elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 202107
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Fog; 10
Light: Night
Aircraft: Learjet 35
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Ferry / Re-Positioning
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Pressurization System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: I was involved in a rapid decompression event of an aircraft. I was acting as pilot in command of a reposition flight. We were filed under an IFR flight plan. At the time of the event we were cruising at FL410 and on frequency with ZZZ Center. While in cruise flight; roughly 1:10 into the flight we started experiencing a loss of pressurization in the cabin. I made my First Officer aware of the decompression; immediately donning the oxygen masks and requesting a descent from ATC. The frequency was cluttered with radio chatter and I was having trouble transmitting to ATC that we needed an immediate descent due to the loss of pressurization. Due to the hazardous nature of our situation I began a descent without being able to communicate with ATC. My First Officer immediately input the emergency squawk code of 7700 into our transponder to relay to ATC that we had an emergency. ATC saw our descent and queried us 'Aircraft X verify level at FL410.' I replied with 'We need a descent now.' ATC then cleared us to FL240 where we began running checklists and were able to stabilize our cabin altitude.Once we had the situation under control we informed ATC that we were no longer [in need of priority handling] and that we had our cabin altitude stabilized. My copilot and I agreed that the situation was under control and that our cabin altitude was stabilized enough to where we could safely continue our flight to our destination at FL240. We flew the remainder of the flight and landed safely without other incident.




Synopsis: Captain reported loss of cabin pressure resulted in an emergency descent and continued on to destination airport at a lower altitude.
Date: 201905
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZHU.ARTCC, TX
Aircraft: Small Aircraft
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZHU
ATC / advisory: Center ZHU
Second aircraft: Small Aircraft
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Air Traffic Control Separated Traffic
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Company Policy; Airspace Structure; ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: The flight plan of Aircraft X was passed to Approach (non radar adjacent facility that controls surface-10;000 ft). The estimated time over NLD VOR that was passed was XA:47z at 8000 feet. At some point a flight plan was copied from Approach regarding a LRD lander. Because Approach requires non-radar separation they would need to de-conflict any conflicts through their airspace. Aircraft Y populated on my radar scope when he was descending from 11;500 feet to 5;000 feet. At the time; I did not have this flight plan in my strip bay. Upon noticing the conflict I immediately called Approach to make sure they were stopping the traffic at 9;000 feet above my coordinated overflight at 8;000 feet. By the time I got a hold of the Approach Controller and issued him a control action of maintaining 9;000 feet the Aircraft Y was out of 8;700 feet in the climb back up to 9;000 with 8 miles lateral. Furthermore; I must mention that not having a direct and quick line to Approach is a safety hazard. We must manually dial a 7 digit number and wait for a response; to then be passed over to the Approach Controller. We must have a direct and quick line that allows us to speak to an adjacent facility. Approach was applying non radar separation to aircraft transitioning through there airspace.




Synopsis: ZHU Center Controller was not made aware of an aircraft estimating their airspace from an adjacent non radar facility that was descending into a conflict with their traffic.
Date: 201712
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Night
Aircraft: B767-300 and 300 ER
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Interphone System
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Attendant; Person Flight Crew
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; General Evacuated; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: At the gate; we were having some intermittent interphone problems while talking to the ground crew predominantly on the Captain's side. We thought we had them resolved and pushed back. When it came time to start the engines; it became apparent that the problem had worsened. We were towed back to the gate and maintenance swapped the Captain's interphone box; which fixed one problem but the Captain's headset jack didn't work. Maintenance MELed the headset and we attempted to depart again. Once again; the interphone system failed. There was a great deal of confusion as we tried to communicate with the ground personnel. Before that was resolved; both the forward and the middle cabin call chimes lit up. I picked up the interphone handset and heard a loud squeal. Through that squeal I heard a flight attendant say that there was smoke entering the cabin and that a smoke alarm was sounding.I got up to see for myself what was going on. FO and FB ran the Smoke and Fume Elimination Checklist and called for the jet-bridge to return to the gate. I smelled a strong electrical smoke odor. The smoke detector reactivated after being reset. I directed the flight attendants to rearm the slides on the right side of the aircraft just in case. As soon as the L1 door was open; I had the flight attendants evacuate the passengers out through the jet-bridge. After running the Smoke and Fume checklist the smell began to dissipate.


Second narrative: After the passengers were all off the airplane; the Flight Attendants disarmed all doors and the Crew debriefed the firemen; maintenance and the [Company] supervisors. After turning the aircraft over to Maintenance; the Crew met with the FA supervisors and their stress management representatives.


Synopsis: B767-300 flight crew and cabin crew reported the aircraft was evacuated at the gate due to fumes; smoke; and smoke detector activation.
Date: 201304
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Night
Aircraft: Regional Jet 900 (CRJ900)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Chip Detector
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Procedure
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: On walk around the First Officer found that the right engine chip detector light was illuminated in the aft equipment bay. He attempted a reset and then contacted me. I then went back and confirmed that the chip detector was indeed illuminated. Two subsequent attempts were tried with no results. Maintenance Control was then contacted and the Mechanic working the desk told me 'Captain why do you have to go there; are you serious?' When I queried him on his comment he put me on hold. Even though I gave him the ship number he questioned me on the type of aircraft I was on i.e.: 200/700/900 as if I didn't know the aircraft I was flying. He was not helpful and somewhat defiant in that I wanted a mechanic to come and resolve this problem. Is this how our safety program works. Is this how our Maintenance Department handles maintenance items that are critical to safety of flight. Maintenance does not appear to want to operate safe aircraft.




Synopsis: CRJ900 Captain is informed that the right engine chip detector light was illuminated in the aft equipment bay. Maintenance Control is contacted and they do not deem it necessary to take any action prior to flight.
Date: 201603
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZZ.Airport, FO
Flight conditions: Mixed
Weather elements / visibility: Cloudy
Light: Night
Aircraft: MD-11
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Cruise
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZZ
Aircraft component: Electrical Distribution Busbar
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: On initial descent; we got a Level 1 BUS R EMER DC OFF alert which caused Auto Pilot (AP) 2 and FD2 to fail. Captain as Pilot Monitoring selected AP 1 and directed First Officer (FO) to FD1 to regain automation on the right side of the cockpit. FO continued as Pilot Flying. Captain retained radio because right ACP failed.A review of the Engine and Alert Display (EAD) presented the following: L1 BUS R EMER DC OFF; L2 FCC 2B DATA FAULT L1 SEL LSAS LOB OFF; L1 SEL YAW UPR A OFF. First actions were to satisfy EAD prompts at LSAS LOB and YAW UPR A. After this; we accomplished AOM procedures for FCC 2B DATA FAULT and BUS R EMER DC OFF. At the conclusion of those checklists; we had time to brief the arrival and discussed the likelihood of a configuration problem since we had flap segment indicators on the PFD; two of which were 'X' presenting no data.We decided to configure early several miles out on base. At slats extend; we got an immediate L2 SLAT DISAG alert and entered a checklist for that. The AOM procedure led us to an abnormal configuration for landing (28/RET) and a moderate speed increase on final. We informed approach control. Our approach and landing were conducted at flaps 28; slats retracted; GPWS flap override on. Rollout to parking was uneventful.


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


Synopsis: Aircrew experienced an electrical failure resulting in multiple systems degradation. Successfully landed in an emergency status.
Date: 201908
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZDV.ARTCC, CO
Aircraft: Bonanza 35
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class E ZDV
ATC / advisory: Center ZDV
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Enroute
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: D01 began the hand off of Aircraft X at 8;000 feet with 9;000 feet as the final altitude request. Per the LOA; I took the hand off assuming the aircraft would be level at 9;000 feet before the boundary. A couple minutes from the boundary; it was apparent Aircraft X was still not climbing to 9;000 feet. I had the D-side (a trainee) call D01 and inquire if the aircraft was climbing and would be level. My minimum IFR altitude is 9;000 feet. D01 responded saying Aircraft X was NORDO and they had attempted to call him multiple times. Aircraft X entered my airspace level at 8;000 feet; below my terrain. I attempted to get a hold of Aircraft X multiple times on my frequency and on guard with no luck. I was then relieved from position.


Second narrative: Called Denver Approach to ask if Aircraft X was climbing to 9;000 feet because he was showing 8;000 feet with no updates to indicate a climb. The airway the aircraft was filed over had an MEA of 8;500 feet. Denver Approach said they tried to climb with no response from the aircraft and to show him NORDO. We tried the aircraft on guard frequency and on out frequency with no response. The aircraft eventually came up on our frequency and was able to climb them to a safe altitude.


Synopsis: ZDV ARTCC Controllers reported handoff coordination issues with D01 TRACON resulting in an aircraft flying below the MEA.
Date: 201205
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: MD-83
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Fuel Distribution System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: Other During Fueling
Result: General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors; Equipment / Tooling; Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: I was in the flight deck checking the weather for the return trip to ZZZ; after having completed the exterior preflight inspection; when one of the Flight Attendant's called me to check the left wing. I went out and saw fuel being vented out of the left wing tip. I ran downstairs and started shouting to stop fueling. The firefighters were called and took care of the spill. I checked with the fuelers and they said that they had all switches selected on Auto. We departed about 30-minutes late without any further complications.




Synopsis: A Captain was informed by an onboard Flight Attendant that fuel was venting out of the left wing tip of their MD-83 aircraft during a gate refueling procedure.
Date: 201712
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: LAS.Airport, NV
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B LAS
ATC / advisory: TRACON L30
Second aircraft: UAV - Unpiloted Aerial Vehicle
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Instructor; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: The problem was a near mid air collision with small drone at 6500 MSL that appeared to be moving southerly while my airplane was flying a magnetic heading of 200 approximately. Our lateral separation was between 150-200 feet. We were in the immediate vicinity of LAS; almost directly above the approach end of Runway 26L. The drone was yellow in color and circular; at most 3 feet in diameter; and did not appear fixed wing. It appeared to have some kind of design/camera at its center. We were receiving radar vectors from Las Vegas TRACON. I was scanning visually while my student was under the view limiting device. We made no evasive action; there was merely a second between the time I saw the drone and it's passing of our position. I queried Las Vegas Approach if there was any drone activity in the area; they responded there was not; I then proceeded to describe the situation; to which they asked questions regarding the drone's altitude and flight path; and prior to our hand off they said they had made a report. This near mid air collision was no fault of Las Vegas Approach or my own; rather the drone operator who violated the airspace.




Synopsis: C172 flight instructor reported a NMAC with a UAV at 6500 in the vicinity of LAS airport.
Date: 201302
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: SCT.TRACON, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: Medium Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Ferry / Re-Positioning
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class E SCT
ATC / advisory: TRACON SCT
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Procedure; Environment - Non Weather Related; Chart Or Publication; Airspace Structure
Primary problem: Chart Or Publication

Narrative: We were repositioning our aircraft Part 91 from UDD to the East Coast on an IFR flight plan. We picked up our clearance on the ground and read back the clearance to SOCAL. We read back cleared ... via the UDD obstacle departure PSP-DEJAY... Once airborne we followed that clearance as we thought that is what we were given. As we departed the PSP VOR we were given a terrain warning from SOCAL and given instructions to climb to 13;000 FT and fly a new heading to avoid terrain. Our aircraft never did give us a terrain warning but we were very confused. The issue and concern is we were supposed to be flying to 'DEWAY' Intersection and not 'DEJAY'. I find it very dangerous to have two intersections with very similar sounds and spelling that close together in the same airspace. Having two similar intersections caused us confusion and could of caused us to fly into terrain. We appreciate SOCAL doing their job but would ask that one of those intersections named be changed.




Synopsis: A corporate jet pilot reported that ATC issued a terrain alert along with a heading and altitude change after the flight crew began navigating to DEJAY Intersection in mountainous terrain instead of to DEWAY.
Date: 201908
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: A320
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Landing Gear
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: On visual approach Runway XR ZZZ approximately 1 NM from ZZZZZ 2;300 feet landing gear lever selected down with no response. Cycled the gear handle again with no response. Told Tower we were discontinuing the approach and were handed off to Approach Control for vectors. Shortly thereafter; with the gear handle down L/G Gear Not Down Locked ECAM appeared. Cycled the gear handle again per the ECAM with no success; Continued with the Landing Gear Gravity Extension Checklist per the ECAM and QRH. The procedure was successful with positive down and locked indications. All checklists were completed and flight attendants and passenger briefed. I assumed duties as Pilot Flying. Flew a normal visual approach to Runway YYR. Landing was uneventful. Stopped the aircraft on runway centerline for ARFF inspection and eventual tow to the terminal. This aircraft had experienced the same malfunction the day before.


Second narrative: On final to [Runway] XR at ZZZ we attempted to put the landing gear down; but it failed to extend. We turned downwind and completed the checklist and manually lowered the gear. This same thing happened the day before with a different crew but maintenance said they had solved the problem. Landed without incident on [Runway] YYR and was towed to the gate.


Synopsis: A320 flight crew reported that the landing gear would not extend normally; necessitating use of the alternate gravity extension method.