elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201306
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZJX.ARTCC, FL
Aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Special Use R2903
ATC / advisory: Center ZJX
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: While working R87; I overheard a landline conversation at Ocala Sector (15) with JAX Approach that R2903 was active to FL320. The D15 Controller called the Supervisor on the landline who stated that to his knowledge it was cold; and the Controller asked him to verify the status of this airspace with Missions Sector in TMU. Upon several promptings for a status verification from the D15 Controller; with no response from the Supervisor; the D15 Controller took the initiative to call the Missions Sector himself. After several minutes it was established that R2903 was in fact active to FL320. Shortly after being relieved from position I proceeded to the Missions Sector in TMU and inquired as to what time R2903 went active. The Missions Controller told me it had been active for some time. There may have been several controllers and several aircraft that came into an unsafe proximity or possibly violated this airspace. Additionally; the Supervisor's lack of concern and urgency for establishing the status of this airspace is unacceptable. There was a clear breakdown of communication between the Missions Sector in TMU and the FLM's in the Gulf Area. Without knowing where or how this breakdown occurred; I can't provide recommendations to prevent this from happening again. However; in light of the lack of concern for the status of the airspace and safety of the area; the Supervisor needs to be reminded of needed priorities.




Synopsis: ZJX Controller voiced concern regarding the lack of timely and accurate information referenced the status of R2903; the reporter listing several communication breakdowns within the facility.
Date: 201603
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Hydraulic Main System
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: The flight was on time and there were no issues prior to climbout. Upon gear retraction; we saw both A system low pressure lights; initially for the engine pump followed by the electric pump light. We looked for other indications and found the right main landing gear was still in the down position and the A system hydraulic quantity was at zero. We began handling the situation per the checklist and got vectors to a holding pattern to burn off gas. The issue was with the handling of the aircraft. With half the hydraulics and no autopilot; I had difficulty staying exactly at the assigned altitude while trying to deal with the problem. I never got more than 300 feet off the altitude; but Approach Control was concerned and made several calls reference our altitude. At that point the First Officer asked for a block altitude and we were then free to deal with the problem. We eventually returned to [the departure airport] for a normal landing.




Synopsis: A B737 Captain reported returning to the departure airport after losing the A hydraulic system.
Date: 201707
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Flight conditions: IMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: B737-300
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Attitude Indicator(Gyro/Horizon/ADI)
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Diverted; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Environment - Non Weather Related; Weather
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Before takeoff; we had a single channel autoslat failure during Recall check. We cleared the runway and MEL'd this item. After departure sometime below 10;000 feet we noticed the standby attitude indicator was displaying a red flag. Shortly thereafter the standby attitude indicator began to wobble and keeled over for good. All other indications were normal at this time; so we notified maintenance and dispatch and pressed on towards our filed destination. Shortly after reaching cruise; I noticed many of my instruments had red flags including my primary attitude indicator. We were down to one known good source of attitude information at this time and since we were IMC; we decided to immediately [advise ATC] and get radar vectors to nearest VMC. Initially we decided to go to ZZZ; but on the descent I saw ZZZ1 just off the right side of the aircraft and completely in the clear; so we changed the plan and diverted into to [that airport]. The remainder of the flight was uneventful. We then swapped aircraft and took our passengers on to our filed destination.


Second narrative: At cruise; First Officers attitude and airspeed red flagged. We had just entered night IMC into storms in the northeast with one reliable attitude indicator. We contacted Dispatch; and ATC; requested a turn west to known high VFR. [Advised ATC] and landed in a nearby airport.


Synopsis: A B737-300 crew reported many First Officer instruments; including the attitude indicator; displayed red flags so the crew; now in night IMC with one attitude source; diverted to a nearby VMC airport.
Date: 201901
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ELP.Airport, TX
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-700
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class E ELP
ATC / advisory: TRACON ELP
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: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: After being cleared to fly the RNAV (RNP) Z Runway 26L Approach; I programmed the FMC incorrectly and proceeded to brief the approach. When passing SARRT waypoint the aircraft proceeded to CABNU instead of FINAB. I even commented on how it was odd that the route was away from the field. Approach inquired which approach we were flying and we incorrectly stated RNAV Z 26L. Approach Control canceled our approach clearance and issued a vector; asked if we had the runway in sight; which we did; and cleared us for a visual approach to Runway 26L. We switched frequency to Tower and were cleared to land. The Crew should have been more diligent in our briefing to verify that the runway programmed was the proper and intended runway. The mistake was easy to make because of the Runway 22 RNAV Z and 26L RNAV Z being on adjacent keys in the FMS. A more thorough briefing would have caught the programming error.




Synopsis: B737-700 Captain reported a programming error resulted in a track deviation on the RNAV (RNP) Z Runway 26L Approach at ELP.
Date: 202002
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Technician
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Airframe; Maintenance Powerplant
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Hazardous Material Violation; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Maintenance
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Was returning part to ZZZ that wasn't used on aircraft.  Box was closed with no dangerous paper work on it and didn't realize it was hazardous.  It was a Flight Control Unit and didn't know it had a battery in it. Cause: box was closed up and sealed and nothing to alert me that it was hazardous. It was a Flight Control Unit and didn't know it had a battery inside. The part had a [maintenance software company product number] and at the time of the occurrence we were not able to get into [company] software to receive part. Suggestions:  [cargo management system] should have a space to put the part number that you are shipping so if it is hazardous it should be flagged as hazardous.




Synopsis: Airline Maintenance Personnel reported aircraft part erroneously shipped in unlabeled container.
Date: 201503
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZOA.ARTCC, CA
Aircraft: Medium Large Transport
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class B SFO
ATC / advisory: Center ZOA
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Confusion
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Shortly before top of descent Oakland Center changed our arrival to the SERFR 1 RNAV arrival. We flew the arrival remaining in VNAV path the entire way and complying  with all restrictions. Upon handoff to NorCal Approach; Oakland Center commented that we had briefly gone below SFO class B duing our descent. Descending below class B while complying with an arrival published for a primary airport is something neither of us would have considered. This appears to be a new procedure and it looks like it still needs to be adjusted. The fact that the path and restrictions allow for you to go below Class B while flying an arrival designed for aircraft landing at the primary airport is counterintuitive. Furthermore; complying with the arrival would not allow for a speed reduction. Crews and ATC should discontiue use of this arrival until the arrival or airspace can be adjusted. Internally our company should consider a NOTAM and/or 10-7 note to discontiue use until this technicality is resolved.




Synopsis: Pilot reports of flying below the Class Bravo while in a descent into SFO on the SERFR1 STAR. Pilot advises there may be something wrong with the arrival that takes the aircraft out of the Class Bravo which is built to protect the aircraft.
Date: 201906
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: LAX.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
Airspace: Class B LAX
ATC / advisory: Ground LAX
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Troubleshooting; Workload; Confusion
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown; Ground Incursion Taxiway
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: Taxi
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Airport; Chart Or Publication
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: After push-back and contact of Ground Control at C6 we were assigned taxi instructions to taxi to 24L via right turn on taxiway Charlie and hold short C7. Before reaching C7 Ground Control gave further instructions to turn left C7; right Taxiway Bravo; right C8 and left to proceed on Bravo hold short taxiway Papa. Before reaching taxiway Papa we were instructed to proceed on taxiway Charlie; right turn taxiway Sierra; left turn Tango 1; and right turn on taxiway Tango for North Route Taxi to the North Complex. While still taxing west along taxiway Charlie and looking for Sierra both visually and referring to our 10-9 chart; we were advised that we passed Sierra and to make three left turns on taxiways Tango; Bravo; and Sierra to re-join the previously assigned routing. We complied and re-joined Sierra without further complications. Upon reaching Sierra both myself and the Captain confirmed that there is no visible signage or markings identifying taxiway Sierra. Lack of obvious signage or markings identifying taxiway Sierra and some confusion as this instruction is unusual for transition to the North Complex. This event occurred late in the afternoon with low sun angle and some haze causing strong glare in the direction of the assigned turn. Taxiway Sierra is poorly marked and appears as a ramp area for heavy aircraft. This coupled with the unusual taxi instruction could easily lead other crews to make the same error. In addition to improved signage; it is my opinion that a memorandum should be issued to raise flight crew awareness of this potential confusion.




Synopsis: Commercial fixed wing pilot reported a taxiway incursion due to poor signage and pavement markings at LAX.
Date: 201906
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 145 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Technician
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Airframe; Maintenance Powerplant
Human factors: Time Pressure; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Maintenance
When detected: Other Maintenance
Result: General Work Refused
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Human Factors; Equipment / Tooling
Primary problem: Company Policy

Narrative: Aircraft X was in the hangar and in work for a fuel leak. First and second shift had removed the underwing fuel panels to begin the tank ventilation process. When I got there for my shift the panels where removed and a fan had been set up to help remove the fuel vapors from the tank. I was the lead mechanic who was assigned to the plane for the shift. I proceeded to check the AMM (Aircraft Maintenance Manual) reference for fuel tank repairs and found that it calls for an oxygen fed respirator while performing repairs in the fuel tanks if the oxygen levels are between 19.5% and 23.5%. When I informed the supervisor of this; he picked from stores a non-calibrated oxygen level meter and found the oxygen level in the tank to be at 20.9%. The Supervisor on duty for the night told me I needed to have one of the mechanics get in the tank and begin drying out the tank so we could begin repairs. He gave me a common paint respirator with disposable charcoal filters and told me it would be suitable for use in the fuel tank. I then showed the Supervisor the AMM (Aircraft Maintenance Manual) reference and told him that the paint respirator he had given me was not the right one for work inside fuel tanks and told him that unless he was able to acquire an oxygen fed respirator like the AMM calls for that I was not going to have any of the mechanics work inside the fuel tank as it is not a safe environment. The Supervisor continued to tell me that I needed to put someone in the tank with only the paint respirator and when I told him that due to safety and health concerns I would not let anyone go inside the fuel tanks without the proper breathing equipment as called out by the AMM; he proceeded to tell me to go home. We need the proper PPE (Personal Protective Equipment) and safety equipment per the AMM if we are doing any work inside of a fuel tank.




Synopsis: Aircraft Technician working on EMB-145LR was not provided correct safety equipment for fuel tank entry.
Date: 202009
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: C83.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: Marginal
Weather elements / visibility: Haze / Smoke; 2.5
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class E ZOA
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Departing C83 Byron IFR; I deviated from the ODP because I had relatively good visual with the ground and proceeded on course to destination.  The visibility was such that they were doing skydiving at Byron.  I now realize that ATC doesn't know what my conditions are and that I need to stick to the plan so as not to increase their workload to handle my errant ways.




Synopsis: Single pilot reported deviated from IFR clearance by flying direct course to destination instead of following the ODP on departure without ATC authorization.
Date: 201602
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZFW.ARTCC, TX
Light: Night
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZFW
ATC / advisory: Center ZFW
Second aircraft: Small Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turboprop Eng
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Developmental
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Situational Awareness; Confusion
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings
Primary problem: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings

Narrative: Aircraft X was eastbound at 7000 ft; Aircraft Y was westbound at 16000 ft the targets merged but I didn't call traffic being separated by 9000 ft. Aircraft X asked if we had any traffic because he had a near mid-air with traffic within 300ft. I issued the traffic at 16000 that merged ranged in the display as far as I could and still nothing. About 30 seconds later a primary target (Aircraft Z) appeared 3 miles behind Aircraft X. The primary target was not displayed or hidden from sight. Make the targets a different color than the data blocks. Maybe if it was hidden under the data blocks it would show up a different color.




Synopsis: ZFW Controller reported an aircraft under his control reporting a NMAC. The Controller had traffic 9;000 feet above this aircraft and did not see any other traffic. Controller zoomed radar scope in and saw nothing. Seconds later the Controller observed a primary target 3 miles south of the reporting aircraft.
Date: 201709
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Dawn
Aircraft: Regional Jet 200 ER/LR (CRJ200)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Main Gear
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: I was the pilot flying; after takeoff; I called for the First Officer to retract the gear. We were well within the normal profile for gear retraction; and the First Officer moved the gear selector to up. As we climbed; we heard the nose gear doors close; but could still hear the noise associated with the main gear being down. Soon after; we received the 'Gear Disagree' warning message. We continued the climb profile; while maintaining an airspeed below 200 KIAS for the landing gear limitation. At a safe altitude; I transferred controls and radios to the First Officer and completed the QRH procedure for the 'Gear Disagree' warning with the gear selector in the up position. During this time; we contacted ATC and notified them we would be restricted to 200 KIAS because the landing gear would be extended for the duration of the flight. I also contacted Maintenance Control via ACARS and they told us to contact line maintenance on the ground when we got to [destination]. Since it was early morning; and we had plenty of fuel; (we were tankering an extra hour plus worth of fuel); we decided to continue. We discussed the situation; there was no immediate danger; we had maintenance and assistance if needed; and the flight was short enough where we would have plenty of fuel flying at our slower airspeed and with the landing gear down. Furthermore; the entire region was complete VFR and was expected to remain that way throughout the day. We also discussed if the situation did become serious; [a suitable alternate] was on the way and would make a great diversion airport if needed. We continued and landed and taxied in without further incident.The cause of this event was a malfunction of the landing gear system on the CRJ-200. The failure was not serious and did not affect the immediate safety of the flight.


Second narrative: [Report narrative contained no additional information]


Synopsis: CRJ-200 flight crew reported continuing to destination in VFR conditions after the main landing gear failed to retract after takeoff.