elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 202105
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Exterior Pax/Crew Door
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural MEL / CDL; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Release Refused / Aircraft Not Accepted
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: We refused aircraft for improper logbook documentation.The aircraft arrived in ZZZ with a write up that the aft; right service door light illuminated in cruise flight. I spoke to the inbound captain face to face who told me that the light illuminated twice in flight and per QRH procedure he directed the cabin crew to push the door handle down which extinguished the light.Maintenance applied MEL 52-XXX which is for the door warning light system. This MEL applies if the door warning light system is malfunctioning. It is my judgment that the warning system was functioning properly. This function was tested again in ZZZ. When the door handle was lifted the light illuminated; and with the door handle fully closed the light extinguished.  In other words; the malfunction was likely within the door itself and not the warning system.I discussed this with two B737 check airmen via telephone who agreed the MEL was inappropriate. I also spoke with a representative of the ZZZ chief pilot office and the duty pilot and told them I would gladly take another aircraft or accept the current aircraft if the door/sensor could be adjusted or if a different MEL or sign off could be applied to the logbook.The flight eventually cancelled.The cause of this event was the application of an MEL which did not address the actual maintenance issue.Perhaps this MEL could be written in a matter to include other malfunctions of the door system.




Synopsis: B737-800 Captain reported refusing an aircraft due to improper MEL application.
Date: 202202
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B777 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Time Pressure; Distraction; Workload
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Hazardous Material Violation; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Weight And Balance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Other Pushback
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure; Company Policy
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Pushed back without Final DG. Received during pushback.


Second narrative: After switching aircraft; we pushed off the gate prior to receiving our final dangerous goods document. We had been delayed leaving ZZZ. We had also briefed not pushing off the gate until receiving our final weights. With the late night tempo and running late; we ran checklists and with clearance pushed back. We immediately recognized our mistake and held off taxi until receiving our final dangerous goods document.


Synopsis: B777 Air Carrier flight crew reported gate departure without required final Dangerous Goods documents. Flight crew temporarily delayed taxi until final Dangerous Goods documents arrived and departed safely.
Date: 202006
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZZ.ARTCC, FO
Aircraft: Airbus Industrie Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZZ
Aircraft component: Oil Storage
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Distraction; Time Pressure; Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Autopilot 1 engaged. Passing 15 to 16;000 feet we noticed the right engine oil quantity began to decrease.  Captain was Pilot Flying and declared 'My aircraft' and I got the QRH in anticipation of an ECAM (Electronic Centralized Aircraft Monitor). We asked Center to stop climb at 23;000 feet in order to investigate our engine indications. The oil quantity decreased to zero and two amber X's appeared where oil quantity is usually read. No ECAM. We asked for a turn back. We leveled off at 23;000 feet and began a left turn. The right engine oil pressure then began fluctuating and decreasing. We swapped controls. I as Pilot Monitoring announced 'My aircraft and my radios.' The oil pressure on the right engine dropped to red indication and then immediately we got the master warning and shut down engine ECAM. The Captain followed ECAM. I declared 'MAYDAY' and advised Center we lost the right engine and asked for direct to a fix for an ILS approach.The Captain advised the flight attendants of the return and made a returning PA; advised Dispatch via ACARS of return; and did follow ups in QRH from the engine shut down ECAM. I was descending to 11;000 feet single engine on autopilot 1. Center did offer direct to one of the fixes along our route but we declined. We swapped controls again and Captain declared 'my aircraft.' Now as Pilot Monitoring I followed up with normal checklists.  The Captain flew an approach single engine and landed. We taxied to hard stand number 23 where airport personnel and Maintenance met us.




Synopsis: An air carrier pilot departing an airport reported shutting down one engine due to a oil leak and returning to their departure point.
Date: 201506
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: FRG.Airport, NY
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Robinson R44
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class D FRG
Second aircraft: SR20
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: A Robinson R44 helicopter with two pilots was cleared to land on the numbers of runway 19 at Republic Airport (FRG). At 1;500 feet MSL; the pilots initiated a simulated engine failure and autorotation. At about 200 feet AGL; the pilot flying noticed a Cirrus SR20/SR22 taxiing onto runway 19; creating a head-on situation. The helicopter pilot immediately increased throttle to terminate the autorotation; while taking evasive action in a sharp right bank; followed by a left bank to avoid the Cirrus. In order to avoid a collision; the helicopter pilot also increased forward airspeed so as to overfly the Cirrus if necessary. Once in a hover; the helicopter pilots notified Republic Tower on frequency that a Cirrus had been present on the runway; and observed the Cirrus make a right turn off the runway. The estimated horizontal distance between the helicopter and plane was 150 feet; with no vertical separation. The Cirrus was on Republic Ground frequency; so we were unable to determined whether the runway incursion was the result of controller error; or pilot error by the Cirrus.




Synopsis: R44 pilot reported that during autorotation practice they noticed a light aircraft taxiing onto runway 19; creating a 'head-on' conflict.
Date: 202003
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: A330
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Climb; Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Second reporter function: Check Pilot; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Weight And Balance; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Attendant; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; General Maintenance Action; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: After takeoff there was a strong smell in the cockpit and cabin which smelled like wire insulation or electrical equipment burning. Continued with climb out to 12;000 ft.; then leveled off. Communicated with cabin crew and verified the extent of the problem. Decided to [request priority handling] with departure control and requested a return back to ZZZ for an overweight landing. Requested they roll the emergency equipment with approach control and ask approach to notify Dispatch of our [situation]. Returned to the field. Performed a visual approach to a soft landing. Remained on the runway till crash & rescue had a chance to inspect the aircraft. Then taxied to the gate and removed passengers.


Second narrative: Right after takeoff Flight Attendant called complained about strong burning smell in the cabin which we could also smell in the cockpit. Communicated with cabin crew to verify the extent of the problem in the cabin. Burning smell also got stronger in the cockpit. We decided to [advise ATC] and return to ZZZ. We also requested approach control to roll the emergency equipment and contact Dispatch. We Landed overweight; remained on the runway till crash and rescue had a chance to inspect the aircraft. Then taxied to the gate and removed the passengers.


Synopsis: A330 flight crew reported a strong burning" smell was noticed throughout the aircraft during departure resulting in a return to the departure airport"
Date: 202110
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: UES.Airport, WI
Flight conditions: Mixed
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Aircraft: PA-28 Cherokee/Archer/Dakota/Pillan/Warrior
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class D UES
ATC / advisory: Tower UES
Aircraft component: GPS & Other Satellite Navigation
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Instructor
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Distraction; Confusion; Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation - Altitude Crossing Restriction Not Met; Deviation - Altitude Undershoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Software and Automation
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Vectored to ILS/LOC 10 into UES; had base of clouds around 2;300 AGL; the at or above altitude for our final approach fix. I entered flight plan into top Garmin unit and had user error. I was expecting G430's to be in cooperation with one another after entering flight plan and programming. In the moment forgetting this morning we encountered an updating information error in one of our G430's. While being vectored; I spent too much time trying to problem solve why my G430's weren't in unison rather than paying attention to my altitude. I flew below my final approach fix altitude before arriving at way point. At this time; we were below the clouds and I had visual of Runway 10. I noticed my glide slope was well above me and then re-looked at my plate realizing my error. The problem was in my scan; which I had just finished instructing my student about in our lesson. I spent too much time fixated on my attitude indicator and GPS that I failed to realize my glide slope was gradually raising above me. A very avoidable error.




Synopsis: GA Flight Instructor reported being distracted while trying to troubleshoot a GPS information error resulting in an altitude deviation and CFTT during final approach to UES airport.
Date: 201901
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: D01.TRACON, CO
Aircraft: B757 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class B DEN
ATC / advisory: TRACON D01
Second aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Working final - RWY 35R at Denver. Aircraft X checked in expecting RNAV Zulu RWY 35R Approach. I issued approach clearance and pilot read back correctly. Several miles later I notice that Aircraft X is 2 miles north of the RNAV Zulu path - off course and heading towards the final approach fix. I deem that it is not feasible for the pilot to correct and get back on track - plus - there is another aircraft over the final approach fix and Aircraft X is getting too close to that aircraft. I cancel Aircraft X's clearance and instruct pilot to turn left heading 180. The pilot replies asking what altitude. I descend to 080. At this time there is another aircraft on the final for RWY 35L - Aircraft Y at 090. I heard the final one controller point out the traffic and instruct their aircraft to maintain visual separation. However at the same time I recognize that Aircraft X's turn radius isn't looking good and issue a left turn to heading 150. I pointed out the traffic to Aircraft X as well; but did not instruct Aircraft X to maintain visual separation. B757's seem to always mess up the RNAV Zulu Approaches. My advice would be for the pilots to learn how to maneuver their airplanes properly to avoid pilot deviations that result in errors like this one.




Synopsis: Denver TRACON Controller reported a loss of separation due to an aircraft off course and slow turn radius to get back on course.  The Controller noted that this is a frequent occurrence with B757 aircraft.
Date: 201603
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Agusta Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Government
Operating under: Part 91
Mission: Ambulance
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Second aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Air Traffic Control Separated Traffic; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Near miss occurred when departing from the hangar at a tower controlled airport. Sequence of events leading up to the near miss are as follows: aircraft requested taxi and departure to the NE. Tower acknowledged and cleared the aircraft to taxi as requested. Aircraft taxied out; completed takeoff checks and departed. After takeoff ATC Tower made immediate evasive maneuver calls to prevent a collision with other traffic that had recently departed.This close call was a clear case of a pilot requesting a clearance and hearing the clearance that he was expecting; not the clearance that was actually given. Tower gave a taxi clearance and a taxi clearance only. At no time did the tower say 'cleared for takeoff'. The pilot was expecting the Tower to issue a taxi and takeoff clearance in one transmission; but only a taxi clearance was given. [Aircraft] took off without ever hearing or receiving a 'cleared for takeoff' in their clearance.




Synopsis: AW-139 helicopter pilot reported an NMAC when they took off without clearance.
Date: 201703
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Aircraft: Skylane 182/RG Turbo Skylane/RG
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Autopilot
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Aircraft had a malfunction of the autopilot. The autopilot would not disconnect by pressing the disconnect button on the yoke or the AP/FD buttons on the dash. The breaker for the autopilot was pulled and it took over 30 seconds to power off. Even after the autopilot was powered down the controls were heavy. With this situation; the best course of action was land back at [the departure airport].




Synopsis: C-182 flight instructor reported a malfunction of the autopilot and was unable to disconnect it with the button on the yoke or the AP/FD buttons on the dash. The circuit breaker was used to power off the autopilot.
Date: 202008
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: 46N.Airport, NY
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Light Sport Aircraft
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Chart Or Publication
Primary problem: Chart Or Publication

Narrative: Current VFR Sectional shows 46N; Sky Park; as a public use airport with paved 2;600 ft. runway. Despite speaking with airport manager to confirm no parking fees two weeks prior to landing; today I received a call from the Duchess County Sheriff's office and an in-person visit from the Houston Police Department for trespass. The developer which owns this airport has no familiarity with FARs and; despite describing similar 'unauthorized landing' incidents; was completely unfamiliar with the process to re-chart this strip.




Synopsis: GA pilot reported owner of airport did not re-chart airport as private.
Date: 201401
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Aircraft: Cessna 170
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Normal Brake System
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Instructor
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Sea
Human factors: Other / Unknown; Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: After landing; my student lost directional control. I regained directional control but my student had applied brakes causing the tail to rise up resulting in a prop strike. We exited the airplane and there were no injuries or property damage. I notified the FAA immediately.




Synopsis: C170 instructor pilot reports a loss of directional control by his student after landing. Directional control is regained by the instructor; but the student had applied brakes sufficient to cause the propeller to strike the runway.
Date: 201212
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Weather elements / visibility: Snow
Aircraft: MD-11
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Aircraft component: Fan Blade
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Technician
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Powerplant; Maintenance Airframe
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Maintenance
When detected: Other Snow Inspection
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Chart Or Publication; Aircraft; Human Factors; Procedure; MEL
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Company Policy requires an Inspection inside the Number 2 Engine Inlet after snowfall. During my inspection of Number 2 Engine inlet for snow; I discovered a bent tip on one fan blade. I contacted Company Maintenance Control; took a picture of the bent blade tip and electronically sent it to Maintenance Control. Then; I repaired / blended the fan tip blade per Company Maintenance Manual. I took a picture of the fan blade after completing the repair and electronically sent it to Maintenance Control. I accomplished this repair at night with the use of a hand-held flashlight; and the weather was very cold; approximately 15-degrees Fahrenheit. An Eddy Current Inspection of the fan blade was deferred; through Maintenance Control; because the ZZZ Maintenance Facility does not have a qualified Inspector / Technician.




Synopsis: A Line Mechanic reports finding a bent inlet fan blade tip on Number 2 Engine during a Snow Inspection of an MD-11 aircraft in 15 degrees Fahrenheit temperatures. After blending out the blade tip damage; Maintenance Control deferred the fan blade Eddy Current Inspection; aircraft later experienced Number 2 Engine vibrations.