elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 202007
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Reporter qualification: Flight Attendant Current
Human factors: Confusion
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: In-flight; Pre-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: The Captain on this flight did not wear a mask during the flight. He gave a briefing to the flight attendants and also did not maintain 6 feet spacing. He willingly and knowingly put me and my family and the families of my flying partners in jeopardy.  Company is required to provide a safe and healthy work environment for their employees; but they are not enforcing their own policy when it comes to pilots. People like this are slowing the recovery of the virus and are causing more furloughs than necessary. Flight attendants tell passengers all the time to put their mask on but then they see some pilots come on board without one.  This puts the crews in a very awkward position.  On this flight; there was not a bathroom break however if there was; I would not have gone into the cockpit without both pilots having a mask. This is not an isolated incident. This happens quite frequently. This issue is causing a breakdown in communication between the cockpit and cabin.




Synopsis: Flight Attendant reported the Captain did not wear a COVID-19 type mask during the flight.
Date: 202109
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Tower, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Dawn
Aircraft: Regional Jet 700 ER/LR (CRJ700)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Airspeed Indicator
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Upon rotation on takeoff; I noticed the stall barber pole was higher than normal and the low speed awareness cue was equal to to it. There were no messages and no faults displayed on the MDC. We took off at the appropriate flap setting and the FO's (First Officer's) display appeared normal. We elected to request expedited handling and to return to field to mitigate delays and to make sure that a larger problem did not exist. To prevent the stall protection system from falsely activating we turned off the captain side stall protection switch; ran the STALL FAIL caution message QRH; applied the safety reference and landing distance additives; and landed on runway XXC in ZZZ. We parked at gate XX; deplaned; and were reassigned a new tail.




Synopsis: Captain reported unreliable airspeed and stall protection system indications and elected to request expedited handling and an air turn back to a successful precautionary landing.
Date: 201502
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: B767 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Time Pressure; Distraction; Confusion; Workload; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Company Policy; Human Factors
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Our [US to South America] flight was not normally an ETOPS flight. I called and queried dispatch as to why it was being scheduled to operate as an ETOPS flight and was told there was an issue with 60 minute enroute alternate airport and [the dispatch computer program] would not allow them to plan the flight outside of ETOPS as normal. I had reviewed all the paperwork including the DIL/LOG. I noticed that the aircraft had no [pertinent] inbound defects. I went to the aircraft and performed my preflight duties as normal. There were numerous distractions (i.e. misfueled) as well as others. I looked at the maintenance release and verified it with ACARS. It was the same as my paper work. I looked for the class II navigation guide and could not find one in my chart bag nor the spare bag so I completed my preflight duties from memory. I was interrupted and distracted numerous times with load planning issues and other operational intrusions. We pushed back and departed late. After we were airborne and things settled down in cruise I got my IPAD out and reviewed the class II navigation guide.  That is when I realized that the Pre Departure Service Check (PDSC) for my ETOPS flight had not been completed. I contacted dispatch via SAT phone and thankfully we were able to amend the release to a non ETOPS flight at that time. There were several factors involved with this as the trip is not normally an ETOPS flight. There must be a disconnect between dispatch and maintenance when it comes to triggering an ETOPS PDSC. (On traditional ETOPS legs an automatic gripe of ETOPS PDSC breaks the MRD and thus prevents an inadvertent departure) my flight had no such gripe. Therefore; when I was pushed for time and continually distracted and interrupted I was easily assured by my release verification that my [Maintenance Release] was good when in fact it should have been broken and I should not have been able to verify it as good.




Synopsis: Dispatch of a B767 flight from the US to South America was compromised by a dispatch program error requiring it to be conducted under ETOPS requirements; which was abnormal. A breakdown in normal ETOPS protocol resulted when an inspection required for such a departure wasn't completed and went undetected. Fortunately; by the time the error was noted the computer problem had been resolved and the flight was re-dispatched as non ETOPS.
Date: 201412
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: MD-80 Series (DC-9-80) Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Altitude Hold/Capture
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Confusion; Human-Machine Interface
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance; Flight Crew FLC Overrode Automation
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Descending via the RNAV Arrival; we were cleared to cross ZZZ intersection at 12;000 feet MSL and 250 knots.  Approaching 12;000 feet; ALT CAP annunciated properly; then ALT HLD annunciated properly.  The nose then dropped and the aircraft continued to descend.  Captain re-selected ALT HLD mode with no effect.  Captain then rolled the Vertical Speed into a positive rate of climb with no effect.  He then disconnected the Autopilot and hand flew the aircraft smoothly back to the proper altitude of 12;000 feet.  Lowest altitude reached during the event was approximately 11;550 feet (450 feet below assigned altitude).At 12;000 feet MSL; the autopilot was re-engaged for a test.  The nose of the aircraft once again lowered into a descent while ALT HLD mode remained annunciated.  The AP TRM also annunciated at this time.  Autopilot was disconnected and the aircraft was hand flown on the remainder of the arrival and approach.  Maintenance was notified and briefed on the failure upon gate arrival.  Follow on crew was also briefed on the event and failure.


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


Synopsis: While in a descent an MD-80 flight crew overshot the level-off at 12;000 feet because the altitude capture feature failed. They disconnected the autopilot and hand flew the aircraft to a successful landing.
Date: 201601
Location: CRW.Airport, WV
Light: Night
Aircraft: Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class C CRW
ATC / advisory: Tower CRW
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Flight Engineer
Human factors: Confusion; Distraction; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Airport; Procedure
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: The EMAS had a land slide at the approach end of RWY 05. The end lights are gone with the slide. The threshold is displaced about 570 feet. The FAA and airport have turned off the VASI and GS to RWY 05. I submit this may be good layering but flies in the face of safety! Turn them back on; put NOTAMs in about landing long or better yet put a new VASI in. This is a black hole airport in terrain and taking the vertical guidance away is not the solution. I can see some poor guy in low visibility ripping his gear off or worse yet landing short with fatal outcomes. I wonder if the airport guys talked to any flight safety guys. I am also a former PE (Practice of Engineering) in civil engineering and I appreciate the operational problems of this airport; but nothing should take away safety devices at an airport.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain commented that CRW Runway 5 is a black hole following a landslide which disabled the ILS Glideslope; VASI; and REIL while displacing the runway threshold.
Date: 202007
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Flight phase: Taxi
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Vehicle Driver
Human factors: Confusion; Distraction
Second reporter function: Technician
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Ground Personnel
When detected: Taxi
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Company Policy

Narrative: At approx. XA:09 while monitoring radios to assist if and where needed as ramp was closed due to lightning on or near the field I heard the crew operating PAATS (Park At Any Time System) Truck X declare malfunctioning lights and mis-park of and Aircraft X on Gate X-XX.  As this has a protected overhang I proceeded to make my way to verify and assist as I have red tagged this vehicle several times in the past.  En-route I verified it was Truck X.  Upon arriving to the gate/breezeway/overhang; I observed the crew (super-tug crew also operating PAATS  using my assigned equipment for that day repositioning an aircraft to the correct stop mark.  One operating the super-tug; one marshaling (in the open) and directed by manager (in the open) or possibly counseling said crew while the ramp is still closed.This event also exposes several crews to possible unintended COVID exposure.  Super-tug X (PAATS X)  Crew is X-X break room. Supertug Y (Me and my partner) are Y-XY [room].Had I not observed the above I would not have known my equipment was used and to disinfect again. PAATS lights on Truck X have been intermittent and is a known issue.  Though [I] was told it was addressed and on my last user check it functioned it seems to have an issue again.


Second narrative: Approx. XA:10 ramp closed due to lightning.  Thunderstorms called for and predicted.  No plan to staff PAATS (Park At Any Time System).  Call from Operations to close ramps and start parking aircraft.  With several gate numbers and aircraft types but no flight numbers tails or relay of information to flight crews of parking assist frequency to make contact.While Dispatch worked to get second parking assist / APU truck staffed. Management staffed second parking assist / APU with mixed break rooms (COVID precautions). 3 aircraft parked...4th unable due to equipment.  Several others missed due to time staffing/communications issues with making contact to flight crews.


Synopsis: Ground employees reported supertug parking aircraft issues and combining separate parking crews; which undermines current COVID-19 policies.
Date: 202007
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 30
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turboprop Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Taxi
Airspace: Class G ZZZ
ATC / advisory: UNICOM ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Other back taxi on Rwy
Result: Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was holding short of the runway and was aware there was traffic incoming (Last radio call was 20 miles I believe). I called and asked for position of the inbound single engine aircraft two times; and no radio call was announced. I also checked my garmin unit for ADSB data and there was none. I made the decision to announce a back taxi radio call on Runway XX and proceed onto the runway to back taxi. At about 1;000 feet left; I noticed a plane executing a go around on the runway; and flew over me at approx an altitude of 200 feet above. I then called if he was on frequency and he responded 'yeah'. I asked if he made any radio calls and he said 'no I missed the last radio call'; and asked if he heard my back-taxi call to which he responded yes. I proceeded to turn around at the departure end of the runway and depart without incident.  In summary I made 3 radio calls that were unanswered; did a visual search before entering the runway before back taxi; and checked for ADSB to see if the plane was in the airport environment before my decision to back taxi.




Synopsis: Pilot reported after announcing on Unicom intentions to enter runway and starting to back taxi; an opposite landing aircraft performed a go-around.
Date: 201301
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZZ.Airport, FO
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZZ
Aircraft component: Trailing Edge Flap
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: On approach at 2;000 FT; decelerating through 210 KTS; Captain selected flaps 1. Flap position indicator showed needle split of L(up); R(1/2) and LE Flaps 'xnsit' light remained amber.I continued to fly the aircraft and entered holding pattern as Captain consulted QRH. We identified the problem as trailing edge flap asymmetry and accomplished applicable checklists. Captain declared an emergency with Tower and requested ARFF. Landing was uneventful and after inspection by ARFF Captain taxied aircraft to the gate.




Synopsis: B737-800 flight crew received a flap asymmetry warning light during approach. An emergency was declared and an uneventful landing ensued.
Date: 201210
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZZ.ARTCC, FO
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: B767-300 and 300 ER
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZZ
Aircraft component: Oil Filter
Component problem: Improperly Operated; Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Training / Qualification; Situational Awareness; Troubleshooting
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; General Maintenance Action; General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Approximately 35 minutes after takeoff we noticed the right engine oil quantity indicated 12 quarts. Since we had just had maintenance performed on the Left Engine Oil Pressure System (oil pressure sensor) we suspected a problem. After another 10 minutes of flight the oil quantity indicated 10; oil pressure and temperature remained constant and normal. The First Officer and I discussed returning to the departure airport or an en route stop for maintenance. I called Dispatch and Maintenance Control; all agreed return to the departure airport was best for maintenance and passenger service. Air Traffic Control approved a turn direct turn back to the departure airport. ATC approved fuel dumping in their airspace and we dumped fuel. Even with the fuel dump it became apparent we were going to land over weight so an emergency was declared. We elected not to stay airborne and burn more fuel because we did not know how long we could run the left engine before all oil was lost. On base leg and final approach the oil quantity was 3 quarts during the landing roll out while in reverse thrust oil quantity went to 0. Stopped on runway and rescue vehicles inspected aircraft. No external damage was seen so we taxied to the gate. Over weight landing info: Landing weight 329;000; Vref 152; Touchdown speed 157; Vertical speed 200 -300 FPM; Braking Thrust Reversers only till 80 KTS then medium braking to a stop on the runway. Kudos to both First Officers for their assistance on checklist and analyzing all possible scenarios of the approach landing and possible go around.


Second narrative: We flew back to the departure airport fast to try to land before needing to shut down the engine; with speedbrakes deployed to reduce landing weight.


Synopsis: During the flight following a B767 oil pressure sense unit replacement; the crew returned to the the departure airport because of oil quantity loss.
Date: 201706
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: RV-4
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: CTAF ZZZ
Second aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Approaching airport from south (15 NM) heard Cessna aircraft call 10 south shooting GPS app to Runway 36. Continue north; when about 7 NM south Cessna called on GPS app at 5 miles. I called; looking for you; Cessna called he was along power lines. I called I had a visual on him. Cessna was at my 1030 several hundred feet low at a mile. I call inbound for up wind entry (overhead) for RWY 36. As I passed down the Cessna's right side high (2.0 to 2.5 miles south) I called I was passing over head; for the overhead. At midfield turned right to enter right down wind for landing 36. Pilot of Cessna came to my hanger and said I passed inside of 100 feet and he could see the rivets on my aircraft.




Synopsis: RV4 pilot reported passing a C172 on a practice instrument approach; at what the RV4 pilot believed was a safe distance. The C172 pilot did not think so.
Date: 201507
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Small Transport; Low Wing; 2 Recip Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Confusion; Distraction; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Ground Conflict; Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Ground Event / Encounter Object
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Gate; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: After completion of run up; and the before takeoff checklist. I called Tower; said holding short of Runway 10; ready for departure.At that moment; when Tower replies 'Clear for takeoff Runway 10.' I start positioning the airplane onto the runway; after visually clearing the final approach end of Runway 10. At this moment my clearance was still being issued; and when I hear the words 'aircraft departing from runway intersection'' my instant reaction was to look on that direction. There it was. This abrupt head movement while an unexpected double takeoff clearance from the same runway is happening; caused me to come off centerline and the propeller hit a taxi light.




Synopsis: A pilot reported that; after receiving a takeoff clearance on the runway; he became momentarily distracted by another ATC transmission and drifted off centerline; striking a taxi light. The aircraft then returned to the gate.