elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201305
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: SCT.TRACON, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Citation Excel (C560XL)
Operator: Fractional
Operating under: Part 135
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: TRACON SCT
Reporter organization: Fractional
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict
Detector: Person Flight Crew
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Citation Excel departed VNY 16R and executed the NEWHALL 8 departure. Per the departure we executed a left turn to 110 degrees below 1;700 feet at VNY 2.2 DME. In the left turn; a TCAS TA activated and I continued the left turn to 095 degrees for less than 5 seconds; then corrected back to the right to 110 degrees. In the turn back to 110 degrees ATC SOCAL asked our heading and we informed them of our situation and intention. What I heard next was SOCAL ATC denying any traffic in our area and began arguing with the other pilot concerning the traffic. Then ATC realized we had remained on our 110 heading awaiting instructions. What I heard next was a barrage of instructions to Excel; 'Turn left to 320; continue turning left until I say; climb to 14;000 feet.' I began the left turn to 320 degrees and then reset the heading bug to a left turn beyond 320 degrees; then ATC SOCAL stated to begin our climb to 14;000 feet; which we did. During the 'heat of battle;' this all seemed to happen within a span of about 10-15 seconds; but that is only my impression. I suspect it may have been slightly longer. We continued the departure under ATC SOCAL instructions which was uneventful. My suggestion is to discontinue use of the NEWHALL 8 departure utilizing the turn to 110 degrees. The 110 degree heading from VNY is in direct conflict with LAX airspace; and if any delay in communication to aircraft at 4;000 feet or 7;000 feet is encountered; TCAS TA/RA instructions are very probable. Utilizing the right turn only for every departure off VNY 16R eliminates any conflict with airports in the LA area: BUR; SMO; LAX. If a right turn to an east-southeast heading is necessary; altitude is gained and potential conflicts reduced and/or eliminated.




Synopsis: Corporate jet departing VNY Runway 16R issued a Newhall 8 SID with a left turn experienced a TCAS RA; the reporter suggesting that due to the airspace involved; the NEWHALL SID should be modified.
Date: 202109
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 145 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Electrical Distribution
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Illness / Injury; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Passenger Misconduct; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Attendant; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Equipment Problem Dissipated; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: While operating Aircraft X from ZZZ1 to ZZZ at approximately 19;000 feet odor was detected in cockpit and confirmed in cabin of possible burning smell. Simultaneously a passenger was displaying signs of inebriation and possible medical distress. Passenger had multiple narcotic medications and beers that he had brought on the plane. The flight attendant notified cockpit and recommended medical personnel to meet the plane as well as law-enforcement personnel. While descending through 10;000 feet crew was unable to contact Approach after discussing the crew elected to not request priority due to odor dissipating. Odor re-presented three separate times with no thrust lever manipulation or control change or electrical system manipulation. Aircraft landed without incident to Runway XX ILS in ZZZ. Medical personnel and law-enforcement personnel met aircraft; ground personnel deplaned all passengers except for medical emergency. Law-enforcement personnel met passenger; non incident.


Second narrative: During a routine flight from ZZZ1 to ZZZ; with about 20 minutes left in flight a call to the flight deck was received [from] our flight attendant. Immediately we could tell that the flight attendant was concerned about something. He mentioned that a passenger sitting in row XX had sneaked on open containers of alcohol and may have been drinking it. The concerning part was that the passenger also had a large gallon sized zip lock filled with prescription pill containers. The passenger had allegedly mixed some of these pills with the alcohol and had mentioned to the flight attendant that he did not feel well. We continued to ZZZ since it was our closest airport. Medics were called by operations when we asked them to. Paramedics met airplane and took care of this passenger.  In addition to the passenger issue; this particular aircraft had given off some fumes in the descent into ZZZ. It had a burning electrics smell. I wrote the airplane up upon landing.


Synopsis: Air carrier flight crew reported an intermittent fume event during initial descent. Flight completed a safe landing at destination.
Date: 202007
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Regional Jet 900 (CRJ900)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
Aircraft component: Turbine Assembly
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Other Takeoff Roll
Result: Flight Crew Rejected Takeoff; Flight Crew Returned To Gate; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: I was a Pilot Monitoring and Captain was Pilot Flying. We were [number] 1 holding short Runway XX; I contacted Denver Center on comm 2 for released from ZZZ  airport (non towered airport) ; we completed our Before Takeoff Checklist . I announced our position on CTAF (Common Traffic Advisory Frequency) and we entered Runway XX for takeoff. We started our takeoff roll and 1st Captain call out : SET THRUST; I (FO(First Officer)) Thrust set; 80 kts...Captain replied cross checked. At approximately 95 - 100 kts. airspeed. ITT (Interstage Turbine Temperature) GAUGE was red and started blinking. I immediately bring that to my Captain's attention. At approximately 110 -115 kts. He called for Abort -Abort and brought throttle back to idle. After complete stop on Runway; I announced on CTAF on rejected take off and also announced to passenger Remain seated (3 times).  After exiting runway I informed Denver Center as well and run After Landing Checklist. We taxied back to the gate and deplaned the aircraft.I think that particular scenario should be covered in training session or Reccurrent training. ITT in red during takeoff and blinking in red gauge is something I have seen for first time. I also suggest to add one more call out during takeoff run at 100 kts. (First Officer) Engine gauges green; Captain : checked. Overall; the Captain made a good decision on rejecting take off at that high altitude airport surrounded by mountains and weather building up and complex single engine procedures at ZZZ.




Synopsis: CRJ-900 flight crew reported aircraft encountered engine alert during takeoff roll.
Date: 201508
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Super King Air 300
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 135
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 Flight Instructor
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Routine Inspection
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Human Factors
Primary problem: Company Policy

Narrative: This is a multi-faceted problem extending all the way from the very top of our organization to each of the pilots involved with this same issue. We fly King Air 350i's configured with 9 total passenger seats. For the last year and a half; our company has routinely booked flights consisting of 9 adults plus 1 lap child under the age of 2 years. This was allowed to happen; in my opinion; due to a misinterpretation of regulations regarding lap children. See FAR 135.128 and 135.157. This issue was recently discovered by our company and an email directive was issued company wide to not allow more than 9 total passengers and 2 pilots aboard the King Air. This is due to the availability of only 9 oxygen masks in passenger compartment. For my particular instance; the trip sheet shows 10 passengers whereas my load manifest only shows 9. I do however believe that for this trip in question we only had a total of 9 passengers on board including the lap child. I think one of the original passengers never showed up. Unfortunately I do not know for sure nor can I prove it.




Synopsis: BE300 Captain states that his company has not been operating in compliance with FAR 135.157 due to only 9 passenger oxygen masks being available while carrying 9 passengers plus one lap child. He believes that he may have operated one of these 9+1 passenger flights. The company now carries 9 passengers maximum.
Date: 202105
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Cloudy; Icing
Light: Night
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Airspeed Indicator
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation - Speed All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Procedure; Weather
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: Clean configuration. Airspeed 280 knots. Autopilot on. IMC conditions. Being radar vectored around significant squall line. Anti-ice on. Climbing to cruise altitude and passing altitude about 20;000 feet when my airspeed indicator suddenly went erratic with plus or minus several (at 30 knots greater and less than commanded) indications. Airspeed indicator never reached stick shaker or over-speed warnings limits. Immediately took control of aircraft from autopilot and crosschecked the primary flight display with the Captain and standby indicator. Recommended Captain become pilot flying as his indications were consistent with standby indicator and airspeed indicator was not as erratic as mine (more consistent with turbulent air flying in the 737). After transfer of aircraft control to Captain; I completed the Quick Reference checklist (QRC) and QRH for unreliable airspeed indicator. When double checking the pitot heat was on I notice both Engines Electronic Control (EEC) were in soft alternate mode. During the entire time the aircraft was in IMC the airspeed indicator was erratic and EEC remained in soft alternate. A few minutes later; at level off at cruising altitude (low 20;000s) and out of IMC the airspeed indicator returned to normal along with EEC. Remained clear of clouds and landed uneventfully at ZZZ1. We did not return to ZZZ after [Notifying ATC] because we were more than half way and the squall line was over ZZZ.Unknown as to why airspeed indicator was unreliable and erratic in IMC turbulent air and then returned to normal when clear of clouds. Also did not know why EEC went to soft alternate and then returned to normal.




Synopsis: First Officer reported air data related system failures due to suspected inflight icing conditions which diminished after leaving IMC.
Date: 201712
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: PA-31 Navajo/Chieftan/Mojave/T1040
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Fuel Line; Fittings; & Connectors
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Diverted
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Flying level at 17;000 ft; left fuel pressure gauge indicated over 70 psi (off the scale); but several fuel flows; EGT; CHT were normal; including the ability to lean ROP. When the fuel indicator showed left tank less than expected; ATC was contacted requesting nearby airports with at least 3500 ft. He asked souls onboard and I answered 5 and fuel on board. I think I indicated that we should have had at least 2.5 hours of fuel and that was why I wanted to make a precautionary landing. Right after answering him left engine surged and then quit. I feathered the prop and [advised ATC] and was given vectors to ZZZ. A single engine landing and taxi was made to the FBO; at which time they removed cowling and subsequently found fuel line had come loose. Repairs were made at that time and no further damage was noted. Flight was continued and no further issues arose.




Synopsis: PA31 pilot reported that the fuel pressure was indicating very high then an engine surged; then quit.
Date: 201602
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Cessna 150
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Second aircraft: Robinson R44
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC; 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 Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Airport; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Departure from runway 30; I was handoff from the main tower controller to the departure tower controller. I reported my current location and the tower reply 'right turn approved'. I cleared my wing and turn at around 450 AGL; during the turn; the tower instruct me to turn left 30 degrees; I read back and comply. Seconds after; the tower told me to look for the traffic at 3 oclock; 5;700 feet. I reported in sight; but the helicopter traffic I spot is an incorrect one that was further away from me. At the time there are more than 4 helicopter training traffic in the north pattern. Seconds after; I saw a shadow passing just below my nose and passing to the right; I pull my nose up to best climb speed and I realized that was the traffic tower told me to look out for. The causes of this incident are probably the radar delay and showing the traffic was on my three o'clock but actually it is more like 11-12 o'clock because I was in the turn; and my failure to comply with the AIM recommendation to turn for departure after reaching pattern attitude.




Synopsis: A C150 pilot reported being given a 'right turn approved' clearance by Tower after takeoff and started his turn at 450 feet AGL. The Tower quickly issued a left turn and look for helicopter traffic at 3 o'clock; resulting in a near-mid-air-collision.
Date: 201603
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Flight phase: Taxi
Aircraft component: Engine
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Ground Event / Encounter Object
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I had no intention of flying the plane. I was never near the runway or taxiways. As part of my protocol to keep my engine in good working order when the plane is not being flown on a regular basis; I pull the plane onto the apron/ramp in front of the hangar and start the engine. Once the engine has warmed up and is running smoothly; I shut the plane down and return it to the hangar.On [this day] I pulled the plane out parallel to the hangar row; followed my startup checklist and started the plane. As soon as the key was turned in the ignition; the engine roared to life. I was thrown back in my seat by the sudden forward motion of the plane. I attempted to reposition my feet on both brake pedals; but as my plane moved; it veered closer to an approximately 150' long hangar building on my left. I tried to steer the plane with the pedals while I went through a process of shutting off the engine.The plane continued to accelerate. The left wing tip began scraping the hangars. The engine continued to run with what sounded like full throttle. I felt the plane take a slight airborne hop. I considered my options. There were fuel tanks on my right; a drop off to uneven soft grass beyond the tanks. Straight ahead were buildings and to the left beyond the hangars was the eight foot airport security fence. The propeller torque and the dragging left wing began to pull me into the metal hangar siding; although I don't know what control I had anyway at this point. I spun around to a stop. I had hit the last hangar in the row on my left; with no likely safe outcome beyond this point. The nose dented in the siding of the hangar and the propeller was badly damaged. As the plane swung around; the right wing tip was damaged as it struck the hangar.




Synopsis: The pilot of a C172 reported a loss of control when the engine was started; which resulted in collision with nearby hangers.
Date: 201304
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: SEA.Airport, WA
Aircraft: Medium Transport; High Wing; 2 Turboprop Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class E S46
ATC / advisory: TRACON S46
Aircraft component: Autoflight System
Component problem: Design
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Equipment Problem Dissipated
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Procedure
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: While level at 12;000 MSL we were cleared to descend via the MARNR RNAV STAR to SEA. I deleted the back calculated crossing altitude at MARNR during the briefing of the arrival and its crossing altitudes. When we captured VPATH at RAYNI we reset the altitude alerter to 6;000. With the VNAV page I reviewed the [expected] descent rates.  The initial descent rate from RAYNI to GRYND was 2;200 with all other descent rates approximately 1;800 FPM. After crossing RAYNI the aircraft pitched rapidly to -3;500 FPM; then to -100 FPM; then finally settled out at about 1;700 FPM descent. The remainder of the arrival was steady. I've observed this same series of events during the HAWKZ arrival...although not as dramatic...once as pilot flying and we reached -4;200 FPM initial descent landing north at Seattle. The VPATH undershoots by approximately two times the required descent rate and takes a few minutes to settle on a final descent rate. There is a real good possibility that a Flight Attendant or a passenger may be hurt because of the excessive deviation in descent rates before the VPATH settles on a descent rate.Possible problem with the VPATH/autopilot/FMS interface with the new arrivals. This problem does not occur on RNP approaches. I've only observed this on these two arrivals.




Synopsis: A First Officer reported repeated examples of excessively aggressive initial VNAV/AUTOFLIGHT pitch/rate of descent changes associated with the MARNR and HAWKZ RNAV STARs to SEA.
Date: 201301
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: D01.TRACON, CO
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
ATC / advisory: TRACON D01
Aircraft component: Horizontal Stabilizer Trim
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; General Declared Emergency

Narrative: After retracting the flaps during climb the First Officer was hand flying the aircraft and the electric stabilizer would not move the trim wheel. I pulled out the QRH and followed the Electric Stabilizer Trim Inop checklist. The trim wheel could not be moved electrically or manually. I called Maintenance to see if they had any ideas before returning to the field. We declared an emergency and asked to return. I called Operations and asked them to advise Dispatch of our situation.  We made an uneventful landing.


Second narrative: After takeoff we retracted gear and flaps. With flaps up before the autopilot was engaged; I was using the electric trim and it jammed and stopped moving. Takeoff trim was 5.5 units and failed at about 6.75 units. Electric trim seemed to work normal until flaps were retracted. The Captain followed the QRH Electric Stabilizer Trim Inop checklist. We declared an emergency. Returned to XXX and made a Flaps 15 overweight landing.


Synopsis: The pilots of a B737 identified a stabilizer trim failure following flap retraction during climb.  After following the Flight Manual procedure they were unable to correct the problem; so they declared an emergency and successfully returned to the departure airport.