elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 202105
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ATL.Tower, GA
Aircraft: Regional Jet 200 ER/LR (CRJ200)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class B ATL
ATC / advisory: Tower ATL
Second aircraft: A321
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Procedure; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: After taking off behind an Airbus 321; we encountered its wake causing a significant rolling action right then left 20-25 degrees. The FO was pilot flying and disconnected the autopilot but the encounter ceased. This occurred after being cleared to takeoff before the aircraft ahead had rotated from the runway. We encountered their wake around 1100-1300 AGL.This is caused by ATL clearing aircraft for takeoff while the aircraft ahead is still on the takeoff roll. Despite having different courses and being legal; we frequently encounter wake of varying intensities and I often feel it's only a matter of time before a dangerous/ fatal wake encounter occurs.Either separate aircraft more or change the departure headings to help reduce wake encounters. This happens frequently though this encounter was more severe than normal. The aircraft was fighting the roll right then left with a lot of aileron and if we had encountered a stronger wake; we may have had difficulty controlling the aircraft.

Callback: Reporter stated he has experienced frequent wake encounters in ATL.



Synopsis: CRJ-200 Captain reported encountering wake turbulence departing ATL in trail of an A321.
Date: 201912
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: SJC.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turboprop Eng
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class B SFO
ATC / advisory: TRACON NCT
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Engineer; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I filed an IFR flight plan from SJC-ZZZ. SJC Tower mentioned prior to takeoff; that there was an extended delay for departure. A VFR departure was discussed with Tower as that would reduce the delay in departure. A new VFR clearance was issued; with a 5;000-foot altitude restriction (standard altitude for VFR departures in SJC). After takeoff we departed Runway 12R with a standard departure. After contacting; NorCal departure on 121.3; we verified our cleared altitude of 5;000 and were radar identified. NorCal then cleared us 'on course and approved climb to our VFR altitude;' which was unusual. I questioned the Controller; 'I wanted to confirm; we are cleared to 17;500 and not to stop at 5;000'? The Controller confirmed; 'yes you are cleared to 17;500.' This was unusual as I have flown out of SJC for 15 + years and usually the Class B airspace is restrictive. I followed the Controller's instructions per the AIM which states; pilots are to comply with ATC instructions. After handoff we once again confirmed climbing to 17;500. Upon climbing thru 8;800 (800 into the Class B airspace) the Controller questioned and asked if I had clearance into the Class B airspace; I answered; yes it was my understanding we were cleared. He gave me a number to call after landing which I complied. The Supervisor said he reviewed the ATC communications and acknowledged that I clearly was cleared to 17;500 and on at least 4 occasions I confirmed this clearance with the various NorCal controllers. He said; unless the Controller states 'cleared into the Class B airspace;' the Controller won't necessarily feel a Class B clearance was issued; but also acknowledged that I clearly questioned the clearance to 17;500 and I complied with the ATC clearance(s) per the AIM. No traffic conflict occurred or any TCAS events. I feel this difference in apparent phraseology; needs to be better stressed in either the AIM or other FAA transmittals.




Synopsis: Small transport Captain reported ATC issued an unrestricted VFR climb which penetrated Class B airspace.
Date: 202101
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Cessna 150
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: CTAF ZZZ
Aircraft component: Engine
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Trainee; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Student
Human factors: Training / Qualification
Second reporter function: Instructor; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Inflight Shutdown; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: I was enroute on the first solo cross country.  After passing a checkride along the route; I received a loss of RPM (about 500 RPM) and a loud clanking/ metal on metal sound. I troubleshooted to see if it could be fixed; but determined it could not. I found a field in front of me and made an off-field landing. I safely landed the aircraft. I did not receive any injuries and the plane doesn't have any visible damage. My instructor and I got in touch with local authorities and the landowner. I wasn't on flight following at the time of his power loss. The next day my instructor came back with a mechanic and they determined that it was an internal failure that couldn't have been predicted or prevented. The engine is currently in the process of receiving a total engine overhaul.


Second narrative: A student pilot was enroute on his first solo cross country. After passing a checkride along his route the student reported a loss of RPM (about 500 RPM) and a loud clanking metal on metal sound. He troubleshooted to see if it could be fixed; but determined it could not. He found a field in front of him and made an off-field landing. The student safely landed the aircraft. He did not receive any injuries and the plane doesn't have any visible damage. We got in touch with local authorities and the landowner. The student wasn't on flight following at the time of his power loss. The next day I came back with a mechanic and we determined that it was an internal failure that couldn't have been predicted or prevented. The engine is currently in the process of receiving a total engine overhaul.


Synopsis: C150 student pilot conducting a first solo flight and instructor on the ground reported the student experienced an engine failure and landed safely in a field.
Date: 201808
Aircraft: A321
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
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: Taxi
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: The A321 has a problem. 80% of all my flights land and fumes enter the cabin on taxi in or at the gate with passengers and crew on board.[Day 1; Flight A; Aircraft X]As we taxied to the gate; the cabin filled with fumes. After the Captain opened the flight deck door; I reported the fumes. [Day 2; Flight B; Aircraft Y]Fumes flooded the cabin right before the agent opened the aircraft door. I had to place a wet towel over my nose and mouth. When Captain opened the aircraft door; I reported the problem. He said; 'ok' and left.[Day 3; Flight C; Aircraft Y]We were delayed on the tarmac due to bad weather. The first time the flight stopped and then started again; fumes flooded the business class cabin. I was standing in the aisle speaking to a passenger. I called the cockpit and told him I was going to report this. He said; 'ok.'[Day 4; Flight D; Aircraft X]I didn't smell the fumes until after we disarmed our doors at the gate.This has been a problem for a long time and many of us have been reporting it. It has to do with the new bleed air engine procedure.




Synopsis: A321 Flight Attendant reported noticing a frequent problem with fumes in the cabin on taxi in.
Date: 201501
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: SBGR.Airport, FO
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Widebody; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb; Descent
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Relief Pilot
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Distraction; Physiological - Other; Workload
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Weight And Balance; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Illness / Injury; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Passenger Misconduct; Inflight Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Attendant; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; General Physical Injury / Incapacitation; General Maintenance Action; General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Combative Brazilian male passenger struck female Flight Attendant several times and left visible bruises on her neck. I was in the position of a Relief Pilot on break and called back into the cockpit. The flight returned to SBGR and while in the descent we were lasered on the right side at FL190. Took appropriate action not to look out of cockpit. Reported incident to control. Performed an overweight landing which was un eventful. The aircraft inspected and unruly passenger and family removed from flight along with bags. Local authorities met flight and the 2 Flight Attendants came off the plane which were involved in the incident. Refueled; refiled and departed.




Synopsis: After departing SBGR; an unruly passenger injured a Flight Attendant so the aircraft returned to the departure airport where it was struck by a laser descending through FL190. The passenger and two flight attendants were removed.
Date: 201208
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: JFK.Airport, NY
Aircraft: A340
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 129
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class B JFK
ATC / advisory: TRACON N90
Second aircraft: A319
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I was working final at N90 JFK area. An A340 on final for Runway 31R on an ILS approach and an A319 was vectored for a visual approach to Runway 31L. The A319 was issued traffic about the A340. The A319 advised the A340 was in sight. I said 'maintain visual separation.' At some point I also cleared the A319 for a Visual Approach to Runway 31L. I am not sure of exact times. Replay on the operations floor has no audio replay. I was advised of a 'wake remnant separation event on final' today. I have never been advised what 'wake remnant' is or how to identify it or how to avoid/separate from it. There is a program called 'falcon' that seems to have a wake turbulence 'cookie' or 'hoop' that may display some sort area to avoid. Why is this not on the ARTS display that we use? How can we be held responsible for something the FAA has not identified to me; the 7110.65 has no mention of; the FAA can't tell me how to avoid or separate from. QA people are identifying controllers for 'events' on this matter.




Synopsis: N90 Controller voiced concern regarding a loss of 'wake remnant' separation determination made by the QA office; the reporter noted current Orders do not cover this anomaly and ATC equipment can not identify same.
Date: 201911
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 140 ER/LR
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: Horizontal Stabilizer Trim
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew FLC Overrode Automation; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; General Maintenance Action; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: A repeat write-up of a backup pitch trim was noted. Maintenance said they fixed the issue and correctly signed off the log book. The system tested correctly on the ground. On departure at about 12;000 ft.; we got a Backup Pitch Trim Warning. We followed the QRH; [requested priority handling]; and landed in ZZZ without further innocent. Maintenance and Operations making quick fixes versus taking a deep dive and finding the solution. Give Maintenance more time to fix issues and encourage them to find the real problem instead of the quick fix to mask the real issue.




Synopsis: EMB-140 Captain reported an air turnback due to backup pitch trim failure.
Date: 202007
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: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Hazardous Material Violation; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Other Post Flight Inspection
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Upon post flight inspection I noticed three boxes of HAZMAT (biological substance; and dry ice) on the belt loader. I asked the ground crew if they were about to load the boxes and they reported to me that they had just unloaded the boxes from the airplane we just flew in. We hadn't been informed that there was any HAZMAT on board; and didn't receive a NOTOC. I notified my supervisor. Hazmat was loaded onto our aircraft without our knowledge. Ensure that the ground crew always notifies the Captain of hazmat aboard.




Synopsis: Airline Captain reported no required Hazmat documents were provided to flight crew at departure resulting in transport of undocumented Hazmat cargo.
Date: 201206
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZZ.Airport, FO
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: A320
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
ATC / advisory: Ramp ZZZZ
Aircraft component: Cowling
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Troubleshooting; Situational Awareness; Distraction
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: General Release Refused / Aircraft Not Accepted
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Company Policy; Manuals; Procedure
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: My First Officer did a walk around on the aircraft and found landing gear door seal missing a two inch chunk and the right engine had a six inch chunk of honeycomb missing just outside the fan blades. The Captain went out to look at the engine saw it was part of a repair to the acoustical material just in front of the fan blades and at the bottom inside of the cowl. The repair was approximately six inches wide and two inches deep. I called Maintenance after approximately 1.5 hours to find out the status of the aircraft and was told the aircraft was fixed. I asked about the engine and was told everything was OK and it was on a twenty cycle deferral. We flew the aircraft and on the next walk around the First Officer noticed the repair patch was disintegrating. I inspected the repair and saw a piece was about to come off and go into the engine. I talked with Maintenance Control and they told me the missing pieces of acoustic lining are within tolerance; but they failed to address my concern of the loose pieces of the patch coming off and going into the engine. I refused to fly the aircraft back in its current state. I do not understand why the integrity of the repair patch was not inspected when a small part of it was missing before the previous departure.




Synopsis: An A320 Captain refused an aircraft when a section of the inlet cowl acoustical material was found loose after the same section was temporarily repaired prior to the previous flight.
Date: 201408
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZMP.ARTCC, MN
Light: Night
Aircraft: Medium Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Corporate
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZMP
ATC / advisory: Center ZMP
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Troubleshooting; Situational Awareness; Time Pressure; Distraction; Confusion; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings
Primary problem: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings

Narrative: Toronto Mitchell (CZYZ) sector had an aircraft approaching the boundary. When I realized that Toronto had not called with a handoff and the aircraft was about to enter my airspace I initiated a call to them using the CZYZ 2 shout line #162. When I hit the button it turned blue not green which is the normal color. I tried to call the sector but when I keyed up; instead of my call going out over the line; it went out over my frequencies in my sector. I hung up the line to try again and after I hung up and hit the 'RLS' button; the line would remain blue for about 3 more seconds and as if I was still on the line. During these 3 second the VSCS acted as if it was frozen and wouldn't let me do anything. I yelled at my Supervisor that something was wrong and tried to call again. I repeated this process over about 5 times with no luck in getting a hold of CZYZ. At this time I could see Aircraft X had entered my airspace and it appeared as if CZYZ was initiating a turn to the aircraft to turn the aircraft out of my airspace. I then heard the CZYZ dial 3 line calling and assumed it was CZYZ calling wondering what was going on. I picked up the line and it was the appropriate sector trying to handoff the aircraft to me. They stated that they had called 7 times and were spinning the aircraft and wanted to know why I wasn't picking up the line. I stated that there were equipment issues; I had tried calling them and that Aircraft X was radar contact and could proceed on course. The aircraft did not violate any other airspace and separation was not lost with any other aircraft.I have no idea. Equipment failure.




Synopsis: ZMP Controller reports of land line equipment failure; causing an adjacent sector to spin aircraft until communications were established.
Date: 202008
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Reporter qualification: Flight Attendant Current
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Workload
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: Found two guest with masks that have vents. Was missed due to guest with face shield and no mask. Is the station even checking for the proper masks?Please tighten up the mask enforcement prior to boarding. Guests are still boarding with direct vents. It's very taxing on the flight crew to ensure mask compliance on top of normal duties.




Synopsis: Flight Attendant reported passengers boarded with face masks that had vents.