elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 202006
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Citation Latitude (C680A)
Operating under: Part 91
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Nose Gear Door
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Contracted Service
Reporter function: Inspector; Technician
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Powerplant; Maintenance Airframe
Human factors: Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: After takeoff landing gear handle was raised on schedule; but after the main mounts indicated up and locked the nose gear indicated an amber hash pattern indicating according to the Emergency/Abnormal. Preliminary inspection revealed the R/H nose gear door was damaged by the nose gear during gear retraction. After further investigation; it appears the R/H nose gear door was not in the over-center position (normal position) up against the open stops and caused the nose gear door rollers on the right side to strike the door bending the door edge during the retract sequence.I believe this is a design flaw and should be addressed by the OEM. Also train pilots to verify doors are in the fully open position and up against the stops. As maintenance vendor; some kind of verification that door is in the proper position during Post Maintenance.




Synopsis: Inspector reported right hand nose gear door of a C680 was not in over center position when nose landing gear retracted; causing damage to the door and an unsafe nose gear indication.
Date: 201907
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: Other Passenger Boarding
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant In Charge
Reporter qualification: Flight Attendant Current
Human factors: Physiological - Other
Anomaly: Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Illness / Injury; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Attendant; Person Passenger
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: Aircraft Equipment Problem Dissipated; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Odor in aft of aircraft during boarding. Commented upon by customers seated in aft seats. C Flight Attendant notified the pilot who indicated conditions normal. Odor dissipated approximately 10-15 after boarding commenced. I experienced irritated throat and cough and dull headache which persisted throughout the evening.




Synopsis: Flight Attendant reported a fume event during boarding and confirmed by passengers. Fumes dissipated; but health issues persisted throughout the evening.
Date: 201809
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: LAX.Airport, CA
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 170/175 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class B LAX
ATC / advisory: Tower LAX
Second aircraft: B787 Dreamliner Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Ground Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Procedure; Aircraft; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: On takeoff from RWY 24L at LAX; full length of runway used; we were the second aircraft to depart behind a B787 heavy that had departed from same runway at least 4 minutes earlier. On climb out we encountered what could have only been the 787 wake vortices; as there was no wind shear reported or forecast. At approximately 200 to 300 feet AGL while hand flying; the aircraft rolled left and right in quick succession to approximately 40 degrees of bank; then again at 500 to 600 feet AGL. A master caution posted multiple EICAS messages. There was no loss of speed or pitch control during either event. Normal use of aileron and rudder was used to counteract the rolling motion; excessive control input not used nor warranted. At 400 feet the 'NAV' mode was selected and at acceleration altitude 'VNAV; speed FMS' was the mode called for on guidance panel. Once aircraft was stable in speed; pitch; roll; and yaw; the autopilot was engaged. I then assigned flying pilot duties to First Officer (FO); and proceeded to run QRH for the following faults: 'Wind shear fail' 'stall prot fail' 'AOA limit fail'; followed a couple of minutes later with 'AT fail'. [I] liaised with Dispatch via ACARS; agreed it was safe to continue in clear and smooth weather. Applied all necessary QRH factors and landed without further incident with a buttery smooth touchdown on the longest runway. On touchdown the EICAS messages all depopulated and were replaced with 'ADS Probe 1;2;3;4; fail'. Parked; [and] Contract Maintenance was summoned and a 10 minute power reset fixed the problem.




Synopsis: EMB-175 Captain reported multiple EICAS system failures were annunciated following a wake turbulence encounter departing LAX in trail of a B787.
Date: 201406
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: PSP.Airport, CA
Weather elements / visibility: clear
Aircraft: Small Aircraft
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
ATC / advisory: Tower PSP
Aircraft component: Tablet
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: While flying northeast of Palm Springs a fighter jet approached very fast flying in front of the plane then circling around several times rocking his wings and trying to get my attention. I knew something was wrong so I searched for radio frequencies that I could use to find out what the problem was; I even looked on the iPad to check for TFR's and did not see any there. Then I heard Palm Springs Control Tower tell the aircraft northeast of the airport to turn east immediately and that there was a TFR for 30 miles around Palm Springs. After turning east I was told to contact Control. After several failed attempts trying to contact Control; I tried to reach Palm Springs Tower again but could not get anyone. The fighter jet followed me to the east out of the TFR and I did not hear anything else. I had told the Tower that the ForeFlight on the iPad was updated that very morning. But upon returning home I found that the viewing of the TFR feature on the iPad was turned off. The cause of the problem began when I failed to make 100% sure of the settings on the iPad. Something that could be done to prevent this from happening again is using more than one form of information (such as a computer) for planning the flight.




Synopsis: Small aircraft pilot reports inadvertently entering a TFR and being intercepted by a military aircraft. It was discovered that the iPad ForeFlight program had been set to not display TFR's and no other source had been checked prior to flight.
Date: 201912
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: PA-28 Cherokee/Archer/Dakota/Pillan/Warrior
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class G ZZZ
ATC / advisory: CTAF ZZZ
Aircraft component: Main Gear
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Technician
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Airframe; Maintenance Avionics; Maintenance Powerplant
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Ground Strike - Aircraft; Ground Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Upon takeoff left landing gear wheel assembly and lower strut departed aircraft due to bolt failure. Aircraft 100 hr. complied with and annual complied with. Landing gear and associated hardware were inspected for cracks; damage and security of hardware. No defects noted at that time.




Synopsis: Technician reported L/H lower strut and wheel assembly departed aircraft after takeoff.
Date: 201406
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, 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: Parked
ATC / advisory: Ramp ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Person / Animal / Bird
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: After landing; we taxied to the gate; we were met by the Contract Ground Crew and marshalled in to park without delay. While executing the engine cool down procedure and [with] both engines still running; one of the contract ramp agents opened the forward cargo door. I feel this is a serious safety violation. I shut down the right engine immediately upon hearing the Aural Warning Unit's triple chime and recognizing that the cargo door had been opened because of the EICAS Warning. I can't be 100% sure that the entire engine cool down had been fulfilled. I was more concerned with the safety of the ramp personnel. I don't believe that I or my crew did anything wrong. I want to draw attention to this safety issue that I've experienced more frequently than I'd ever expect.I suggest a new procedure; do not taxi to the gate (taxi beyond the gate number painted on the Gate Lead In Line) until it can be assured that the Engine Cool Down Procedure has been completed.




Synopsis: An ERJ-175 was marshalled into the gate by a Contract Ramp Agent and when the EICAS alerted the forward cargo door had been opened the Captain shut the right engine down before the cool down period was complete.
Date: 201903
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: A300
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Hazardous Material Violation; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Weight And Balance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I discovered that the ULDs (Unit Loading Devices) listed did not match paperwork. I went back to discuss with the DG (Dangerous Goods) expert and was given an 'I have no clue' look. There was a Ramp Manager already present on the aircraft. I had to say 'This doesn't match; but I'm not the expert here. Can you please figure this out.' They left and came back with the same paperwork scratched out to reflect appropriate ULDs. I inspected the accessible DG; but wasn't really given a 'warm; fuzzy feeling' on this load crew. We departed and flew to ZZZZ. Upon block-in the crew (us) was given a pushback delay back in ZZZ...when in fact it was the DG issues that delayed us.Two days later; we arrived to fly ZZZZ-ZZZ. A ZZZZ mechanic (I believe) let us know that when we landed two days prior; there was no door on one of our accessible DG cans. He also told us that there was a lower can below without the locks engaged and the can had been bouncing against the bulkhead the entire flight. We were also informed that there were aircraft parts in the [aft cargo hold] with normal freight and not where they were supposed to be.I do my job reliably. I'd like to be able to rely on my DG experts and load personnel to do their jobs.Cause: Inadequate or lazy load team and DG specialist. I'm not sure exactly the issue here. Hire better personnel? Train better? More checks and balances?




Synopsis: A300 First Officer reported documentation and load configuration violations related to a Dangerous Goods shipment.
Date: 202101
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZMP.ARTCC, MN
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class C OMA
ATC / advisory: TRACON OMA; Tower OMA
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Chart Or Publication
Primary problem: Chart Or Publication

Narrative: The minimum cleanup altitudes for Runways 32L and R on the Jeppesen OMA (Omaha) Simple Special EFP chart differ by one foot as compared to the flap retraction altitudes for the same runways on the OMA Takeoff and Landing Report generated (date) at (time); [Report Number] for [Aircraft X].Shouldn't the Jeppesen chart minimum cleanup altitudes and TLR flap retraction altitudes agree?




Synopsis: Captain reports Jeppesen chart minimum clean-up altitudes and TLR flap retraction altitudes do not agree.
Date: 202004
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Tower, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Engine
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: 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 Overcame Equipment Problem; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: I did a touch and go on Runway X at ZZZ. After takeoff; I began flying a standard pattern. Once I started my turn to downwind from crosswind; I heard a very loud bang; the engine had faulted. The bang that came from the engine startled me so I trimmed for glide speed (65 kts.) and continued my turn back towards the runway. I then [advised ATC] to report them on the situation and told them repeatedly that I was landing Runway X. I then rolled out onto a left base for Runway X. Tower cleared me to land. After landing; I taxied the airplane clear of the runway and shut it down. A sparkplug blew out of one of the cylinders causing me to lose engine power. The aircraft was returned to its previous airworthy state after the aircraft was inspected and the sparkplug was replaced by a certified mechanic. It was returned to its operating state one day after the situation after the mechanic signed off on the aircraft. A test flight was also successfully completed by request of the mechanic before its return to service.




Synopsis: C172 Pilot reported an engine malfunction shortly after takeoff that resulted in a return to the departure airport.
Date: 201710
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Amateur/Home Built/Experimental
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class G ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Fuel Tank
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; Flight Crew Diverted
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: During cruise flight; I noticed the smell of fuel. A visual inspection found fuel leaking from the right tank at the wing root. I immediately proceeded direct to the nearest airport and contacted Approach to [inform them of my predicament]. Approximately 10 minutes from [the alternate airport]; I notified Approach I would be shutting off the electrical system for safety reasons.After an uneventful touchdown; I called Approach on the phone to notify them I had landed safely and was off the aircraft.




Synopsis: AL3 pilot reported diverting to an alternate airport after noticing a fuel leak in flight.
Date: 202111
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: A320
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent; Taxi
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Physiological - Other
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Attendant; Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi; In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: On taxi out detected odor. On descent noticed odor again and Flight Attendant in aft made complaint about it and possible eye irritation.




Synopsis: Air carrier pilot reported a fume event during taxi out and also during descent for destination. Aft flight attendant experienced physiological symptoms.
Date: 202001
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Costruzioni Aeronautiche Tecnam Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: CTAF ZZZ
Second aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Time Pressure
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I was doing touch and go's at ZZZ. On a one of my touch and go's I had just lifted off and was climbing through ~500 feet when I heard on CTAF that a Cessna 172 was going to overfly the airfield to enter the downwind. I immediately looked to my right; the direction they were approaching from; to verify their position for my own situational awareness when I saw that they were on an immediate collision course with my aircraft and at my altitude. I immediately pushed my aircraft nose down to avoid a collision and no sooner that I had pushed my nose down they flew right over us; this had all taken place at about 700 feet. I immediately radioed on CTAF to inquire about their altitude and they claimed that they were at 1000 feet; the pattern altitude of the airfield. I soon landed and was informed by the FBO that owned the plane I was flying that from their perspective it was a very close miss between my plane and the other aircraft.




Synopsis: Pilot reported that an aircraft overflying the field at pattern altitude caused an NMAC.
Date: 201212
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: IWA.Airport, AZ
Aircraft: MD-80 Series (DC-9-80) Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class D IWA
ATC / advisory: Tower IWA
Second aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach; Departure
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Procedure; Airspace Structure
Primary problem: Airspace Structure

Narrative: I was working the Pima and Willy sectors combined. These sectors get combined often so it was not unusual for this to happen. I had moderate to heavy traffic with an MD80 inbound to IWA on the HUUTY1 RNAV. The MD80 had the airport in sight and I cleared the aircraft for a visual approach estimated 19 miles from the airport. There were lots of aircraft on frequency; and two different drop zones at other locations were calling for their required skydiving operations calls. The MD80 approximately 15 miles northeast of IWA reported seeing a possible skydiver below him. I informed him that the closest VFR target was at least 14 miles away. I then switched The MD80 to IWA Tower frequency. I then reported the possible skydiver sighting to management and noticed a collision alert with the MD80 and an untracked VFR tag that was approximately 5 miles northeast of IWA at 037. This was on the boundary of IWA's Delta and I elected to not call IWA since it was on the very border of their airspace and the MD80 had been on their frequency for some time. I was informed later that the MD80 reported a near mid air collision with the VFR aircraft not talking to me or IWA Tower. IWA has no protection from VFR aircraft flying in the immediate vicinity. Three different airlines; multiple military aircraft; and various corporate jets fly in and out of the airport and it is my feeling that a Delta airspace does not provide the protection needed to accommodate safe aviation activities. VFR aircraft litter the area and some of which are aerobatic and the result is multiple Resolution Advisories and close calls. The warning signs are there; and it is known that East of IWA is dangerous.  Multiple VFR aircraft at higher MVA's makes separating aircraft difficult.




Synopsis: P50 Controller described a reported NMAC between a IWA Air Carrier arrival and a VFR aircraft operating near or in Class D airspace; the reporter noting the existing airspace does afford the needed safety for IWA operations.