elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 202012
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Turbulence
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Learjet 60
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Other LR60; ERJ170/190
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence; Inflight Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control
Detector: Person Flight Crew
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Weather
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: Flying ZZZ-ZZZ1 the flight experienced a severe updraft in clear air at FL270; which caused the airplane to climb 1;600 ft. despite any attempt to arrest the ascent for roughly 20 seconds. I instructed the Pilot Monitoring to request priority handling once it was evident that the altitude was uncontrollable. ATC responded that we were cleared down to FL250 when able. We regained control of our altitude and ensured that nobody was injured during the event. We determined that the event did not exceed any of the airplane limitations and continued on to ZZZ1.




Synopsis: LR60 Captain reported a severe updraft caused the aircraft to climb 1;600 ft before crew could regain control.
Date: 201708
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: A330
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ramp ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Time Pressure
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: While taxiing in the ramp area approaching [the gate] I noticed the visual docking system was turned off. There were 2 wing walkers and a marshaller though so I continued in to park. About 40 feet short I felt there was inadequate clearance with the jet way. I stopped the aircraft; set the parking brake; and directed the passengers to remain seated. The marshaller then gave me the stop signal and motioned that the jet way was to be moved. After the jet bridge was properly positioned there was a short delay before the ground crew called on interphone. Apparently; someone had prematurely placed a chock on the nose wheel and it was now stuck there. I was told to release the parking brake to allow the aircraft to roll back; freeing the stuck chock. When I released the brake nothing moved. To assist I momentarily placed the thrust levers to idle reverse. Again nothing moved. I repositioned the thrust levers to forward idle and reset the parking brake.Coordination with the ground crew resulted in the engines being shut down and a tug moving the aircraft back so the chock could be removed; then forward to the parking spot. Subsequent parking and securing procedures were conducted uneventfully. Because [the flight] was operating late I became overly focused on getting to the gate as soon as possible. In this effort I momentarily activated the thrust reversers; which constituted an unauthorized power back operation. I failed to maintain a primary emphasis on safety- I realize there was a very real chance of foreign object damage or; most critically; personal injury.  I was inattentive to the safety concerns and Operating Manual restrictions associated with a power back operation. I placed too much focus on arriving as close to schedule as possible.




Synopsis: A330 Captain reported after a stop short of the gate a chock was stuck. Captain reported using idle reverse to attempt to free chock; in violation of policy.
Date: 202006
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: 20
Aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We were training and went to ZZZ to use their ILS (in VFR conditions- no flight plan). After the approach; we did a few patterns and departed for ZZZ1 (about 18 miles). ZZZ asked if we wanted flight following and we agreed and entered a code. We departed north east to ZZZ1 and told them we would be operating west of ZZZ1 in our approved practice area. There was no further communication with ZZZ and due to the lack of activity with COVID there was absolutely no communication on the frequency. We forgot about them entirely and headed back into ZZZ1; forgetting to 'cancel' flight following. (There was no call from ZZZ to terminate either). On the ground Tower asked us to call and informed us of a 'possible pilot violation' and upon talking with ZZZ we were told we forgot to cancel radar services. There was; in fact; no traffic at ZZZ or at ZZZ1 at the time and no separation was lost or diverted.I think the primary cause was the complete *lack* of traffic. We never heard a call on frequency for a half an hour and while conducting our maneuvers (a busy time) we forgot entirely that we were being monitored by radar. Our last maneuver was an 'emergency descent' and we were pretty quickly in ZZZ1's airspace and never 'canceled' flight following with ZZZ.




Synopsis: Pilot reported they were advised by ATC they forgot to cancel VFR flight following.
Date: 201310
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: LAX.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Workload; Troubleshooting; Time Pressure; Confusion
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Procedure
Primary problem: Company Policy

Narrative: On the ground at gate for short turn through flight. First Officer outside doing the walk-around; I went to flight planning to complete flight planning duties. Airplane was only planned to be on the ground for a short 20 minute turn as we were running behind schedule due to previous maintenance issue. When both pilots returned to the cockpit; we found passengers boarding. We entered the cockpit and started to finish our cockpit setup for the next leg. We found much of our setup reconfigured. We found 2 IRU's tuned off and one in align; the battery switch and STBY power switch OFF. We found the emergency exit lights disarmed and the APU shutdown. There should have been no mistake this airplane was getting readied to go right back out; our bags; headsets; papers were all in place. At first; I couldn't figure out what happened and asked to speak to the Ground Security Coordinator thinking someone was in the cockpit who wasn't authorized access. It took a few minutes to determine what had actually taken place. I learned from the station that the APU gate team is instructed to board and move cockpit switches. This has the potential to be a serious safety of flight issue. We; the pilots had nearly completed our cockpit setup for this flight when we left the aircraft. Now; without our knowledge; someone boards the aircraft and completely reconfigures our work. We boarded thinking most of our work complete; and it wasn't till we noticed Comm #1 not working that we started looking around and saw the battery and STBY power switches off. Then we saw the emergency exit lights disarmed with passengers boarding.




Synopsis: The flight crew left the aircraft to perform post flight duties during a very short ground turn around time and after returning to the flight station found the aircraft in a shutdown condition.
Date: 201910
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: PAO.Tower, CA
Aircraft: No Aircraft
ATC / advisory: Tower PAO
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Local
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Troubleshooting
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings
Primary problem: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings

Narrative: While working various positions in the Tower cab; it became apparent there was an issue with the shout line to NCT. Every position reported calls sounded near muted level quiet with static on the line. This made routine coordination extremely difficult as PAO had to ask for the NCT controller to repeat themselves several times before the message was understood. NCT did not appear to have any difficulty hearing PAO controllers. PAO uses a very old communications panel that has been seeing an increasing number of issues recently. This is the second time in a one week period that there has been difficulty communicating with NCT via a shout line; although the problems were not identical to each other. A new communication panel should be more reliable and result in fewer interruptions. Permission granted to share a de-identified copy of this report.




Synopsis: PAO Tower Controller reported that an unreliable; aged; failure prone communications panel is unsafe for use.
Date: 202009
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Reporter qualification: Flight Attendant Current
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Passenger Misconduct
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Human Factors; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Passenger [in] seat XX1 was removed. Asked passenger to lift mask above nose during boarding process. While doing demo noticed mask still below nose. After demo once again asked to put mask above bridge of nose. Passenger nodded yes. He lifted mask above nose; as I walked away I turned back and he took mask off nose. I returned and asked him again to wear mask above nose. At this point I informed crew of problem with passenger. I walked back to passenger and told him this will be your final notice about our policy wearing masks. I went back up front told crew what happened and we decided to have him removed. FA A called Captain who returned plane back to gate. As passenger was being deplaned he said; 'My mask won't stay up because it is too loose.' I replied; 'You could have tightened it or ask for one from us.'




Synopsis: Flight Attendant reported a passenger was removed from the flight for non-compliance with face mask policy.
Date: 201306
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-700
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Oxygen System/Crew
Component problem: Design; Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors; Manuals; Chart Or Publication; Aircraft
Primary problem: Chart Or Publication

Narrative: While performing our pre-flight duties in the morning we tested all the systems as required by the AOM.   Specifically when testing the Crew Oxygen System; the test was valid and the crew oxygen was deemed to be working fine and the test returned the expected results within parameters.  The Oxygen gauge showed a PSI level of around 1;800 PSI.  We departed for ZZZ1 and arrived uneventfully ahead of our scheduled arrival time.  Our trip was over at that point.  Later in the evening of the same day; I received a phone call from the Captain that took our airplane for the beginning of his trip.  He called to advise that when they in turn did the Oxygen Test; their test showed a large drop in PSI and an invalid test.  When Maintenance looked at the problem; they found that when the same airplane underwent maintenance the evening before in ZZZ; the Crew oxygen bottle was swapped out and Maintenance in ZZZ failed to open the Crew oxygen valve all the way.  Again; our [Crew oxygen preflight] test in the morning showed a perfectly valid test and we continued as planned.  Unfortunately; there may be no remedy on the B737 of avoiding a recurrence of this event as the pilots have no way of checking whether the oxygen valve is fully 'open' or not.  The only way would be to notice a lack of PSI on the oxygen gauge and in our situation it showed full.  The overhead speaker test worked fine as well.

Callback: Reporter stated he would never have known there was a problem if the later outbound flight Captain had not informed him of the low Crew Oxygen System pressure. He has not seen any specific length of time for a pilot to hold the 'Press to Test' button on their Preflight Checklist. Usually they do a quick 'Press to Test'; checking the O2 Pressure Gage for any noticeable drop in pressure while also performing the oxygen mask internal speaker test. He believes their Crew O2 bottles are composite type bottles. He plans on holding the 'Press to Test' function on the crew mask box a lot longer than he has in the past.



Synopsis: A Captain who had flown a B737-700 aircraft earlier in the day; was informed by an outbound Captain beginning their trip; that the Crew Oxygen (O2) on the same aircraft had a large drop in oxygen pressure when performing the Crew O2 Preflight Test. Maintenance found the Crew oxygen bottle valve handle was not opened all the way.
Date: 202007
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: Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Reporter qualification: Flight Attendant Current
Human factors: Distraction; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors; Company Policy; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I had begun to do the brief and was interrupted by customer [who was] uncomfortable about the seating arrangement and COVID-19.Can't remember if I finished or not but just thought I'd self report in case I didn't.




Synopsis: Flight Attendant was interrupted during the briefing by a passenger who was concerned about the seating arrangement due to COVID-19 reasons. Flight Attendant was not sure if the briefing was completed.
Date: 201304
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Baron 58/58TC
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Second aircraft: DA20 Undifferentiated
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Local
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: A Baron [was] inbound for Runway 12R on a right downwind. A Diamond departed the crossing Runway 23 for a right turn out and a northbound flight along the river. When I anticipated the Baron would be past the departure end of Runway 23; I cleared the Diamond for takeoff. The Diamond turned right early instead of continuing runway heading for a half mile this put him directly in the Baron's flight path instead of behind him. I did not notice the Diamond's early turn because I was dealing with opposite direction traffic over the river both north and southbound there were 3 northbound and 2 southbound on visual sight seeing tours going opposite direction. I was pointing out traffic to the sight seeing tours that were passing on the river; looked to see that the separation existed with the Diamond and cleared him for take off looked back to the arch to point out traffic for the sight seeing tours and the Baron called NMAC as the Diamond turned early in his face. Instead of anticipating the Diamond would continue 1/2 mile before turning as is standard; I should have clarified that he needed to continue straight out for 1/2 mile before starting his westerly turn.




Synopsis: Tower Controller described a NMAC between a departing aircraft and another near by aircraft. The reporter noted that more specific instructions should have been issued to the departure.
Date: 202006
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: MD-11
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Descent
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Time Pressure
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: On descent into ZZZ; we smelled a strong acrid smell like something was burning.  We notified ATC and requested direct the field.  We were given direct to the IAF.  I went as fast as I could before the smell got worse or we started to get smoke in the cockpit.  We continued the approach and landed uneventfully. [Unknown]System malfunction.




Synopsis: MD-11 Captain reported a strong acrid smell" during descent for landing."
Date: 201402
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Regional Jet 700 ER/LR (CRJ700)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: ACARS
Component problem: Design; Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: During the initial climb of the flight we experience several events of strong radio interference due to ACARS transmissions/crosstalk. These events caused both discomfort due to the very loud volume of the interfering transmissions and difficulty in understanding ATC communication.  In the last month many crews have been experiencing frequent events of radio interference due to ACARS transmissions/crosstalk. These interference events should be a safety concern. They caused; on more than one occasion; missed/misunderstand critical ATC communications and instructions during the departure phase of the flight. Something changed since December 2013. The cause can be changes in the ACARS communication software; protocols; procedures; equipment.  Usually after Weight Off Wheel both the FMS and the EICAS show an 'ACARS NO COMM' message; shortly after that a very loud burst of digital communication is heard in the pilot headsets. In the worst cases the interfering signal is repeated multiple times during the first few minutes after takeoff. There should be an investigation of these events. Pilots should be provided temporary procedures (like disabling the ACARS system) to be used during the departure phase of the flight.

Callback: The reporter states that he has an engineering background and is familiar with the sound that an ACARS transmission makes and that this interference is caused by the ACARS; but he does not know why. The company either does not know how to correct the problem or does not want to deal with the cost or down time to make the necessary repairs. A logbook write up will result in the ACARS being MELed; greatly increasing the communication workload for the flight crew. He believes that a similar issue was common years ago when the aircraft were first delivered from the manufacturer and was subsequently corrected.



Synopsis: CRJ-700 First Officer reports strong interference from ACARS transmissions occurring after takeoff on most of his company's CRJ aircraft and making ATC communication difficult. The reporter believes that changes in the ACARS communication software; protocols; procedures or equipment are the cause of the problem. The company does not currently have a solution to the problem.