elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201511
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: MD-83
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: FMS/FMC
Component problem: Design
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Company Policy
Primary problem: Company Policy

Narrative: The destination airport; along with all associated approaches; was not in the FMC database.  After speaking with the duty pilot; I was told that the FMC does not have enough memory to include [destination airport] and associated approaches.It is UNACCEPTABLE to have primary navigation equipment that does not include departure and destination airports in its database.  This is especially true when flying to an airport in close proximity to Washington; D.C. -- with multiple prohibited areas located nearby.Please understand that there are measures that need to be taken when deciding to fly to a given airport.  Aircraft must be properly configured to support safe and efficient navigation to and from said airport.  If unable to do this; dispatch needs to be advised so that a properly equipped aircraft can be flown to airports like [destination]. Please invest in our equipment and include all [Company] airports (at least) in the navigation databases.




Synopsis: A MD-83 Captain reported the FMC did not have destination airport and associated approaches in the database. He was advised the problem was related to memory capacity of the FMC.
Date: 201911
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZZ.ARTCC, FO
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Turbulence
Aircraft: B767 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Workload
Anomaly: Deviation - Speed All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Weather
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: During climb out on the ZZZZ [SID] departure we got the stick shaker twice on the turn from ZZZZZ to BL059 as I commanded flaps up from Flaps 1 on the turn. Conditions were Heavy airplane ( 392.2 GW); Bank angle 25deg.; Moderate turbulence; Narrow margin between stick shaker and Flap 1 over speed (250 KTS); and IMC. As we got the stick shaker; First Officer lowered the flaps to 1; and due to the turbulence we sped up to 260 knots momentarily; causing a flap over speed. We raised the flaps again and got a secondary; momentary stick shaker.




Synopsis: B767 Captain reported that moderate turbulence on departure resulted in two stick shaker warnings.
Date: 202009
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: 100
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Distraction; Workload; Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown; Confusion
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Staffing; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Was being vectored for the GPS XX approach at ZZZ.  Was a plane ahead with a similar call sign.  Controller gave me a approach clearance for the ILS XX; I was expecting the GPS XX and the position sounded off.  I turned to join the approach course as I was positioned for this; but then questioned the Controller telling him I thought he meant to give the clearance to the plane ahead.  He said he had but the plane ahead also stated they were given no clearance.The Controller had given me; Aircraft X; the clearance in error.  I then turned back to my assigned heading and the Controller then cleared the other plane.  I never left my assigned altitude.  The Controller seemed over loaded throughout the flight.  The current staffing at ATC seems to be straining their capacity with controllers covering many more frequencies which means pilots tend to step on each other as we can't hear the other frequencies.




Synopsis: GA pilot reported ATC clearance issues involving similar call signs and cited Controller workload as a contributing factor.
Date: 201703
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZHU.ARTCC, TX
Flight conditions: Marginal
Weather elements / visibility: Turbulence; Thunderstorm
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Embraer Legacy 450/500
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZHU
ATC / advisory: Center ZHU
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Weather
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: Crossing a line of storms; we were at FL450. It appeared the storms were about 6;000 feet below us. All of the sudden we got into moderate turbulence and wave which caused the plane to climb and kick off the autopilot. It was caused by wave and turbulence due to the storms. The PIC took control of the plane and got us calmly back down to altitude. No suggestions at this time.


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


Synopsis: EMB550 flight crew reported moderate turbulence at FL450 that kicked off the autopilot and climbed the aircraft.
Date: 201205
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Gulfstream V / G500 / G550
Operator: Fractional
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Main Gear Door
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Fractional
Reporter function: Technician
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Airframe; Maintenance Powerplant
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Distraction; Fatigue; Situational Awareness; Workload
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: May 2012 evening; I was dispatched to go to ZZZ1 to work on a Gulfstream G-V aircraft. I was told it had a # 4 Brake Assembly that was worn to limits and that I would need to make arrangements to go to our Repair Station at ZZZ to acquire the proper tooling. I left my house at XA:00 am the next morning to fly to ZZZ2. My flight was delayed one hour; so I didn't arrive until noon. I then drove to our Repair Station facility in ZZZ to pickup equipment; I left there approximately two and a half hours later. I then drove to ZZZ1 (139 miles). It took me six hours in rush hour/holiday traffic to make the trip. I met up with Mechanic Y. We got to the aircraft and started to work on the aircraft. I disconnected the right outboard Main Landing Gear (MLG) door rod end from the outboard MLG door and I reinstalled the hardware into rod end so we wouldn't lose it. I then used a rubber chock to prop the Main Gear door outward so we could get the # 4 Tire/Wheel Assembly off; to gain access to the # 4 brake. When we went to pull the wheel off; Mechanic Y bumped the door and the chock fell down; so Mechanic Y used the rod assembly and placed it against the gear door to keep it out of our way. We got the wheel assembly off and started removing the brake. [An] air-turn back [occurred later.]




Synopsis: An Aircraft Mechanic describes the events that led to an air turnback of a Gulfstream G-V aircraft. He and another Mechanic had just completed a # 4 brake change on the right-hand Main Landing Gear (MLG); but failed to reconnect the outboard MLG door.
Date: 201502
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Cockpit Furnishing
Component problem: Design
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Company Policy
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Arrived at aircraft and discovered maintenance working on a L3 window overheat written up by previous crew. As mechanic removed the RAM mount [iPad holder] from L3 window; I noticed the window was delaminated where the ram mount had been stuck to the window. I wrote up the delamination. Both issues were deferred. No attention was brought to the fact the RAM mount had been stuck on that window. I am concerned the black rubber suction cups we are sticking on the heated window are absorbing heat from both the window heat and sun then reflecting the heat back into the window. I removed a RAM mount from the window on the next plane we flew and discovered the window was hot where the mount had been placed. I am concerned the potential damage caused by this excessive heat could be a serious safety issue and also concerned we may be incurring unnecessary and significant maintenance costs.




Synopsis: B737 Captain believes that the RAM mount suction cup fastened to the L3 window is causing overheats and delaminations.
Date: 202003
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: SEA.Tower, WA
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 170/175 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class B SEA
ATC / advisory: Tower SEA
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach
Contributing factors: Procedure; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Experienced some wake turbulence at about 100 ft. above the runway making us a little unstable. Conducted a safe go around.




Synopsis: E175 Captain reported that a wake turbulence encounter on final approach resulted in a go-around.
Date: 201204
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: SEA.Airport, WA
Flight conditions: IMC
Aircraft: A319
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Weight And Balance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Approximately half way towards the departure end of the Runway (16L SEA) Load Planning sent an ACARS message with our 'Final' weights. Within a minute we received a second 'Final' weight message. At this point we were approaching number one for takeoff and quickly loaded into the FMGC the new ZFW/CG (Zero Fuel Weight/Center of Gravity) numbers for recomputed Center of Gravity/Trim and ran through our 'Before takeoff' checklist. Due to the nature of our late arriving weights my First Officer and I elected to stay with the higher speed numbers we had computed prior to engine start (ATGW of 147.6). With our final checks complete we were put into position on Runway 16L and given takeoff clearance. Right after we were airborne we received another 'Final' weight message (3rd) and the ZFW had increased by over 6;000 LBS from the previous message (2nd message). After reaching our initial cruise altitude I sent a message to Dispatch as well as Load Planning to explain the discrepancies. Load Planning replied that right before our takeoff he had received a revised passenger count from [Customer Service]. [Recently] there have been quite a few incidences where Load Planning has sent a message to the cockpit stating that the weights were incorrect and that new weights were on the way. However in this case we did not receive any such notification that 'new Final' weights were on the way. With all the distractions; and constant change that is taking place with our new procedures it is really important to ensure crews do not takeoff if final weights are dynamically changing. It would be better to have Load Planning hold the flight on the ground to ensure all data is stable.




Synopsis: An A319 Captain reported he received final weights after takeoff and this was not an isolated incident.
Date: 201903
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 170/175 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant In Charge
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Illness / Injury; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Attendant; Person Passenger
When detected: Taxi
Result: Aircraft Equipment Problem Dissipated; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: After landing at ZZZ while taxiing; I could smell a strong odor in aft of plane. I called Flight Attendant (FA-A) she could smell it too. She thought it smelled like gasoline. To me the smell was like burnt fuel; but really strong. Passengers could smell it too. It was throughout the plane. It left a taste in my mouth/throat/nose. Eyes stinging; feeling sick; light headed; headache. The feeling came on rather quickly. The Captain did not smell it in cabin after main door was open. We deplaned aircraft.




Synopsis: EMB-175 Flight Attendant reported strong gasoline type odor and subsequent health issues during arrival taxi to gate.
Date: 201811
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Hazardous Material Violation; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Ground Personnel
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General Maintenance Action; General Work Refused
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Received off inbound flight mail parcel containing undeclared lithium battery UN3481. This undeclared dangerous good was put on a passenger airline [flight] containing lithium batteries. This is becoming a very frequent event of the USPS tendering mail parcels with undeclared dangerous goods lithium batteries for passenger airline flights. This mail had already flown and was boarded on one leg of a flight.




Synopsis: Load Control agent reported connecting USPS parcel containing Hazmat cargo missing required dangerous goods identification label.
Date: 201809
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: M-20 B/C Ranger
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Parked
Second aircraft: Helicopter
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Instrument
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Other Watching while eating lunch.
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged
Contributing factors: Airport; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: After conducting an instrument proficiency flight we parked on the ramp and were having lunch at the on airport restaurant. At approximately XA15 a turbine powered helicopter hover taxied; landed; and departed behind my aircraft that was parked as directed by ground [control]. The distance from my aircraft to the helicopter was less than 50 feet and the flight control surfaces of my aircraft were being fully deflected in both directions for perhaps 45 seconds. This represented an unsafe situation with the potential to significantly damage my aircraft. Ground [control] should have required the helicopter to hover taxi and land a safe distance away from my aircraft and others parked in the vicinity. The helicopter pilot should have; in the absence of direction from the tower; hover taxied and landed much further away from parked light aircraft. There is plenty of open ramp space at [the airport] and the irresponsibility demonstrated by both the controller in the tower and the helicopter pilot should not be dismissed. As you can probably tell; I am more than a little angry over this incident.




Synopsis: A Mooney Pilot reported that a Helicopter did a hover taxi less that 50 feet behind his aircraft.
Date: 201912
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZZ.Airport, FO
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: A319
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Landing; Parked
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
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 Illness / Injury; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Attendant; Person Flight Crew
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate; Taxi
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: When I parked at gate and opened door #1 (Flight Attendant) FA reported fume event in cabin. #2 FA reported a strong dirty sock odor and advised me she was not feeling well.I went to cabin saw cleaners/security cleaners also wearing mask and holding noses. I put info in logbook and Maintenance advised could be APU and wanted to me to run engines without APU. While hooking up aircraft with cart station personnel sprayed entire aircraft with a lemon smelling spray making odor even worse.Tried starting engines but air cart failed. Maintenance advised they would find another one and with doors and windows shut and without air odor become unbearable and left aircraft due to concern of safety.




Synopsis: A319 Captain reported being advised by flight attendants of strong fumes in the cabin during gate arrival resulting in physiological issues.
Date: 201702
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: PA-23-250 Aztec
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Attitude Indicator(Gyro/Horizon/ADI)
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Departed and cleared to 2;000 expecting 7;000; I got distracted when my gyro CB popped with a strong smell of electrical wiring and flew through 2;000 to 3;000 and when Departure saw my error; he told me to maintain 3;000. I am too dependent on my autopilot/Flight Director (FD) and when it all failed; I got distracted; again!




Synopsis: PA-23-250 pilot reported he climbed through his ATC assigned altitude when his gyro CB popped.
Date: 201409
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: I90.TRACON, TX
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class D CLL; Class E I90
ATC / advisory: TRACON I90
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure; Airspace Structure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: VFR flight from SEALY intersection to Waco (ACT) via CLL VOR. Using traffic advisories (flight following) from Houston Approach Control; I had received several advisories and vectors from approach control due to the fairly low ceiling and high traffic volume into HOU and IAH.  I was tracking the 143 radial inbound to CLL VOR when I received a call from approach; asking if I was talking to CLL tower since I was in their airspace.  I replied 'No;' and the approach controller advised he would give them a call.  I received no further communication on the subject from approach control or CLL tower.  My past experience has been that when under traffic advisories; ATC has coordinated any transitions for me or advised me to contact the control tower for transition prior to entering the airspace.  I was approximately 3 nm from the CLL VOR at the time; so I was already inside the Class D airspace.  I saw one aircraft off my right wing; approximately 2 miles away; appearing to be maneuvering in the pattern.  I was focusing on maintaining my altitude and cloud separation; and I was also especially in tune with ATC to ensure I didn't miss any traffic call outs.  I didn't realize I was that close to the airfield; and when ATC notified me; I double checked my sectional.  CLL is in an especially busy portion of the Houston Sectional; and the Class D boundary got lost in the clutter on the map.  I'm not aware of any actual or potential near misses caused by or incidental to my lapse of situational awareness.  It was a valuable lesson for me to ensure appropriate communication when near controlled airspace.




Synopsis: Pilot reports of receiving flight following and the Controller asking him if he is talking to CLL Tower for permission to go through the Class D airspace.