elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201301
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Aircraft: B757-200
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Cooling Fan; any cooling fan
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Equipment Problem Dissipated; Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Cruising at 37;000 feet; we experienced a fume odor consistent with an electronics overheat or fire. The smell was shortly followed by a FWD EQPT SMOKE message. The odor was confirmed to be throughout the cabin as well. We began accomplishing the 'Smoke or Fire or Fumes' checklist; declared an emergency; and began a divert to the nearest suitable airport. About five minutes later; we had an EQPT OVHT message which was complied with. The smell of fumes dissipated within about seven minutes. We landed and emergency personnel noticed no sign of fire or smoke; and we continued to the gate.


Second narrative: No additional information was provided in Narrative #2.


Synopsis: B757 flight crew reports electrical fumes at FL370 followed by a FWD EQPT SMOKE message. During descent and diversion to the nearest suitable airport an EQPT OVHT message is displayed and complied with; prior to landing the fumes dissipate.
Date: 201511
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: LAS.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Medium Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class E ZLA
ATC / advisory: TRACON L30
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Confusion
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation - Altitude Overshoot
Detector: Automation Aircraft RA; Person Flight Crew
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Departing Las Vegas on the SHEAD9 from Runway 1L. After the initial turn west were given a hard altitude of 10;000 feet. Shortly thereafter we were given a vector to avoid traffic at 10;000 feet. The controller asked us to tighten the turn and this is when we received an RA to descend. We descended 400 feet until clear of conflict. Later we were given 19;000 feet and direct SHEAD by the same controller. We initiated the climb and were then instructed to level at 12;000 feet. We were already through 12;100 feet and climbing at 3;000 feet per minute. We descended to 12;000 feet and were told to turn to a heading for traffic. In the next second he told us to disregard the heading and maintain visual separation from a B737 that was at our 3 o'clock and also at 12;000 feet. This aircraft was in a turn to avoid us.This was the most frightening controlling I have been subject to in my career. Twice given altitudes that were in conflict of other traffic and all within a few minutes of the departure phase of this flight. Finally told to maintain visual separation to cover himself.




Synopsis: A departing aircraft was issued a radar vector for traffic. The aircraft then responded to an RA for the traffic. The aircraft was then climbed to 19;000 feet. Then the aircraft was told to maintain 12;000 feet as it was climbing through 12;100 feet. The aircraft descended to 12;000 feet and was issued a vector for traffic than told to disregard the vector. The aircraft was instructed to maintain visual separation from traffic approximately three miles from it at the same altitude.
Date: 201703
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: MD-11
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Reverser Actuator
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Technician
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Airframe; Maintenance Powerplant
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Maintenance
When detected: Routine Inspection
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Incorrect / Not Installed / Unavailable Part; Manuals
Primary problem: Incorrect / Not Installed / Unavailable Part

Narrative: I was tasked to remove and replace the upper actuator on the left hand thrust reverser; on the Number 2 engine. The rod end was written up for being broken. Looking for the part number; I looked through the IPC and was having difficulty looking for an available part. The IPC points you to the GE CMM and notates GE Spec 1477M56P03 for applicable alt part numbers. When looking in the CMM for the CF680C IPC (78-32-11-10 Item 16A); it shows part number 3275538-3; that also cross references to our IPC for the MD-11 (78-32-15-01 Item 40). In the CMM; it shows 2 part numbers in the comments as ALT PN 3272602-3 and 3272602-4. Another contributing factor to the confusion; when ordering either part number in the company system; both part numbers; 3272602-3 and 3272602-4; show up as the same CPN (Company Part Number). As I was comfortable; I was installing the correct part on to the aircraft; I continued with the install.I was notified four days later of the possible incorrect part install by a company QA auditor by email. I then did the research and provided him with screen shots and documentation showing all that I have explained. Also; I was contacted by email and by phone and I was explained that starting at the buildup process; Form 8130; and company serviceable tag were possibly incorrect; and that the part may have been incorrectly tagged from the vendor.Possible corrections could be to clear up the confusion between the manuals if the part number applicability is incorrect; and correct the CPN confusion that makes it seem that the part is interchangeable; especially if the parts are not compatible between 2 different aircraft types.




Synopsis: Maintenance Technician reported that after replacing a reverser actuator using an alternate part number; he was informed that the part may have had an incorrect parts tag.
Date: 202103
Location: MIA.Airport, FL
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Climb
ATC / advisory: TRACON MIA
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Confusion; Troubleshooting; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Deviation - Speed All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; No Specific Anomaly Occurred Unwanted Situation
Detector: Automation Air Traffic Control; Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Chart Or Publication
Primary problem: Chart Or Publication

Narrative: We were flying the VALLY2 SID out of MIA.  The SID note states; 'SPEED RESTRICTION...Turbojet aircraft accelerate to 250 knots; if unable; advise ATC.' I was the PF (Pilot Flying) and at 10;000 feet; I asked the Captain for Economy Climb.  We accelerated to ECON CLB.  Shortly after reaching this speed; ATC instructed us to fly 250 knots and stated something like...Aircraft X; maintain 250 knots; Center will give you a higher speed; you've already accelerated.  (Not verbatim; I cannot remember the exact phraseology). It gave us the impression that we missed a published speed restriction.  After rereading the SID note; we are both confident that this is not a speed restriction.  We are also confident that we did not miss an ATC assigned speed restriction. If however our interpretation of this SID note is incorrect; it is not written as it should be. The Jeppesen Chart Legends publication has a section written about speed restrictions.  It clearly states that 'speed restrictions vary widely within individual procedures.' If we unintentionally violated a speed restriction in this case; perhaps this 'wide variation' in depicted speed restrictions needs to be better address from a human factors perspective; since the VALLY2 SID does not clearly depict a 250 knot speed restriction with terminology such as 'maintain 250 until advised by ATC' or 'do not exceed 250 knots etc.




Synopsis: Air carrier First Officer reported confusion with the '250 Knot' wording on the SID.
Date: 201503
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Cessna Citation Sovereign (C680)
Operator: Fractional
Operating under: Part 135
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Exterior Pax/Crew Door
Component problem: Design
Reporter organization: Fractional
Reporter function: Other / Unknown
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Airframe; Maintenance Inspection Authority; Maintenance Powerplant
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Maintenance
When detected: Routine Inspection
Result: General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Main Cabin Door upper step (hinged) riser is found bent on occasion. Sometimes by crew members that cause flight schedule disruptions and others times by technicians during inspections. Step riser Part Number (P/N) 4419086-10 has been replaced 15 times in the past 365 days. When this riser bends it can cause a trip hazard; depending on the amount of bend and unleveling of the top step surface or when allowing the trim piece to stick out from its flush position. Recommend Cessna engineering will need to improve the structure of the riser assembly to carry a higher load.




Synopsis: A Maintenance Manager reports the Main Cabin Door Entrance upper step (hinged) riser has been replaced 15 times in the last 365 days on their Cessna CE-680 aircraft. Risers are found bent by flight crews and Maintenance technicians. When the riser bends; the top surface of the upper step becomes unleveled causing a trip hazard.
Date: 201504
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Tablet
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Workload; Troubleshooting; Situational Awareness; Human-Machine Interface
Second reporter function: First Officer
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Procedure
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Enroute; the Jepp TC application crashed on both Captain and First Officer iPads. Both iPads had sufficient battery life remaining. None of the numerous attempts to restore operation were successful. Weather at our destination was VMC. Contacted dispatch to coordinate for radar vectors to a visual approach. Landed uneventfully at our filed destination.


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


Synopsis: Both the Captain and First Officer iPad JEPP TC APPs crashed in flight. The crew had Dispatch contact ATC for vectors to their filed destination which was VMC.
Date: 201303
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: IAD.Airport, VA
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 170/175 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class E PCT
ATC / advisory: TRACON PCT
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Human-Machine Interface; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Chart Or Publication; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: We were descending on the GIBBZ1 RNAV into IAD between BBONE and KILMR when ATC assigned us a 020 heading for traffic. Our descent clearance was 'descend via the GIBBZ arrival; with no specific altitude given. I told my First Officer to ask ATC what altitude he wanted us at; and we got no reply. After 2 more unsuccessful tries to get an answer (the Controller was busy); I leveled the aircraft at 11;000 FT; which was the altitude for the next fix. We finally got a reply to our questions and were told to continue to descend to 6;000 FT. We complied with no further issues.As we had [previously] been cleared to 'descend via' the STAR and; when vectored off of it; were no longer on the arrival; we had [no guidance as to our cleared] altitude. Ive had this happen a couple times; with different altitudes given each time; some the same as the bottom altitude [on the STAR]; some different. Anytime an aircraft has been given a 'descend via' clearance and is later turned off the arrival; ATC needs to assign an altitude.




Synopsis: When they were vectored off the GIBBZ RNAV STAR; by which they had previously been cleared to 'descend via;' the flight crew of an ERJ-170 were uncertain as to their cleared altitude. Difficulty communicating with the busy Controller forced a brief level off at an intermediate altitude until a new clearance could be provided.
Date: 201709
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: P50.TRACON, AZ
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class E P50
ATC / advisory: TRACON P50
Second aircraft: Medium Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Automation Aircraft RA
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Chart Or Publication; Airspace Structure; Company Policy; Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I was working the QUARTZ Arrival Sector and had a stack handed to me from ZAB 42. I had two arrivals on the PINNG arrival descending via and was breaking up the stack handed to me off the HYDRR Arrival. I did not see the departure aircraft climbing out on the RBN (Boneyard Departure). Aircraft X told me he was responding to an RA. I then noticed the traffic that was on the SID climbing into my traffic. I rogered Aircraft X and told him to comply via the STAR when able. This is a departure that is not procedure separated.




Synopsis: P50 TRACON Controller reported not noticing a departure climbing through the altitude of an arrival until the pilot reported responding to a TCAS RA.
Date: 202105
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: YRK.VORTAC, KY
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Rain; 6
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class E ZID
ATC / advisory: TRACON HTS
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Fatigue; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Weather
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I had just crossed the YRK VORTAC and began a descent from 2;600 feet MSL towards 2;300. I realized that I had descended too quickly and should have held level at 2;600 until reaching the initial fix of MYKEE for the RNAV 12 approach into HTS. Huntington Approach queried me as to my low altitude (I had descended to 2;450 feet MSL). I corrected my altitude and was then asked by Huntington Approach if I could maintain my own obstruction clearance on the approach. I answered in the affirmative and continued on the approach to a landing without any further issue. This was my initial error. I realized I was fatigued on a long flight with a strong headwind and long period of time in IMC. I should have maintained 2;600 feet MSL until crossing MYKEE.




Synopsis: GA pilot reported an altitude deviation during approach to HTS airport resulting in a low altitude alert from ATC.
Date: 201903
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: JFK.Airport, NY
Aircraft: A321
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground JFK
Second aircraft: A319
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Ground
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown; Confusion
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: Taxi
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Aircraft X called for taxi; but I must have heard Aircraft Y. I gave taxi instructions to Aircraft Y and did not hear the readback differently and was not corrected by the pilot. I continued to work traffic and when I went back to give the aircraft sequence instructions and switch him to Tower; I realized that he was definitely not an A319. I then asked him to verify his callsign and found out that it was actually Aircraft X; an A321 that I had been giving instructions to. Please advise [airline] that flight WXYZ and WYXZ should not be proposed for departure anywhere near the same timeframe at the same airport.




Synopsis: Ground controller reported mistaking an aircraft with similar call sign with another aircraft.
Date: 201403
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZZ.Airport, FO
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B777 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Other Parked Pre-departure
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Flight crew was in pre-departure cockpit preparations when an ACARS Dangerous Goods Notification was received. The notification detailed the loading of 2;800 pounds of Lithium Ion batteries ranging from 128 to 537 pounds in the forward cargo compartment. The Class/Division for the cargo was 9 with a drill code reference of 9FZ. Class 9 denotes flammability and the FZ drill code denotes 'aircraft cargo fire suppression system may not extinguish or contain the fire; consider landing immediately' and 'firefighting: use water if available on Z drill code'. The Captain contacted Operations and asked to speak with the Dangerous Goods Representative. None was available. The Captain contacted Dispatch via SATCOM and asked that the Load Planning Representative join the call. Load Planning stated that this cargo load was approved for transport. I referred all parties to the FOM as documented above and reminded them of the aircraft accident in 2010 attributable to the carriage of lithium ion batteries as cargo. The Captain advised Dispatch; Load Planning and Station personnel that this cargo was being refused and that it was to be off loaded from the aircraft. This situation constitutes a normalizing of deviation that compromises air safety on passenger flights. Lithium ion batteries; and the contingent risk associated with them; could have resulted in a fire which per the FOM could not be suppressed or contained and could have resulted in a ditching event on this overwater flight. It should be noted that the once offloaded; the cargo was not in a mitigation container but merely shrink wrapped to a pallet. Flight operated 30 minutes late and continued safely to the destination.




Synopsis: B777 Captain reports refusing a shipment of lithium ion batteries due to their potential for fires that cannot be contained by the aircraft fire suppression system.
Date: 201810
Location: ZMP.ARTCC, MN
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Super King Air 200
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class E ZMP
ATC / advisory: Center ZMP
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Chart Or Publication; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: During mission planning for a flight; my Captain and I saw the NOTAM in Foreflight for 'NAVIGATION ILS RUNWAY 31 LOC/DISTANCE MEASURING EQUIPMENT OUT OF SERVICE'. He and I both understood the NOTAM to mean only the DME was not working for the approach. We requested direct FILTA to set up for a straight-in approach to runway 31. Shortly before reaching FILTA we were cleared by the ZMP controller for the approach. When the GPS showed we had reached FILTA; the CDI had not moved off the 'wall'. We immediately advised the ZMP controller the NAVAID was not working and requested vectors for the RNAV 31 approach. He gave us vectors and read us the NOTAM. My Captain and I realized at that time; the NOTAM was for the entire NAVAID being out of service. After landing we checked the DINS NOTAM website; and the verbiage was not much clearer: 'NAV ILS RWY 31 LOC/DME U/S.'The lesson learned for my Captain and I was not to assume anything when reading NOTAMS. A possible solution to future confusion would be to delineate that each component is out of service. Example: 'NAV ILS RWY 31 G/S U/S & LOC/DME U/S.'




Synopsis: BE200 First Officer reported misinterpreting a NOTAM and found more equipment out of service than expected.