elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201809
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Beechjet 400
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Fuel Distribution System
Component problem: Improperly Operated; Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Ground Personnel
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: I performed cockpit preflight all systems checked normal then went into the FBO. Shortly after the line crew advised there was fuel spilling on the ramp from the right wing. We went out to the aircraft moved fuel transfer switch to left then right and fuel spill stopped. Maintenance was contacted and suspected battery did not have sufficient power to close the valve.




Synopsis: BE-400 First Officer reported being advised of fuel spilling from the right wing.
Date: 201910
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: BHM.TRACON, AL
Aircraft: Light Transport
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class E BHM
ATC / advisory: TRACON BHM
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Automation Air Traffic Control; Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Aircraft X was handed off to me from Center from the northeast; landing at TCL. There was weather throughout the airspace so the aircraft requested deviations and I approved it. I told the aircraft to expect direct NENMY when able. When the aircraft got within 30 miles of TCL airport he wanted to go west of the final app course of Runway 22. I descended the aircraft to 4;000 feet because of the obstacle 20 miles northwest of the TCL airport and the final. When Aircraft X said he could go direct to NENMY; I cleared him and told him to cross NENMY at or above 3;000 feet. At the time and position I did not realize that track would take him over the 3;700 feet MVA (Minimum Vectoring Altitude) obstacle. The aircraft ended up passing over the MVA obstacle at 3;000 feet and already passed it when we realized it. The MSAW (Minimum Safe Altitude Warning) only flashed and there was no audible alarm heard. What I learned from this event is… whenever you have an aircraft approaching from the north in that general area and they will cleared on an instrument approach is wait until the aircraft is well south of that MVA area. The aircraft will have time to get down on a legal approach. Also; for me; maybe put a J Ring around that obstacle as a reminder.




Synopsis: BHM Controller reported they issued a clearance to an aircraft which placed it below the Minimum Vectoring Altitude.
Date: 201503
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: A319
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Aircraft component: Autoflight System
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We flew a RNAV RNP app. to [destination airport]. We set up the app. using normal Airbus blue pages and the app. was completely briefed even with our plan b that we used a visual app. After being cleared for app.; we armed the app. but we did not get what we expected on our PFD FMA. We had Loc and GS in blue armed mode and LS flashing in amber but this was not what was in the box that we had checked. This would be correct for an ILS but not for an RNAV RNP. We discontinued the RNAV and since it was VMC we applied the visual app. and landed. After the shutdown checklist was complete we debriefed what might have caused the problem. We then noticed both Captain and FO radio management panel Nav buttons were green. This places the nav in a manual tune situation. These are guarded push buttons and are almost never used. This explained why the aircraft was expecting an ILS even though a RNAV app was in the box. We both missed this during our preflight. The aircraft had come from the hangar and other switches normally not used were also pushed that we found during the prefight. We might also have missed this since this green push button lines up perfectly with others and so it did not look out of place. Please pass this information on to the Airbus fleet so others will not make the same mistake.




Synopsis: A319 pilot reported both he and the other cockpit crewmember during preflight missed two out of position autoflight selectors that resulted in confusion during an RNAV approach.
Date: 201402
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: SAN.Airport, CA
Aircraft: MD-82
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class B SAN
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Confusion
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Unstabilized Approach
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Chart Or Publication; ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: This approach now brings aircraft too high to land on glidepath from MDA. I know it has a steeper glidepath; that is not the problem. The problem is that the glidepath puts aircraft too high at MDA to make a normal landing. The PAPI is all white. I was able to land only because I broke out 500-600 FT above MDA. The week before; the ceiling was close to MDA and aircraft had to go-around. Please have FAA flight check technicians call me; as the prior reports do not seem to be understood by company and union representatives.

Callback: When asked if it was possibly an incorrect glidepath angle could have been entered when the approach was programmed into the FMS the reporter advised that the 'charted' glidepath angle is programmed automatically by the FMS when the approach is line selected by the flight crew. The crew is restricted from altering any database programming inside of the FAF.The reporter advised he had spoken with his First Officer who has flown the approach again subsequent to the report event who advised that their approach; in IMC to the actual MDA; had worked out perfectly; stabilized from MDA to touchdown in the touchdown zone. The reporter was aware there had been discussion of the subject between his union and airline's safety people and the airport/FAA and adjustments had been made. He was unaware of the exact nature of the changes; but the report from the First Officer has ameliorated his concerns.



Synopsis: An MD-82 Captain reported that when flying the RNAV Runway 27 approach to SAN the charted glidepath (3.5 degrees) inside the FAF failed to place the aircraft vertically at a point from which a stabilized approach and touchdown could be accomplished. Per a later conversation with the First Officer of that flight the reporter learned the problem appears to have been resolved via discussions and subsequent actions between government; airline and pilot union representatives.
Date: 201206
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: MDW.Airport, IL
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-700
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class A ZAU
ATC / advisory: Center ZAU
Aircraft component: FMS/FMC
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer
Human factors: Training / Qualification; Situational Awareness; Human-Machine Interface; Communication Breakdown
Second reporter function: Captain
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation - Altitude Crossing Restriction Not Met; Deviation - Altitude Undershoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We had the FMC programmed with the correct altitudes for the MOTIF 4 Arrival into MDW. We were given our initial descent from FL390 to FL330. During the descent; we were given a crossing restriction of 50 west of BFD at FL240. I put FL240 in the MCP and programmed the crossing restriction in the FMC. The aircraft was in a 1000 fpm descent as we were still below the path. At FL280 Chicago Center called and asked where we were. We responded FL280 with the restriction of FL240 50 west of BFD. I then noticed that we had left VNAV PATH and had arrived at the restriction of 50 west of BFD 4;000 FT high.


Second narrative: VNAV must have gone to Speed and we did not catch the change.


Synopsis: After receiving a crossing clearance 50W of BDF at FL240; the flight crew of a B737-700 failed to monitor autoflight performance and crossed at FL280.
Date: 201709
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ATL.Airport, GA
Light: Night
Aircraft: A319
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground ATL
Second aircraft: B777 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Physiological - Other; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: Taxi
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: [We] almost hit a B777 when taxiing into Atlanta. We landed on runway 8L and turned off at B11. Tower told us to turn right onto Bravo to Victor. We did our after landing flow checklist and around B6 I heard the tower yelling STOP. I wasn't sure who the tower was yelling at but I hit my brakes. Only then did I see a B777 being towed about to cross our path. There was no time to completely stop so I veered hard right and somehow missed it. The only lights I saw were from the tug vehicle. No warning of taxiing traffic was ever given to us by the Tower. I didn't see any lights on the plane but it was a quick and scary view from my perspective. We continued on to the gate normally.Better communications and more lights on the B777 would have helped.




Synopsis: A319 Captain reported a near collision while taxiing at ATL with a B777 that was under tow with insufficient lighting for the night conditions.
Date: 201208
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: MTPP.Airport, FO
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Windshear
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
ATC / advisory: Tower MTPP
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Confusion; Distraction; Time Pressure; Workload
Anomaly: Deviation - Speed All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Airport; Weather
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Approaching glideslope intercept for ILS 10 approach at MTPP at 4;000 FT; 15 flaps; 200 KTS; selected 160 KTS in speed window; autothrottles went to idle; autopilot started down glideslope; surface winds were 090/14 gusting to 21.  Encountered a brief gust of wind/updraft; aircraft speed briefly increased to 213; above the flap limitation for flaps 15; speed indicator flashed red for a few seconds; disconnected autopilot; increased pitch to decrease airspeed as throttles were already at idle. Speed immediately decreased below 200 KTS again. Total event time was 3-5 seconds.




Synopsis: An air carrier on the MTPP Runway 10 ILS encountered a brief windshear which caused a speed increase and a flap overspeed while the autopilot and autothrottles to disengaged to stabilize the aircraft.
Date: 201906
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Ramp
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Hazardous Material Violation; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Ground Personnel
When detected: Taxi
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Ramp Lead loaded the Hazmat in Pit 2. His scanner showed 16 total bags. He thought he was okay. However; 2 of those bags were Quick Packs with dangerous goods in them; which meant he only had 14 bags; not the required 15 bags.




Synopsis: Air carrier ramp personnel reported Ramp Lead incorrectly completed Hazmat document resulting in shipment not properly configured for air transport.
Date: 201905
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Bonanza 35
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class G ZZZ
Aircraft component: Gear Extend/Retract Mechanism
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Ground Event / Encounter Gear Up Landing
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was approaching to land at my home airport; in my personal aircraft. ZZZ is a private grass airstrip. I was flying by myself. While downwind to runway XX; I lowered the landing gear. I then lowered the flaps. On final approach; I do not remember checking the green gear down light. I realized the gear was not down when the plane slid to a stop on the undercarriage. A contributing factor was that the gear warning horn was not implemented in the audio panel due to the age of the aircraft. Since I was wearing noise canceling headsets; I was not able to hear the gear warning horn. I had also been training with an instructor (co-pilot) and became complacent with him helping with gear and other safety checks. Should I own or fly a complex aircraft in the future; I will make sure the gear warning horn is implemented in the audio panel or NOT wear noise canceling headsets. I will also confirm (reconfirm) on final approach that the gear down light(s) is illuminated.




Synopsis: BE35 pilot reported not checking gear down position resulting in a gear up landing.
Date: 201505
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; High Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: CTAF ZZZ
Second aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Announced takeoff making a straight out departure. Made one 360 degree circle over [the] Inlet.  Made turn to the west to parallel [the] Beach while still climbing; airspeed about 80 MPH.  Saw a flash of movement at my 11 o'clock high as a high-wing aircraft crossed overhead and in front of me.  Aircraft came in at a 45 degree angle from my left rear over-taking me to cross overhead and in front of me going to my right front.  When I saw the flash of movement I pushed forward on the stick; but the whole thing was over before any evasive action would have ever been effective. As the aircraft was clearly in sight now; I turned to parallel the flight path and called on [frequency] 'Aircraft over [the] Beach are you on [frequency]?'  Female voice responded that she was over [the] Beach flying to the west.  She said her N number; but I did not get it.  I then said: 'Do you realize you just over-flew me and missed me by about 50 feet?'  She responded: 'Where are you now?'  And I replied: 'Look at your 7 o'clock low; do you see me?'  'Yes'; she said.  I then told her I would reduce altitude to 500 feet over the ocean to stay below her.




Synopsis: A single engine high wing aircraft pilot experiences a NMAC with a Cessna at 1;000 feet.
Date: 201303
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: A320
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
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; Inflight Event / Encounter Fuel Issue
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Was getting vectored for ILS approach and had been slowed to 210 knots by ATC. Was descending to 5;000 feet and upon passing 7;000 feet I called for Flaps 1. At approximately 6;500 feet got a F/CTL Slat Locked-Wingtip Brk ECAM. We told ATC that we had an issue to resolve and asked for holding or vectors. They said that they would give us vectors and asked us to maintain 6;000 feet. We complied. We followed all ECAM/QRH standard procedures in preparing the aircraft for landing.The First Officer was the Pilot Flying and I worked on the slat issue; conferring with him as necessary. I declared an emergency with ATC at ZZZ; advised the flight attendants that we had declared the emergency and to prepare the cabin but it would be a normal landing. I spoke to the passengers and advised them that the landing would be normal however they might see some equipment standing by for precautionary purposes; by our request. I also sent off a quick message to Dispatch to inform them of our situation. I never had time to check their response. At this point our fuel was already down to 7;600 pounds in spite of the fact that I had added 1;500 pounds to our fuel load [before departure] because I was unhappy with Dispatch's fuel load which had us landing with 7;300 pounds. We stopped the rest of what we were doing and requested the approach. We made an uneventful ILS to a visual approach in good VFR weather. We taxied to the gate and left the flaps in their landing configuration. My only comments are that I feel that the QRH procedure for this problem should be simplified or made a little more user friendly. There are points that I think could be a little more clearly presented by a simple change in verbiage. Also; the fuel issue here is an excellent example of a continuing problem with regards to insufficient fuel loads; especially on longer transcontinental flights. I was extremely happy that I had added the fuel but actually wish that I had added more.




Synopsis: An A320 flight crew complied with all appropriate checklists; declared an emergency; and landed safely after encountering a malfunctioning flap/slat extension system.
Date: 202107
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 145 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ1; Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Squat Switch
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; 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 Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Procedure
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: I was operating as First Officer and pilot flying on our morning flight out of ZZZ. As soon as the gear came off the ground we heard a ding and received two EICAS messages; LG AIR/GND FAIL and ENG1-2 REV DISAGRE". In the climb out the captain ran the QRH and advised dispatch through ACARS of the situation and that we would continue to our destination which not only had the longest runway but also maintenance. We [requested priority handling] with ZZZ1 Center and asked them to advise ZZZ2 that we would need the center runway for our landing. ATC was very helpful. Upon arrival the trucks were standing by just in case. The flight was uneventful and was conducted normally. The [priority handling request] was precautionary just in case there was an issue. We executed a normal landing. As soon as we got the message we knew that there was an issue and that we would need to [request priority handling] at our destination. As soon as we received the messages we were unsure of the cause but attributed it to possibly having something to do with the fact that the plane had been in short term storage.We reacted appropriately by flying the plane first and then once at a safe altitude ran the QRH and worked as a team to troubleshoot the problem. As mentioned above we decided the best course of action and most conservative approach was to [request priority handling] and continue to our destination which was most suited for this type of situation."




Synopsis: First Officer reported an air/ground sensing system failure after takeoff.  This failure was suspected of being a result of aircraft storage and maintenance issues.