elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201808
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZME.ARTCC, TN
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class A ZME
ATC / advisory: Center ZME
Second aircraft: B747 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: Departure
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control; General Physical Injury / Incapacitation
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Climbing through FL350 enroute to ATL; we encountered suspected wake turbulence off a B747 10 miles ahead of us. We had momentary loss of control of the aircraft; banking in excess of 45 degrees to the right. Flight attendants were already taking drink orders and in the aisle when the encounter happened.Through the upset recovery process; the flight attendants laid on the floor and one of the flight attendants injured her knee in doing so. No diversion was needed and we continued onto ATL.We never saw that aircraft on TCAS until after the fact. And at 10 miles; we would have never thought of wake turbulence. But that being said; we might have the flight attendants stay seated until TOC (top of climb) when feasible.


Second narrative: Aircraft Y was in level flight en route to ATL at FL350. Aircraft X was climbing to FL390. Aircraft X asked what the a/c ten miles ahead was because they encountered moderate turbulence from it's wake. I advised it was a B747 Heavy. I asked if there were any injuries or damage to the a/c. He got back to me and initially said everyone was functional and the aircraft was okay; but he would keep me advised. Before switching the aircraft to sector 61; I asked again and he stated that it was almost a loss of control. I coordinated with 61 and told Aircraft X to change frequencies and advise if they needed any further assistance.In this situation; I think better awareness of the extent of wake turbulence behind a heavy aircraft for another aircraft climbing vs level flight.


Synopsis: B737 Captain and ZME Controller reported a wake turbulence encounter ten miles in trail of a B747 at FL350.
Date: 202105
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Robinson R44
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Second aircraft: Robinson R44
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Other / Unknown; Time Pressure
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was operating Aircraft X out of ZZZ doing tour flights. I was flying southwest down ZZZ when I heard another helicopter radio that he was southwest; inbound for landing; and Tower told him to report 3 miles to the south and advised that I; the other helicopter; was flying down ZZZ. I started looking visually out the window outside the helicopter looking for the other traffic. I couldn't find them so I started looking on the ADS-B for their location and they were also not reporting with ADS-B Out. I looked out again trying to find the aircraft; and at the last second spotted him right in front of me banking hard right so we wouldn't collide midair. Upon landing I went and talked to the pilot to make sure he was okay and when I told him I was trying to find him on the GPS he told me that since he was from Canada; his helicopter was not equipped with ADS-B. His tail number started with C" not 'N' so I'm assuming it was not an American-registered helicopter. After telling me his aircraft was not equipped with ADS-B Out; he laughed about it; telling me to stay quiet about it as he walked off."




Synopsis: Robinson R-44 pilot reported an NMAC event with a non-ADS-B-equipped helicopter.
Date: 201910
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: A321
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Air Conditioning and Pressurization Pack
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant In Charge; Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Human factors: Physiological - Other
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Crew; Person Passenger
When detected: In-flight; Pre-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; General Maintenance Action; General Physical Injury / Incapacitation
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: I commented to FO [First Officer] at boarding about 'wet puppy' odor in jetway. I detected it in cabin so commented same to crew and opened gasper vents for air. I got busy with checks and galley prep and odor seemed to dissipate. During cabin safety checks FA [Flight Attendant] 1; 4 and 2 were in aft when engine powered up to taxi forward and aft galley we all left aft area due to high concentration of exhaust fumes. Passengers also complained and showed symptoms during flight. I shared info with all crew and Captain. During climb I experienced strong oily smell and began to feel symptoms so moved into last row of cabin to finish climb and seek more air. I notified Captain by interphone and followed up with cabin worksheet and delivered to flight deck. I addressed PAX [passenger] symptoms in flight. PAX rows 27 to 34 most affected. Sought care post flight with FA1. Suggestions: non-bleed air source for cabin. Better filtered of air supply. Proper reporting by previous crews and maintenance attention to odor on overnight. More awareness of issue among cabin and maintenance and flight deck crews. Filled out needed forms and sought medical care post flight and attended to PAX symptoms in flight.




Synopsis: A321 Flight Attendant reported fumes from preflight to post flight of varying intensity in passenger cabin. Flight Attendant and passengers experienced health symptoms.
Date: 202108
Local time of day: 0601-1200
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: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Weight And Balance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Hazardous Material Violation
Detector: Person Dispatch
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Equipment Problem Dissipated; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We received an ACARS message stating that unmanifested DG was on board. We calculated that no limitations were exceeded and continued to the destination without further incident. Loading crew/Hazmat Agent error.




Synopsis: Air carrier First Officer reported receiving an ACARS notification of unmanifested Hazmat on board. Flight crew continued to destination without incident.
Date: 201303
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZZ.ARTCC, FO
Flight conditions: IMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B757 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZZ
Aircraft component: Pitot-Static System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Human factors: Troubleshooting; Situational Awareness; Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Equipment Problem Dissipated; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Exited Penetrated Airspace
Contributing factors: Weather; Aircraft
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: We were at cruise altitude of FL380 at approximately Mach .78 in IMC conditions; when the airspeed abruptly began going erratic along with EICAS messages of AIRSPEED UNRELIABLE; MACH/SPEED TRIM; and RUDDER RATIO. We quickly realized that we had entered an area of moderate icing and that it had caused the pitot tubes to become blocked. The Captain requested that I coordinate a descent to FL320 and I was quickly given permission by Center Control to descend to FL320. The Captain turned on the engine and wing anti-ice and hand flew the aircraft down to FL320; while I set a slower airspeed of Mach .75 in the speed window and monitored airspeed indications. As we approached approximately FL350; the airspeed stopped fluctuating; and the EICAS messages disappeared. We continued our descent to FL320 and I reviewed the QRH to ensure that we hadn't missed any pertinent items. However; as we discussed; all indications were appropriate for icing of the pitot tubes; and not further action on our part was necessary once we had departed those conditions.




Synopsis: At FL380 B757 EICAS alerted AIRSPEED UNRELIABLE; MACH/SPEED TRIM; and RUDDER RATIO in an area of moderate icing. The crew; assumed pitot icing; descended to FL350 where the alerts ceased.
Date: 201201
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: TUS.Airport, AZ
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 20
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Medium Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class C TUS
ATC / advisory: TRACON TUS
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Automation Aircraft Terrain Warning; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors; Airport
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: During approach we were cleared direct to CALLS waypoint coming from the northwest and assigned clearance down to 6;000 FT MSL. After leveling off at 6;000 FT MSL we called the field in sight and were cleared for a visual approach to Runway 11L. The First Officer was flying and he elected to continue to use LNAV to CALLS for the visual approach. A few miles before CALLS the First Officer put 5;000 FT MSL in the mode control panel without verbalizing it and began a gradual descent. I could see the peak which looked okay as it was off center and clear of our flight path. I began looking for the antenna (obstacle). I acquired the peak and the antenna which was off center and clear of our flight path as well. I asked the First Officer if he had the obstacle and peak in sight too. He replied he did. I said this might be a good one to just follow the glide slope from 6;000 FT MSL on. He said he didn't want to get too high on this approach since he had been caught high before. We received a 'Caution Obstacle' EGPWS aural alert. We verbalized with each other to verify that we both had the terrain and obstacles in sight and verified our flight path was okay while both staying ready to make an evasive maneuver. We continued for a normal landing. I believe it's best to join the localizer at LIPTE when cleared the visual and follow the altitudes on the ILS 11L. While being in day VMC conditions we also had the sun shining extremely bright straight in our faces which may have contributed to some visual perception changes. It was so bright that it made it tough to transition back and forth from the windows to the panel. An instrument approach might have been a good option. As a side note; an added backup to visual approach safety for arrivals from the northwest to Runway 11L from an ATC standpoint might be to have Approach Control issue something like 'Cleared direct WASON; cross WASON at or above 5;500 FT then cleared visual approach Runway 11L.' WASON being the first fix inside both the highest terrain and obstacle on the ILS 11L.




Synopsis: Air Carrier Captain experiences an EGPWS 'Caution Obstacle' alert during day visual approach to Runway 11L at TUS. The antenna that produced the alert was in sight and the approach is continued to landing.
Date: 201701
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: A320
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Equipment / Tooling
Primary problem: Equipment / Tooling

Narrative: After the push back we noticed that [the ramp crew] used a baggage cart tug to push the aircraft instead of a normal aircraft tug. The tug they used isn't designed or approved for pushing an aircraft that weight around 160;000 pounds. There are serious safety concerns and potential damage to the aircraft with their action. They never communicated their intention and the reason why they used the baggage cart tug instead of normal aircraft tug.Our stations staffs are poorly trained. Company has done a poor job maintaining quality control of the contract staffs. These problems can be solved by adequately training contract staffs.




Synopsis: A320 Captain reported that the ground crew used a baggage cart to push out the aircraft instead of a proper tug. He expressed concern about using this equipment and the lack of training for ground crews throughout the system.
Date: 202102
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Weather elements / visibility: Turbulence
Aircraft: B787 Dreamliner Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation - Speed All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Weather
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: During cruse at FL400 mountain wave was encountered.  The airspeed exceeded Vmo/Mmo with accompany EICAS alert; Master Caution Alert and audible alert.  I was the pilot flying and the FO was Pilot monitoring.  The FO extended the speed breaks to full extend and reduced the throttles immediately to idle.  The aircraft descended 500 feet.  The airspeed reduced below Vmo/Mmo; the warnings stopped.  The FO retracted the speed breaks and the autothrottles increased to maintain VNAV programed speed.  This all occurred within 10-20 seconds.  I was attempting to determine what was happening as the FO accomplished the above items.  ATC was notified of the mountain wave and altitude excursion.We briefed the mountain waive and actions which were taken.  I reviewed the Flight Manual regarding high altitude overspeed situations.  It was determined that the actions taken deviated from FM directed guidance.  We reviewed CRM items on what went right; what went wrong and what we would do in the future.  It was a great discussion.It became apparent to me that the 4 hour departure delay and all the associated tasks had taken a toll on my ability to process information in a timely manner.  I was slow to react to the overspeed.  As a result; the FO used CRM skill of leadership to deploy the speed break and reduce the throttles.  We had a conversation about the FO acting too quickly and me not acting quickly enough.  Maintenance Control was contact to determine what items needed to be included in the report regarding the overspeed.  An electronic logbook write up was submitted.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported that an airspeed exceedance and altitude excursion occurred when the aircraft encountered a mountain wave.
Date: 202109
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Landing; Taxi
Airspace: Class G ZZZ
ATC / advisory: UNICOM ZZZ
Second aircraft: Cardinal 177/177RG
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Instructor
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Time Pressure; Training / Qualification; Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We were doing traffic pattern operations and Aircraft Y joined the pattern. Due to the runway being short we were doing land and taxi backs. On our second to last landing we were taxing back to the taxi via the runway. During this time Aircraft Y called short final. I took controls from my student and expedited the taxi. We cleared the runway with only about 5 seconds before touchdown. Aircraft Y cleared the runway behind us and departed shortly after us. As we were in downwind Aircraft Y said that he was number two following the Aircraft X. As we landed we heard him calls for a final again. When we turned around to back taxi Aircraft Y was already in his round out to flare. I directed the student to get to the right side of the runway. This gave us the most room from Aircraft Y since he was not going to go around and we did not have a safe place to clear the runway. As he can just stop he turned off the runway and got in front of us to taxi back to the hanger.During this incursion I believe the main cause was decision making process. Even though the runway is 200 ft wide there should not be two airplanes on the runway. I believe Aircraft Y thought that with that being 200 ft wide that he'll be okay landing at the same time we were taxiing back. He also did not use his radio to tell us what his plans were.




Synopsis: A Flight Instructor conducting training at a non-towered airport reported they back taxied on the runway after landing two times causing a near collision with a trailing aircraft which was landing and had reported on final approach behind them.
Date: 201710
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: BJC.Airport, CO
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: PC-12
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Test Flight / Demonstration
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class D BJC
ATC / advisory: Tower BJC
Second aircraft: M-20 Series Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Automation Aircraft TA
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: IFR departure clearance off BJC 12L [and I] was flying heading 150 and climbing to 8000. After liftoff Tower advised traffic in a left downwind for 12R (Mooney). There was conversation with an additional Mooney inbound to the airport. We could not make a right turn to 150 because of the traffic on downwind initially. When we were clear of conflict with that aircraft (just past abeam their position) we began our turn and got a TA. I looked down to see if the conflict was with the downwind traffic. As soon as I looked back up the other Mooney was crossing our flight path. There was minimal separation. I increased the rate of turn and increased the rate of climb to de-conflict our aircraft. This occurred less than 1 nm from the departure end of runway 12L. I did not hear us called out as traffic for the other aircraft. I do not know if the inbound aircraft was going to the wrong runway or if there was a loss of positional awareness in the Tower when our takeoff clearance was issued. If we had delayed our takeoff by 30-60 seconds neither of the other aircraft would have been an issue for our takeoff instructions.




Synopsis: PC-12 pilot reported an airborne conflict with a light aircraft shortly after takeoff from BJC.