elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 202111
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Turbine Engine
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Inflight Shutdown; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: It was day five of a five day trip. I was the pilot flying and the Captain was the pilot monitoring. Taxi and takeoff were uneventful until passing FL320 for FL370. The plane momentarily leveled off at FL320 followed by N1 roll back. We both noticed the roll back and confirmed we just lost engine #1. The Captain quickly advised ATC of our situation and requested a left turn back to [departure airport] and a lower altitude as well. We ran the first portion of the ECAM actions until the engine relight portion. We agreed that an engine relight was possible due to no signs of severe damage and the engine parameters looked stable. After an unsuccessful relight attempt we finished running the ECAM actions and secured engine #1. We started the APU and monitored the aircraft systems including any possible fuel imbalances throughout the descent. The Captain did an exceptional job coordinating with ATC; Dispatch; and our inflight team. The rest of the flight was uneventful all the way to the landing portion and the taxi in.We flew [a different aircraft] on the second day of our five day trip. On my walk around I noticed engine #1 leaking a tremendous amount of fuel (it was a steady stream) from the engine drain mast. I notified the Captain of the situation and Maintenance was notified. Maintenance asked us to do an engine run-up but we refused due the severity of the leak and the unsafe condition the leak presented. A bucket was placed underneath the engine drain mast and it quickly filled up. We felt pressured to comply with the engine run-up 'operational favor' but we stood firm with our decision and declined. Around 2 1/2 hours later a very professional qualified Maintenance Technician showed up qualified to do an engine run-up. Around the 3 hour mark were notified of an aircraft swap. We proceeded on to the new aircraft and flew to [destination].No flight crew should feel pressured to perform any type of maintenance action if they don't feel comfortable with it. Safety should always be the primary way we run our operation. If concerns arise for any given situation it should be addressed immediately with a level of respect and professionalism.




Synopsis: Air carrier First Officer reported returning to departure airport after experiencing inflight failure of #1 engine. Separately; the reporter described being pressured to start an engine at the gate that had a significant fuel leak.
Date: 201908
Aircraft: B757 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Other N/A
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Chart Or Publication
Primary problem: Chart Or Publication

Narrative: This report is about some inaccurate NOTAMs in Oakland Oceanic airspace.1) The VOLMET weather broadcasts from the Honolulu station (see attached) have been out of service for at least five years. The NOTAM for this condition only exists in the PHNL airport NOTAMs (see attached). So unless you have PHNL listed as a destination or alternate; you have no way of knowing that the Pacific VOLMET is out of service. This affects all non-SATCOM-equipped flights in the Pacific region; which includes all 737s; 757-300s; and any other jet with the SATCOM inop. This NOTAM should be listed with the Oakland Oceanic airspace NOTAMs and not the PHNL airport NOTAMs so everyone operating in this region has access to it.2) Maybe someone could check with the appropriate sources to see if there is any intention of reinstating these VOLMET broadcasts in the Pacific. If there isn't; the information should be removed from the Jeppesen Airway Manual.3) The Oakland Oceanic NOTAM entitled 'do not log on to KZAK for CPDLC' (see attached) is not named correctly. This NOTAM implies that no aircraft should log on to KZAK; which is not true. It should be named 'do not log on to KZAK for CPDLC in an aircraft without SATCOM' or equivalent. The point is that VHF-only aircraft should not try to use CPDLC in oceanic airspace.




Synopsis: Pilot reported NOTAMS are five years out of date.
Date: 201604
Location: ORD.Airport, IL
Aircraft: B757 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Flight phase: Taxi
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical; Ground Event / Encounter Vehicle
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: After our push back was complete; we began our initial taxi from [the] gate. I cleared the right side of the aircraft and verbalized 'all clear'. The push back angled the airplane requiring a turn to the left. As we began moving; I noticed what looked like the employee bus driving at a fairly high speed on the service road paralleling the terminal. It didn't appear that he was stopping (or even slowing down). I told the Captain to 'stop'. The arc of the wing during the turn would have most certainly hit the bus. I immediately called the Flight Attendants to ensure no one was injured and notified the ramp of the incident. The bus came to a stop close enough for us to see the bus number which we reported to the ramp.




Synopsis: B757 First Officer reported a near collision with a bus while taxiing at ORD.
Date: 201305
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: DAL.Airport, TX
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Dispatcher
Reporter qualification: Dispatch Dispatcher
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Dispatch
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Procedure; Company Policy
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Not too long after taking over the desk today; the SOD STUB Originated Flight (flight #) DAL-ZZZ with aircraft (AC#) and call sign (stub flight #). I added the following canned phrase to the remarks section of the new release and filed it: CALLSIGN CHANGED WITH ATC DUE TO CONFLICTING FLIGHT NUMBERS; I did not cancel the original ATC Strip for flight (flight #) DAL-ZZZ as I did not think it was necessary due to the call sign change. However; 30 minutes after departing DAL the pilot tells me via ACARS that he is operating flight (flight #) but his release says (stub flight #). I immediately realized he contacted Clearance Delivery as (flight #) instead of (stub flight #). I explained to the pilot that his flight was a STUB Originate and the call sign change was to avoid radio errors with the inbound (flight #) ZZZ1-DAL. I looked at inbound flight (flight #) and saw it blocked into DAL before the STUB (stub flight #) pushed out of DAL. I advised the pilot to continue as (flight #).




Synopsis: Dispatcher described unintended consequences when trying to change a flight number to avoid duplication in the ATC system.
Date: 201511
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Fatigue
Anomaly: No Specific Anomaly Occurred All Types
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Other Post-Flight
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I just filled out a fatigue report; but due to my present state of fatigue and irritability; I decided to file this report. I finished a 4 day trip today; second consecutive early pick-up (XA45); 7:40 of flight time in unusually bad weather. I was assigned a 2 day for tomorrow; next day; with 8:39 scheduled; 12:50 on duty. Even in my youth in the military; this would be unacceptable for routine ops. If you don't think degraded performance is linked to long days like this; try it in the sim; which is way easier than the real thing. Consider the average age of pilots.Somebody thinks it's a great idea to squeeze in as much flying time into days as possible. Ever see a 16:30 hour two day trip? With our old rules; I wouldn't have been legal for this assignment; and for good reason.If there are hard chargers who want to make tons of money wearing themselves out; keep some lines or sequences like this for them; but for those of us who recognize our inability to be in top form at the 12 hour mark; how about constructing some easier lines for us? I love this job; but I hate being exhausted and knowing I'm not performing well. Flying while exhausted I think is our biggest threat; right up there with pressing the weather and technical incompetence. Please put the brakes on this productivity push. It's the function of safety departments to balance the pushers. You most likely have flown long days like these before. They aren't just uncomfortable; they are unsafe. We all know it.




Synopsis: Pilot reported fatigue after a four day trip then an assignment for a two day 16 hour trip.
Date: 201212
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: JFK.Airport, NY
Aircraft: B757-200
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class B JFK
ATC / advisory: Tower JFK
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation - Speed All Types; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: We took off out on Runway 13L; Kennedy One Departure - Canarsi Climb; with gusty winds and behind a B747. We waited two minutes for separation and max power was used. After takeoff at 400 FT LNAV was selected and a left turn direct to Canarsi VOR was flown. During the climb we experienced some turbulence and we overshot the Canarsi VOR and the speed below 10;000 FT. We corrected our speed and returned to join the departure. No involvement or query by ATC; the flight continued uneventfully.




Synopsis: Air carrier First Officer encountered possible wake vortex departing JFK that resulted in course and speed deviations.
Date: 201209
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Cessna 310/T310C
Operating under: Part 91
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Local
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Training / Qualification; Confusion
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: The airport was IFR due to low visibility caused by smoke. A C310 was VFR inbound to the airport and called about 20 miles out. The pilot checked on requesting a Contact Approach. Much confusion ensued as to whether this was appropriate use of the term. I believed it was only an IFR operation but was unable to climb the pilot to issue an IFR clearance because he was maintaining ground contact. Quick reference was made to the .65 and all we (I; another Controller; and a Supervisor) could determine was it needed to be requested by the pilot and 1 mile visibility. I issued the Contact Approach even though it didn't seem right at the time. After I got off position I reviewed the book and indeed found that it only applied to IFR aircraft on and instrument approach. The pilot should have requested a Special VFR clearance. This was the first time I ever had anyone request a contact approach. That being said; I still should have been more familiar with the operation. Review procedures that are rarely used more often.




Synopsis: Tower Controller described confusion regarding the application and clearance for a 'Contact Approach' vs. a 'Special VFR' request.
Date: 201809
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B757-200
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Aircraft component: Door Warning System
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Rejected Takeoff; Flight Crew Returned To Gate
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: On takeoff at approximately 115mph; 'FWD Access door' EICAS alert came on. Air conditioning cart was used in ZZZ. Forward access door was closed and light extinguished prior to engine start. After 80 knot call I was focused on engine instruments when alert came on. I elected to reject at that time. Proceeded back to the gate. Brake cooling chart applied. Micro switch malfunction or door wasn't fully secured.




Synopsis: B757 Captain reported a rejected takeoff due to an access door EICAS alert.
Date: 201906
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: RV-7
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: AC Generator/Alternator
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Distraction; Time Pressure; Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; 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 Diverted; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Pilot received a burning smell through the air [ducts]. I advised Approach and asked if there were any controlled fires normally for this area. ATC said no and asked if it was my airplane. I replied; I would monitor my airplane and keep a visual for any fires. The smell turned out to be my alternator going bad. A piece which covers; I believe voltage regulator; caused the alternator to go bad. My battery voltage dropped from 14.5 to 12.5. This happened while flying from ZZZ to ZZZ1. I turned off Comm 2 and all electric switches; leaving just the bare minimum on to legally land. I eventually diverted to ZZZ2 and called my mechanic from ZZZ1. The alternator was replaced because it was not keeping charge; along with other pieces in the electrical system.




Synopsis: Van's RV-7 pilot reported experiencing electrical fumes attributed to a faulty alternator; resulting in an inflight diversion.
Date: 202111
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: BFL.TRACON, CA
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; High Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZLA
ATC / advisory: TRACON BFL
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Ground Event / Encounter Ground Equipment Issue; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was working South Radar combined with all the sectors in the TRACON; I took an IFR handoff from JCF in the area of WJF Airport. I looked back after working other aircraft and Aircraft X was below the MVA. He was level at 080 and was in a 090 MVA. I heard the aircraft check in but couldn't hear me. I called JCF to ask what their MVA is in that area with hope that it was a valid altitude to assign and they said something along the lines of he's my control to climb. I tried to reach out multiple times to contact the aircraft and no response - I think he was too low for my radio coverage. I reached out on Guard to climb the aircraft; no response or ident. The aircraft went back to previous frequency and I believe got control instructions to climb. Once they were about 085-087 the pilot was able to hear me. After flying about 20 miles the aircraft asked if he did anything wrong. The pilot claimed he had a much different route filed but the controllers gave him direct.[I recommend to] appropriately staff the FAA's facilities so simple mistakes don't get overlooked.




Synopsis: BFL TRACON Controller reported an aircraft going below the MVA and was unable to communicate with the aircraft due to spotty radio coverage at the aircraft's altitude.
Date: 201701
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 170/175 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Autopilot
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Deviation - Speed All Types; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Aircraft Equipment Problem Dissipated; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors; Weather
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Departing from ZZZ; we had been switched to Center and given a climb to 10;000 and direct to Mobile.  Just after breaking out of the clouds the pilot flying; (F.O.) requested the auto pilot.  I reached up and pushed the auto pilot button. We both then reached for our sun visors and sunglasses since we were pointed directly at the sun.  After securing the sun protection; the aircraft enunciated 'bank angle; bank angle'. The 1st officer immediately took the controls back and corrected the course.  The auto pilot was never activated and the aircraft began a right climbing turn.  we deviated 16 degrees off our course; ATC asked if we were direct Mobile after we had already began correcting.  We replied yes and were given a climb to 13000 ft  The aircraft sped up to 285 knots below 10;000 for aprox 15sec.CAMI [Confirm; Activate; Monitor; Intervene] and have your sunglasses ready.


Second narrative: [Report narrative added no additional information.]


Synopsis: An ERJ-170 crew reported the autopilot was not controlling the aircraft as expected; and the crew recovered from an unusual attitude.
Date: 201212
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Night
Aircraft: A320
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Fan Disc
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Technician
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Airframe; Maintenance Powerplant
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Troubleshooting; Confusion
Second reporter function: Technician
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Maintenance
When detected: Other During Maintenance
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Chart Or Publication
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Midnight shift. Myself as Mechanic X and Mechanic Z were attempting to remove the Retaining Ring for the Number 1 Engine. We were unaware that the retaining ring had been installed incorrectly. Therefore; when we tightened the jackscrews to remove it we encountered resistance. Ultimately; the jackscrew at the twelve o'clock position sheared off. At that point we thought that the jackscrews were too short so; we tried longer jackscrews to no avail. We were not able to remove the retaining ring so we notified the Maintenance Supervisor. The problem was not resolved before the end of shift. When I came into work for my next shift; I was made aware that the Retaining Ring had been installed incorrectly. As a result of that incorrect installation; our attempt to remove it ended up causing slight damage to the flange; aircraft damage.


Second narrative: During the installation of the Front [Fan] Blade Retaining Ring there is a (...CW...) item [signature block item on Job Card] and it is not clearly understood as to whether this is a 'Clearance' item; or a 'Check' item before 'Continuing' [on with the work] item. [Mechanic Y].


Synopsis: Two mechanics report about their efforts to remove a Retaining Ring at the Forward Fan Blade assembly on a V2500 engine. The A320 aircraft's Number 1 Engine flange was slightly damaged.
Date: 201809
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: PA-28 Cherokee/Archer/Dakota/Pillan/Warrior
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Cruise
Aircraft component: Horizontal Stabilizer Control
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Instructor
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Aft top stabilator cable snapped during flight. The safety wire held to allow some control. The PIC was able to land safely and taxi back to the ramp. No one was injured as a result and no further damage to the aircraft occurred. There was an AD related to the broken issued and we are in full compliance.




Synopsis: PA28 flight instructor reported that the stabilator cable broke during flight.