elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201305
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Aircraft component: DC Battery
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Inspector
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Airframe; Maintenance Powerplant
Human factors: Other / Unknown; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance
When detected: Routine Inspection
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Manuals; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: One of the fulltime receiving Inspectors; notified me that the new emergency battery pack; part number ABS-D717-XX-XXX; that I had received the previous morning had been off charge for more than 7 days.  Per MPM section 25-XX-XX 'Shelf Life Storage of Aircraft Emergency Battery Packs'; I should not have received the battery pack and the pack should have been rejected by the Material Specialist.  After researching the part and speaking with the Maintenance Lead; I have found out the battery pack was for ACFT XXX; RH aft emergency exit door.  The paperwork that came with the part was correct.  I checked all of the RII notes and the listed shelf life.  It showed 180 days shelf life.  The vendor was verified as correct and valid.  The battery pack was in new condition from the vendor (date).  It appeared to be in perfect condition.  The battery pack was installed and the problem corrected.  The RII notes did not reflect the MPM [Maintenance Procedures Manual] requirements.  After further research; it appears that the RII notes for the B717 have been changed to reflect the MPM requirements; (but not for the Company B717).  It also appears that we have only 7 days from the date of manufacture of the battery to have the battery shipped to us; pass through the Materials Specialists and go through receiving inspection; at which time it must go on charge.  The fulltime Receiving Inspector stated that he was in the process of rejecting the other 8 batteries at the receiving station at our warehouse.  I sincerely regret having missed the MPM requirement.  Have the RII notes in the receiving inspection secton for emergency battery packs updated to reflect the MPM requirements for the B717.




Synopsis: Maintenance Inspector reports receiving emergency exit light batteries and installing them in an aircraft.  He is later informed that the batteries should not have been accepted due to the MPM requirement that the batteries not be off charge for more than seven days; which they were.  The RII inspection notes did not contain this requirement.
Date: 202004
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Dawn
Aircraft: B737-700
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Cockpit Door
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Procedure; Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: We had just finished the Before Start Checklist and the Flight Attendant just closed the flight deck door and checked to make sure it was closed. The door switch was down and all lights on the center panel were out. However; I always go beyond the call of duty and push on the door from the inside to make sure it is closed. When I did so; the door came flying open. The metal door lock inside the frame was not locking. We MEL'd it with Maintenance and were told to use the manual lock instead.I have had this happen three times in my career where the door lock fails like this. I have filed reports about this problem before and nothing has been done to fix this safety threat with the way we do things here at Company. Our checklist tells us to look at the lights on the center panel to see if they are out. For some reason we seem to think those lights are telling us that the metal latch inside the door is actually working right; but that is wrong. That LOCK FAIL light is only telling me that [the] electrical power circuitry in the arming switch portion of the door is indicating that the Flight Deck Access System Switch is off; or the flight deck door has failed to lock. However; we have seen that it does not always detect a failed door lock working properly. We have seen that flight deck doors come open with the LOCK FAIL light and the AUTO UNLK lights both out and the arming switch is in the downed position. Nowhere in our procedures does it tell a Pilot to physically push on the door from inside the flight deck to double check to make sure the lock is actually working; to make sure the door does not fly open. About 90 percent of the time Flight Attendants do not check the door or forget to flip the switch down when they close the door. I have caught many times that the door was not locked properly by just pushing on it and having it come open. We are letting our guard down and accepting too much risk by not adding in our procedures; or including in our checklist to have either Pilot take one second and push on the door from the inside to make sure it is indeed locked and working properly. This is the only airline I have ever flown for that does not physically push on the door to make sure it is secure. We need to add this to our procedure.




Synopsis: B737-700 First Officer reported a recurring failure of cockpit door locking mechanism and the incorrect door locking procedures.
Date: 201606
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: DCA.Tower, DC
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Medium Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground DCA
Second aircraft: Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Ground
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Confusion
Second reporter function: Local; Handoff / Assist
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Ground Conflict; Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: Taxi
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; Flight Crew Rejected Takeoff; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Airport; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I taxied Aircraft X to Runway 1 via Juliet to hold short of Runway 4. Upon taxiing Aircraft X said they could depart Runway 33 if it meant they would have an earlier departure. I then taxied Aircraft X to Runway 33 via Foxtrot to hold short of Runway 1. I then told Aircraft X to cross Runway 4 and monitor tower on the other side. At that time Aircraft Y was just starting departure role on Runway 1. Aircraft X started to cross Runway 1. I was alerted when the Local Control and Local Control Assist started yelling and I immediately yelled for Aircraft X to hold short of Runway 1. By then Aircraft X had already crossed the hold short line for Runway 1 causing Aircraft Y to abort takeoff.


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


Synopsis: DCA Ground Controller cleared an aircraft to cross a runway that another aircraft was beginning its takeoff roll on.
Date: 202004
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 15
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Caravan 208B
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Ground ZZZ
Aircraft component: Powerplant Fuel Control
Component problem: Improperly Operated; Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; Flight Crew Returned To Gate; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: The airplane performed normally as I landed ZZZ; departed there and flew to ZZZ1. After landing on Runway XX; I had a long taxi on the runway to get to the turn off point. Since it was a long taxi on the runway; I started doing the after landing items while still on the runway. I shut off one fuel valve; retracted the flaps and moved the fuel condition lever to the low idle position. While moving the fuel condition lever; I accidentally pulled it slightly past the notch for low idle and into the fuel cutoff area. The engine shut down. As soon as I realized the engine had shut down; without thinking I moved the lever back into the low idle position believing that would keep the engine running. The engine did not keep running or restart. I then moved the lever all the way into fuel cutoff; waited for the engine to slow down; turned the fuel valve back on and restarted the engine with the starter. The engine restarted. The engine instruments appeared normal during the restart. I continued taxiing down the runway; then to parking and shut down normally. Upon preparing to depart; the engine lost power on taxi out. A tug was required to reposition the aircraft back to the FBO. I later found out that there was severe damage to the engine.Following normal procedure and waiting to clear the runway before completing the after landing check list may have prevented the engine damage. Several of the same model aircraft that I fly have a positive lock out for the fuel cut off position. This would've prevented me from moving the lever beyond low idle. I also believe that a placard with a warning about moving the fuel condition lever to low idle after an accidental shut down may have prevented the damage.




Synopsis: C208 pilot reported executing an improper engine shutdown procedure; causing damage to the fuel control system.
Date: 201906
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Widebody; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Check Pilot; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Hazardous Material Violation
Detector: Person Dispatch; Person Flight Crew
When detected: Routine Inspection; Pre-flight
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Dangerous Goods Manifest did not require air conditioning ON even though we had 16.83 kilograms of Dry Ice in the AFT cargo compartment. The Flight [Operations] Manual only requires we position the selector to ON if the DG Manifest has an alert requiring it. The FOM requires the lower cargo air conditioning to be on any time dry ice is loaded and 'a statement will print on the DG Manifest as a reminder'. The reminder did not print. The only reason we didn't make a mistake was because I called the Dispatcher who informed me we did have dry ice and the air conditioning needed to be on.Cause: Auto DG system did not print reminder for lower cargo air conditioning to be turned on due to Dry Ice in Lower Aft Cargo compartment.Suggestions: Fix the Auto DG system to print the reminder.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported call to Dispatch to clarify missing Dangerous Goods Manifest statement regarding cargo air condition ON requirements.
Date: 201402
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ORD.Airport, IL
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ramp ORD
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Distraction; Training / Qualification; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Vehicle
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Ramp control cleared us into the gate on the North taxi line and cleared us to park. A vehicle was parked on gate lead in line and took several minutes to move. As the vehicle cleared and I began to move for parking; the same vehicle crossed back over the extended centerline. Up to four or five other vehicles crossed the lead in line for with me starting and stopping the taxi to the gate. Each time a vehicle was in the way; I came to a stop and another radio call was made to ramp. I flashed my taxi lights to these vehicles to gain attention without effect. The process to park at took five minutes due to ground personnel improperly crossing in front of the aircraft after I started the turn for the lead in line. One driver was queried after arrival and did not appear to know policy or procedure for safe vehicle movement around aircraft. This same driver was observed on our departure (same aircraft) from this gate driving within 15 FT of the aircraft at a speed greater than 15 miles per hour. I called Ramp Control and described the safety issue with this after arrival. The response was that this happens often here. These ground workers need to be retrained and monitored for compliance [with operational SOP]. Personnel who do not or will not comply with safety procedures for ground vehicle movement around taxiing and parking aircraft should be removed.




Synopsis: A B737NG Captain was effectively blocked from taxiing into his assigned gate when multiple vehicles refused to grant right of way as he approached on the lead-in line. Additional training and monitoring of ground crew compliance was cited as a viable fix.
Date: 201406
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: LAX.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class B LAX
ATC / advisory: Tower LAX
Second aircraft: A380
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: On arrival to LAX Runway 6R; we were sequenced behind an A380 Super. On initial arrival Approach Control stated that we were 10 miles in trail. I verified it with TCAS. As Approach Control switched us to Tower; he stated that we were 7 1/2 miles in trail of a Super; caution wake turbulence. Due to the 737-800 high approach speed at flaps 30; I elect to use flaps 40 to slow us a little more. As we were approaching 1;000 FT; I heard Tower tell the Super to contact Ground Control clearing Taxiway V. This is the end of the runway. As we were starting the flare; we started to get quite a bit of wing rock; and some airspeed fluctuations. It almost felt like we were 'skidding' on the wake. At this point I decided that the best thing was to go-around. I am not sure of the altitude; but it was below 50 FT [AGL]. Tower asked the reason for the go-around as we were handed off to departure control and the First Officer stated that it was due to wake turbulence over the runway. My gut feeling is the A380 landed long since they did not exit the runway until the end. I do not have anyway to verify this; just my gut feeling.




Synopsis: B737-800 Captain reported he executed a rejected landing at LAX when he encountered wake turbulence at 50 FT AGL in trail of an A380.
Date: 201509
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZZ.Airport, FO
Aircraft: B757-200
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ramp ZZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Dispatcher
Reporter qualification: Dispatch Dispatcher
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Distraction; Workload
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Dispatch; Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Clearance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Company Policy
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: During taxi-out the crew was cleared for the SID. This did not match with the flight release the crew had so they questioned dispatch about the routing beyond [transition waypoint]. At the time the dispatcher was unaware of the discrepancy in the paperwork and had planned the flight for the SID departure with the routing remaining the same after [transition waypoint]. The crew then informed the dispatcher that their flight plan showed them departing over [a different waypoint]. It was at this point the dispatcher realized there was a discrepancy in the paperwork and informed the crew they were not to go anywhere until it was sorted out. With information from further discussions with the captain it was determined the crew had been given the flight release [from two days earlier;] resulting in a complete breakdown of the barriers to safety. The flight crew had input the incorrect routing into the FMS and it was unknown to the dispatcher whether or not they had current and correct weather information or takeoff performance data.The flight was not allowed to return to the gate per local ATC so correct paperwork was printed for the crew and delivered to the aircraft waiting in a remote parking spot. This event occurred for multiple reasons as is often the case. First; the paperwork is not scheduled to be released to the system for access by stations until 90 minutes prior to departure. Second our crews no longer have briefing rooms in many of our stations at which to take the time to thoroughly review the paperwork they receive. Third the crews are rushed to the airport; often delayed by traffic or other unforeseen circumstances; rushed through the airport; and finally given the paperwork then rushed to the aircraft. This event occurred because the crews no longer have adequate time or facilities to review their paperwork and brief the crews where more than one set of eyes is looking at things. A barrier to safety has been lost.




Synopsis: B757 flight crew; preparing to depart on an international oceanic flight; received a departure clearance that did not agree with their filed flight plan. When Dispatch was queried; it was noted that the crew had been issued a flight release which was 2 days old. After a 32 minute ground delay; the situation was satisfactorily resolved.
Date: 201507
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZAB.ARTCC, NM
Light: Night
Aircraft: Widebody; Low Wing; 4 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Military
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Tactical
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZDV
ATC / advisory: Center ZAB
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Distraction; Confusion; Time Pressure
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Procedure; Weather; Human Factors
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: I was working sector 17 as an R-side.  There was moderate traffic; as well as weather deviations.  I got a call on frequency from Aircraft X.  When I had time to talk to the Aircraft X he said that he was going to TIK; that needed an IFR clearance immediately.  I had my d-side look up the callsign in the NAS; and saw nothing.  I gave the Aircraft X a code and told him to maintain VFR.  The Aircraft X said he was unable to maintain VFR and needed an IFR clearance immediately.When I asked him his location; he gave me a fixed radial distance from a point far outside my airspace.  When I spanned out my radar scope; I saw what I thought was his code approximately 10 miles southeast of SAF.  I tracked the datablock to the code I believed to be the Aircraft X; and I told the Aircraft X that; according to what I believed his position to be; his best option to avoid precipitation would be approximately a 160 heading for weather; or; to reverse course; as the weather appeared to be building east of SAF.  I believed that my D-side called R16 and explained who the Aircraft X was; and what he was requesting. I had other aircraft on my frequency requesting weather deviations; and the Aircraft X seemed to have deteriorating radio communication; so I shipped the Aircraft X to sector 16.  I was relieved off position for a break shortly after; and notified the Supervisor of the situation.  I was later told that the Aircraft X was actually in ZDV airspace the entire time.The pilot needs to not get himself into trouble; and then call the incorrect center.  Why was he flying a VR route into weather?




Synopsis: A Controller receives a call from an aircraft that isn't in his airspace that needs an IFR clearance due to weather. Aircraft is found and sent to correct frequency which was in another Center's airspace.
Date: 201703
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Cardinal 177/177RG
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Utility / Infrastructure
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: CTAF ZZZ
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Instrument
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Fuel Issue
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Was finished doing a pipeline patrol and was [flying] home. Stopped for fuel where AFD said the airport was staffed until XA:00. However; there was no one to operate fuel truck and no self-serve. I thought I had enough fuel to fly for another hour so I chose to continue on and stop at the next larger airport. I made it to about 15 miles from ZZZ and my engine started to sputter and eventually quit. I was able to safely land the airplane on a gravel road without incident. I believe that my fuel consumption was much higher than expected because I did not lean it enough. It was an airplane I had not flown in a while and seemed to be at the proper mixture setting but was consuming at least an extra 1.5 gallons an hour. According to my Tach time the engine had been running for 4.2 hours when it quit. My expected fuel burn was 9.5/gals an hour. I had 49 usable gallon tanks that I had filled.




Synopsis: C177 pilot on pipeline patrol reported running out of fuel and landing on a gravel road.