elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 202111
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: A320
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
ATC / advisory: Ramp ZZZ
Aircraft component: Coalescer Bag
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate; Pre-flight
Result: General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Wet old sock musty smell when APU Bleed turned on in flight deck. Fume event. One of the Maintenance Control agents stated this was 'normal' because oil needed to burn off. This was definitely the poisonous oil smell; nothing else. [The cause of the event indicates] lack of training to mechanics regarding the extremely poisonous nature of these fumes. Lack of keeping APU properly clean. Clean APU equates to less chance of contamination. This is on Airbus safety application. Maintenance Control needs to be trained on the serious nature of the poisonous fumes. APU need to be properly maintained to avoid fume events. It was dispatched just a few hours later with different crew.




Synopsis: A320 Captain reported a fumes event during preflight. The aircraft was assigned to Maintenance and was dispatched hours later with different crew.
Date: 202108
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B767-300 and 300 ER
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ1
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Second reporter function: Dispatcher
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Hazardous Material Violation; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew; Person Dispatch
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Radioactive material loaded in 2L.  In accordance with Flight Operations Manual should have been position 3 and aft. Hazmat cargo incorrectly loaded by ramp.  I failed to catch error. [Captain suggest company] develop software that will not allow paperwork to print if Hazardous Goods are incorrectly loaded.


Second narrative: The ramp agent loaded radioactive II  0.1 T.I in position 2l.  The crew did not catch it.


Synopsis: B767-300 Captain reported Hazmat cargo [Class 7] loading error missed prior to departure.
Date: 201810
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Learjet 75
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Rudder Trim System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Rejected Takeoff; Flight Crew Returned To Gate
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: After being cleared for takeoff the aircraft moved about 1;000 feet down the runway and we received a 'Configuration' warning and had to abort the takeoff. We then taxied back to the FBO without further incident. Detected via Master Warning. The Lear 75 has an ongoing bulletin regarding an indication of un-commanded rudder trim movement. Until now I have not seen the trim move enough to exceed takeoff limits. On the takeoff roll the rudder indication went from '0' to 'L2' which is out of configuration for takeoff. This caused a 'Configuration' warning due to 'Take Off Trim.' System should be investigated for solution. This could be very dangerous on a contaminated runway.

Callback: Reporter indicated that this was an indication problem that resulted in a configuration warning. There was no swerve during the takeoff roll. The referenced bulletin states that Learjet is working on the problem and it should be considered a nuisance unless it exceeds 2 units of trim.



Synopsis: Learjet 75 Captain reported configuration warning during takeoff roll due to a rudder trim indication anomaly.
Date: 201809
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: No Aircraft
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Ground Personnel
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Airport; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was given a couple of flights to pick up over at [the] terminal. I was crossing the taxiway in an eastbound direction; when I was near [a] gate; a food service truck had just pulled away from the stop sign headed westbound and another food service truck was behind that one stopped at the stop sign. As I was passing the westbound truck on the taxiway; in the opposite direction; an Airfield Safety pickup truck came flying between the two food trucks at a very unsafe speed nearly hitting me in the process. I was not expecting anyone to be driving in that direction (from my left to right); let alone at such a high rate of speed. I don't want to think of what could've happened had the driver made contact with me. This was an unsafe act on their part. This would be my second such event with ZZZ Airfield Safety. The other [incident] not reported; but every time I stop at [the] gate; I always look behind me to make sure Airfield Safety isn't cutting in front of me from the left; at a high rate of speed. [I will] never forgot that incident.




Synopsis: Air carrier vehicle driver reported that airfield safety vehicles often operate in an unsafe manner.
Date: 201604
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: POC.Airport, CA
Aircraft: Cessna Single Piston Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Taxi
Airspace: Class D POC
ATC / advisory: Tower POC
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Supervisor / CIC
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Ground Conflict; Less Severe
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: Taxi
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Airport; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings

Narrative: I was working Controller In Charge position. I saw a Cessna turning off of the runway at the taxiway and turn to the west. Approximately 125 feet East of that; I saw a large box truck turn out of the space between hangar rows and drive onto a taxiway to avoid a vehicle parked at the end of a Hangar row and turn into the space between hangar rows to exit the airport. After Ground Control issued taxi instructions to the Cessna to taxi I asked Ground Control if he saw that box truck at the hangar row. He stood up because he could not see this area from where he was sitting; and said 'no.' The truck caused no safety issue with the Cessna because it turned West. If the Cessna had turned East; they would have been approximately 75 feet apart and facing each other.The Ground Control position has to be moved because it CANNOT SEE THE PORTION OF THE AIRPORT THAT HAS HAD THE MOST TAXIWAY DEVIATIONS IN THE PAST 24 YEARS. This is the fourth time I have reported this problem and it needs to be fixed. Will it actually take two aircraft or vehicles hitting before anything is done? It is not only blocking the Ground Control scan of the taxiway but it also blocks the Local control scan of the runways as has been reported in previous reports.




Synopsis: The Tower Controller in Charge observed a truck entering a taxiway. The Ground Controller did not see the truck. The CIC reports this portion of the airport is blocked from the view of the Local and Ground controllers.
Date: 201210
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZZ.Airport, FO
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
ATC / advisory: Ramp ZZZZ
Aircraft component: Oxygen System/Crew
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Training / Qualification; Troubleshooting; Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Environment - Non Weather Related; Aircraft; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: While performing pre-flight (first flight of the day on an aircraft we did not fly in); I performed oxygen check in accordance to Vol I.  Pressure in the system was approximately 1;500 PSI and the system checked normally.  After the Captain showed; he did his oxygen check and it also checked normal.  IAW a crew briefing bulletin that came out approximately a month ago; we did the oxygen check simultaneously and the pressure dropped to about 300 PSI.  We called Maintenance and told him of the problem.  He went down and checked the oxygen valve and reported to us that the valve was closed or very close to closed.  He opened the valve and our subsequent oxygen check checked normally.The crew briefing bulletin outlines the potential problem with the oxygen valve not being open and the check to make sure that it is.  Had there been a requirement for the crew to use oxygen; there could have been a catastrophic result.  There probably needs to be a one time check of all 737 oxygen systems and Maintenance and Boeing (this was an almost brand new aircraft) notification.




Synopsis: Both B737-800 pilots simultaneously used the oxygen system on preflight; as per a new company procedure; and found very low mask pressure; so a maintenance check found the crew oxygen bottle valve nearly closed.
Date: 201901
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Icing
Light: Night
Aircraft: Regional Jet 700 ER/LR (CRJ700)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Engine Air Anti-Ice
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Troubleshooting; Distraction; Workload
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence; Inflight Event / Encounter Unstabilized Approach
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Weather
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: We were in icing conditions with wing and cowl anti-ice both on. We got an anti-ice duct warning message; which went away before we made it through the QRH checklist. We completed the QRH anyway; then we got a right cowl anti-ice caution message. We did the QRH for that and it also went away. Then we got the anti-ice duct caution message; but it went away right away...it flashed on and right back off. One other time the anti-ice duct warning message flashed; but it went off right away. As we were dealing with all of these messages and doing the QRH; I noticed the left engine vibe went all the way to 3.0 in the red; and the aircraft started to yaw. I got on the rudder to keep it going straight; and as I did that the vibe went into the yellow; then into the green and it stopped yawing. As we were coming in on the approach; the caution message flashed a couple more times (I can't remember which one); and I was preoccupied with those and keeping my eye on the left engine vibe; and after we landed we realized we had landed with flaps 30. We forgot to finish configuring.




Synopsis: CRJ-700 Captain reported landing aircraft with incorrect configuration due to multiple intermittent EICAS warning messages.
Date: 201603
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: SCT.TRACON, CA
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E SCT
ATC / advisory: TRACON SCT
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Troubleshooting; Situational Awareness; Distraction; Human-Machine Interface; Confusion
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings
Primary problem: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings

Narrative: Aircraft X was maneuvering in the CMA valley practice area. I issued traffic and a 30 degree turn to the left to Aircraft X. At the conclusion of my transmission the target jumped to the right and tracked in the opposite direction. I asked the pilot his heading; and then the target jumped back to where it was initially.Our facility has had this issue since installing STARs in FIM VOR area. This issues occurs even at higher altitudes as well. Many of the traffic/air carriers transitioning over the FIM VOR have the same issues. The facility is aware of our equipment issues; but my concern is twofold; the new equipment is in and will not be fixed; and I will through no fault of my actions will vector an aircraft into another aircraft resulting in a mid-air collision and loss of life.Fix our equipment or fall back to common ARTS.




Synopsis: SCT Controller reported of targets jumping in a certain area on his radar scope. Facility is aware of the problem. Controller wants the problem fixed.
Date: 201712
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Instructor; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC; Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Automation Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Instructor and student were climbing out on SID when instructed to climb to 4000 ft. ATC advised traffic 12-1 o'clock 1000 ft above. While watching for that traffic the student accidentally climbed through the assigned altitude and came dangerously close to the other aircraft; enough for ATC to get an alert and issue a pilot deviation and phone number to call when back on the ground.




Synopsis: C172 instructor pilot reported an altitude deviation and a NMAC after the student pilot inadvertently climbed above the assigned altitude.
Date: 201304
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZID.ARTCC, IN
Aircraft: B737-500
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class A ZID
ATC / advisory: Center ZID
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings
Primary problem: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings

Narrative: Working Sector 30 with Sector 23; 87 and the North half of 97 combined; which is normal for that time of night. There was a solid line of weather to the West which had been impacting us all day; especially with bad rides. While working; I became aware that I could not hear many aircraft transmitting on 124.45 (CMH frequency.) This was a problem I ran into before in the last several weeks before and Maintenance was/is aware of it. It has been an on-going problem for a while which hasn't been successfully remedied. I called the OMIC desk twice; but he was running between several different areas dealing with the issues the weather was causing; including holding. I finally ran over to the SOC and asked them to send someone who could help with a frequency issue. When he arrived I was quite busy and did my best to explain the problem while dealing with the frequency issues; other traffic issues I had working; chop and weather. I was doing my best to comply with the Maintenance persons' requests and having aircraft test frequency configurations. In normal operation we have to turn off one of the sites because the frequency is almost unreadable with both turned on. While this was happening; I gave enroute descents to several aircraft descending. I realized too late that they were not going to have the 5 miles necessary. While I am fully responsible for distractions; I did and was. The Maintenance person was very quiet while I was talking and only responded or made a request when I initiated conversation. I don't blame the frequency problems or distractions for missing the traffic; I do however firmly believe that had 124.45 been working correctly I would not have had my attention divided and missed the traffic. Fix the mess on 124.45. We used to have one transmitter that was high powered and worked beautifully for decades. They lowered the power and installed a second transmitter and told us it would work just as well; it does not.




Synopsis: ZID Controller described a conflict event when frequency problems with 124.45 caused a distraction resulting in the event. The reporter noted the frequency issue must be fixed.
Date: 201902
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: B777 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Ramp
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Ground Personnel
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: My partner and I brought aircraft into [the gate]. While I was proceeding to chock the aircraft; Customer Service Agent began to approach the aircraft. I approached the Customer Service Agent and asked them why they are doing an unsafe task by bringing the jet-bridge up while the aircraft was still not chocked. The agent notified me that their supervisor told them to approach the aircraft immediately. While talking to Customer Service; Ramp Servicemen proceeded to approach the aircraft and open up the pits. This is happening all while the aircraft is still [moving]. I notified my dispatch immediately; they notified [Operations Center] of the situation as well. I informed the Ramp Supervisor on the scene as well of the situation. After notifying them; ramp proceeded to pull away the equipment; allowing my partner and I to secure it safely. This could have ended in a very bad way due to negligence from both departments.




Synopsis: Ramp worker reported gate agents were approaching the aircraft before it was secured; making for a dangerous situation.
Date: 201212
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Night
Aircraft: No Aircraft
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Other / Unknown
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Airframe; Maintenance Powerplant
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness; Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Maintenance
When detected: Other During Maintenance
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Equipment / Tooling; Human Factors
Primary problem: Equipment / Tooling

Narrative: We have a malfunctioning hangar door here at ZZZ. The door to our Hangar Bay-X moves when other doors (i.e. Bay X) is commanded. This is not supposed to happen. While we were going out of the Bay-Y door; myself [as Maintenance Supervisor] and Mechanic X were almost crushed when the Bay-Y door was commanded 'Open' [in order] to move the tug to the aircraft that had just pulled in. This is standard operations down here [at ZZZ].  We all go out to help tow our Routine Overnight (RON) aircraft into its assigned Hangar Bay. I am bringing this to your attention in hopes that this problem can be remedied before someone gets hurt. These doors weigh a lot; and if someone was to get caught between them it could be catastrophic. The discrepancy has been brought to the attention of my upper Management team; but the problem never seems to duplicate when it's checked out. I do not believe this is any one person's fault. The Hangar doors need to be fixed to avoid possible future injury. I did push Mechanic X out of the way and injury was avoided in this instance. My personnel on shift have been notified and I will again bring it up to Management in the morning when they arrive.  Recommend perhaps a regular service schedule for our Hangar doors. These doors get a ton of use every night. There may actually be a Service Schedule; I am not privy to that information. This door in Bay-X needs to be adjusted or rewired.

Callback: Reporter stated the sudden movement of Hangar Bay-X door when Bay-Y door has been commanded 'open;' is an intermittent problem and difficult for their electricians to troubleshoot. The hangar doors are approximately 18-20 FT high and move fairly quickly; side to side on steel wheels that ride on rails in the hangar floor. The sudden; unexpected movement of a hangar door raises concerns about damaging aircraft and seriously injuring Maintenance personnel. Reporter noted he was returning to work after a holiday time-off and has not heard of any repairs to the hangar doors electrical wiring at this time. Their hangars can accommodate six ERJ-145s and ERJ-170 aircraft.



Synopsis: A Maintenance Supervisor reports about a malfunctioning hangar door that suddenly moves when a different hangar door is commanded 'open;' endangering aircraft and serious injury to Maintenance personnel.