elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201503
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Aircraft: B767-300 and 300 ER
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: Pressurization System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Human factors: Fatigue; Situational Awareness; Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; General Declared Emergency; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: About halfway to MIA from [South America]; cruising at FL360; EICAS message Cabin Auto Inoperative displayed and caution beeper sounded.  Status messages also appeared for automatic cabin controllers 1 and 2.  Cabin altitude remained stable.  Confirmed on overhead pressurization panel that auto fail light was illuminated with auto selected.We called for the captain to return from his break immediately and ran the cabin automatic [pressurization] inoperative checklist.  This left us in manual mode for pressurization which was fine as the cabin was fairly stable around 6000 MSL as it had been at time of malfunction.  The captain returned promptly and we discussed options.  We had several hours left to go and had a good option in [ZZZ1] which had good weather.  With no backup other than manual for pressurization and now below max landing weight; we decided the best course of action was to divert there.  Captain informed dispatch and ATC.  The captain became Pilot Flying so the FB and I could focus on the divert and monitoring the pressurization.  We landed uneventfully and called maintenance.  Maintenance found a large water leak that had spread throughout the aft galley and into other areas of the aircraft where ice had formed.  With flight attendant duty time issues and concerns that the ice should be allowed to melt and drain for maintenance reasons; we stayed the night and continued home uneventfully with the same crew and aircraft the next evening.




Synopsis: A B767-300ER flight crew opted to divert to an enroute airport when both automatic pressurization controllers failed.
Date: 201504
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: IMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: A321
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Powerplant Fuel Control Unit
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Check Pilot; Captain
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach; Flight Crew Inflight Shutdown; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; General Declared Emergency; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Outside the OM for the ILS; ECAM advised ENG 2 FUEL CTL FAULT.  Almost immediately after; ECAM advised ENG 2 FAIL followed by complete loss of thrust.  ECAM then advised FAC 2 FAIL and ENG 2 START VALVE (FAULT?) We aborted the approach; remained at 3;000 feet and [notified ATC] and requested a pattern back to the ILS to provide time for ECAM and QRH actions and follow up.  I was pilot flying and remained so initially; Captain followed [the] non-normal methodology; had me continue to fly while he accomplished non-normal procedures.  After all ECAM; QRH and follow up actions were complete; including notification of ATC; flight attendants and operations he took over duties of pilot flying for the single engine landing.Initial evaluation by maintenance personnel indicated a fuel control failure; loss of fuel feed to the engine causing the rollback and loss of thrust. I would like to say that as a new hire (on IOE during this event) that the initial Airbus training program is excellent.  Every initial instructor; ground school instructor; simulator instructor/evaluator; and the IOE captains were wonderful to work with; expert in their areas; professional and personable.


Second narrative: While on ILS at 3000 FT; 180 KIAS CONF 2; and 5 miles from the FAF the following ECAM MSG showed up. 'ENG 2 FUEL CTL FAULT'; with an additional message 'avoid rapid THR LVR changes'. 15 seconds later ECAM 'ENG 2FAIL' appeared and ENG 2 rolled back.Aborted approach remained at 3000 FT and RWY heading. [Notified] ATC due to engine failure and requested vectors back to the ILS with a long final to complete checklists. FO retained aircraft control; while I completed all ECAMS; QRH follow-up items and the EMERGENCY checklist in QRH. Did discharge fire bottle #1 on the engine for suspected damage and possible fuel leak. After I completed the checklists took control of aircraft for single engine landing.


Synopsis: A321 flight crew experiences an engine failure at 3;000 feet during approach and elects to go-around to perform ECAM actions and QRH procedures. The Captain takes control of the aircraft for the single engine approach and landing. ECAM had annunciated 'ENG 2 FUEL CTL FAULT'; just before the engine rolled back.
Date: 201202
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Light: Night
Aircraft: Regional Jet 200 ER/LR (CRJ200)
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: Cockpit Window
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Distraction; Training / Qualification; Workload
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: While in cruise flight at FL300 we noticed the top left side of the left windshield was glowing in an orange color and sparking. It began to show hairline cracks or lines. Within a few minutes of that; the entire windshield shattered into a spider web like series of cracks making the entire windshield unusable for seeing through. The aircraft maintained pressurization while we completed the QRH procedure. We diverted and landed into a nearby airport which was 40 NM away uneventfully.




Synopsis: A CRJ200 Captain's windshield developed hairline cracks over the entire window so the flight diverted to a nearby airport for a precautionary landing.
Date: 201404
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: Fractional
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: CTAF ZZZ
Second aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Reporter organization: Fractional
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Confusion; Fatigue
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I mistakenly flew the pattern for Runway 1; while making radio calls for Runway 19. Another plane was in the pattern for Runway 19. Both traffic patterns are on same side of Runway (left traffic for 19; right traffic for 1). As such; the other plane and I passed each other at the same altitude; going opposite direction; about 200 feet apart. I was clearly too fatigued and not concentrating sufficiently on the flight. I regret this close call and will be much more focused from now on.




Synopsis: C172 pilot reports a NMAC with another pilot in the traffic pattern due to mistakenly entering right traffic for Runway 1 while attempting to join left traffic for Runway 19.
Date: 202006
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Cessna 180 Skywagon
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
Aircraft component: AC Generator/Alternator
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Procedure; Aircraft
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Cessna 180 had recently undergone a major engine overhaul and annual inspection. I reviewed all the logbooks and verified all was in order prior to the first flight. An engine run and leak check was conducted and all systems including electrical appeared normal. The aircraft does not have a voltage gauge; only an amp meter. I conducted a 1 hour flight over the airport and all systems appeared normal. Several days later one of the another pilot flew a local flight to put time on the new engine and all was normal. About a week later the same pilot left on a cross county pleasure flight and enroute lost all electrical power. He returned to our home field and the Mechanic who performed the engine overhaul; installation and the annual discovered the generator connections had been incorrectly attached. The Mechanic fixed the problem and made the required log entries. I believe the reason the aircraft didn't exhibit any electrical issues until the third flight was due to a fully charged battery. The insidious nature of the failure and a fully charged storage battery made it impossible to identify the wiring issue prior to battery drain and electrical system shutdown. I highly recommend older aircraft install a voltmeter or generator warning light in addition to a load meter or amp meter.




Synopsis: Pilot reported another pilot had a loss of electrical power on a C182 during flight after engine replacement due to alternator connection not installed correctly.
Date: 202112
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Airport Personnel; Ramp
Human factors: Workload; Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Hazardous Material Violation; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Ground Event / Encounter Ground Equipment Issue
Detector: Person Ground Personnel
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Airport; Procedure
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: There was a lavatory spill on Gate XX at ZZZ airport at XA:15 on Date; truck #XXXX. The Lavatory Driver noticed the clear dump hose had a crack in it and was spilling lavatory waste on to the ramp. Where the aircraft was parked and being serviced next to a storm drain about five ft. away. The Lavatory Truck Driver noticed lavatory waste draining into the storm drain. The Lavatory Truck Driver stopped the servicing of the rear lavatory. The Lavatory Truck Driver then went to look for a spill kit within the vicinity of the Gate XX and Gates XY and XZ there were no spill kits available. There was about 6 to 8 gallons of lavatory waste that spilled into the storm drain as a result of there being no spill kits available to stop the flow of lavatory waste. Creating a hazardous waste environmental spill in to the storm drain.There is supposed to be spill kits in-between each gates at ZZZ airport from Gate XA to Gate XE. There is currently only 3 spill kits for the whole Terminal C located at Gates XC; XD and XE. The lack of available spill kits to stop hazardous spills on the gates from entering storm drains and creating environmental issues could be addressed with the availability of spill kits properly staged were the can be easily obtained.




Synopsis: Air Carrier Ground Service personnel reported a lavatory waste ramp spill caused by a ground equipment malfunction. The waste spill drained into storm drain due to the lack of Spill Kit availability.
Date: 201911
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: None
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
Second aircraft: Heavy Transport
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Vehicle Driver
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Ground Personnel; Person Other Person
When detected: Taxi
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Operations directed us to tow an aircraft a certain direction. While towing the aircraft; the winglet of Air Carrier X aircraft went under the rear stabilizers of Air Carrier Y. Air Carrier X Ramp Supervisor witnessed the incident.




Synopsis: Ramp driver reported a ground event during aircraft towing in which aircraft winglet passed under the stabilizer of parked aircraft.
Date: 201405
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: EWR.Airport, NJ
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-700
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Tower EWR
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer
Human factors: Confusion; Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Ground Incursion Taxiway
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Exited Runway 29 in EWR.  Told W2 to Y eastbound.  Diagram showed left turn off runway and straight to Y.  We saw a sign for Y in the distance.  There was no other taxiway we saw.  We went to the taxiway we thought was identified by the Y taxi sign (closest to it).  We ended up on another carrier's ramp.  Ground said we missed Y and we stopped.  He coordinated with Ramp and we continued uneventfully to the gate.  Better signage and ground markings.  We didn't see Y properly and ended up on another carrier's ramp.




Synopsis: B737 First Officer reports confusion after exiting Runway 29 at EWR on Taxiway W2 and being told to taxi via Y; ending up on the Terminal C east ramp. Lack of signage and taxiway markings is cited.
Date: 201309
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: CCR.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Light Sport Aircraft
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
ATC / advisory: Tower CCR
Second aircraft: Small Aircraft
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Sport / Recreational
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Another small GA aircraft (possibly a Grumman from radio traffic); passed above my starboard wing from my 4 o'clock to my 10 o'clock at a vertical separation I would guess at being less than 200 FT. From radio traffic; I believe the other pilot was not aware of my position before crossing almost directly above me. My speed was approximately 90 KTS and I had recently made my radio call at approximately 10 miles out. The other aircraft seemed to be traveling much faster than my aircraft.




Synopsis: Light Sport Aircraft pilot reports an NMAC with a low wing aircraft at 3;100 FT near CCR. The other aircraft passed overhead from the 4 o'clock position and apparently did not see the reporter.
Date: 201509
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: EIDW.Airport, FO
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B757 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class A EIDW
ATC / advisory: Tower EIDW
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Airport
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: Was given late descent clearance into EIDW on OSGAR 1L arrival requiring a high rate of descent was given altimeter setting of 1023mb. First Officer (FO) reconfirmed and was given 1032mb. Continued shortened arrival for ILS Runway 28. Encountered VMC at 2;000 feet. Runway contact at 1;500 feet. Noticed several unusual lights on runway that resembled vehicle tail lights. FO asked tower if any vehicles on runway and response was no. Continued approach; at 1;000 feet Captain inquired if any vehicles were on runway. Tower said that there had been pilot reports of unusual lighting around taxiways E3 and R4 but no vehicles on runway. Continued to normal landing. On roll out FO noticed 'distracting' lights coming from runway abeam taxiways E3 and E4. We exited runway at taxiway E6 with normal taxi to gate.


Second narrative: Upon landing it was very noticeable and distracting from the right seat and the Captain stated this to Tower that the lighting was not normal as we exited the runway at E6 the lady controller replied she would relay this complaint to her manager and supervisor. Then we switched to ground for taxi instructions to the gate. Rest of flight normal.


Synopsis: A B757 flight crew reported noticing unusual and distracting lights during their approach to Runway 28 at EIDW.
Date: 201706
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ABR.Airport, SD
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Regional Jet 200 ER/LR (CRJ200)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
Second aircraft: Small Aircraft
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Less Severe; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Airport; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: On taxi out we made several calls over CTAF. No one responded or self announced and no one was observed on TCAS. We then announced we were holding short of the runway. No one else transmitted on CTAF. We made another announcement on CTAF that we were going to take the runway for takeoff. CTAF was quiet except for an Aircraft X taxiing out behind us. As we were taxiing across the Hold Short Line I spotted an aircraft on the opposite end of the runway lined up (even though the wind favored our selected runway). I immediately notified the Captain and he immediately turned a 180 on the runway and exited. After we exited we queried CTAF about the other aircraft (Aircraft Y). Aircraft X behind us said he never saw or heard the guy on CTAF either. Aircraft Y exited the runway as well further down the runway. He came nose to nose with Aircraft X and only then transmitted on CTAF to ask Aircraft X why they were nose to nose. We taxied to the ramp so could turn around and taxi back the runway.


Second narrative: [Narrative contained no additional information.]


Synopsis: Air carrier flight crew reported a ground conflict at an uncontrolled field due to a lack of communication by the conflicting aircraft.
Date: 201307
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: CLT.Airport, NC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Airbus Industrie Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class A ZTL
ATC / advisory: Center ZTL
Aircraft component: FMS/FMC
Component problem: Design
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure; Aircraft
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Once again the IVANE 1 bit us in the butt. As before ATL Center cleared us to a hard altitude of FL220 at MAYOS. The First Officer was pilot flying and we had briefed this thoroughly with a warning that this clearance required two changes in the MCDU programming...and in fact we found another 'got U' on this terrible [arrival]. We cleared the constraint at MSTRD and changed to a hard constraint FL220 at MAYOS. We called Approach and were cleared to descend via the IVANE 1. The First Officer put 6;000 in the FCU and as we passed MAYOS he engaged vertical guidance. The airplane disregarded the FL220 constraint at the following waypoint and started descending immediately. We stopped it as soon as we saw the amber over the next waypoint; but it was already an altitude deviation. This occurred because of expectations and because ATL is not involved in the descent. When in the descent mode the plane will follow the profile; but when ATL gives you a hard altitude; it is in descent mode; but at MAYOS; because we did not re-enter a cruise altitude in the progress page (note this is a workaround we should not need to do-due to a bad policy and procedure). The plane left FL220 immediately to a 1;000 FT per minute descent. It is impossible and not practical for the crew to think of every variation of procedure we have to remember because we have to work around a bad policy and procedure. We change original procedure because we don't want to pay for software upgrades; so we make protocol; then we find [in order] to make it work we have to redefine secondary failures into primary failures to make our workaround 'work.' Company culture is to change what is Airbus recommended; intuitive and simple to save money. This IVANE 1 arrival is riding the speedbrake; giving a bad ride; and using fuel [in order] to enhance throughput in CLT by what a few operations per hour. As soon as you have to deviate for weather or other reason or get another speed restriction by ATC; you set us up for failure.




Synopsis: Airbus Captain reports descending early on the IVANE 1 arrival to CLT due to ATC changes to the arrival and FMGC design issues.