elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201508
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: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Training / Qualification; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Hazardous Material Violation; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Ground Personnel
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Electric wheelchair loaded in bulk pit of aircraft was not secured; not turned off; and batteries not disconnected prior to departure.[I was made aware of the event] by the Federal Aviation Office at [our European destination] upon completion and block in of flight.Ground personnel loading aircraft failed to take necessary precautions prior to closing bulk cargo door.Ground crew must take necessary precautions to prevent a possible onboard fire; with a [company] employee verifying their work.




Synopsis: B767-300ER Captain reported he was notified by oversight authorities at his European destination that an electric wheelchair loaded in the bulk pit was not properly secured and the power was still connected and on.
Date: 201409
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: CLT.Airport, NC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Medium Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class B CLT
ATC / advisory: TRACON CLT
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Procedure; Company Policy; Human Factors
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: During descent into CLT had Company flight ABA come on same frequency. Immediately noticed that AB and ABA we're difficult to differentiate on a busy frequency. The F/O and I discussed the problems when the company assigns similar sounding call signs; particularly at busy airports or in international airspace. A few times there was confusion as to whom ATC was talking to; both by ATC and by the crews. The last clearance which we responded to was a descent to 4000.  There was later a clearance for a turn and intercept LOC for 18C which was either issued to or accepted by ABA. As we approached the LOC ATC was very busy and we were waiting for our clearance to intercept when we received a 'TRAFFIC' advisory from TCAS. I increased our rate of descent to avoid a resolution advisory when ATC told us to increase our rate to 4000. He then asked us why we were not turning onto the LOC as cleared. We responded that we had NOT received any clearance other than descend and maintain 4000. We were broken out of the sequence and reslotted. It is unclear whether the controller issued our clearance to ABA or ABA took our clearance. Even during the final approach tower was getting the two flights confused. Similar sounding call sign.  This problem keeps reoccurring and simply MUST stop.  Whomever makes these decisions should listen to an ATC recording with the rapid fire of flight numbers; similar sounding flight numbers from other airlines; talk over transmissions; clearances; amended clearances and all; of the other assorted typical issues involving radio ops at a major airport.  Then MAYBE they will get the idea that selecting flight numbers to ease internal tracking can result in confusion aloft; a reduction in efficiency; increase in fuel burn (like this flight) and a potential degradation in safety (ie: our nose-to-nose with the traffic intercepting the LOC from the opposite side).




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain describes the confusion that ensues when a company aircraft comes on the Approach Control frequency with a nearly identical call sign.
Date: 201402
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: B757-300
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Landing
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Human factors: Confusion
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Equipment Problem Dissipated; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: After [we had] a very smooth touch down as the weight settled on the wheels the aircraft violently pitched up. WAG about 5. I have been on the 756 for almost 20 years; and I have flown the -300 since it came on the property. The 200 has never done this. However this is the second time in about 6 months that I have had this happen on the -300. First time I wrote it up in the maintenance log; but Maintenance found nothing wrong with the aircraft. Fortunately having seen it I knew what it was doing as it happened and was not as surprised as the first time. I am not the ace of the base; but I know when an airplane is doing something it shouldn't be doing. In both cases the First Officer agreed that it was not a control input on my part. Discussing this with other pilots I have had some tell me they too had it happen and it scared the heck out of them. This airplane is doing something funny; and it needs to be looked in to. Feel free to call me to discuss particulars.




Synopsis: A B757-300 Captain reported that the aircraft pitched up violently for unknown reasons after a smooth landing as the aircraft settle on the wheels. This was the reporter's second such event in six months.
Date: 201708
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: HCF.TRACON, HI
Aircraft: Helicopter
Flight plan: VFR
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E HCF
Second aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Confusion; Distraction; Human-Machine Interface; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Automation Air Traffic Control; Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I issued a squawk to Aircraft X; was distracted by some departures and conflict alerts to other helicopters is the area. Then noticed the [discrete squawk] code getting close to the Tower's airspace. The problem is Aircraft X was already tagged up on another non-discrete beacon 1200.I don't know exactly what happened. I was excited because of the helicopters; Aircraft Y; Aircraft X and two other 1200 codes all in very close proximity to each other and in conflict. I may have accidentally mistagged the 1200 code. But recently we started the fusion program at our facility and was wondering if the fusion tagged the wrong beacon. If this is the case then that would be a big problem.




Synopsis: HCF Controller reported a problem that might have been caused by FUSION Radar; or the Controller not using the correct procedure.
Date: 201912
Location: ZZZZ.Airport, FO
Aircraft: A319
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant In Charge
Reporter qualification: Flight Attendant Current
Human factors: Time Pressure; Other / Unknown; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Gate Agent / CSR; Person Flight Attendant
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: General Maintenance Action; General Work Refused; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: During a fume event; the Station Supervisor was pressuring us to board the aircraft. They tried to hide the smell of the fumes by spraying lemon scented spray throughout the entire aircraft; completely disregarding the maintenance procedures. We were given attitude and not taken seriously that the aircraft was unsafe to board. We were forced to sit in the airport for 9.5 hours for a rolling delay; never given a hotel; never called back by the company. They then expected us to fly a new aircraft out that ended up leaving at XA45 with a different crew because we refused. We were finally given a hotel at XJ30 after being stranded in the airport all day. Force this company to take fume events seriously.




Synopsis: A319 Flight Attendant reported a fume event during preflight which resulted in a 9.5 hours rolling delay. Flight attendants were  eventually released from flight.
Date: 201304
Weather elements / visibility: Clear
Aircraft: PA-32 Cherokee Six/Lance/Saratoga/6X
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: DVFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Landing
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: AC Generator/Alternator
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Other / Unknown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Routine Inspection; In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Aircraft
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: I was forced to make an emergency landing due to electrical failure caused by a broken alternator belt. There were no injuries but the airplane suffered a propeller strike because the front landing gear did not fully extend. In the process of gathering information for the FAA and my insurance company I discovered that the Annual should have been performed by March. It is very upsetting to me that now my standing with the FAA and my insurance company are in jeopardy in spite of handling the emergency successfully. I think that it would be a good idea for the facility that performs the Annual to put a sticker notice of some sort in the pilot's view after the completion of the Annual stating when the next Annual for that aircraft is due. I had noted the date of the previous annual in my logbook but that note was a few pages back and not readily noticeable to me.




Synopsis: PA32 pilot experiences an alternator failure due to a broken drive belt. The nose gear fails to extend fully during approach resulting in a propeller strike. A logbook check after the incident reveals that the annual inspection was one month overdue.
Date: 202007
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: A319
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant In Charge
Reporter qualification: Flight Attendant Current
Human factors: Physiological - Other
Anomaly: Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Boarding was complete and forward entry door had been closed. We were ready for pushback and the safety demo was playing. Flight Attendant 2 and myself (Flight Attendant 4) noticed extremely strong fume smell entering the AFT galley and cabin area. The fume event was burning our eyes and was even so strong we could taste it. On my account the taste was very metallic. We immediately called to inform the Captain of what was going on.




Synopsis: A319 Flight Attendant reported notifying the Captain of an 'extremely strong fume smell in the cabin' while preparing to pushback.
Date: 201411
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Aircraft: B757-200
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: Pneumatic Valve/Bleed Valve
Component problem: Malfunctioning
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: Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: On initial climbout; observed EICAS messages 'L PACK OFF' & 'L ENG BLEED OFF' with corresponding OFF lights in respective switches. Turned switches OFF per QRH. Shortly thereafter the R PACK & R BLEED began cycling on & off; with the R CTR FUEL TANK PUMP cycling on & off. Notified ATC of our intention to return and declared Emergency due to intention of making an overweight landing. Notified flight attendants; pax; station & dispatch. Landing accomplished normally with 200 fpm descent at touchdown at 216.0 GW. Utilized long rollout; no auto-brakes; minimal braking below 60 kts. Terminated emergency with ATC upon clearing runway for normal taxi to gate. No further issues.


Second narrative: No suggestions other than replace parts on a time schedule vs a fly to fail policy.


Synopsis: On initial climbout; B757 flight crew observed EICAS messages for L PACK OFF & L ENG BLEED OFF. The switches are turned off per the QRH and shortly after the R PACK & R BLEED began cycling on & off and also the R CTR FUEL TANK PUMP. The crew elects to return to the departure airport.
Date: 201401
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-700
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: Pneumatic System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Second reporter function: First Officer
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Diverted; General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: We were at cruise at FL410 when the right bleed tripped off. Using our QRH procedures; we tried a reset. The bleed tripped again after about 10 seconds. As we delved back into the QRH; the left bleed tripped also. We tried a reset which failed. We then declared an emergency and began an emergency descent and turn back. When we then detected a smell of something overheating we decided to land at the nearest suitable airport. On landing; we had emergency vehicles assess the aircraft for signs of smoke or fire. Since there were none; we proceeded to the terminal.


Second narrative: While in cruise flight FL410; the right bleed tripped off. This was after smelling a hot odor. We ran the QRH and reset it; it tripped off again. Approximately 30 seconds later the other bleed tripped off; we tried to reset it without success. At this point we declared an emergency and began an emergency descent initially diverting back to the departure airport. The hot odor became much stronger while in the emergency descent; so we elected to divert offline.


Synopsis: B737-700 flight crew experiences a right bleed trip that cannot be reset at FL410. Thirty seconds later the left bleed trips and an emergency descent is initiated. When the smell of something overheating is detected the crew elects to divert to the nearest suitable airport.
Date: 201204
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Weather elements / visibility: 20
Aircraft: J3 Cub
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Ferry / Re-Positioning
Flight phase: Taxi
Airspace: Class G ZZZ
Second aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Anomaly: No Specific Anomaly Occurred All Types
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Airspace Structure

Narrative: Pilot of a single-engine turboprop; on an instrument approach to ZZZ; landed shortly after I landed with a J3 Cub under basic VFR rules in Class G Airspace. The pilot of the turboprop stated that the J3 Cub was turning onto the taxiway from Runway 27 when be came out of the clouds on the GPS approach to Runway 27. The pilot of the turboprop insisted that I had no right to be on the airport or in the vicinity of the airport with a VFR-only aircraft when the ceilings are reported to be below 1;000 FT. I disagreed with him and an argument ensued about whether or not the airspace from the surface to 700 FT AGL at ZZZ is controlled or uncontrolled airspace. No resolution of the matter occurred and the turbine pilot copied the N number of the J3 Cub presumably to report the issue to the FAA. I was fully in compliance with 14CFR 91.126; 91.127; 91.155 and also verified on the VFR sectional chart that the Class E airspace at ZZZ does not extend to the surface; but starts at 700 FT above the ground and the visibility was greater than 3 statute miles. There was sufficient separation between the IFR and VFR traffic and no incursion or near-miss occurred. Class E airspace is misinterpreted by many pilots especially around the airport environment. Due to advanced GPS navigation equipment; lower Minimum Descent Altitudes are being established at many non-towered airports bringing some IFR aircraft into Class G Airspace. Better education and training for IFR pilots of technically advanced aircraft specific to transitioning from controlled airspace to uncontrolled airspace will help pilots better understand the possible scenarios and conflicts with VFR traffic that may be present when IFR aircraft fly into non-towered airports.




Synopsis: J-3 pilot reported being accused of flying a VFR-only aircraft in IMC by a single-engine turboprop pilot who had just landed from an instrument approach. J-3 pilot pointed out that he was legal since the airport was Class G Airspace up to 700 FT AGL.
Date: 201908
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: DTW.Airport, MI
Flight conditions: IMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Regional Jet 700 ER/LR (CRJ700)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class A ZOB
ATC / advisory: Center ZOB
Aircraft component: Flight Dynamics Navigation and Safety
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation - Altitude Crossing Restriction Not Met; Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: We were descending via the STAR and there were scattered thunderstorms along the [route] so we turned on the radar while descending and both MFD's (Multi functional Flight Display) went blank. We reset the MFD's via the company procedure and they didn't reset but [on] the second attempt; the MFD's reset and the radar was up and running. ATC asked us if we were descending via the STAR and we said yes. By the time we got our MFD's back up and running; the fix we were going through was between 21;000 ft. and 17;000 ft. and we were actually going through around 15;300 ft. which is low for that fix. The rest of the STAR; approach and landing were normal.We were distracted resetting the MFD's and getting the radar up for the thunderstorms in the area. It was RNAV fixes on the STAR and the priority was getting the MFD's back and by the time we got them back up; we were low on the one fix.




Synopsis: CRJ-700 Captain reported overshooting an altitude restriction on arrival after a loss of both MFD's and weather radar.
Date: 202203
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZOA
ATC / advisory: Center ZOA
Second aircraft: Balloon
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Troubleshooting; Time Pressure; Situational Awareness; Other / Unknown; Workload; Distraction; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Conflict Airborne Conflict
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Environment - Non Weather Related; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Flying enroute over Pacific Ocean; we heard other aircraft talking about a balloon sighting on a very frequently travelled aeronautical track from US mainland west coast to Hawaii. My First Officer sighted the balloon when it was over 10 miles away. This was computed using our TAS and a clock. To see this balloon at 10 miles distance; and be able to ascertain that there was some type of equipment apparatus suspended closely underneath; we estimated the size to be somewhere between a corporate jet and a 737 aircraft. We flew directly underneath the balloon; and as we were at FL380 at the time; we estimated the balloon was around 45;000 ft. in altitude. I notified both Dispatch and SFO ARINC of the sighting with exact position; time; and estimated altitude. It is my opinion that were an aircraft to collide with this object; the result would be a fatal hull loss.




Synopsis: Air Carrier Captain reported encountering a large balloon with equipment attached several thousand feet directly above their flight path while crossing the Pacific Ocean enroute to Hawaii.