elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201903
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: IAH.Airport, TX
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 170/175 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B IAH
ATC / advisory: TRACON I90
Second aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Automation Aircraft RA
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: While being vectored from the GESSNR One to intercept the 8L localizer; with instructions to maintain an altitude of 3;000 feet MSL; we received a TA indicating a climbing intrusion 500 feet below; approaching from behind and crossing left to right. When the intruding aircraft was 400 feet below I received an RA 'DO NOT DESCEND' at this point I focused my attention to the PFD and anticipated a climb command.However; the intruding aircraft passed and there was no additional RA given and there was no deviation from the assigned flight path.After discussion with colleagues; we concluded that filing a report was not required due to the fact that we did not deviate from our assigned flight path. However; given that the aircraft encroached on our ATC assigned flight path; I felt it might be in the interests of safety to report.




Synopsis: EMB-175 First Officer reported an NMAC on approach to IAH airport.
Date: 202110
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Aircraft component: Galley Furnishing
Component problem: Design
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Technician
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Airframe; Maintenance Powerplant
Human factors: Confusion; Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Maintenance
When detected: Routine Inspection
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: While working interior mod; the work card to install galley were vague.  The instructions were to install brackets if removed and brackets where not removed; so I N/Aed the step. The FAA found this and made me write an explanation as to why.




Synopsis: Technician reported confusion over steps contained on a work card while installing a galley.
Date: 202009
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: Marginal
Weather elements / visibility: Haze / Smoke; 5
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skylane 182/RG Turbo Skylane/RG
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Second aircraft: PA-28 Cherokee/Archer/Dakota/Pillan/Warrior
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Separated Traffic; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure; Weather
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was in the pattern in a C182T practicing touch and goes. During the previous landing I was behind a PA-28. On the upwind of that landing the Tower was switching numerous other aircraft on our runway to the secondary Tower frequency but I did not hear a switch for myself and I don't remember if the PA-28 was switched or not. Due to the smoke and hazy conditions it was hard to keep visual on the aircraft in the pattern; including the PA-28 who I assumed was still in front of me in the pattern. Upon reaching 6300 ft. MSL which is approximately 500 ft. AGL; I began my normal crosswind turn. Upon entering the turn I noticed the PA-28 at my 9 o'clock headed in the downwind; approx. 100 ft. above me and 500 ft. from me horizontally. I widened the crosswind and stopped my climb momentarily to keep this traffic in sight. I also told the Tower on the radio I had visual on the traffic and was trying to stay out of his way; and the Tower replied 'You've been behind him the whole time'. I complied with the Towers instruction to widen the downwind to remain east of the interstate; and after an extended downwind I was then cleared for another uneventful touch and go.I believe the following contributed to this situation:1) My loss in Situational awareness as my head was focused on all of the radio traffic from Tower switching other aircraft and wondering why I wasn't being switched. I believe the Tower might have also lost situational awareness and not asked for the aircraft in front to turn an early enough crosswind and/or me to continue upwind as they had on previous touch and goes prior to this to keep us separated and in line.2) The smoky conditions making it extremely hard to see other traffic against the gray/white background; which could have made it difficult for any of us involved (me; the other pilot; or ATC) to successfully avoid any potential conflict.




Synopsis: Pilot reported taking evasive action to avoid a collision with another aircraft.
Date: 201205
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Regional Jet 200 ER/LR (CRJ200)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Fatigue; Situational Awareness; Confusion; Distraction
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Ground Incursion Taxiway
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors; Company Policy
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Beautiful sunny morning with good visibility. Was told to taxi from the to Runway 28 Via Charlie and Bravo. First Officer read it back as stated and correctly. I taxied via Charlie and took a right turn on Bravo One followed by a left on Bravo. The Ground Controller stated we made a wrong turn and I stopped. We sat there for about 25 minutes or so and waited to be released to our destination. Neither the First Officer nor I caught the mistake until [the] Controller told us. I believe the only factor involved was fatigue: Two nights earlier was a reduced rest later PM finish with 8 hours behind the door. I probably slept 6 hours that night. The night previous to this incident was a minimum compensatory 11 hours from duty of which I only slept 3 or 4 hours. I Just could not sleep the night before. More sleep would definitely make me more alert and less apt to make mistakes such as this.




Synopsis: A fatigued CRJ-200 Captain made an error while taxiing on an early morning departure after two nights of poor rest; the first night with reduced rest; the second just poor sleep.
Date: 201904
Aircraft: B757 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Company Policy
Primary problem: Company Policy

Narrative: On many aircraft the inflight wifi allows the use of specific messaging applications without buying the internet plan. This is becoming a problem; as more and more people are addicted to their phones. I'm getting tired of reminding first officers that they shouldn't be texting while flying. This isn't a generational thing -- I see it with old people; and I see it with young people. It's a phone addiction thing. Apparently some captains do it too; because the first officers tell me that some captains are okay with it. By allowing this free access; the company is putting those of us who like to follow the rules in an awkward position. Yes I'm the Captain and I have the authority and responsibility to prohibit this unauthorized and unsafe behavior; but I shouldn't have to exercise this authority on a majority of flights. Other pilots should know better. I suspect they do know better; but like I said it's a phone addiction thing. Deviance is being normalized here. The company should solve this problem by turning off free access to text messaging apps on the aircraft wifi. As it currently stands; they're setting us up for failure -- and that could mean a failure in crew communications; or it could mean a failure to fly the airplane.




Synopsis: B757 Captain reported the need to remind pilots it is in violation of the FAR's to text and fly. The Captain suggests the company shut off the free Wi-Fi inflight.
Date: 201812
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: B757 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ramp ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: The tug driver told me he was ready for pushback. I told him to stand by while we awaited maintenance paperwork. This delay waiting for the [Maintenance Release] took 5-10 minutes. Once we got the [Maintenance Release] and completed our checklists; we obtained pushback clearance. At this point; I'm supposed to release the brakes and say 'brakes released; cleared to push'. Instead; I asked the tug driver if he was still ready to go. This is non-standard phraseology on my part; but after the delay I wanted to make sure the ramp was still ready to go prior to brake release. It's a good thing I did ask; because I got no response. It turns out there was a shift change; and our pushback crew left. Nobody ever said a word to me. This is exactly the scenario that is never supposed to happen. Having laminated phraseology cards in the tugs does not solve this problem. This challenge/response procedure is faulty; and it could have led to uncommanded aircraft movement. When we got a new pushback crew; they tried to push us with an electric tug; but the tug would not capture the nose wheel properly. The tug driver told me it might be a low battery; so we waited some more while they found a standard tug. Once the standard tug was connected and ramp was ready again; the tug driver told me; 'We had to get a standard tug because we're not qualified to use the electric tug.' I don't fully comprehend what happened here; but if they weren't qualified to use the electric tug why did they try to use it? That's just not acceptable.




Synopsis: B757 Captain reported a number of deviations from SOP during pushback from the gate.
Date: 202003
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: A320
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Equipment Problem Dissipated; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: While at FL 350 the flight attendants notified us of a rubber burning smell in the forward cabin . They stated the smell lasted for about one minute. The First Officer went back to the forward cabin area to assess. He did not notice the smell; queried some of the passengers for any input and concerns. There were no ECAM indications showing a problem. We continued on to ZZZ and notified Maintenance.


Second narrative: At FL350; the lead Flight Attendant called the Captain and said she smelled a burning rubber odor. The Captain instructed me to go back to the first class cabin and investigate. After one of the flight attendants came in the flight deck; I went back to the first class cabin and forward main cabin and did not smell anything. I spoke to the first class cabin passengers and they said they did smell a burning rubber odor but it lasted only a minute. I went back to the flight deck and reported back to the Captain. We continued to ZZZ and landed without incident. The Captain spoke to Maintenance and the outbound crew about what happened.


Synopsis: A320 flight crew reported they were notified by the flight attendants of a brief rubber burning" smell during cruise."
Date: 201512
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: SEA.Airport, WA
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Icing; Turbulence
Aircraft: Small Transport
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B SEA
ATC / advisory: TRACON S46
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Confusion; Workload; Time Pressure; Situational Awareness; Fatigue
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Crossing Restriction Not Met; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Chart Or Publication; Human Factors; Weather
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Cleared for the ILS 16R at SEA and established on the LOC; prior to Bugne; SEA Approach Control advised new cleared for the LOC 16R. [GPS] was set-up 'Vectors-to-Final' and #2 Nav set-up to the LOC. I started flipping thru approaches to bring-up the fixes; the weather was bad; faster traffic behind me; using the #2 Nav/DME; I had the field in sight; and continuing to flip thru the approaches to bring-up the fixes. My altitude was then 2;700 feet prior to Bugne (3;200 ft) and then Approach Control advised me to 'Cross Bugne at 2;700 feet.' Then halfway between Bugne and Finka (1;900 feet); the Gilde Slope came alive and I continued to landing.After landing and waiting for clearance to cross 16L; I flipped thru the approaches again; pressed Agane fix and there was what I was trying to get. I can only explain that I had a brain-lock at the worst possible time.




Synopsis: Air taxi pilot reported his confusion during an SEA ILS Runway 16R Approach.
Date: 201508
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: PA-32 Cherokee Six/Lance/Saratoga/6X
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Landing
Aircraft component: Brake System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Developmental; Flight Crew Private
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Ground Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Ground Event / Encounter Object; Ground Excursion Runway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Airport
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Touchdown was uneventful. Upon application of the brakes; both pedals were soft. I then pumped and reapplied the brakes only to find the left one was firm and the right went all the way to the floor. As a result; the aircraft swerved off of the runway and through a barbwire fence. I taxied back to the ramp without incident. The damage appeared to be limited to the leading edge of both wings being dented from the impact with the fence posts.I had flown the aircraft on two separate occasions a few days before and the brakes had operated normally.




Synopsis: The pilot of a Piper PA-32 experienced loss of braking system on landing rollout; resulting in a runway excursion and contact with a fence.
Date: 201812
Aircraft: B757 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Cockpit Door
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: The electrical operation of flight deck door was inoperative and MELd. This required the crew to use the manual pin to lock the door in accordance with both the MEL and the FM. We had a long discussion among the crew about cockpit access in the event of pilot incapacitation. The flight manual has a warning not to use the manual pin unless directed by the MEL. In this case the MEL did direct us to do that. However; I now regret accepting the aircraft. There have been two fatal aircraft accidents that I can remember that have been caused by pilot incapacitation. I understand the necessity of the locking pin in case of door failure after dispatch. I also understand having the MEL in certain cases such as ferry flights. Dispatching the aircraft with that MEL with passengers on board is something that I am no longer comfortable doing.




Synopsis: B757 Captain reported accepting the aircraft with the cockpit door electrical operation inoperative and deferred; but also expressed safety concerns with the conditions.
Date: 201210
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: DCA.Airport, DC
Light: Night
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Tower DCA
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Confusion; Fatigue
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Ground Incursion Taxiway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Airport; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We we cleared to Line up and wait on Runway 1 and the taxi line and lights made our turn onto J1 very obvious and the only choice.  I looked right into what seemed like a black hole and it appeared to me that this taxiway was the end of the runway; however as soon as we took the runway it became clear that there was still another taxi way at the very end of Runway 1 which I did not see!  We both had our Commercial airport diagram out at the time.  I quickly contacted Tower and they stated 'no problem' and we cleared the runway at taxiway J so as not to be rushed.  The Tower had no issue as they were very busy with arrivals.  We did a 180 turn on Taxiway J and waited for takeoff clearance without further issue.  The third leg of a very long day and the visibility and lack of lighting to taxiway J were poor to nonexistent.  The airport lighting in this area was very poor and even though I was looking towards Taxiway J; it looked like a dead end.  The obvious choice was Taxiway J1 which seemed like the only path to the runway end.  Tower did not specify which taxiway to take and had they stated J specifically; we would have stopped and not entered at J1.  I was unfamiliar with the airport and can see how easily this mistake was made.




Synopsis: B737 First Officer reports confusing Taxiway J1 and J at the approach end of Runway 1 at DCA.  Reporter cited fatigue and poor lighting as factors and resulted in entering the runway at J1 instead of J.
Date: 202011
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Other unknown
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Time Pressure; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Incursion Ramp
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: We were told to Taxi C - G cross Runway XX to the gate. We contacted ramp and were given taxi to the gate. Our gate was X2 and we made the mistake of picking the wrong alley and started down the odd gate side. We realized our mistake as well as Ramp Control and we asked to go up the next line over and then to the even numbered side gates. We apologized for this and Ramp was pleasant towards us; told us 'Oh you're good; don't worry' allowing us to turn. It was not a busy time on the ground and we had plenty of room to make our turns to get to our gate. There was no safety issue involved but I feel it to be the correct choice in filing this.Contributing factors: I had not touched an airplane in over 1 month and I had not flown as Captain in well over 1.5 months or been to ZZZ in over 2 months; so I was focusing and not splitting attention accordingly I would say. I had my charts open and just misread.We were delayed all day so there was a time pressure.The gate that I was going to next was on the odd numbered side and I think I was thinking of the odd side due to this.I had been sitting in a crash pad for a few days and I believe that the stress of commuting and not being home for over 6 days may have had a factor on my mental state.Things learned: Slow down and read the charts better as well as make sure to properly look at the gate information displayed on the ACARS. It is always OK to ask for help. Never assume one gate vs the other. Not actively working means focus more on the task at hand for degraded skills.




Synopsis: Air carrier pilot reported a ramp incursion and cited lack of flying as a contributing factor.