elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 202006
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: DTW.Airport, MI
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B DTW
ATC / advisory: Tower DTW
Second aircraft: UAV - Unpiloted Aerial Vehicle
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness; Time Pressure
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: On final approach; approximately 4 miles from touchdown at approximately 1200 ft AGL; I spotted what initially appeared to be a large bird directly in front of the aircraft; below the glide path.  I was the pilot monitoring for this flight.  As we closed; I realized that it was actually a medium-sized drone; likely the 'quad-copter' type by its shape; and bright orange (likely why I initially spotted it.  It was almost exactly on the extended runway centerline; and appeared to be moving on a reciprocal heading to the runway (right towards us; but remaining below our path; neither climbing nor descending).  We passed above it; I would estimate by about 150 feet; and continued to a normal landing.  The First Officer was busy flying; head down watching the flight instruments as required; and did not see the drone.  As I knew we had traffic behind us; I notified ATC (Tower) of the drone so they could warn the other traffic.  Landing and taxi-in were normal.  I notified the appropriate authorities (including this report).  I was prepared; once I realized what it was; to take control and take evasive action; but none was necessary.  Also; from the first spotting of the 'perceived' bird; to passing overhead the drone; was between 3 and 5 seconds.Someone with more money than brains (to afford the drone) stupidly flying it in an absurdly unsafe area and manner. Find the people that do this; and very publicly prosecute them to the fullest extent of the law.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported flying over an opposite direction UAV while on final approach.
Date: 201508
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Rain; Thunderstorm
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Pitot/Static Ice System
Component problem: Design; Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Confusion; Distraction; Troubleshooting; Workload
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Weather
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Climb out from a Pacific Island; numerous thunderstorms in area and extensive deviation from route. On climb out of 16;000 Captain's (CA) altimeter jumped from 16;000 to FL180 and then jumped again down to 14;000 before settling back around FL185; after this I asked the First Officer (FO) if he had seen the same thing which he said he did. I then asked if he had noticed his altimeter doing the same to which he said no and he did not think the standby had either. We discussed continuing if we did not observe this again; but before we had even finished looking through the QRH to see if there was anything about this type of incident it happened again going through FL260. This time we both verified that the FO and standby had not been effected; and immediately transferred control from the CA to the FO.I got on the SAT phone and called dispatch advising them of the issue and asking for a three way patch to maintenance; after getting the patch and explaining to the Mechanic what we had experienced we all agreed that taking this aircraft to our island destination into known mountainous terrain at night and in weather would not be a good idea. Maintenance asked my weight and advised burning fuel before landing in departure airport; the Dispatcher concurred and so we orbited for an hour plus to burn off enough to be below max landing weight. Uneventful approach and landing.




Synopsis: While climbing over the Western Pacific between 16;000 feet and FL260 with thunderstorms in the area; a B737 Captain's altimeter was intermittently fluctuating so the flight returned to the departure airport on the advice of Maintenance.
Date: 201603
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZOA.ARTCC, CA
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZOA
ATC / advisory: Center ZOA
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Developmental
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Human-Machine Interface; Confusion
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I had turned Aircraft X for spacing to LAS. When I turned him back to the southeast I thought there would be enough room to clear the Nellis airspace; but a combination of the aircraft groundspeed and being a [large transport]; the aircraft didn't turn quick enough to stay clear of Nellis airspace. There was a large amount of frequency congestion due to moderate turbulence and light to moderate chop; and ride reports. The winds were also strong out of the west. The volume or complexity was average but the frequency congestion and reports were constant. When I thought the aircraft may come close to the Nellis airspace I had the D side call Nellis and point him out. They said traffic observed but to keep him clear. I gave the aircraft a south heading to try to steer him farther away but it was already too late and he went a few miles inside the airspace. I approximate that I turned the aircraft 18 or 20 miles west of the airspace and he still entered. It's kind of embarrassing to me because I thought it was enough time to turn back.I talked with some people in the area and they said this has happened in the past and suggested using a fix to the northwest to ensure the aircraft won't go into Nellis. Giving the aircraft direct TEZUM direct BTY should have kept him clear or I should have vectored him sooner and used a larger buffer.




Synopsis: ZOA Controller reported turning an aircraft 20 miles away from another facilities airspace and doing a point out. The aircraft entered the airspace and the reporter was told to keep the aircraft out of the airspace. Controller reported others have this same problem
Date: 201708
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: SNA.Tower, CA
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class C SNA
ATC / advisory: Tower SNA
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Flight Data / Clearance Delivery
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors; ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Aircraft X; a PDC clearance aircraft was given 'climb via the SID except maintain 2000' instead of just 'Climb via the SID' on the drop down menu at the CD position. When Aircraft X departed; the aircraft was below the minimum vectoring altitude. This was a fat finger mistake. Although; that option is no longer used anymore so it should have not been there at all.Remove the climb via the SID except maintain 2000 from the drop down menu on the clearance delivery position.




Synopsis: SNA Tower Controller reported using a Pre Departure Clearance function in error which caused the aircraft to be below the Minimum Vectoring Altitude.
Date: 201302
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Q400
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Cargo Door
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Ground Personnel
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Weather; Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: The Captain performed the post flight walk around at our intermediate stop. It was morning twilight; 0C OAT with wind gusts to 25 KTS. It was COLD! While passengers were loading ground personnel advised us their belt loader was inoperative and they were physically loading bags up the aft loading stairs into the cargo pit. As we prepared for an on time departure a ground agent advised the 'forward cargo door has a flap sticking out of the bottom of the door.' He continued; 'It came [into the gate] that way.' He asked if the Captain wanted to view the door but he said he was good to go. (He assumed it was a door seal that was not aligned in door.) We closed the doors; ran the check lists; started engines; taxied out and took off normally. Climbing through 12;700 FT AGL the Master warning chime rang along with the 'Cabin Press' warning light. The Captain leveled off; we ran the checklist and complied with 'max bleed' required by that checklist. [We advised ATC we were taking care of a pressurization problem and would like a revised clearance over the mountainous en route terrain at 10;000 FT. ATC provided an appropriate clearance and the cabin altitude held steady at 8;000 MSL.] We notified Dispatch and asked them to run the fuel burn for our new routing and altitude; all of which were OK. Dispatch passed us off to Maintenance to discuss the pressurization problem. The Captain told Maintenance about the ground agent's comment about a 'Flap out the bottom of cargo door.' Following an uneventful flight; upon arrival Maintenance met the aircraft and determined the 'forward cargo door depressurization door flap was fully open and out of adjustment.'




Synopsis: A Q400 crew; during a cold and windy enroute stop; decided not to check a report from the ground crew of a 'flap' sticking out of the cargo door. During the subsequent climb out toward mountainous terrain they experienced pressurization problems; but fortunately were able to reroute and stay at an altitude at which pressurization below 10;000 MSL could be maintained. Maintenance determined the un-investigated flap was a fully deployed cargo door depressurization flap.
Date: 202105
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Aircraft: Regional Jet 200 ER/LR (CRJ200)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Flap/Slat Control System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Enroute to ZZZ1 at 12;000 and 300 kts with AP on; I saw the flap indicator appear on ED1 and momentarily display flaps extended before returning to zero. Approx 1-2 seconds later; the aircraft pitched nose down slightly and descended about 200 feet before leveling off and returning to our assigned altitude. We notified Dispatch and Maintenance; and decided that the best course of action would be an air return to ZZZ. We flew back to ZZZ and landed without further incident.Cause - The FO and I initially both suspected a momentary uncommanded flap movement due to the indication and the pitch down moment we experienced. We discussed the situation with Operations and they requested we return to ZZZ; a decision that we agreed with. Later discussions with Maintenance brought up the possibility that an erroneous sensor indication may have caused the auto trim system to trim the aircraft nose down.




Synopsis: CRJ-200 Captain reported a flap indication issue followed by an uncommanded pitch down movement.  The crew contacted Dispatch and Maintenance Control and decided to return to the departure airport.
Date: 201308
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Weather elements / visibility: Clear
Aircraft: Citation I (C500)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Air Conditioning Compressor
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: While at flight level 370 our Emergency pressurization came on. Thinking our cabin was depressurizing we put on our O2 masks and started a descent. We put 7700 in the transponder and once we were able to communicate with ATC they asked if we were doing an emergency descent. I confirmed and said we were having pressurization trouble. They cleared us to 10;000 FT and were very helpful. When we went through the checklist we found out that our ACM ejector failed due to overheating and that emergency pressure takes over to allow the ACM ejector to cool. We selected a warmer cabin setting and the system reset. No pressurization was lost. We continued our flight to destination.




Synopsis: CE500 Captain experiences Emergency pressurization coming on at FL370. Oxygen masks are donned; descent is initiated and 7700 is squawked before discovering that the ACM can be reset by selecting a warmer temperature.
Date: 202009
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 170/175 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Aircraft Cooling System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Technician
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Airframe; Maintenance Powerplant
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural MEL / CDL
Detector: Person Maintenance
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Contributing factors: Procedure; MEL; Human Factors; Aircraft
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was told to go to the gate at ZZZ airport to inspect a write up on an ERJ175. The write up stated that the pilots were not able to get cool air in the cockpit during cruise; but the packs worked and blew cool air on ground. It was written up previously and was a repeat write up. Because this was a repeat and there were no EICAS (Engine Indication and Crew Alerting System) messages reported; I decided to interrogate the CMC (Central Maintenance Computer) for active faults and faults stored on the previous flight. I found two fault codes on the current leg as active with no inactive time stamp showing it was resolved. I then went to active faults and both codes were stored as active there as well. The two fault codes were 21000020AM2 and 21000030AM2. Following the FIM (Fault Isolation Manual); the problem was a fault with SPDA (Secondary Power Distribution Assembly) 2 Module 26. I inspected the MEL (Minimum Equipment List) list and there was no deferral for this item. I informed my lead and ordered parts needed for repair. The parts would not arrive until the next morning so I was told it would be days. Shortly after arriving at work; I was informed that it was signed off as left pack deferred and flew out. Looking at the fault codes; the fault was for more than just the pack system which made it non-deferrable.Days did not follow the turn over stating that the faults were active and that the problem was with the SPDA 2 Module 26. They also did not look up fault in FIM and followed the procedures. This allowed for a broken plane to have a different part to be deferred while the actual problem was not addressed. Mechanics need to follow manuals and carefully read shift turnover.




Synopsis: Aircraft Technician reports that an incorrect aircraft part was deferred per Minimum Equipment List.
Date: 202101
Flight conditions: Mixed
Weather elements / visibility: Mostly VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Falcon 50
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Other All
Aircraft component: Exterior Pax/Crew Door
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Other DA50
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural MEL / CDL
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Company Policy; MEL; Human Factors
Primary problem: Company Policy

Narrative: Upon closing the main cabin door to the aircraft; the Captain (other person) broke the loop end of the door handle from the main cabin door off. The door was still functional as it could be opened and closed; however as the part was broken; I argued that we were AOG (Aircraft On Ground) until it got fixed. The part is not in the MEL (Minimum Equipment List) / CDL (Configuration Deviation List). The Captain disagreed and stated that her conversation with the company said we were good to go. I had reservations about the broken part and made them known to both her and the company however the initial repositioning leg (empty) and two charter (Part 135) legs thereafter with passengers were flown. Only in a conversation today did I realize that the Captain did not actually report the problem in its entirety to our maintenance department for a full evaluation of the issue.The plane was fixed the following day.I have had a conversation with the company and may likely be resigning this position as this incident is indicative of a much larger; systemic problem within this company regarding maintenance culture. Operations will likely be making changes to the staff based on this event but I am not confident in this pilot position causing a future accident / incident / violation. I had been chastised about not following the chain of command in reporting maintenance issues in the past which is why I did not speak up further during this incident. I personally will never again put myself in a situation where an obvious maintenance issue such as this overrides common sense (and likely a few [CFR]'s) (Code of Federal Regulations).




Synopsis: Pilot flying Falcon 50 aircraft reports company dispatched aircraft with broken door handle.
Date: 202007
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 2 Eng; Retractable Gear
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Developmental
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Procedure; Airspace Structure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Airspace Structure

Narrative: I called Approach to advise of a VFR aircraft I was trying to hand off to them; and they asked if I could accept more coordination. They said Aircraft X was at 8;000 feet direct to a fix and my control into ZZZ.  I said roger and we got off the line. I realized when I went to clear them for the approach that they were entering a 9;000 foot Minimum IFR Altitude and I cleared them for the approach. If Approach is going to hand off aircraft at 8;000 feet they should clear them for the approach before giving them to us.  I should have told them to clear them or climb them in order to accept the hand off and then subsequently clear them for the approach.




Synopsis: Center Controller accepted a handoff from an Approach Controller for an aircraft that was below the Center's Minimum IFR Altitude but at the minimum IFR Altitude for the Approach Control.
Date: 201705
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: A319
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Reporter qualification: Flight Attendant Current
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Upon take off I; the number 3 flight attendant; and the number 2 flight attendant noticed a distinct dirty sock; mildew smell. We both donned the masks provided on the emergency equipment bin and informed the captain. This was the only instance the smell was noticed on the aircraft.




Synopsis: A319 Flight Attendant reported a dirty sock smell during takeoff.