elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201205
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Regional Jet 200 ER/LR (CRJ200)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Descent
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Inflight Shutdown; General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: On initial descent; when the First Officer pulled the thrust levers back; the right engine did not slow normally. All the engine perimeters were normal. We adjusted the thrust lever several times. At first the engine would slow to about 88% N1; but after a few more attempts it became totally unresponsive. The engine was stable at 92% N1. As we descended the engine slowly accelerated to 94%.We reviewed the Jammed Thrust Lever Checklist in the QRH. We decided since the engine was stable and still within parameters; we would wait to shut the engine down until we had everything else done. I decided that we needed to divert to longer runway (our destination runway is just 6;000 FT) due to the increased landing distance and the abnormality of a single engine approach. We decided that ZZZ seemed to be the best option with a 10;000 FT runway; major airport emergency services; controlled airspace and good passenger handling capabilities.I contacted the Dispatcher who concurred that ZZZ appeared to be the best option. We contacted ATC about the diversion; declared an emergency and then began preparing for the approach. Once we were caught up we executed the QRH procedure and shut the engine down. We requested a long final to make sure we did not feel rushed. The First Officer executed a beautiful single engine approach and landing with a normal rate of touchdown. We exited well before the end of the runway. The fire trucks followed us back to the gate.


Second narrative: The Captain then started looking in the QRH for a procedure to try and run. I told the Captain that just two months ago I had my AQP check ride and received the exact same problem with the engine thrust non-responsive. I told him that we ended up running the 'Thrust Lever Jammed' checklist which leads you to shut down an engine.


Synopsis: A CRJ-200 flight crew; faced with an unresponsive right engine thrust lever; shut the engine down; declared an emergency; and diverted to an airport with longer runways and better facilities for CFR; maintenance; and passenger handling.
Date: 201810
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Security; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: Pre-flight
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Human Factors; Manuals
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Two armed escorts with a prisoner. FOM (operations manual) updated [recently] states no prisoner will be accepted on a flight over 4 hours. Our flying time was [considerably longer]. The Captain refused to; or could not; find the information. I had it on my electronic device. He refused to look at my device. He allowed the prisoner on. He also said there should be no reason for the prisoner to be handcuffed the whole flight. Another FAR broken.




Synopsis: Flight Attendant reported the Captain allowed a prisoner on the aircraft under conditions in violation of FARs and Company policy.
Date: 201712
Location: LVJ.Airport, TX
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: M-20 E Super 21
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class E I90
ATC / advisory: TRACON I90
Second aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Airspace Violation All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action

Narrative: I was climbing out of LVJ and turned westbound to avoid Houston Class B airspace. My intent was to climb to 1;500 ft and proceed westbound around Class B airspace and climb once in radar contact and/or cleared into Class B. As I was passing through 1;000 ft; my passenger called out traffic going right above us. As it was going from my 4 o'clock to 10 o'clock high position I saw it was a B737. He looked close! As he began the turn to the right and still descending on what looked like a visual approach to Runway 4 at HOU; it appeared that he was descending below Class B airspace and again heading towards us. At this point; I decided to descend and maneuver out of his way. Meanwhile; I was in contact with HOU Approach and they gave me a squawk code and asked me to IDENT. No mention of any radar contact. After the 737 passed above the first time; I queried ATC if they had us on radar; and told them I had the 737 in sight. At this point; the Controller gave me a new frequency. I switched frequencies. No answer there; so I returned to [previous frequency]. It was at this point that I maneuvered to get out 737's way. After the completion of the maneuver I was given another squawk code and a radar contact. I might have gotten close to the tip of Class B airspace; but I am certain I did not penetrate the boundary. After getting the 'radar contact' call; the rest of my flight was uneventful. In the vicinity of HOU; there are several busy GA airports. Most GA pilots will stay below Class B airspace and possibly not be in communication with ATC. It is critical that airline pilots remain aware of the floor of Class B and stick to it as that is one of the big protective layers for all parties. In this case; I would caution 737 pilots against descending below Class B airspace; and specifically remain at 2;000 ft until inside of 3NM from ESAAY on approach to HOU Runway 4.




Synopsis: GA pilot reported an airborne conflict with a 737 outside of Class B airspace near HOU.
Date: 201906
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Other / Unknown
Human factors: Troubleshooting; Training / Qualification; Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Weight And Balance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Hazardous Material Violation
Detector: Person Ground Personnel
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Gate; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Dangerous goods were labeled as an AOM; which was planned for pit (6). Upon loading the last and the heaviest AOM; I realized it was a DG. I then added a pit during the flight and placed both DG's in pit (5) and proceeded to bring more bags from the cart located in the front (where we were loading) to the back to make sure it was SOP for the DG with 15 bags around them. When trying to close out Aircraft X; I was unable to. I radioed for a trainer to help with closing out the flight; while the flight was still on the gate. I received no response from the trainer. When the flight was being pushed out; I called again; explaining the flight was leaving the gate and there was an urgency for the help. I then called for the Zone 4 Supervisor and received no response as well. It was not until the flight was in line to take off that a trainer showed up at the gate. He explained that the DG was not secure after checking the computer. The trainer never gave me a close out screen for the DG. Upon the flight returning; the supervisor that was working Zone 3 and myself discovered that neither of the DG's were surrounded by the 15 bags. One of the DG's was located in pit 6 with no bags around it. The other DG was located in pit 5 and had 13 bags; however the DG was located on top of the bags. This DG also had one of the required 15 bags located in pit 4; and the trainer counted the DG as the 15th bag making it actually only 14 bags.




Synopsis: Airline Ground Personnel reported Dangerous Goods cargo incorrectly loaded for air transport. Gate return to correct prior takeoff.
Date: 201907
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Large Transport; Low Wing; 3 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Cruise
Aircraft component: Cargo Restraint/Tie Down
Component problem: Failed; Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Weight And Balance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: While at cruise at FL260 we heard a very loud noise something like a loud bang [or] explosion. At first; we believed it was a compressor stall but while monitoring the engines [a] few minutes later the crew heard another loud noise with no change whatsoever in engine readings; hydraulic readings; electrical readings; smoke/fire detection indications etc. After cleared to descend to FL240 another couple of loud noises were heard by the crew and mechanic on board. When cleared to descend to 12000 ft we heard 3 or 4 loud noises. The noises were not consecutive at all; they were rather sporadic. From 12000 ft to landing no other loud noises were heard. After landing I informed Dispatch and Maintenance Control of the loud noises and we all proceeded to thoroughly inspect the airplane in its entirety. While conducting [the] inspection the Lead Load master informed me that they had encountered several floor locking devices sheared and broken apart. It wasn't until we saw the locks broken that we were able to figure out and assess the origin of [the] noises. Improper loading and securing of ULDs at departing airport.




Synopsis: Captain of a cargo aircraft reported noticing loud noises in cruise flight that were later determined to be related to broken floor locking devices.
Date: 201701
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: CLT.Airport, NC
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: A319
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower CLT
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Workload
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert
Contributing factors: Staffing; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Cleared for takeoff. Multiple aircraft on frequency; including instructions for taxi to ramp instructions. ATC apparently tried to tell our flight to abort takeoff clearance. Due to heavy congestion and multiple aircraft speaking simultaneously; neither I nor Captain heard call from tower. After takeoff tower informed us to call ATC. Tower was unable to control volume of traffic nor operation single frequency. Later in the evening we came back and during our next position and hold Tower again made numerous errors clearing us to takeoff the position and hold. Tower is not effectively managing operations and should be admonished accordingly. Frequency congestion. Supervisor oversight for Tower operations.




Synopsis: A321 First Officer reported they did not hear the instruction to cancel their takeoff due to frequency congestion.
Date: 202011
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Decathlon 8KCAB
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Climb
Aircraft component: Engine
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Commercial
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: On climb out approximately 7-8 miles southwest of the field; I noticed propeller RPM was less than commanded/nominal for the phase of flight. RPM should have been 2700 RPM and was indicating less than 2550 initially. Requested direct routing back to ZZZ. As a descending turn was started further non-commanded reduction in propeller rpm was observed. Attempting to maintain level flight and airspeed I observed audible and indicated abnormal fluctuations in propeller RPM. With minor changes in manifold pressure came RPM fluctuations past redline and as low as 2100 RPM without a change in commanded propeller RPM. At this time ATC asked souls and fuel on board and I was able to land without incident. ATC was very accommodating.




Synopsis: Super Decathlon pilot reported returning to departure airport after experiencing engine malfunction.
Date: 201907
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: A321
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground ZZZ
Aircraft component: Fuel System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Distraction; Workload; Time Pressure
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Gate; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: We had completed push back and the engine starts. After start flow had been completed. We receive a call from the aft flight attendants. They reported a strong smell of fuel and both crew experienced throat and eye irritation. Passengers were seen covering their faces. While I was talking to the crew; Ground Control calls us and reports a large amount of liquid on ground which appeared to be coming from our airplane. We immediately call Operations and ask for a gate to return. We started the APU (bleed was left off) and shut down the engines. Operations calls the fire and rescue as a precaution and we got towed into the gate. Passengers were deplaned normally. This was a repeat write up for this aircraft. Maintenance needs to evaluate cause of repeated fume events on this aircraft.




Synopsis: A321 Captain reported a strong smell of fuel in the aft cabin shortly after engine start; resulting in the engines being shut down; and the aircraft being towed back to the gate.
Date: 201509
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operating under: Part 91
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Landing
ATC / advisory: CTAF ZZZ
Second aircraft: PA-34-200T Turbo Seneca II
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Instructor; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Airport; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: While touching down on runway (Cessna 172); an aircraft (Seneca II) on final approach for (the reciprocal runway) touched down as well. I realized the Seneca II was in transit in the oncoming direction only after touching down on the runway. The winds were calm; but the flow of traffic was for Runway XY; as several aircraft were using Runway XY and broadcasting such intentions. The pilot of the Seneca admittedly failed to listen to the AWOS where a NOTAM was posted pertaining to the frequency change from 122.8 to 122.725. The pilot of the Seneca was transmitting on 122.8 meaning no traffic in the area could receive the transmission. Both of our aircraft braked and deviated to the right of the runway center-line. No person were injured. The only property damage springing from the incursion was to the Cessna 172 I was instructing in due to heavy braking. The tire on the right main of the 172 will have to be replaced because of baldness. Such an incident was hazardous to heavy training operations at/in the vicinity. It is my prediction that this event could have ended with a higher consequence if both of our quick and concise inputs were neglected.




Synopsis: C172 instructor reports landing and discovering a Seneca II landing in the opposite direction. Both pilots brake hard and keep to the right and a collision is avoided. The Seneca pilot had not listened to the AWOS and was not aware of a CTAF frequency change.
Date: 201910
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: SLC.Tower, UT
Aircraft: Small Aircraft
Operator: Air Carrier
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class B SLC
ATC / advisory: Tower SLC
Second aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Workload; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation - Speed All Types; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was working the Local Control and Clearance Delivery positions combined. Traffic was fairly complex and busy. I was sequencing VFR arrivals and departures with IFR arrivals and departures as well as working VFR overflights and ground traffic and runway crossings to a compromised runway (K1 at Runway 35 is closed; and has been closed for an unreasonable period of time). The main exit (K4) for landing small aircraft to Runway 35 in the North configuration is also the main departure point.When the incident happened; I was sequencing two VFR aircraft in front of Aircraft X on final; I was also sequencing southbound VFR traffic over the I-15 freeway. In order to land the two inbound VFR aircraft I requested Aircraft X reduce speed; I also requested the following Aircraft Y reduce speed and/or accept a change to Runway 34R to prevent a separation loss or possible go around. When I felt that the situation would not work I requested Aircraft Y make an S turn to create space. While exiting; my landing traffic Aircraft Y over-extended the S turn and came in close proximity (approximately 1.4 miles) to the southbound VFR Aircraft Z. I was visually observing the aircraft; however I may not have issued the traffic call before Class B airspace separation was lost.I could have not attempted to land the two VFR aircraft until later. I could have told Aircraft Y to make a 'small S Turn.' I could have sent either Aircraft X or Aircraft Y around when I felt it wasn't going to work; rather than request the S turn. I recommend flow and speed control training to S56. When sequencing large jets with small general aviation aircraft; they need to be more aware of performance differences.




Synopsis: SLC Tower Controller reported an unsafe operation between three aircraft that resulted in a loss of separation.
Date: 201309
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: N57.Airport, PA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 50
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: J3 Cub
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class E N57
ATC / advisory: UNICOM N57
Second aircraft: PA-25 Pawnee
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Runways 6-24. Field has UNICOM only. My aircraft is not radio equipped. Winds had favored Runway 6 all day and traffic had been using this direction. Glider club; however; had set up to use 24; which is more convenient for them; although there was a tailwind of approx 5-6 KTS. As I taxied to Runway 6; I noticed that the glider and tug were off to the side and not yet ready to tow. (Runway 6 is the far end of the airport.) Following run-up; I cleared as usual and noted that the tug and glider at the far end still appeared to be stationary on the grass beside the paved runway. As I became airborne; however; I found that they were also taking off. At this point; an abort was not feasible. I kept my aircraft low and passed under them. I am not sure they ever saw me.




Synopsis: J3 Cub pilot reports taking off and discovering that a tow plane and glider are taking off opposite direction. The reporter who has no radio passes under the aircraft. The takeoff had been initiated believing that the glider and tow was not ready to go.