elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201512
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ORD.Airport, IL
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Medium Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground ORD
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness; Fatigue
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Ground Personnel
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: After push-back from gate; the first officer called ATC for taxi instructions. When taxi instructions were received; I cleared the area visually and saw no ramp crew and no obstructions so I began the power-up for taxi. A ramp crew employee jumped back from under the nose of the aircraft and gave us the stop signal. The power-up was immediately canceled and the brake was re-set. Apparently the wave-off never occurred even though I thought that it had. I signaled for the ramp crew to hook up their headset to ensure that no one was hurt. I was advised by the ramp crew that the tug was not attached to the aircraft and that there was no damage to persons or property. We continued the flight without incident.This was a three day trip. Day two had an [early morning] local van. Day 3 had an [evening] van. When switching a crew from the front side of the clock to the back side of the clock it can make for a difficult day. That being said; somehow the first officer and I both missed not verifying the wave-off from the ramp. From now on before any taxi I will verify the wave-off with the first officer and if there is any doubt I will contact ops for absolute verification.


Second narrative: After Pushback from gate in ORD; with both engines started; the Captain called for the after start checklist. We ran the checklist and upon finishing the checklist I called Chicago metering and then was switched to ground control. Ground gave us Taxi instructions and I read them back. When I was done transmitting I heard the Captain talking to the ground crew because the tug and rampers were still near the aircraft. The Captain verified that everyone was ok. We continued the flight with no other incidents.


Synopsis: Air carrier flight crew reported attempting to taxi without receiving the all clear signal from the ground push back crew. The Captain stopped the aircraft and then established communication with the ground crew to ensure that there were no injuries. Crew then safely taxied away from the ramp.
Date: 201604
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: DAY.Airport, OH
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Medium Large Transport
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class C DAY
ATC / advisory: Tower DAY
Second aircraft: Helicopter
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Other / Unknown
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Distraction; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Air Traffic Control Separated Traffic
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Aircraft Y was transitioning south to the northwest. Aircraft Y was pointed out to CMH approach. Aircraft Y was approximately 5 miles west of DAY when Aircraft X switched over to local controls frequency. Aircraft X had been cleared for the visual approach to runway 6L without any exchange of traffic on Aircraft Y. Aircraft X was flying directly at and descending toward Aircraft Y as the DAY controller exchanged traffic information between the two aircraft. Thanks to the actions of the DAY controller no separation was lost.This was an extremely dangerous operation by CMH approach. Before you clear and ship an aircraft on an approach; it is the controller's responsibility to ensure all conflicts have been resolved. They failed to accomplish this very important requirement. Had Aircraft X delayed his check in; or had difficulty with the frequency; there could have been a loss of separation or a catastrophic event.I'm reminded of the aircraft accident that occurred in California when a B727 was cleared for a visual approach and the conflict with a C172 was not resolved which resulted in a mid-air collision.I would recommend CMH resolve all traffic conflicts prior to clearing an aircraft for an approach or shipping them to tower.




Synopsis: DAY Controller reported an airborne conflict that was not resolved by Approach Control. Local DAY Control resolved the situation.
Date: 201410
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B737-300
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Electrical Power
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Second reporter function: First Officer
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Gate; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Shortly after we started a single-engine taxi (#1 gen bus on APU and #2 gen bus running off of the #2 engine); my First Officer noticed a strong electrical burning smell. At first I did not smell it but then it became very strong and the smell filled to cockpit. Shortly after this; we had what I will call a partial loss of electrical power. The APU shut down un-powering the #1 gen bus. We also lost additional items. Both IRS went to standby power and; although I appeared to have radios that were working; I could not transmit or talk to the Flight Attendants in the back. The emergency evacuation lights also came on in the back. I tried to reset the #2 generator by taking it off line and putting it back on line but none of the generator control switches would respond. I could not take the #2 generator off line. The smell of electrical equipment burning was dissipating as we returned to the gate. I had to open the cockpit door to communicate with the Flight Attendants what was going on. We removed the passengers for the aircraft through the front entry door. We were not able to restore any power to the aircraft until ground power was hooked up. After we received ground power; the aircraft went back to a normal power state except the APU was shut down. It was almost like some relays were stuck and they reset when ground power was attached to the aircraft. Dispatch was called and I spoke to [them] about the situation. Maintenance responded to the aircraft and started to troubleshoot. A logbook entry was made. We were given another aircraft and continued to [destination] without further incident.


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


Synopsis: B737-300 flight crew reported noticing strong electrical fumes and electrical system anomalies during taxi. They returned to the gate for maintenance.
Date: 201706
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: SQL.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 12
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Single Engine Turboprop Undifferentiated
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class D SQL
ATC / advisory: Tower SQL
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Sea; Flight Crew Rotorcraft; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Glider
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; General Physical Injury / Incapacitation
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: Beyond the threshold of Runway 30 (while over the runway); I was temporarily yet severely blinded by the sun's reflection off of a recently installed solar panel located on the left mid-field of Runway 30. The solar panel is positioned in such a way that it reflects direct sunlight directly at landing aircraft. This is an absolute hazard.




Synopsis: General aviation pilot reported a newly installed solar panel left of SQL Runway 30 at mid-field that caused a blinding reflection during landing.
Date: 201809
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: Mixed
Weather elements / visibility: 15
Light: Dawn
Aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 103
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Descent
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Student
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Inflight Event / Encounter VFR In IMC
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Weather
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: Arrived just after sunrise to ZZZ. Unable to takeoff due to poor visibility and light precipitation. Forecast for clear skies within 5 hrs. At [Time + 1hr] the fog had cleared and the ceiling had lifted to >1;000 feet AGL. Our flight of 2 paramotors launched from ZZZ and proceeded to climbout to the NW. Conditions continued to improve during the initial 30 minutes of the flight. The ceiling continued to break and the flight of 2 ascended through a large hole in the ceiling and was VFR on top for just over 5 minutes at 4;500 feet AGL. We stayed directly above our ascent hole and immediately adjacent to another hole. I watched my wingman begin a descent through the original hole and I began to follow with the notion that I had plenty of time to make my descent below the ceiling. As I began to reach the cloud tops; the hole closed rapidly in <10 seconds. I started towards my backup and it too closed. The lower paramotor was able to make it through the ceiling clear of clouds. I climbed with intention of finding another hole; but after approximately 20 min on top; I was unable to locate an opening to descend through and the next safe spot was well out of range even if I'd had max fuel. I utilized my phone's GPS navigation to ensure I was over the valley we took off from and to help ensure I was clear of terrain below and in front. I then powered back to idle and intentionally settled into the cloud layer in a descent of approximately 500 feet/minute starting at 4;500 feet AGL and ending at 1;200 feet AGL. I maintained course with my cell phone GPS and popped out of the clouds right where I was supposed to be. Navigated back to our launch site and landed without incident.




Synopsis: Paramotor pilot reported being stuck above an overcast layer and descending through the clouds to land.
Date: 202008
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Aircraft: Small Aircraft
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Parked
Second aircraft: UAV - Unpiloted Aerial Vehicle
Aircraft component: Wing Leading Edge
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Other / Unknown; Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Inflight Event / Encounter Object
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Routine Inspection
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: The events regarding the wing damage was found on date. I flew the aircraft on date. No damage was seen during pre flight or post flight. The Right side leading edge damage was suspected to be a drone. I flew at XA:00 and did not see; hear; or feel anything abnormal during the flight.




Synopsis: GA pilot reported right wing leading edge damage two days after last flight in which no damage was noted. Pilot suspects possible in flight conflict with Drone.
Date: 201905
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: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Incursion Taxiway
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: Taxi
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors; Airport; Chart Or Publication
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Metering was in effect. Metering pushed us to Ground for pushback clearance. Ground cleared us to push back at our discretion. Captain gave the ground crew clearance to push us back. The Captain initially told me to just start one engine. Once he noticed the ground crew was turning our tail north; he told me to go ahead and start both engines due to the position we would be in (parallel to Runway XX/XY facing southeast). Ground Control called shortly after we came to a stop advising us to call the Tower and relayed a phone number. Ground also informed us to call our Operations. The Captain and I elected to make the call to the Tower prior to our departure; and coordinated with Ground for a spot to taxi to and hold. The phone call to Tower made us aware that we were pushed onto [a] Taxiway without specific clearance to do so. Our [Company procedures] only addresses [certain] gates when it comes to specifically requesting pushback clearance onto [the] Taxiway.Our procedures need to be updated to include [this gate] with the other highlighted gates. Our ground crews should be informed that pushback from this gate should be into the alley unless told otherwise by the crew. Ground (like most airports) should be specific with push instructions (i.e. push into the alley; push onto [Taxiway]; etc.).




Synopsis: B737-800 First Officer reported they pushed back onto a taxiway without clearance from Ground Control.
Date: 201906
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Other All
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: Fatigue
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Staffing
Primary problem: Staffing

Narrative: [Date 1] Requested an FB for the sequence from the Chief Pilot. [Date 2] I called Crew Schedule to check on the FB request; since none was put on the crew list. There was a First Officer on short call who was legal and available; but the Senior on Duty refused to assign him to our flight. I managed my sleep before reporting to work by taking a nap in the afternoon of [Date 2]. However; as I approached my 6th hour in the seat and since the sun had not come up yet; I found it increasingly challenging to stay focused on flight duties. After landing in ZZZZ; our bus ride to the hotel was long; as expected; due to heavy traffic. We got to our rooms about XA:00 and I slept until XF:00. That evening; I was unable to sleep until about XP:00; [next day]. [Next Day] I awoke at XU:00. Since departure wasn't until [another 12 hours]; with an 8 hour flight; and a 2 hour drive home still ahead of me; I knew that I had to try to get a nap before pick up. Despite construction outside my hotel window and daylight peeking in around the curtains; I was able to get some sleep. Before our descent into ZZZ the sun had set and that's when the effects of fatigue started to become more noticeable. To complicate matters; the weather was down to 300' overcast and rain. Had I not at least gotten the 'all-too-short' nap before pickup; I would have been awake or about 22 hours when landing at ZZZ and 24 hours upon arriving at home. Every time I fly a European trip at night with a three man crew; I sleep soundly during my inflight break; because my body obviously needs it. Flying two man during that same period is most definitely moving us; as a crew; out of the 'green' and (at a minimum) into the 'yellow.' Crew Schedule refused to assign a legal and available reserve pilot to fly as FB on this sequence. Put the FB back on night flights to Europe; regardless of whether it is 'paper legal' to go without them.




Synopsis: Air Carrier Captain reported fatigue after 2 man rotation ZZZ-ZZZZ and return next day.
Date: 201907
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZID.ARTCC, IN
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: BAe 125 Series 800
Operator: Fractional
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class A ZID
ATC / advisory: Center ZID
Second aircraft: B757-200
Reporter organization: Fractional
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Procedure; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: During climb to FL360 (.70M 1800 FPM); encountered a very hard 'hit' of what felt like wake turbulence.  Encountered a very brief and rapid positive loading; followed by a very brief and rapid negative loading.  It felt like we drove over a speed-bump at 410 knots; it was that rapid and hard.  Flight crew members and passengers were restrained by shoulder/lap harnesses.  We asked ATC if there were any 'heavy' aircraft proximate to us.  They advised there was a B757-200 15 NM to our NW (1:00-2:00 relative position).  FMS computed winds aloft at FL340 were from the north at 21 knots.  No injuries and no damage to aircraft.




Synopsis: HS-125 Captain reported encountering wake turbulence climbing through FL340; probably from a B757 15 NM to their northwest.
Date: 201306
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: B757-200
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Hydraulic System
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: Other takeoff roll
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Gate; Flight Crew Rejected Takeoff; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Preflight; start; and taxi out uneventful with no indications of hydraulic problems. After setting takeoff power EICAS indicated L Hyd Qty and L Hyd Press and status page indicated PTU. I aborted at low speed. Lost all left hydraulic items. PTU did not give back high load items as designed. I had difficulty taxiing clear of runway without nose wheel steering. After clearing runway; we shut off hydraulic pumps and called for tow back to gate. It appears we lost all left hydraulic fluid. Engine hydraulic pump and electrical pump were on 3-5 minutes after fluid loss. Ran APU and shut down engines when instructed by Maintenance. Tow back uneventful.




Synopsis: A B757-200 flight crew rejected their takeoff at low airspeed when EICAS alerted of low pressure and fluid in the left hydraulic system.
Date: 201301
Aircraft: Stratolifter (C-135 / 717)
Operator: Military
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Refueling
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Reporter organization: Military
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Instructor; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Distraction
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure; Aircraft
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: This report does not pertain to one particular/specific event but rather a trend that has developed and grown over approximately the past 10 years. Frequently I hear someone mistakenly make a radio call over 121.5; the emergency guard frequency. It's usually an airliner making an inbound-to-station call to advise their company of an ETA and status of the flight. I understand that mistakes happen. Typically; this is followed by another pilot on another aircraft will politely respond over guard to advise the mistaken pilot that he/she has transmitted on guard. If it stopped there; I think this would be fine. But it's what typically follows that presents a hazard to flight safety. Several immature and unprofessional pilots will begin to chastise the mistaken pilot over the guard frequency and it seems to become a contest to see who can arrive at the most clever/humorous statements to that effect. Military pilots are required by our regulations to monitor 121.5. I believe that most air carriers are required to monitor 121.5 also. The design of my aircraft makes transmissions over 121.5 distinguishably louder than that of the other aircraft radios. Imagine trying to orchestrate a hazardous air refueling operation while these immature and unprofessional pilots carry on for sometimes over a minute berating the error of another airman; or perhaps it occurs as an airline pilot is attempting to fly an ILS Precision Runway Monitoring (PRM) approach in adverse weather down to minimums. This practice is unprofessional and unsafe. Furthermore it is unbecoming; It's a distraction that can not be ignored. Someone might actually need the guard frequency for an actual emergency. I used to hear it rarely; but recently it has been happening on nearly every flight. Today it went on for over 30 seconds while I was being vectored for an instrument approach. I would like to see the FAA start a campaign to stop this potentially hazardous and unprofessional behavior.




Synopsis: A military pilot commented that he frequently hears air carrier pilots making pre-arrival station reports on 121.5 and he considers the practice an unprofessional distraction with adverse safety consequences.