elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201811
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 145 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Aircraft component: Indicating and Warning - Landing Gear
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew; Person Flight Attendant
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew Diverted
Contributing factors: Procedure; Company Policy; Human Factors; Staffing
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Captain calls me to inform me that we have a maintenance issue. The landing gear 'sensor' was malfunctioning. We were making an emergency landing in ZZZ. He is requesting emergency vehicles to follow us. CA (Captain) informed me to prepare for worst case scenario-loss of brakes and rolling off the runway. CA makes a PA. I pull out FA (Flight Attendant) Manual and start preparing galley; cabin and passengers for possible emergency landing. Due to large Spanish speaking population onboard I asked a bilingual passenger to make PA in Spanish from the FA Manual. CA lowered the landing gear and informed me and then later; the passengers; that we were burning fuel for another 30 or so minutes before we could land safely. The CA also told me that the sensor started working correctly once the gear came down but we were still going forward with the diversion to ZZZ. CA informs me that brace will be issued on landing because the landing gear didn't look secure on flyby. Brace commands given by CA.Safe landing and CA gives ok over PA that we are clear and to stop brace commands. We to the gate and deplane passengers. The safety issue in this event was a language barrier. I had approximately 16 Spanish speakers who had no idea what was going on. I am thankful there was a bilingual passenger that graciously offered her assistance.We need other languages on the announcement CD. When going to [other countries] where passengers don't speak English; it can be impossible to convey very vital; sometimes lifesaving information to passengers! Even a short announcement stating that we are in a possible emergency situation; please read your Passenger Information Card and follow the instructions from the flight crew. Spanish and English. Having all of the announcements in all 3 languages would be a great help but at least emergency announcements. This was a domestic flight and almost half the passengers were non-English speakers.




Synopsis: Flight Attendant reported difficulty communicating safety-related information to several non-English speaking passengers.
Date: 201711
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Cessna 402/402C/B379 Businessliner/Utiliner
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Rudder Control System
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: 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 Diverted; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: While in cruise from ZZZ; after exiting ZZZ airspace; the right rudder pedal went to the floor/full forward. I did not have any right rudder authority; but the aircraft remained in straight and level flight with this configuration. I then told Approach of my mechanical issue and request to divert to ZZZ1 as it was the closest suitable airport. I then informed Operations of my intentions to divert to ZZZ1 and that I had a mechanical issue with the rudder. The tower in ZZZ1 was informed of the issue and had emergency vehicles waiting for when I landed. I landed with no incident but was unable to taxi off the runway. The passengers were taken off the aircraft and brought to the terminal by a van and I was towed back to the [ramp] by Maintenance.




Synopsis: Cessna 402 pilot reported diverting due to the loss of rudder control during cruise.
Date: 201204
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Aircraft: No Aircraft
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Upon beginning the shift I read the Comprehensive Electronic Data Analysis and Reporting (CEDAR) information as required. I noticed there was a Read and Initial (R&I) memo about not using the (TYP) amendment for aircraft using ERAM as a RADAR display system. The memo said do not use the TYP amendment or it would delete all data in the equipment part of the ICAO flight plan template. I notified the Operations Manager; who was in the area at the time; I felt the memo should have been a Hot Sheet instead of and R&I. I understood what was being said in the memo and how to use the ICAO template; because I have taken time to teach myself how to use it; but most of the work force in my area and the facility do not. She said that the facility had been 'trained' on this issue and the way it was in CEDAR was just fine. I went on to tell her that I estimated less than 30% of the controller force know how to use the template portion of the ICAO Flight Plan. She said we had been trained in the past and it was the problem of the controller to know how to use the template. There have been a few times when the wrong data in the RNP section have resulted in a deviation in another control facility; and charged to my ARTCC. I arrived to work today and as was given a copy of the briefing that was given several years ago about the ICAO flight plan. Obviously she did not listen to what I said; because there was a note attached to the FLM to ensure I understood the information in the packet. I asked 12 of the 15 other controllers in the control room at the time; either they did not understand the information; or had never been given the briefing; let alone taught how to make changes in the ICAO flight plan template. I recommend that there be computer based instructions or hands on training be given to the controller work force on how to use the ICAO template. This could be in the TTL or a free sector in the area by the FLM. There is a big difference between a briefing and instruction.




Synopsis: Enroute Controller described an unsafe situation in the facility with regard to ERAM equipment and ICAO Flight Plan modifications; the reporter suggested additional instruction on the subject process in lieu of briefings.
Date: 201502
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ATL.Airport, GA
Aircraft: Medium Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground ATL
Second aircraft: Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure; Airport
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Landed runway 27L in ATL and was instructed to hold short of runway 27R at N5. Then instructed to cross 27R and join M taxiway and contact ground on 121.75. Ground control was busy; so after I cleared hold short line and join M; I brought the aircraft to a stop. After a minute we were able to get a word in on ground control and informed him we were on M and needed to go to ramp X. We were instructed to taxi to ramp X. First officer switched over to ramp and received clearance to enter. Shortly after he tuned ground control on number two so that we could monitor. As I made the left turn off M into ramp X; I noticed an Aircraft Y; from my left; taxiing at a high rate of speed with his nose light on. I felt like the Aircraft Y was not going to slow or stop and a collision was imminent. I slammed on brakes and the Aircraft Y passed off our nose. Ground control contacted us as I was slamming on brakes; and asked why we stopped; and if ramp would not let us in? We informed him of the Aircraft Y; and he instructed us to; again; taxi to the ramp. At gate; I called clearance delivery to get tower supervisors phone number. Called supervisor; have not heard back from him. Would like to know what happened first.




Synopsis: The flight crew of an Aircraft X inbound to the gate at ATL had to stop abruptly for a crossing Aircraft Y that failed to acknowledge or slow before passing the reporter's aircraft.
Date: 201502
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Aircraft: MD-11
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Cruise; Taxi
Aircraft component: Escape Slide
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General Evacuated; General Physical Injury / Incapacitation
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: I was jump seating. At cruise I was awakened by a loud noise which sounded like a door fell off one of the cans in the cargo area. [Another deadheading pilot] heard the same noise. We both got out of our seats to take a look through the cargo viewing window when we noticed that the FSS [Fire Suppression System] indicator by L1 showed two red positions (1C/1R). We returned to our seats and notified the crew. They acknowledged our communication and shortly announced that we were diverting [nearest suitable airport]. Prior to landing; we were told that once the aircraft was clear of the runway; we would evacuate. Upon taxiing clear; the aircraft came to a stop and I could hear the crew go through the emergency evacuation checklist. The FO was the first one out of the flight deck and proceeded to open L1 using the emergency handle. The door opened and the slide started to inflate. The slide; however; did not extend and was being held back by its Velcro straps. The slide was finally freed and the FO exited the aircraft by jumping onto the slide as we have been taught. The slide did not provide the proper support and he unfortunately hit the ground extremely hard. He rolled clear of the slide and laid there in pain. After some discussion with the rescue crew; they physically held the slide out and taut which allowed the rest of us to deplane. The FO was cared for by the rescue crew and was transported to the hospital. We had a chance look at the slide and noticed that the support tubing underneath the slide was not inflated. This was no doubt the reason for the injuries sustained by the FO. The crew did a magnificent job keeping us informed and getting the jet on the ground in an expeditious and safe manner. Unknown why FSS activated. Unknown why slide did not properly inflate.




Synopsis: MD-11 flight crew deviated to nearest suitable airport due to a Fire Suppression System fault. The First Officer was injured when the escape slide did not properly inflate; allowing him to hit the ground hard.
Date: 201711
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ORD.Airport, IL
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: Regional Jet 200 ER/LR (CRJ200)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class B ORD
ATC / advisory: Tower ORD
Second aircraft: Airbus 318/319/320/321 Undifferentiated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Deviation - Speed All Types; Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Procedure
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: We were assigned an intersection takeoff from runway 33 at intersection T10. Ahead of us was an Airbus (319 or 320) that received the same clearance. As the Airbus began its takeoff roll we were cleared to line up and wait. The Captain stopped the airplane on the runway and transferred the controls to me after we verified the correct runway heading. After the Airbus had departed and climbed to a distance of what seemed to be routine separation for departing aircraft; we were given a takeoff clearance. We proceeded with a normal takeoff (reduced thrust). Shortly after rotation (approximately 50 AGL); I felt the aircraft roll strongly to the right and immediately recognized the force as wake turbulence. Immediately as I began to correct with aileron; the stick shaker engaged for less than 1 second and I responded with brisk but slight forward pressure on the yoke. By no means were we at an unusually high angle of attack; and our airspeed was increasing normally before we encountered the wake turbulence.The sole cause of the stick shaker activation was wake turbulence from the departing Airbus ahead of us. As mentioned above; I believe that the separation provided for us behind that traffic was not less than ordinarily provided at ORD. The light winds at the time of our departure most likely allowed the wingtip vortices the remainder over the runway for an extended period of time.Increase awareness among pilots about the separation required behind departing aircraft; especially Airbus 319/320s. This is not the first time I have experienced strong wake turbulence behind this type of aircraft; and it is deceiving because it is not considered a 'heavy' aircraft. It may be wise to use normal thrust takeoffs behind Airbus 319/320 aircraft for this reason; and to allow extra separation to allow vortices to dissipate.




Synopsis: CRJ-200 First Officer reported the stick shaker was activated on initial climb out of ORD when they encountered wake turbulence in trail of an A319/320.
Date: 202101
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: GXY.Airport, CO
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 20
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Landing
ATC / advisory: UNICOM GXY
Second aircraft: Small Aircraft
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Instructor
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Airport; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: On the 3rd touch and go landing after touch down on Runway 28 I could see a Aircraft Y approach our runway from left to right at Taxiway C. I commented to the student to keep an eye on him to make sure he stops. Aircraft Y proceeded to cross the runway in front of us without stopping. I immediately took control of the airplane and began a full brake application. We were getting close enough to Aircraft Y that I was considering turning the aircraft off the runway to avoid contact. We were able to avoid hitting the airplane and remain on the runway. We were slightly past Taxiway D when we came to a full stop; I do not recall hearing any radio transmission from the Aircraft Y announcing his intentions. I commented to Aircraft Y 'Thanks for crossing in front of a landing aircraft and you can buy us a new set of tires.' He commented that 'he did not see us.' This is just the latest of several incursions I have witnessed on this runway. Most are caused by pilots unfamiliar with our airport; this is the first from an what I would assume to be a highly experienced pilot and was told by the lineman that aircraft is here fairly often. I feel there is a need for more emphasis and training in making pilots aware of ground procedures and traffic pattern etiquette especially at uncontrolled airports with multiple runways. Having to cross a runway to get to the designated calm wind runway which also is the longest runway (10;000 ft.) presents a huge potential for an accident.




Synopsis: GA instructor pilot reported taking evasive action after landing to avoid another aircraft crossing the runway at GXY airport.
Date: 201912
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: DCA.Airport, DC
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Rain; 2
Light: Night
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Confusion
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Airport; Human Factors; Weather
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: Weather in DCA was two miles visibility with rain and 300 overcast. It was night.  This is a general Safety concern about the taxiway markings and signage on the ground in DCA and around the gate area.  The taxiway markings are horrible at night; and when you throw in rain to wash out any discernible taxi markings; there might as well be no markings at all. In rain conditions at night you can barely make out the center taxi line using your taxi lights. A few times I had to use my landing lights to see any of the markings at all.  As we traveled on Taxiway K to the terminal; any lines on the taxiway seemed to disappear in the rain.  You could make out blue reflectors on the centerline; but they did not reflect any of my taxi light. Upon entering the ramp area; with multiple vehicles moving around; and parked aircraft; all pretense of safety marking seemed to follow the rain; right down the drain.  You could see none of the markings that defined a Safety Zone; parking spots; or the centerline of the parking spot. It was only because of good communication with my FO that we were able to figure it all out; and arrive safely at the gate with no damage to the aircraft; or a taxiway incursion.Both Company and FAA need to fix this; not only at DCA but at many of the airports in our system. This was a night event with rain and no snow. I should be able to see the Safety markings while taxiing.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported that taxiway markings; signage; and markings associated with parking spots at DCA are difficult to see at night during rainy conditions.
Date: 201505
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: LAX.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: Citation V/Ultra/Encore (C560)
Operator: Fractional
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B LAX
ATC / advisory: TRACON SCT; Tower LAX
Reporter organization: Fractional
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Physiological - Other
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Anomaly: Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Illness / Injury; Inflight Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General Physical Injury / Incapacitation
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: On approach into landing for runway 25L at LAX; both flight crew members experienced a laser event. A green laser was exposed into the cockpit from a position south and roughly abeam the final approach fix; LIMMA; for 25L. The first officer was flying and I had my head down running a checklist when he said; 'whoa.'  I looked up to see a green laser and turned away after I saw it. I notified ATC. We continued the approach in VMC and landed uneventfully. Approximately 15 minutes after landing; we both began to experience sensitivity to light. My left eye felt worse compared to my right eye. It felt like it was heavy and I had a slight headache. We contacted the union and the company. We then both proceeded to an urgent care clinic to have our eyes examined.


Second narrative: On final to 25L; LAX; just outside LIMMA; a green laser fired from the ground; at our 10 o'clock and 1-2 miles; and hit the cockpit. I was Pilot Flying (PF) in the right seat and the laser hit me in both eyes. I ducked under the glare shield and on my movement the Pilot in Command (PIC) looked up and was hit in the left eye. It was over in a second; before any other action could be taken. We advised LAX tower and landed normally. Again; it was so quick there was nothing we could have done differently to avoid it.


Synopsis: A CE560 flight crew experiences a green laser event approaching Runway 25L at LAX and lands normally. Eye discomfort is felt after the landing and medical attention is sought.
Date: 201204
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: PA-28 Cherokee/Archer/Dakota/Pillan/Warrior
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Second aircraft: PA-28 Cherokee/Archer/Dakota/Pillan/Warrior
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Supervisor / CIC
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: An aircraft was taxied to Runway 25L at C8 for an intersection departure. The Ground Controller stated that there was an intersection departure at C8 to the Local Controller. An Archer (P28A) then landed on Runway 25L; on landing roll the Archer was instructed to turn left at C8 a contact Ground by the Local Controller. The Archer made the turn at C8 but was unable to cross the hold bars because the intersection was blocked. The Local Controller then cleared an Archer (P28A) for take off anticipating separation. The Ground Controller told the Local Controller that C8 Intersection was blocked. The Local Controller then cancelled the take off clearance. The cancellation of take off clearance was not accepted by the Archer and the aircraft departed. As CIC at the time of the event; I told the Local Controller that C8 was blocked when I heard him tell the Archer to turn left at C8. The event was caused by poor scanning by the Local Controller and not hearing the coordination by the Ground Controller.




Synopsis: Tower CIC described a confused intersection departure event caused by a breakdown of communications between the Ground Controller and Local Controller.