elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201308
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: BFD.Airport, PA
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Small Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turboprop Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Landing
ATC / advisory: CTAF BFD
Second aircraft: Small Aircraft
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Other / Unknown; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Airport
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: In the landing flair [for] Runway 14 in BFD there was a plane that departed on Runway 23 crossing our runway. We made calls at 15; 10; 5 miles and short final and were talking to the ground Maintenance guy [who] at 15 miles told us he was fixing the taxi light; so we know we were on the right frequency. The aircraft taking off made no radio calls. I understand it is an uncontrolled field and there is no requirement for a radio however we landed on the favored runway and were approached by the [pilot] who stated he never heard us and it was our fault. There was no option for a go-around as this would have caused us to most likely collide; instead we opted for max breaking and stopped just short of the crossing runway. The runways are hindered by trees so if you takeoff from one end you are unable to see the other runway because of the forest. They should have to at least cut a line of sight out to check for traffic.




Synopsis: The Captain of a turboprop twin landing Runway 14 at BFD using CTAF procedures encounters a Biplane taking off on Runway 23. Maximum braking is applied by the Captain to stop short of the intersection and avoid the Biplane. Neither pilot heard the other although both state they were using CTAF procedures.
Date: 201505
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Night
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Off Duty
Anomaly: Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Passenger Electronic Device
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We had landed and the crew was leaving the terminal. I saw one of our pax just outside the terminal door with all the contents of her purse spread all over the sidewalk. As I walked past her I heard her tell someone that her purse was smoldering and smoking. I walked back to her and re-introduced myself as one of her flight attendants on the flight. I asked her what was going on. She said and showed me that her electronic cigarette had melted several items in her purse. As she was leaving the plane and walking through the terminal; she realized that something was wrong and she hurried outside to dump her purse. She discovered that the safety was off on her Electronic cigarette. We did not do anything wrong in this situation; but I felt the need to report this in order to point out the danger of fire. If the timing was even a little different it could have resulted in a fire on board the aircraft.




Synopsis: After departing the terminal; a Flight Attendant saw a passenger from the previous flight dump her purse contents on the sidewalk. When asked why; the passenger responded her electronic cigarette's safety was off and it melted some purse contents as she exited the aircraft earlier.
Date: 201906
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Confusion
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Hazardous Material Violation; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Pre-flight; Routine Inspection
Result: General Work Refused; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Upon arrival at the flight deck; the F/O (First Officer) pointed out at the Planned Dangerous Goods Summary. It indicated a shipment of Lithium Ion Batteries. We then researched the FOM (Flight Operations Manual) for guidance; and based on the information described in the summary and FOM; I called Operations to query the discrepancy. Operations said that a Ramp Agent would come up to the flight deck to provide more detailed information. Following that; I then placed a call to the [Duty Manager] to further discuss the issue. The ramp person that showed up was Ill-informed and could not answer some basic questions that I asked in regards to that shipment. Ultimately; I felt very uncomfortable with the situation and in the best interest of safety; I requested the shipment be removed from the aircraft.




Synopsis: B737 Captain reported refusing Hazmat cargo due to lack of information provided to flight crew regarding the nature of the cargo.
Date: 201601
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: SKBO.Airport, FO
Flight conditions: IMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Widebody; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Climb
ATC / advisory: Center SKBO
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: My first officer and I were all set to depart off of runway 13L with all briefs completed and during pushback ground control advised that they had a new routing for us. We stated that we would call them back and continued with the push back and start. Once we were under way and all checks were completed we indicated that we were ready to copy the new clearance. The clearance was actually a change of the runway to runway 31L which is seconds away from our ramp as well a new clearance was issued. We both listened in which is always a bit difficult with the accent; but we were both 100% certain that we received the Zipaquira 9G and I was certain that the FO read back the Zipaquira 9G. We worked hard to slow things down and spent a considerable amount of time going over everything from start to finish; as well we referenced the QRH for guidance for the runway change. On the departure while waiting to turn right to intercept the course the controller stated [Air Carrier X] turn left. Knowing that we had terrain the FO asked for a specific heading and the controller went silent. Soon he responded with a specific right turn instruction and then mentioned that we were given the Zipaquira 9F. Bogota has four departures with Zipaquira; the Zipaquira 5J; Zipaquira 2H; Zipaquira 9G and Zipaquira 9F. We continued the flight to [the destination].




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported a track deviation departing SKBO because of communication issues with ATC.
Date: 201704
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Elevator Feel System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: On takeoff/rotation we received a Master Caution; FLT CONT on six pack; with the FEEL DIFF PRESS light on the overhead panel illuminated. The aircraft was 'mushy' in the pitch axis. I was pilot flying; and was very concern of over rotation and having a tail strike; the aircraft continued to be sluggish until we retracted the flaps and accelerated to 250 knots. As we climb; around 4000 ft MSL; we had a FMC/FMC on the FMC scratch pad and loss both LNAV and VNAV. We ran the QRHs and consulted the Part 1 for overweight landings. We also lost both flight directors and the autopilot. Once we were able to restore LNAV and VNAV and couple back to the autopilot; I made a radio call to Dispatch to ask for phone patch with Maintenance. During the phone patch we discussed the loss of systems; thunderstorms enroute to ZZZ1 and the option of diverting. Based upon this discussion with Dispatcher; Maintenance Control; the First Officer; I made the decision to divert back to ZZZ. We received clearance back to ZZZ; [advised ATC] for Flight Controls and the overweight landing. We had ARFF standing by and upon landing; ARFF check the aircraft for any abnormalities while on the taxiway. Once ARFF gave the all clear we taxied to the gate. AML entries were made for the FEEL DIFFF PRESS; FMC; and overweight landing. The FEEL DIFF PRESS was a repeat issue/write up in the AML. I can provide further insight to the safety board if necessary.




Synopsis: B737 Captain reported multiple equipment failures; ran the QRH checklists; and returned to the departure airport.
Date: 201303
Location: ZZZZ.Airport, FO
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B757-200
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Initial Climb
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZZ
Aircraft component: Turbine Engine
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Inflight Event / Encounter Bird / Animal
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; Flight Crew Inflight Shutdown; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: At approximately 500 FT AFL on departure from Runway 10 we encountered a flock of large birds and ingested one or more into the right engine; a severe vibration was immediately felt; the throttle was reduced to idle and an emergency was declared. The engine was shut down using the immediate action items; and after pulling the fire handle we received a notification from the cabin that we had a fire in the right engine. As a result we discharged the fire bottle even though we had no indication of an engine fire. The EGT had peaked at 963 degrees.Assuming that we had a potential engine fire with no warning; a tight approach was made back to Runway 10; the QRH and Before Landing checklists were completed; and an overweight landing with a smooth touchdown were made. The off to on time was 5 minutes. We cleared the runway and were immediately met by numerous ARFF trucks; a precautionary dousing of the engine was made by a fire truck's water cannon; and after confirmation of no fire we were escorted to the gate without further issue.Birds are a known problem at this airport. I don't know if there is any validity to the idea that a radar will have an affect on bird dispersion; but I will be using it from here on out for departures. This is my second engine failure due to bird strike. Although ATC gave us an immediate clearance to land after we declared the emergency; the Controller's English was a safety issue. After clearing the runway; we made repeated attempts to communicate through her to have ARFF examine the right engine for fire; and an Approach Controller finally broke in and issued the directions to the fire crews. Mandating that the entire world adhere to phraseology protocol is useless if you can't understand what is being said.




Synopsis: A B757 ingested birds into an engine at 500 FT; EGT peaked at 963 degrees. The engine was shut down and aircraft returned to land uneventfully in emergency condition.
Date: 201304
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Viking/Turbo-Viking 17-30/31
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: CTAF ZZZ
Aircraft component: Gear Extend/Retract Mechanism
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Instructor; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; Flight Crew Rejected Takeoff
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: While practicing crosswind landing touch and goes the student pilot on the fifth landing and after touchdown; inadvertently put the landing gear handle in the up position during the ground roll instead of retracting the flaps. The gear handle and flap handle are both located in front and down by the floor of the pilot and co-pilots seats. The approximate aircraft speed at this time was 30 to 40 KTS. The aircraft started to feel like we had a flat tire; then the student added power and when I noticed the student put the gear handle up instead of the flaps. I pulled power and the aircraft never got airborne. The aircraft slid to a stop on the side of the runway with the gear retracted. We exited the aircraft with no injuries and minor damage to aircraft. This aircraft does incorporates a safety switch on the main gear to keep from inadvertently retracting the gear on the ground. This switch will be inspected to see if this was a contributing factor for the gear retracting while the aircraft was still on the ground.




Synopsis: A flight instructor and student pilot experienced an inadvertent landing gear retraction during a touch-and-go landing. The aircraft settled onto the runway and slid to a stop with no reported injuries.
Date: 201401
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Snow; Windshear; 2
Aircraft: Bonanza 35
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Instructor; Local
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Approach Control transferred control/communications on a BE35 to the Tower - Local Control on an ILS approach to Runway 32R; but the aircraft was almost 1/2 mile left of course; not established on the published approach. The airport was IFR at the time with 2 miles visibility; overcast ceilings at two thousand six hundred; wind 350 at 25; gusts 30; snow squalls; blowing snow; and low level windshear advisories. The TRACON 'vectored' the aircraft for the Runway 32R approach twice; but each time the pilot was 1/4 mile left of the extended centerline for Runway 32L; or 1/2 mile left of the extended centerline for Runway 32R! After further discussion with the pilot; it was determined that the pilot had selected the incorrect localizer frequency. The TRACON Controller should have noted that the aircraft was extremely left of course. The TRACON Controller should also have realized that this pilot was in distress and was encountering extremely challenging flight conditions and stepped in to provide the pilot with additional services. The TRACON Controller should have taken actions to assist the pilot in determining what localizer frequency was being used. If a pilot states that he/she is having problems navigating; help the pilot; especially in hazardous IMC conditions. Tell the pilot the purpose of the 'breakout' and ask if additional assistance was needed for another approach. The TRACON Controller should not have shipped an IFR aircraft to Tower that was so blatantly off course. The excuse that the pilot had reported 'established' does not absolve the TRACON Controller of his/her responsibilities to the pilot. It should not take a Tower Controller; who does not hold a RADAR ticket; to determine that this was an imminent situation that required prompt action; and that the aircraft was never correctly established on the published approach.




Synopsis: Tower Controller described an unsafe situation when IFR traffic on final was transferred to the Tower significantly off course in IFR conditions; the reporter listing a number of TRACON shortfalls in this event.
Date: 201403
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Night
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 145 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Hydraulic Main System
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Technician
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Airframe; Maintenance Powerplant
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Time Pressure; Confusion
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Maintenance
When detected: Routine Inspection
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Equipment / Tooling
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was servicing the Number 1 Hydraulic (HYD) System on an EMB-145 aircraft. I went over to where the servicing carts are and chose a X-colored cart with the correct [fitting] hook-up on the service port for the EMB airplane; which I thought had Skydrol; since the CRJ aircraft has Skydrol [hydraulic fluid] in the same X-colored cart. The other employees were waiting on me so they could turn on the HYD. As soon as I had serviced the plane and had disconnected; they turned the HYD on. I noticed the wrong color of the HYD fluid [from the cart] which made me realize that I had serviced the EMB-145 with MIL-H-5606 (red) hydraulic fluid. I checked the service cart and had the system shut down and reported it to the Lead Mechanic. This incident occurred due to an end of shift time crunch combined with the CRJ Skydrol cart and the MIL-H-5606 hydraulic fluid cart being identical in design and color. The only exception is that the MIL-H-5606 hydraulic fluid cart has a fitting that will connect to the EMB-145 Hydraulic System. [Recommend that] to prevent a future occurrence; regardless of fleet type; the all fluid carts should be color coded to match either the fluid contained within; or the Manufacturer's original packaging. To further prevent such an incident; fluid fittings should be standardized to prevent Skydrol systems being serviced with MIL-H-5606 hydraulic fluid. Hangar; A-Check and Periodic Service Check (PS-2).




Synopsis: An Aircraft Maintenance Technician (AMT) reports he inadvertently serviced the Number 1 Hydraulic System on an EMB-145 aircraft with MIL-H-5606 red hydraulic fluid instead of blue Skydrol hydraulic fluid. Technician recommends that hydraulic fluid fittings be standardized to prevent Skydrol systems being serviced with MIL-H-5606 hydraulic fluid.
Date: 201410
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: HOU.Airport, TX
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Light Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground HOU
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Airport; Human Factors
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: Taxi from the FBO ramp to Runway 04. Normal taxi is to the end of the taxiway to the runway.  This particular runway design has Runway 04 partially down the taxiway. Accidently crossed 04. The runway hold lines should be repainted. I suggest in ground hold lights should be installed at this holding point prior to reaching Runway 04.




Synopsis: Charter pilot failed to note the Runway 04 hold short lines at HOU and taxied onto the runway without clearance.
Date: 201202
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 100
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skylane 182/RG Turbo Skylane/RG
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: FSS ZZZ
Aircraft component: Fuel System
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Fuel Issue; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Weather
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: I ran out of gas; short of my destination. I took off with plenty of fuel (1 hour extra). I was going direct to my home base; usually a 2.5 hour trip. When I got to the halfway point I noticed my ground speed was about 120 MPH; not good for a C-182. I called Flight Watch and got the winds aloft for 9;000 FT; said 25 KTS. I changed my destination to buy some fuel and then head to my original destination. In the next hour the upper winds went to 40 KTS. When the engine started to sputter I had to look for a road to land on in the desert. I called Flight Watch again told them the head wind had almost doubled and gave him my latitude and longitude. I landed going south in the National Park on a narrow paved road. Landing roll was great. As I taxied looking for a place to get off the road ASAP; my left wing hit a cactus doing minor damage. I should have gotten an upper wind forecast before heading over to the coast. I could have picked up fuel at an airport on the river; all my fault. I talked to my Flight Service guy that night. He said indeed the winds had picked while I was enroute.




Synopsis: A C182 pilot completed a safe off-airport landing due to fuel exhaustion after the winds aloft increased above forecast which caused fuel usage to include his one hour fuel reserve.