continue on to our destination and I concurred with that decision. On our descent the odor returned. We declared an emergency with Center who gave us expedited handling with a vector directly to the airport. We landed uneventfully.


Second narrative: Smoke dissipated on its own; approach and landing uneventful.


Synopsis: When an electrical odor dissipated after running the Smoke/Fire/Fumes Checklist the flight crew of an MD-82 opted to continue to destination. When the odor returned during descent they declared an emergency and got priority handling to the airport where they landed without incident. The odor again dissipated during the descent.
Date: 201812
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Rain; Thunderstorm; Turbulence; Windshear; 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: PC-12
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Workload
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence; Inflight Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control
Contributing factors: Weather
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: The flight was Part 91 in a Pilatus PC-12 flying to ZZZ.The flight proceeded normally. The weather at my destination ZZZ was Marginal VFR with broken clouds at 2;100 feet and broken at 4;000 feet and 10 miles visibility. There were showers reported in the vicinity. Approach was vectoring me for an ILS. The closer I got to the destination airport and as we descended; I encountered increasing IMC. The radar showed green with some yellow. There was not a concern for wide areas of heavy rain that could not be circumnavigated. As we were descending to an assigned altitude of 9;000 feet; I encountered moderate turbulence. As I was reaching to disconnect the autopilot; we encountered a severe down draft that took me past my altitude and put the plane in a 45 degree roll to the right. The attitude and turbulence disconnected the autopilot before I had a chance to. My first concern was to regain a wings level attitude while slowing the aircraft and then stop the descent. By the time the plane was under control and the turbulence subsided to light/moderate; the altitude was estimated to be arrested around 7;700 MSL.At that point; Approach asked to what altitude I was descending to. I explained what I encountered. He told me to 'just maintain 7;000 feet'.The rest of the flight to the ILS and eventually a VFR landing was uneventful.




Synopsis: PC-12 pilot reported on initial approach in IMC conditions and encountered severe turbulence and a downdraft the disconnected the autopilot. The pilot recovered and made an uneventful landing.
Date: 202201
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: LGB.Tower, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class D LGB
Second aircraft: Small Aircraft
Reporter function: Departure; Instructor
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: On departure from LGB; I was handed off early to switch to the practice area frequency. While still on with Tower; there was another aircraft with a gear indication problem. While still in Class D airspace over the [ship]; but on the practice area frequency; I noticed a fast approaching airplane on ADS-B. It was below us and climbing. I took controls from my student and told him to look for it since it was on his side of the airplane. I started a descent while looking for the airplane and lifted the left wing to have better visibility. We saw the airplane and I had to descend very quickly to make sure the airplane did not hit me while passing overhead. Both the other pilot and LGB Tower were obviously not looking out for traffic in their airspace.




Synopsis: Flight Instructor reported taking evasive action to avoid other traffic that had also departed from LGB airport.