elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201509
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: PCT.TRACON, VA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Helicopter
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Traffic Watch
Flight phase: Cruise
Aircraft component: Transponder
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Contracted Service
Reporter function: Captain; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Confusion; Communication Breakdown; Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Security
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Aircraft Automation Overrode Flight Crew; General Police / Security Involved
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Procedure
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Operations inside of the D.C. SFRA had been conducted for approximately 2 hours with no problems; and Ops were complete. I was enroute to my base to refuel; park and standby. Approximately 4 miles West of landing I was contacted by Potomac Approach on 119.700 and asked for my location. I responded. Potomac then asked me to Ident. As I reached to press the Ident button; I observed my assigned Mode 3/A Squawk code no longer appeared in the Bendix/King KT-70 TSO transponder's display window - instead it showed 1200. I cycled the transponder's power knob to OFF then back to ALT - however 1200 continued to be displayed. At some point during the flight the transponder had dumped the Mode 3/A code and switched; uncommanded; to 1200. At no point did I press the 'VFR' button on the transponder. At no point did I touch the knobs to manually set a new transponder code.Prior to landing the Approach Controller gave me a phone number to call after landing. After landing and shutdown; I called the number. They asked several questions about my personal information (Name; address; FAA Certificate number; etc). They asked if any part of ATC had instructed me to squawk 1200 - I answered No. They also asked if I had purposely or accidentally set my Mode 3/A code to 1200 - I answered No. I then explained that the transponder had switched to 1200 uncommanded; with no input or interaction from myself. They informed me that I would likely receive a follow-up phone call from someone on the matter.




Synopsis: The KT-70 transponder of an aircraft operating in the D.C. SFRA transitioned from the PCT assign code to 1200 uncommanded. ATC questioned the pilot who was told to call after landing.
Date: 201809
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Night
Aircraft: B767-300 and 300 ER
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Cockpit Lighting
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Time Pressure
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural MEL / CDL; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: General Maintenance Action; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: MEL; Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Upon preflight preparation it was noted that an MEL for cockpit lighting was on the [Flight Plan] but not in in the logbook. Upon review of the logbook a discrepancy was noted on Day 1 for backlighting inoperative on the isle stand. On Day 2 a logbook entry was made referencing this DMI (Deferred Maintenance Item) number stating that 'the aircraft was not suitable for nighttime operations.' The MEL appeared to be cleared on Day 3 stating operations check good by Maintenance in the logbook.I called Dispatch to inquire if the MEL on the flight plan was still open; and I was told that it was. I asked Maintenance why the DMI was not on the logbook can; and they were unsure; but 'reopened' the DMI and placed a sticker on the can and on the panel for MEL 33-XX-XX; 'Flight Deck Lighting.'During our flight deck preflight we noted the backlighting to be inoperative for the left VHF radio; the left audio panel; the ADF tuning panel; the ILS tuning panel; and the rudder and aileron trim panel. We determined that the aircraft was unsuitable for night operations and informed Dispatch of our determination.A new proposed departure time of XA:55 was agreed upon to accommodate day time operations. Maintenance trouble shot the problem until XA:45; at which time I was able to return to the flight deck to resume departure preparations. At approximately XB:10 a load plan was presented to us. At XB:29 the logbook was returned to the flight deck; we then immediately started engines and blocked out at XB:32.It is questionable to that the DMI was cleared; but not really; especially after a previous crew had also determined that the aircraft was unsuitable for night operations. I received total support from the first duty pilot that was contacted; the second was neutral; and the third was putting pressure on me to take the airplane; suggesting I hold a flashlight; disregard the FO's (First Officer's) discomfort; and set the radios up prior to pushback. Maintenance control was also putting a lot of pressure on us to go; arguing that they use this deferral number all the time with no problems.There seems to be a definite trend in maintenance items being pushed aside; and a culture of move the jet at all cost at [company].




Synopsis: B767 Captain reported that due to cockpit lighting issues; the aircraft was not suitable for nighttime operations.
Date: 201708
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: MIA.Airport, FL
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Rain; Thunderstorm
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Widebody Transport
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class B MIA
ATC / advisory: TRACON MIA
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: Distraction; Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Automation Aircraft Terrain Warning; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Weather; Human Factors; Aircraft
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Uneventful descent into Miami while avoiding thunderstorms. Vectors to intercept final course for RNAV/GPS Rwy 26R. We kept the speed up to get on the ground before a series of thunderstorms got to the airport and received shortened vectors to final inside the NAYIB fix on the approach. On final and after confirming FMS speed; Nav; and profile MDA; while consulting with each other about rain showers close to the airport; we noticed that the airplane was descending below the profile glidepath and I disconnected the Autopilot to arrest the descent. We descended to 1300; below the minimum 1500 ft for that portion of the approach before the Final Approach Fix ZARER. We immediately started a correction back to published altitude. At that point we received a yellow GROUND PROXIMITY alert for several buildings 2 to 3 miles in front and on both sides of the approach course. After confirming we were well clear of all obstacles and still in a safe position for landing we opted to visually continue the approach and landing. Distraction with weather during the approach. Clarify before the approach the duties (i.e. who will be looking at the radar and who will be closely monitoring the instruments).


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


Synopsis: Air carrier flight crew reported descending below the MIA Runway 26R RNAV Approach profile. The autopilot did not capture the vertical path and the crew did not detect it until they were low causing a GPWS warning.
Date: 202201
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ROA.TRACON, VA
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class C ROA
ATC / advisory: TRACON ROA
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Distraction; Workload; Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: It was a night flight from ZZZ1 to ROA. We were receiving vectors for the RNAV 24 approach into ROA. The Approach Controller's vectors brought us east of the airport. At this time we were maintaining 5;200 ft. as per our altitude assignment. Approaching roughly 10nm east of PROSE; approach cleared us direct to PROSE. When the aircraft had finished the turn to the fix; we were roughly on a 270 heading. We then received the clearance to cross PROSE at 5;200 ft. and cleared for the RNAV 24 approach. While enroute to PROSE at 5;200 ft.; we received a ground proximity indication; and an aural message 'Terrain' followed by 'Pull up.' Moments later I disconnected the autopilot; applied maximum thrust and initiated a climb to 7;000 ft. The indications ended shortly after we started climbing. The FO (First Officer) promptly reported our situation to the Controller. The Controller could not provide us with a reason as to why we got the indications; as according to the Controller; we were above the highest obstacle in the area. The Controller gave us a new clearance for the approach and we did not receive any further ground proximity warnings.




Synopsis: Pilot reported receiving a terrain warning while inbound to ROA.
Date: 202008
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 145 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch; Initial Climb
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Air Conditioning and Pressurization Pack
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Flight Engineer; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Attendant; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Aircraft X had a write-up for smoke/fumes in the past week. On date; it had an eval flight and was signed off. Upon takeoff; an odor began emitting that smelled like a wet rag/skunk. I noticed right on the climb out and it became increasingly worse. The FO (First Officer) did not notice anything except right after take-off. After reaching a safe altitude I asked the FA (Flight Attendant) if she smelled something as well; she replied positively. I told her we would be returning to the field immediately and then the FO and I then advised ATC. We smelled the fumes mostly throughout the entire duration and faintly after landing. We taxied back to the gate with emergency equipment following us.Captain and FA; FO only smelled an odor on takeoff.Fumes/odor.Precautionary Air Return landing. Tried using 02 masks but mine was giving me a bad feedback through the headset. FO's mask had a boom issue and could not communicate at all. We decided then not to use the masks.Find what is causing these issues.


Second narrative: We taxied to runway and began our takeoff roll. After taking off the Captain asked me if I smelled anything. I told him not really. I believe I said I can smell the packs; not smoke or anything. He stated he smelled something; fumes; not smoke or electrical. He asked me to call the FA (Flight Attendant) and ask her. I called our FA and she stated she could smell something but not smoke. The Captain told me to advise ATC and ask to return to the field. The only smells I could smell were normal smells associated with a take off in our aircraft. ATC stopped our climb and cleared us vectors. I programmed the FMS; radios; and landing speeds. I told the Captain we would be landing overweight. He stated he understood and proceeded to land. We were met by fire rescue and followed to the gate. The Captain smelled what he described as 'musty' or 'wet socks'.


Synopsis: ERJ-145 flight crew reported a fumes event described as a wet socks" odor that resulted in a return to the departure airport."
Date: 201201
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Turbulence; Thunderstorm
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: MD-82
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Stall Warning System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Situational Awareness; Time Pressure; Workload; Communication Breakdown; Distraction
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Inflight Event / Encounter Fuel Issue; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Diverted; General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Weather; Aircraft
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: We had been holding for a period of approximately 20 minutes due to convective activity between us and the airport. We had been experiencing sporadic turbulence and heavy rain. We were at 5;000 FT and 250 KTS. We had attempted to contact Dispatch via ACARS free text message and SAT phone but could not establish communication using either method.  Our filed alternate was some distance and we wanted to consider changing it to something closer due to fuel. While holding; the stick shaker and stall warning light/aural warning activated. Pitch; power settings and all airspeed indications were verified and no abnormalities were detected. I decided to divert to the nearest suitable VFR airport due to the combination of weather and the stall warning issues. We asked our destination Operations to notify Dispatch of our diversion and stood by for any further information. I declared an emergency because the divert airport was not the specified alternate for the flight. The stall warning stopped after a few minutes but we were already headed to the divert airport. Dispatch did acknowledge our divert and sent us all applicable data prior to our landing. Remainder of flight was uneventful.


Second narrative: [Narrative #2 had no additional information]


Synopsis: An MD82 was holding for thunderstorms at the destination airport when the stall warning activated so considering the delay; remaining fuel; and the stall system malfunction the flight crew declared an emergency and diverted to a nearby airport.
Date: 201406
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: JFK.Airport, NY
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: 5
Aircraft: Challenger 300
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B JFK
ATC / advisory: Tower JFK
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: While on approach to Runway 4R at JFK; aircraft encountered wake turbulence from heavy B747 and descended below assigned altitude of 2;000 FT while on autopilot. ILS was fully coupled on the localizer and was joining the glideslope. After occurrence and recovery; the aircraft was again fully stabilized prior to the final approach fix. Aircraft was recovered to assigned altitude without incident; incursion or impact to other aircraft.


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


Synopsis: CL-300 flight crew reported encountering wake turbulence on approach to JFK in trail of a B747 that caused a deviation from initial approach altitude.
Date: 201807
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Thunderstorm
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZTL
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Confusion; Distraction; Situational Awareness; Workload
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors; Weather
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: This is a report about aircraft being put on a 'weather re-route' that takes them into known weather.  At least 2 Center weather advisories had been issued for heavy to extreme precipitation and thunderstorms over the top of ZZZ with tops reported at FL430.The Command Center and our local TMU (Traffic Management Unit) ignored these CWAs (Center Weather Advisory) for at least 3 hours.  The flying public was put at risk and the NAS system safety was compromised in my opinion.  We have the ability to see weather and precipitation more clearly.  The controllers at [neighboring Towers and Centers]; worked together to keep the aircraft safe by working out their own 'weather re-route'. If we have to continue to do TMU's job we don't need them. This problem of the Command Center and our local TMU routing aircraft into know convective activity has been an ongoing problem for years.




Synopsis: Center Controller reported Traffic Management Unit issued weather re-routes that took aircraft into known weather instead of around it.
Date: 202108
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: COS.Airport, CO
Light: Night
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower COS
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Troubleshooting; Confusion; Distraction
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Ground Equipment Issue
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Airport; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: During takeoff; I; the Captain; PM; saw a very bright single white LED light on center-line at the far end of Runway 35R. The light could be interpreted as the taxi light of another aircraft lined up on the opposite end of our runway. I was confused because I didn't hear another aircraft on Tower frequency at that time. I thought it was a visual illustration caused by a light source outside the airport's perimeter. Since we were very light with just 12;000 LBS of fuel for our flight to ZZZ; I thought we could get airborne with less than 1/2 of the 13;500 feet runway used. I elected to continue to takeoff. The FO also saw the light and he didn't know what it was either; but we did not discuss the light during takeoff roll. I didn't want to distract him during this critical phase of flight; since I decided to continue the takeoff anyway. We discussed it at altitude and I told him I would submit this report about the light distraction.




Synopsis: Air Carrier Captain reported a distracting light at the opposite end of the runway during the takeoff roll in COS.
Date: 201305
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Aircraft: PA-28 Cherokee/Archer/Dakota/Pillan/Warrior
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Situational Awareness; Distraction
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was cleared for takeoff on Runway XXR. ATC announced several times to takeoff on XXR and informed me that another airplane was on short final. I was on [a mid-field] taxiway. I made a right turn instead of left onto XXR. The term Runway XXR misled me and the repeat of the ATC to hurry me to take off due to another airplane on short final; I turned right. As I took off; I saw the airplane on short final and we both banked to the right.




Synopsis: The pilot of a Piper PA28 was preparing for a mid-field takeoff from a runway over 10;000 FT long. When he felt rushed to begin his takeoff; he inadvertently turned towards the arrival end of the runway rather than towards the departure end. The arriving and departing aircraft performed right banking turns to alleviate the traffic conflict.