elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201405
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: A320
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Fuel System
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew; Person Ground Personnel
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Evacuated
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Aircraft
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: I was the first to arrive at the aircraft and found a Mechanic sitting in the cockpit monitoring the fueling process. As I relieved him he pointed out the abnormally high fuel load we were taking (41.1k lbs) and how he had to switch the center tank pumps to manual in order to keep the tanks balanced. I acknowledged his instructions and told him I wouldn't touch it. Once the Captain arrived I pointed out the fuel load and the fact that the Mechanic switched the center tanks to manual. The Captain then switched off the center tank pumps and selected the mode back to auto. A short time later the fueler came up to the cockpit to inform us that he had just experienced a significant fuel spill and that the clean-up crew was on its way. The Captain and I looked up the procedures for a fuel spill in the FOM and proceeded to ask operations to deplane the passengers. The Captain also asked; numerous times; for the fire department to be notified. As I walked outside to conduct my exterior inspection I immediately noticed fuel coming out of the left wing like a fire hose for the second time and returned to inform the captain. The ground crew promptly notified the fueler of the situation. The spill covered most of the area under the left wing and outboard of the Number 1 engine. In about 5 minutes there was a clean up crew laying down 'kitty litter' on the spill and cleaning it up. I made the mistake of allowing the Maintenance personnel to leave the fueling system on manual; contrary to our SOP. When I relieved the Mechanic I shouldn't have been worried about what the Mechanic knew that I didn't and I should have followed our procedures. Instead I waited for the Captain to arrive at the aircraft in order to confer with him.




Synopsis: A320 First Officer is informed by the Mechanic involved that that the aircraft is being fueled manually due to the high fuel load. The First Officer informs the Captain when he arrives who switches to auto. A short time later a large fuel spill occurs out of the left wing.
Date: 201902
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: P19.Airport, AZ
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: PA-28 Cherokee/Archer/Dakota/Pillan/Warrior
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class G P19
ATC / advisory: CTAF P19
Second aircraft: Mooney Aircraft Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was left-downwind for P19 Runway 17 (self-announcing on CTAF). There was a Cessna on final and another aircraft on the ground performing pre-flight. We were all on CTAF and audible.A Mooney flew over the approach end of 17 below pattern altitude in an attitude and heading that put him on a direct collision course with my aircraft at approximately 45 deg left of head-on. I took evasive action by increasing throttle and pulling up; clearing the Mooney by less than 200 feet. The Mooney continued on in the general direction of CHD.




Synopsis: PA28 pilot reported an NMAC event during approach to Non-Towered P19 airport.
Date: 202201
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Troubleshooting; Time Pressure; Workload
Anomaly: Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Result: Aircraft Equipment Problem Dissipated; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: While on flight X in Aircraft X; we experienced a fume event leveling off at 11;000 ft. The sweet magic marker type smell was noticed by both the Captain and the First Officer. The First Officer continued to fly the aircraft while the Captain began the checklist. A call was made to the Flight Attendants to ascertain if they noticed the smell. One Flight Attendant said that she smelled the same smell in the front galley. It appeared that the smell was dissipating. On short final the odor returned to the Cockpit. The aircraft landed safely in ZZZ without further incident. A logbook entry was made and Maintenance was notified.




Synopsis: Air Carrier flight crew reported a fume event during descent which was characterized as a 'sweet magic marker type' odor. While the flight crew was proceeding with the appropriate QRH procedure the odor dissipated only to return on short final.
Date: 201605
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: PFD
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
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 Diverted; Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: While in the climb out at approximately 28400; the autopilot disengaged while simultaneously the Captain's PFD and MFD lost all indications. I transferred control of the aircraft to the FO. We stopped the climb and descended out of RVSM. The amber; IRS fault light along with the Master Caution; IRS; lights had illuminated. I ran the corresponding QRH checklist for the IRS fault. We operated with the IRS selector switch in BOTH ON RIGHT. I established a radio patch with dispatch and a subsequent conference call with maintenance. We discussed what had happened and the possibility of diverting. I ruled that with the loss of redundant attitude; airspeed; and altitude indications; the continuation did not seem like the best plan of action.  We [advised ATC] and diverted. The landing was uneventful and normal.




Synopsis: B737 Captain reported losing his primary flight display and IRS. He transferred control of the aircraft to the First Officer and diverted resulting in an uneventful landing.
Date: 201501
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZMA.ARTCC, FL
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZMA
ATC / advisory: Center ZMA
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Distraction
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: I was on the D-side position coordinating an inbound on Aircraft X who was on a vector for the visual approach.  When I came off the line the pilot told the R-side that he had a near miss.  When I looked I saw a VFR target behind the aircraft at 2;800 feet.  I did not see that aircraft before I went on the line to coordinate.  I also don't know if the aircraft had T-CAS because he never said anything about a TA or RA.I would recommend that Controllers are better trained to balance workload and service.  In a terminal environment there are times when VFR flight following is not possible due to the amount of traffic calls that are required.  It takes time and attention out of your scan for IFR traffic.  I would also recommend that Sector 03 and 04 be split earlier regardless of arbitrary traffic numbers.  Sector 03 is a unique sector and requires constant attention to traffic calls; if we split it all the time it is easier to stay on top of those calls.




Synopsis: ZMA Controller reports of an NMAC report he heard about; while off-line doing other coordination. IFR and VFR aircraft.
Date: 201810
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZME.ARTCC, TN
Aircraft: B757-200
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class A ZME
ATC / advisory: Center ZME
Second aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Separated Traffic; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Loss of separation occurred between Aircraft X and Aircraft Y. Controller Pilot Data Link Communications (CPDLC) testing had just begun. This was my first time using it. I uplinked a climb message to Aircraft X to climb to FL300 and handed him off to the R21 Controller leaving FL195 climbing to FL300. The R21 Controller did catch that Aircraft X was climbing to FL300. Aircraft Y was being worked by R21 Controller descending to FL240. The R21 [Controller] realized Aircraft X was climbing to FL300 after the aircraft had been handed off and switched to the R27 Controller. The R21 Controller then stopped [Aircraft X] at FL250 and turned the aircraft and called traffic. Separation was lost. Aircraft X should have been climbed to FL230 by me.




Synopsis: ZME Enroute Controller reported a loss of separation occurred between two transport aircraft. CPDLC testing was cited as contributing to the error.
Date: 201203
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: B737-300
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Second aircraft: Cessna 425/441 Conquest I/Conquest II
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Local
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Ground Conflict; Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: A B737 2 mile left base for Runway 14 Visual Approach; a C441 departing Runway 14. The C441 was ready for departure. I issued cleared for immediate take off and exchanged traffic; 'C441 cleared for immediate take off traffic on 2 mile left base. The C441 acknowledged. The B737 was given traffic departing prior to your arrival; the B737 acknowledged with; 'We'll square the base to final.' The C441 took his time rolling. At the time of lift off it appeared that less than 6;000 FT existed between the still airborne B737 and the C441. In the future I will not trust the C441 to comply with an immediate take off clearance; and/or; I would make a decision earlier whether to issue a go around or cancel take off clearance.




Synopsis: Tower Controller described a questionable runway separation event when traffic cleared for an 'immediate take off' failed to respond as expected.
Date: 202005
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Night
Aircraft: Widebody; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Ramp ZZZ; Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Incursion Taxiway
Detector: Person Ground Personnel
When detected: Taxi
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Upon landing Runway XXL Ground said cross Runway XXR via [taxiway] join [other taxiway] to [intersection]. Ground Controller asked if we were going into Gate YY and we replied 'Yes.' Airport was completely quiet; no other aircraft taxiing and assumed cleared all the way to gate. Turned into intersection and saw guide in and continued to uneventful parking. After shutdown we were advised to call operations. We called and were told we needed to call Ramp Tower as they were still open and operating.


Second narrative: Neglected to call Ramp Tower after landing and during taxi to the gate. In past XXXX-ZZZ legs; the aircraft type would be parked on the end of the concourse at a gate that doesn't require a call to Ramp. With the gate assignment being YY; I neglected to notice that a call to Ramp would be necessary.Contributing to the mistake; we were cleared to the ramp entrance by Tower as we were clearing XXL and that further contributed to me thinking we were good all of the way to the gate. It was very late relative to my home time zone; so I was tired. This was also my first flight in the FO seat in almost two months due to COVID-19 concerns.


Synopsis: Air carrier flight crew reported not calling Ramp before taxiing.
Date: 202010
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: UAV - Unpiloted Aerial Vehicle
Operating under: Other 107
Mission: Photo Shoot / Video
Flight phase: Cruise
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR
Detector: Person Observer
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: During flight; every effort was made to insure flying over grass embankment on sides of road and to fly over roads where there was no traffic due to traffic lights at intersection. Ultra frequent downward camera checks were made to confirm my position with respect to roads and walkway and that there were no underlying cars. Pedestrians were not seen at all. No incidents or accidents occurred. Flight terminated with normal landing. After flight; I was approached by an individual who later identified himself as a pilot. He appeared quite agitated and aggressive causing me concern about where the conversation would be heading and whether it would be civil. He was requesting citation of regulations with respect to how close I was permitted to fly to a vehicle. He later indicated that I was flying or hovering over or near his vehicle. He was not specific about the details. Although aerial footage was not taken for 100% of the flight; I was able to review the footage that was taken. My review indicated that I had been successful in avoiding flying over vehicles (stationary or moving) for all but two short portions of the flights. With respect to those two periods; the video is not conclusive because of the angle of the camera. I don't know where the individual's vehicle was so I don't know if there was a different time that he may have been referring to. If the individual was right; my diligence and awareness of the requirement not to fly over vehicles ultimately may not have prevented flight over vehicles. I will need to plan even more intently before the UAS leaves the ground how to prevent flight over vehicles. Changing takeoff and landing locations and/or filming locations may be necessary to reduce the possibility of flight over vehicles.




Synopsis: UAV pilot reported he was approached by an individual concerned that the UAV had been operated over his vehicle.
Date: 201308
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: 1G5.Airport, OH
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: M-20 B/C Ranger
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: CTAF 1G5
Second aircraft: Piper Single Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Other Takeoff Roll
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Airport; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Taking off from Runway 19; Medina Municipal Airport.  Wind indicated a 19 departure; plus Runway 29 is listed as being in poor condition. Runway 19 has a 737-foot displaced threshold due to trees on the approach. Did run-up on the pavement between the ramp and 19; radioed CTAF (which I had used to speak to another pilot on the way in; so I know it was the correct freq.) that I was entering 19. Shortly after; radioed that I was departing from 19; began takeoff roll. I did not notice the aircraft on the run-up ramp next to Runway 27. I had accelerated to maybe 60 KTS on takeoff roll when I saw the other aircraft turn onto Runway 27 and begin either a taxi or takeoff roll; crossing directly into my path. I took evasive maneuvers; I don't believe he did.  We came very close to colliding -- his propeller with my left wing.  We missed colliding by maybe 30 FT.1.  I didn't even see the other aircraft until it was almost too late. I don't know why I didn't notice it.  My 16-year-old son started pointing but I thought he was pointing to a deer or debris or something so perhaps I was fixated on the runway surface. 2.  The taxiway leading to Runway 27 turns south into the run-up pad for 27; so a pilot doing a run-up in preparation for takeoff on 27 is facing south and cannot see the start of Runway 19 behind him. (But when he/she turns onto 27; Runway 9 is clearly visible.)3.  The pilot of the other aircraft was not on CTAF and did not hear my radio calls.4.  The pilot of the other aircraft failed to check before crossing an active runway.




Synopsis: M20 pilot experiences a near collision departing Runway 19 at 1G5; with another aircraft departing Runway 27.
Date: 201702
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: LAS.Airport, NV
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Night
Aircraft: Super King Air 200
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Ferry / Re-Positioning
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B LAS
ATC / advisory: TRACON L30
Aircraft component: Navigation Database
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: Check Pilot; Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew FLC Overrode Automation
Contributing factors: Procedure; Chart Or Publication; Aircraft
Primary problem: Chart Or Publication

Narrative: When a STAR is loaded into the Garmin G1000; the system automatically loads the identifier for the airport immediately after the last fix published on the STAR; even though the airport is not part of the procedure. The last leg of the FUZZY8 (and the SUNST arrival as well) lay out a track that is an extended south downwind leg that goes past the airport.These procedures call for a straight track from IPUMY to BLD. While executing the FUZZY8; our aircraft began an unauthorized turn back toward the airport shortly after passing IPUMY rather than proceeding to BLD for radar vectors to final. The G1000 apparently thought that LAS was part of the STAR and since the turn back to the airport from our portion required a 170-degree left turn; the turn-anticipation feature began the unauthorized turn almost immediately rather than proceeding to BLD as depicted.




Synopsis: BE200 pilot reported an error in sequencing waypoints when loading arrivals into the G1000.
Date: 201711
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: B767-300 and 300 ER
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Rudder Control System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
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 Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Passing approx 7000 ft slight oscillation of tail noticed. Passing 10000 ft CA (Captain) accelerated normally to 300 KIAS and yaw oscillation intensified. Requested level off with ATC and analyzed problem as a yaw damper malfunction. Turned off right yaw damper and oscillation stopped. [Advised] ATC. Completed normal descent and before landing checklists as well as overweight landing checklist. Returned and landed. Soft landing approx 200 fpm VVI. CA used full reverse thrust and brakes applied approximately 80 KIAS with 3500 ft remaining. Exited at end of runway; fire chief checked brake temp; approx 650 deg on left wheel. Recommended taxi and check again just prior to entering the ramp. Next brake check was 500 deg and decreasing. Taxied into ramp and no ramp personnel available to chock aircraft for over 5 minutes. Normal shutdown and deplaning of pax and crew once aircraft was able to be chocked.




Synopsis: B767 First Officer reported a yaw oscillation after accelerating in climb that was identified as a yaw damper malfunction.