elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201507
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-700
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: Passenger
Reporter qualification: Other Deadheading pilot
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR
Detector: Person Passenger
When detected: Taxi
Result: General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Weather
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was deadheading on the flight sitting in a window seat overlooking the left wing. The window shade was closed to keep the aircraft cool during boarding. When we started taxiing out I opened the window shade and observed cold soaked fuel frost (CSFF) covering about half the wing; to include a significantly coarser; thicker frost area in one section. I notified the FA; and asked her to notify the Captain. The Captain stopped the aircraft and came back to observe the frost. Shortly after he went back to the flight deck; the flight was put on a ground delay for 30 minutes due to weather. During this period the frost melted. The Captain did return prior to departure to check the wings again.The previous flight was greater than two hours and the humidity was high in the ZZZ area; although the temperature was also in the 80's F. Due to the weather in the ZZZ area I am sure there was plenty of alternate fuel on the [inbound] leg.Upon exiting the aircraft I walked past the Captain in the jetbridge and he looked at me and turned away. He looked angry and annoyed that I had made him aware of the CSFF. Most professionals would say thank you for ensuring we didn't take off with frost on the wings. My concern is that maybe some crews are forgetting about how susceptible the 737-700/-800 is to CSFF; even in the summer. Additionally; I am concerned that maybe some pilots don't think it's a big deal to depart with CSFF.




Synopsis: Deadheading pilot reported notifying the flight crew during taxi out of cold soaked fuel frost on the wing surfaces that had presumably gone undetected during preflight.
Date: 201303
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZTL.ARTCC, GA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-700
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class A ZTL
ATC / advisory: Center ZTL
Second aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Aircraft component: Traffic Collision Avoidance System (TCAS)
Component problem: Design
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Conflict Airborne Conflict
Detector: Automation Aircraft RA; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Procedure
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Noticed aircraft toward us on the ND. ATC never mentioned aircraft until event had already occurred. After the event occurred he mentioned clear of traffic climb and maintain FL340. When the RA went off we had captured the altitude we were climbing to and we were leveling off. The command bars on our PFD were the same as the aircraft was doing at the same time. Climb rate too great in proximity to other aircraft. Never was made aware of aircraft even though it was noticed on our screen. After event occurred ATC said 'clear of traffic climb and maintain FL340' we [thought] you never mentioned the traffic anyway. Decreased vertical climb as aircraft was capturing altitude we were climbing to. In close proximity to aircraft may need to decrease climb rate even if you think your rate will not set off the RA/TA mode.


Second narrative: Climbing out of Atlanta airspace south of RESPE waypoint to an altitude of FL320 we noticed an aircraft on our TCAS display. We were not notified by ATC of the traffic. As the aircraft was capturing the altitude and was starting to level off our TCAS called out a RA and adjust vertical speed. Since aircraft was leveling off and the reduced pitch mirrored the command bars no real adjustment was required. As aircraft went by us ATC said you are clear of traffic continue climb. We were never made aware of the traffic by ATC to begin with. We climbed to our new assigned altitude and continued flight to our destination with no further problems. Possible ATC overload; no real chatter on the radio; possibly an oversight on his side or he did not think the climb or distance would cause a problem.


Synopsis: B737-700 flight crew experiences a TCAS RA while leveling off at assigned altitude. The target aircraft was assigned and altitude 1;000 feet above and no action was required by the pilot flying as the autopilot leveled the aircraft 1;000 feet below.
Date: 201310
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: B757-200
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant In Charge
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown; Time Pressure
Second reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: [A gate] agent Supervisor entered the aircraft 11 minutes before the scheduled departure time and wanted to close the aircraft door. I explained that overhead bins were [still] open as the last of the passengers had just entered; and a long line in the aisle was still present. I told her that it was 11 minutes until scheduled departure. I had also informed the gate agents twice during boarding that oversized carry on baggage was entering the aircraft. The agent Supervisor stated that the cargo [bin] had already closed. I told her that we may still have bags to check due to [being] oversized. At that time a bag came to the [forward] galley that was obviously well larger than the bag sizer would allow. The agent Supervisor repeated that the cargo [bin] was closed. I told her we may have additional bags to check. I also told her not to close the aircraft entry door until I could get the overhead bins closed. As soon as I left the immediate area; the agent Supervisor told [another Flight Attendant] that they had to go and proceeded to close the entry door. The FAR for overhead bin was violated. The FAR for stacked luggage in the closet was violated since additional oversized bags were on the plane and the only option was to stack them in the forward closet. The aircraft entry door was closed 5 minutes before scheduled departure time. The event occurred because the agent Supervisor for this flight would not listen to the Purser! This is an ongoing occurrence at this station for this flight.


Second narrative: I was [on duty as a Flight Attendant] in back of aircraft during boarding assisting passengers and closing overhead bins; working my way forward. I then heard from another Flight Attendant that the boarding door had been closed by the agent before we had all the baggage stored and all overhead bins had been closed. To my best knowledge the agent was in a hurry and closed aircraft door before cabin was ready. The flight attendant in front of aircraft and entrance door is the only one who can deal with the agent because the other flight attendant is in the cabin doing their duties. I had no knowledge that the door had even been closed prematurely. I was closing bins as my duties required.


Synopsis: Contrary to policy and flight attendant direction; a gate agent closed the cabin door before the cabin was fully prepared.
Date: 201809
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Light: Night
Aircraft: A320
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Physiological - Other
Second reporter function: First Officer
Anomaly: 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
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Procedure; Company Policy
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Maintenance must use the utmost care before returning an aircraft to service following a fume event. Because the ability to smell the odor is usually lost after a few minutes of exposure to it; it may be difficult for them to make a valid assessment about whether the fumes are still present. We should ensure that mechanics are aware of this issue. Wider availability of the particle sniffer machine would help mechanics make objective assessments about whether an aircraft is fit to return to service. When I first met the FO (First Officer); he told me that when he was on the aircraft earlier; he did notice some residual fume smell. I did consider this and obtained the entire crew's concurrence with the plan to briefly board the aircraft and make an assessment. However; if I have a similar situation again; I will ask more active questions to determine whether it is safe to get on the aircraft even briefly. I don't think I gave anyone the impression of pressuring them to get on the aircraft to make the assessment; but if I have a future similar event; I will actively clarify that I am not creating any such pressure. [The company] must ensure that maintenance personnel are provided with appropriate personal protective/breathing equipment while they work on aircraft which have had a fume event. We hear a lot about medical issues affecting crew members--what about the mechanics? I didn't really think about this until I started preparing this report. If I have a future fume event; I will specifically make sure the mechanics feel comfortable working on the aircraft. [The company] must continue to investigate the causes of fume events and take action to prevent them. The root cause of the APU oil leak should be determined. [The company] must follow up with the FO to ensure that he is fit to return to duty and provide him with any assistance that may be necessary.


Second narrative: Improved evaluation of residual fumes in cabin before clearing aircraft for flight.


Synopsis: Airbus flight crew reported smelling residual fumes from an APU oil leak repair upon entering the aircraft.
Date: 201208
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 145 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Hydraulic System Lines; Connectors; Fittings
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Ground Personnel; Person Passenger
When detected: Taxi
Result: General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: After landing we taxied to the ramp and smoke was seen by passengers from the left side of the aircraft. The ramp personnel marshaled the aircraft to park and we were advised that smoke was coming out from the left main landing gear. Immediately we deplaned passengers and crew. The Captain walked around the airplane and we were met by the fire and emergency [crew]. The Captain noticed that hydraulic fluid was coming out the lines and fire and smoke [was visible].




Synopsis: Passengers and ground personnel noticed smoke coming from the left main gear of an EMB-145 while parking at the gate. Passengers were quickly deplaned and CFR crews responded promptly to the affected area; where a hydraulic leak was found.
Date: 201811
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Technician
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Airframe; Maintenance Powerplant
Human factors: Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Hazardous Material Violation; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Maintenance
When detected: Routine Inspection
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Two mask assemblies were sent for aircraft being worked by Maintenance in ZZZ at Hangar X. A box of unused parts were returned to stores and placed on the serviceable shelf outside the stores area. I shipped the parts back to ZZZ1 which is where ZZZ returns unused parts. I was recently made aware that the mechanics working the aircraft used one of the parts and replaced in the box the used parts which is a Passenger Service Unit and HazMat; and left the tag for parts on the box when they sealed the box before returning the parts to stores. So; I accidentally shipped a HazMat as unregulated on Flight ZZZ to ZZZ1 under waybill. Under the circumstances; and being made aware of the ability to self-disclose; I thought it best to report this incident and; bring the matter to your attention. I deeply regret the error and apologize for the concern I've caused and will be more vigilant in the completion of my duties. The used hazardous part was misplaced inside a box prelabeled for a non-hazardous part; sealed; placed with serviceable parts; and placed in an area marked for serviceable parts. Open any and all boxes both serviceable and unserviceable and verify what is inside the box matches with both the paperwork and the labeling on the box before proceeding to shipping or receiving.




Synopsis: Maintenance Technician reported inadvertently shipping Hazmat parts in Non-Hazmat container.
Date: 202112
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
Aircraft component: Waste Water Disposal System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Technician
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Powerplant; Maintenance Airframe
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Troubleshooting; Workload; Communication Breakdown
Second reporter function: Technician
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Ground Personnel; Person Maintenance
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: While I was working a gate call for Aircraft X. I was alerted to a damaged drain mast by the ramp supervisor. After conferring with Maintenance Control Technician Y; we determined the aircraft was out of service as there were no deferral limits for the damage that the aircraft had. Supervisor insisted I defer it. Supervisor needs to let the mechanics do their job correctly and in accordance with Company procedures.


Second narrative: Aircraft X; ramp called in damage for drain mast. After we went out there me and my co worker we noticed drain mast was damaged and bent. Contacted maintenance control they said aircraft is out of service because no deferral is available. Maintenance Supervisor kept pushing and forcing us to sign this off.


Synopsis: Technicians reported disagreement with a Supervisor over damage limits on an aircraft drain mast and felt pressure to sign it off as airworthy instead of replacing it.
Date: 202111
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: SJC.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: PA-34-200 Seneca I
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class C SJC
ATC / advisory: Tower SJC
Second aircraft: A320
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control
Contributing factors: Procedure; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: I was landing behind Aircraft Y. They had landed about 3 minutes before me. At 60 feet AGL I hit their wake vortex.  My aircraft rolled hard to the left; maxing out at about a 25 degree bank which required a significant aileron deflection to correct.  I would estimate aileron deflection was approximately 80-90% of what was available.  I quickly stabilized the aircraft and continued to a normal landing.

Callback: Reporter stated they were surprised at the intensity of the wake with 3 miles separation.



Synopsis: PA-34 pilot reported encountering wake turbulence on final approach to SJC in trail of an A320.
Date: 201208
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZZ.ARTCC, FO
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B777-200
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZZ
Aircraft component: Flap Fairing
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Troubleshooting; Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural MEL / CDL; Inflight Event / Encounter Fuel Issue
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Chart Or Publication; Procedure; MEL; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: During climb; we noticed an unusual vibration in the aircraft. This aircraft had a CDL placard on it for the the removal of the right inboard flap fairing. I believed that the possible source of this vibration was this CDL item. During cruise flight we began to notice an increase in our fuel burn compared to the flight plan. After two hours in flight we were down by 1;000 LBS. After four hours we were down by 3;000 LBS; after six hours we were down by 4;000 LBS. We contacted Dispatch and also contacted our Engine Shop Technicians to determine the possible extra fuel burn. Since the fuel burn was going to burn into my required reserve and alternate fuel required for landing at ZZZZ; I decided to divert into ZZZZ1. We landed at ZZZZ1 and refueled and than continued on to ZZZZ.


Second narrative: Flight from ZZZ to ZZZZ. Entire flight fuel burn was well below flight progress numbers and flight plan even though flight plan profile was flown. Due to marginal weather at destination; the Captain decided to land at ZZZZ1 and add more fuel. The fuel used was 6;000 LBS. below the plan at that point. Refueled at ZZZZ1 and continued to ZZZZ with uneventful flight.


Synopsis: A Captain and First Officer report about an unusual vibration during climb on their B777-200 aircraft after a CDL was applied for removal of the right inboard flap fairing. Crew diverted due to excessive fuel burn; which would have affected required fuel reserve and alternate fuel.
Date: 202007
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ASE.Airport, CO
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Light Transport
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch; Initial Climb
Airspace: Class D ASE
ATC / advisory: Tower ASE
Second aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Automation Aircraft RA; Automation Aircraft Terrain Warning; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; Flight Crew FLC Overrode Automation
Contributing factors: Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: With an aircraft on a 10 mile final for runway 15; tower instructed us to line up and wait runway 33. After a delay of approximately 30 seconds; we were cleared for takeoff. Shortly after liftoff; tower instructed us to turn right to a heading of 343 degrees which we complied with immediately. Right before FRA (flap retraction altitude) we got a TCAS RA 'descend; descend.' The pilot flying started a descent and we noticed the aircraft on final for runway 15 was 0.5 miles away or less and approximately 500' above our present altitude. The TCAS RA event was first noticed around 8;300' MSL and we climbed as high as 8;700' MSL before we got the aircraft in a descent. The pilot flying started leveling off from the descent because of mountainous terrain. At this point we got a second TCAS RA 'descend; descend' which would have definitely given us a GPWS alert. The pilot flying started a climb; it was our only option because of the rising terrain. Shortly after this; we got the aural message; 'clear of conflict.' During this event we were on the LINDZ9.JNC departure. We flew a heading of 273 degrees to intercept the IPKN northwest course to LINDZ. After we were handed off to center; we were advised of a possible pilot deviation and were given a telephone number to call. We made the call after landing at ZZZ and passengers had departed.Tower put us (the departing aircraft) too close to the arriving aircraft. There needs to be more separation between arriving and departing aircraft.




Synopsis: First Officer reported they failed to comply with two RAs during takeoff so as to avoid flying toward terrain and a possible GPWS warning.