elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201911
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: SCT.TRACON, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: A320
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Flying westbound from JWARD intersection; east of mountains just to the west of SNA; descending into SNA on the DSNEE4 arrival; cleared for the visual Runway 20R at SNA; FO (Flight Officer) flying pilot. Got terrain terrain; pull up; pull up at 5800 ft. MSL. Complied with warning; then normal approach and landing into SNA.Cause: Neither pilot thought we were low. Had mountains in sight. FO's first time into SNA; first time on DSNEE4 arrival contributed to lack of awareness. Captain briefed prior that SOCAL approach will keep airplane high on profile making it difficult to descend into SNA on a normal profile. This brief probably contributed to FO wanting to descend early. Captain had mountains in sight and thought clearance was going to be OK. Suggestions: Don't clear airplanes for visual into SNA when airplane is still east of 5600 ft. mountains east of SNA. Also make chart say keep 7600 ft. until west of mountains.




Synopsis: A320-200 Captain reported GPWS terrain warning activation on descent into destination in mountainous environment.
Date: 201907
Aircraft: Heavy Transport
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Aircraft component: Traffic Collision Avoidance System (TCAS)
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Other / Unknown
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural MEL / CDL; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Procedure; Manuals; MEL; Human Factors; Aircraft
Primary problem: Manuals

Narrative: Maintenance Control received a ACARS (Aircraft Communication And Reporting System) message from Aircraft X in regards to TCAS (Traffic Collision Avoidance System) being INOP (Inoperative). ACARS MESSAGE: 'TCAS INOP - NAV WITH ASSOCIATED ATC/XPDR2 AND ADS-B RPTG 2'. I sent the flight crew a ACARS asking if the fault only dealt with the TCAS. They responded yes. I sent them a ACARS:1MSG FROM [Maintenance]CAN YOU PLEASE PLACE INOP STICKER; NEXT TO TCAS CONTROL PANEL AND PULL CB K10 ON THE 121VU PANEL AND WRAP A INOP STICKER AROUND PULLED CB.' I also sent them via ACARS the MEL which [Maintenance Control] was going to use for that fault. The intent of asking the flight crew to pull and collar a CB (Circuit Breaker) is more of a heads up that there is more that has to be carried out for this particular MEL. There is no expectation by [Maintenance Control] of having the flight crew perform this in flight. We at [Maintenance Control] do not expect the flight crew to pull and collar any CB in flight. The intent is to have the flight crew preform this action once on ground. This is a common practice at [Maintenance Control]; and when the flight crew responds back; 'WILL DO'. We at [Maintenance Control] take this as they will accomplish this task as part of the MEL once on the ground. There is no rush on the part of [Maintenance Control]; because the system is already inoperative.I believe that adding 'accomplished this action once on ground only'; would definitely help in preventing any unwanted CB pull in flight. Also by adding a note to the MEL's which have CB pulls in their procedures that CB are not to be pulled while aircraft is in flight would also be a great help.




Synopsis: Air Carrier Maintenance personnel reported an incident suggesting that the MEL be revised to clarify instructions to flight crew.
Date: 202202
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: CLE.Airport, OH
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb; Initial Climb
Airspace: Class B CLE
ATC / advisory: TRACON CLE
Aircraft component: Radio Altimeter
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Equipment Problem Dissipated
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: Cleveland Runway 24R departure. While on takeoff and climbout; the First Officer's radar altimeter remained at 0 to -5 ft until reaching 3;700 feet MSL or approximately 2;500 feet AGL when it read correctly; then decluttered off our PFD. The Captain side radar altimeter read correctly the entire takeoff and departure. Departure Control was notified of the anomaly.Since ATC was notified; I planned on writing up my incident report at the hotel on the overnight from notes I had taken about the anomaly after takeoff. The radar altimeter operated normally into the next station. I have made an incident report regarding the radar altimeter suspected 5G anomaly.




Synopsis: Air Carrier Captain reported the First Officer's radio altimeter malfunctioned on climbout from CLE and cited 5G interference as possibly contributing to the event.
Date: 202012
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: SEA.Airport, WA
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower SEA
Second aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical
Detector: Automation Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Rejected Takeoff
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We were cleared for takeoff. We set takeoff power and started our takeoff roll. At around 80 KTS the center runway red warning lights came on indicating another plane was on the runway. We queried ATC and they aborted our takeoff.




Synopsis: Air carrier First Officer reported the Runway Status lights indicated traffic on the runway and after asking Tower about it Tower cancelled their takeoff clearance.
Date: 201509
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Regional Jet 700 ER/LR (CRJ700)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Powerplant Lubrication System
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Technician
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Airframe; Maintenance Powerplant
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Troubleshooting; Confusion
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
Result: Flight Crew Inflight Shutdown; Flight Crew Diverted; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: We were called out to aircraft for a #1 hydraulic system quantity low. Serviced the #1 system in accordance with Aircraft Maintenance Manual (AMM). We noticed Skydrol leaking out of the #1 engine drain port. Opened the #1 engine cowl and found the #1 Engine Driven Pump (EDP) to be leaking when the engine was motored over. Proceeded to remove and perform deactivation procedures of the #1 EDP in accordance with AMM. After completion of the deactivation ran the #1 engine for leaks and no leaks were noted. Aircraft was then dispatched with a #1 EDP deferred.Aircraft was dispatched with a #1 EDP [deactivated] and was diverted due to #1 engine loss of engine oil resulting in engine shut down.It would be better if the AMM would be more detailed in the leak check procedure.




Synopsis: A Maintenance Technician reported that following the deferral of an engine driven hydraulic; the aircraft experienced an inflight engine shutdown due to the loss of engine oil.
Date: 201602
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Dawn
Aircraft: Regional Jet 700 ER/LR (CRJ700)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Weight And Balance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Due to ACARS weight and balance I directed the ramp lead to move the one and only bag from the aft cargo compartment to the front and to add 500lbs. of ballast to the front cargo compartment. On rotation we noticed a slight nose up pitch tendency but dismissed it as normal for the aft CG limit. On arrival; the First Officer (FO) discovered that the 500lbs. of ballast had been placed in the aft cargo compartment.




Synopsis: The CRJ-700 Captain noticed a pitch up tendency during takeoff; and discovered after landing that 500 pounds of ballast was improperly loaded in the aft cargo compartment instead of in the front cargo compartment.
Date: 201307
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Thunderstorm; Turbulence
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Citation Excel (C560XL)
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Illness / Injury; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Passenger Misconduct; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Diverted; General Declared Emergency; General Physical Injury / Incapacitation
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Weather
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: Encountered severe turbulence during cruise portion of flight; near convective activity. There were two passengers on board. Prior to circumnavigating convective activity; we put the seat belt sign on; verbally requested [passengers] to fasten their seatbelt's including shoulder harness and visually confirmed compliance. Approximately 30 minutes later; we encountered severe turbulence and after stabilizing the aircraft after the event found one passenger belted in the seat and the other on his back in the aisle of the aircraft. After attending to the passenger and unsure about his condition we declared an emergency and landed at the closest airport with acceptable weather so the passenger could be attended to by paramedics. It was determined that he did not have serious injuries and was released. The passenger later stated; 'It is my own fault. I should have listened to you.' There is nothing a crew can do if a passenger decides to unbelt for comfort against the crews instruction and is hiding doing so under a blanket. I am certain that this Passenger will always be belted in from takeoff to landing from now on.




Synopsis: Passenger on a C560XL did not comply with flight crew's request to fasten seat belt and shoulder harness and was injured when the aircraft subsequently encountered severe turbulence.
Date: 201902
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: MKE.Airport, WI
Weather elements / visibility: Icing; Fog; 2
Aircraft: Light Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Ferry / Re-Positioning
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class C MKE
ATC / advisory: Tower MKE
Second aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Automation Aircraft Terrain Warning; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Procedure; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: During the approach portion; we were given vectors to the final approach; as we were given our final altitude of 2;800 feet to intercept the ILS; we then intercepted the localizer and began our glide slope descent when all of a sudden we encountered severe turbulence and lost altitude in a rapid descent. By the time we started the missed approach; ATC came on the frequency and gave us an altitude alert even though we had started our climb and went missed. My First Officer and I had discussed this on the ground and came to the conclusion that we might have encountered severe turbulence from the previous aircraft that had landed in front of us; a B737. What we've learned from this is that although human factor takes a few seconds to recognize a situation as such; perhaps a quicker reaction towards the turbulence to a missed approach could have been better; also I think ATC was good to promptly advise us of the situation




Synopsis: Light transport Captain reported executing a go-around on approach to MKE when they encountered wake turbulence in trail of a B737.
Date: 201507
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: MKE.TRACON, WI
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Windshear
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Regional Jet 200 ER/LR (CRJ200)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class C MKE
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Deviation - Speed All Types; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Weather
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: During the final approach into the airport; as the captain asked for flaps 45; the airplane began to experience a sudden decrease in airspeed. The wind gust caused the autopilot to disengage and the stick Shaker to go off. As the captain assumed control of the aircraft and applied power; we received a windshear alert. Immediately the captain called for Max trust and followed the escape guidance. As the alert ceased; we advised tower of the go-around and windshear alert. We got vectors and came back around for another approach.Primary cause was the convective activity around the airport; and the windshear that caused a decreasing airspeed indication.When flying an approach into gusty conditions make sure to apply plenty of airspeed correction.




Synopsis: CRJ-200 First Officer describes a windshear encounter during approach to MKE with the Captain flying that results in stick shaker activation as flaps 45 are selected. The autopilot disengages and max power is called for. As the alert ceases the Tower is advised and the go around is continued and vectors received for another approach.
Date: 202102
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: MDW.Tower, IL
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class C MDW
ATC / advisory: Tower MDW
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Local
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Human Factors; Procedure; Airport; Weather
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Aircraft X was inside of a quarter mile final on the ILS Runway 31C approach. I turned around for a second to tell the supervisor about the visibility getting better on final when the supervisor noticed an airport vehicle going onto Runway 31C. At that point I issued a go around to the aircraft and to climb and maintain 3;000 ft. MSL and turn right to a heading of 110. I also let the aircraft know the reason of the go around. They were able to respond in time and were re-sequenced for another approach and landed without incident. I understand it was snowing and airport markers are difficult to see. I suggest airport vehicles be more vigilant of their position on the airport before moving anywhere. Driver refresher course recommended.




Synopsis: ATC approach controller reported issuing a go-around clearance to an aircraft on short final due to a vehicle reported on the runway.
Date: 202011
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Embraer Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Aircraft component: Tablet
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Troubleshooting; Workload
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Software and Automation
Primary problem: Software and Automation

Narrative: Shortly after departure from ZZZ I went to switch to the app to check on turbulence. At this point I noticed that my iPad screen was completely frozen. I could not change anything and had to reboot my iPad to get it back functioning.  I would not have been able to switch to the complex engine out procedure had we had an engine failure!I always only have flight related apps running in the background while flying to help prevent this from happening. Didn't work this time. We need new iPads. Now; I understand this is expensive but our old iPads are starting to become a safety hazard with apps locking up all the time. It's not uncommon for the Jepp app to lag and require closing and reopening. That's a quick fix; rebooting an ipad in the middle of an engine failure is not




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported that the electronic tablet was not functioning properly and required a reboot. Reporter stated it was not uncommon for this to happen.
Date: 201203
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B777 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Second aircraft: B767 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Aircraft component: Cabin Furnishing
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Technician
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Airframe; Maintenance Powerplant
Human factors: Confusion; Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness; Workload
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Maintenance
When detected: Routine Inspection
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Chart Or Publication; Aircraft; Company Policy; Procedure; Human Factors; Manuals
Primary problem: Manuals

Narrative: Company Engineering started the practice of making available PDF versions of the Component Maintenance Manual (CMM) Engineering Orders (EO) for field use; instead of putting the information in the Boeing Illustrated Parts Catalog (IPC).  These Engineering Orders are generally used for cabin furnishings/galleys/seats and the like.  The web page that is used to deliver this information to the Mechanic contains Aircraft Effectivity and links to the effective Engineering Orders.Some of these are for obsolete equipment that has been long removed.  The overall layout of the site is very confusing and has erroneous links/labels; and within it; is a link to another EO site with a different presentation; different labels and erroneous labels/links for those Engineering Order manuals. I fear that someone is going to mistakenly put the wrong part on the wrong seat/component.  The chances of an actual unsafe condition are low; but there is greater probability of an FAA violation.  The mistakes seem to be only with the presentation [display] of the Component Engineering Orders.  The data contained within seems to be OK. The trick is getting to the correct EO to begin with. The problems I am aware of are in the B767 and B777 index of the web page.I have tried for over a year to get someone to update the information with Engineering requests; no luck. I hope that someone can convince Engineering and [Technical] publications to get together and correct how this information is presented and correct the effectivity problems.  The new B777s are on the way with all new cabin interior; it would be nice to have a solid foundation to deliver this new data.




Synopsis: A Technician describes a practice started by Engineering of making available a PDF version of their Component Engineering Orders (EO) for field use; instead of putting the EO information for their B767/B777 aircraft in the aircraft Manufacturer's Illustrated Parts Catalog (IPC). The web page presentation has been very confusing with erroneous links.