elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201302
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Oxygen System/Portable
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Before boarding; I walked to main cabin to deliver catering items. While there I noticed that one of the oxygen walk-around masks did not appear to be correctly connected to the bottle. As I have been finding these regularly; I took it upon myself to check more closely and found that both oxygen bottles in the aft cabin did not have the mask tubing properly connected to the bottle. I told the crew of my discovery and shared my previous experience with them. I suggested that they look more carefully during preflight checks because sometimes it is not immediately evident that the tubing is not connected. I reported the discrepancy to the Captain and asked that the issue be entered in the aircraft logbook. He did and called Maintenance who came and rectified the issue during boarding. Flight attendant training should include emphasis on checking tubing connection on oxygen bottles during every pre-flight check. As mentioned; it is sometimes difficult to see if the tubing is correctly attached because of the confined locations of emergency equipment and other factors.




Synopsis: A Flight Attendant on a B737-800 found that both oxygen bottles in the aft cabin did not have the mask tubing properly connected to the bottle.
Date: 202001
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-700
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
Aircraft component: Autopilot
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Human factors: Confusion
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT; Inflight Event / Encounter Unstabilized Approach
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew FLC Overrode Automation; Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: We were doing the RNAV W to XXR from ZZZZZ. Aircraft was doing fine as we configured. Approaching 1;300 feet AGL; just as the flaps were set to 30; the aircraft pitched over and started a dive. I said; 'what's it doing?' a few times quickly then clicked off the autopilot and recovered the aircraft below 1;000 feet. Tower gave us a low altitude alert. I had the ILS in as backup; and I climbed back to a normal glidepath and landed uneventfully. The Captain and I discussed the situation and we agreed that the aircraft (for some reason) went to 'Speed' and was chasing the airspeed. We all have the aircraft go into speed during arrivals with no indication; but this was a first for me on approach. Had this been night/IMC; it could have resulted in something very bad.




Synopsis: B737-700 First Officer reported that while on final approach the aircraft pitched over and started a dive. After disengaging the autopilot; the flight crew recovered and made an uneventful landing.
Date: 201304
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ABQ.Airport, NM
Aircraft: A320
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class B ABQ
ATC / advisory: Tower ABQ
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Local
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Chart Or Publication; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Air Carrier X was departing Runway 8 with the route ABQ2...FTI. Assuming that the air carrier would be on the GRIZZ1 RNAV departure; I cleared Air Carrier X for take off without giving a vector. Air Carrier X departed runway heading; towards rapidly increasing MVAs. I think the 'RNAV to (point)' phraseology with the take off clearance would be a good idea for all airports; not just ones with parallel runways. I would suspect that a pilot would question a clearance like 'RNAV to TYILR' if they're expecting a RADAR vector; providing a last minute sanity check. The first fix that shows in the aircraft's tag is different depending on whether the aircraft is on a RNAV or non-RNAV departure. Double checking the field before switching the aircraft to departure would be another last-second chance to fix the problem. Changing local procedures to highlight non-RNAV air carrier or air taxi departures might also help; but it's not necessarily Ground Control's or Clearance Delivery's responsibility check every strip for Local Control.




Synopsis: ABQ Controller described a confused departure route event when unsure if the departing aircraft was issued a RNAV or conventional SID. The reporter suggested a number of procedural changes to reduce future occurrences.
Date: 201707
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ISP.Airport, NY
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class C ISP
ATC / advisory: Tower ISP
Second aircraft: Small Aircraft; High Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Airport; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We had to wait several minutes for a takeoff clearance due to general aviation operations. The Tower Controller at the time of departure was having a difficult time with the aircraft that turned into us. It may have been a student pilot as he sounded very inexperienced over the radio. We were finally cleared for departure from Runway 6; flying an assigned heading of 059 and maintain 3000. As we were climbing through about 400 AGL I spotted the single engine turning toward us. It was so close and converging that I had no time to point it out to my First Officer who was flying. I immediately said 'I have the aircraft;' and started an aggressive climbing left turn to get away from it. My First Officer did not see the aircraft until it was passing off his side of the aircraft. He said that he thought it was less than a quarter of a mile. This is my second near miss at this airport. The Controller was very agitated with this aircraft operator for failing to follow his assigned clearance. I know that we must share the airspace with General Aviation; however; I feel that something has to be done to prevent a tragedy from occurring at this airport.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported taking evasive action at 400 feet AGL during departure from ISP to avoid a GA aircraft that was not complying with the Tower's instructions.
Date: 201812
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
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: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Hazardous Material Violation; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew; Person Ground Personnel
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: A Lithium Ion battery powered wheelchair was loaded without pilot knowledge [NOTOC] and not disconnected in accordance with the FOM guidelines. We flew the chair from ZZZ to ZZZ1 without incident. ZZZ1 ramp informed us of the mistake. ZZZ1 ramp made sure the chair was properly stowed and we continued the trip. I would add that the chair was folded up into a bag that looked exactly like a double stroller; something ZZZ is used to seeing.


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


Synopsis: B737NG flight crew reported no Notice to Captain form [NOTOC] provided in addition to Lithium Ion Powered wheelchair not configured for shipment.
Date: 202104
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: PC-12
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Ambulance
Flight phase: Initial Approach
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Reporter organization: Contracted Service
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Automation Aircraft Terrain Warning; Person Flight Crew; Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors; Procedure; Airspace Structure; Chart Or Publication
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was told to cross ZZZZZ at or above 12;300 feet and I was cleared for the RNAV (GPS) Approach. As I was descending past ZZZZZ I set my altitude at 10;000 feet. I should have set 11;800 feet per the approach chart; which is the altitude between ZZZZZ and ZZZZZ1. After ZZZZZ1 it is 10;000 feet until ZZZZZ2. About 10 to 15 miles from ZZZZZ1; Approach asked me to report ZZZZZ1. This seemed like an odd request; so I looked at the chart to make sure where ZZZZZ1 was and realized the error in altitude. As I started to initiate a climb; the TAWS (Terrain Alert Warning) activated and I got the terrain warning. The rest of the approach was normal after that.I think that I had 11;800 [ft.] set before ZZZZZ because the altitude I was descending from and my rate of descent was going to have me cross ZZZZZ well above 12;300 [ft.]. Then after crossing ZZZZZ I set 10;000 [ft.] because I was mentally one step ahead of where I actually was. While I was being proactive and efficient; I did not double check and confirm where I was on the approach. While I wasn't fatigued or distracted; I think complacency played a role due to the nice weather and the length of the flight.




Synopsis: A Medevac pilot reported they set too low an altitude for the approach procedure and received a terrain warning alert.
Date: 201412
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Night
Aircraft: A300
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Landing Gear
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Technician
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Airframe; Maintenance Powerplant
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown; Confusion
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation - Speed All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Manuals; Procedure
Primary problem: Manuals

Narrative: Aircraft arrived at gate with pilot report of inadvertent gear down overspeed of 280 knots at 11;000ft. After consulting with Maintenance Control representative; a Vmo/MMO Inspection was complied with due to Aircraft Maintenance Manual (AMM) defines an overspeed as speed in excess of Vmo +20kts. Maintenance Control Technical checked for an overspeed condition using ACARS playback and found aircraft had no overspeed condition on flight leg reported. As crew report had only a 10 knots overspeed Maintenance Control advised no other action was required. When aircraft arrived at base; aircraft was re-inspected In Accordance With (IAW) Aircraft Maintenance Manual (AMM) for a landing gear down overspeed inspection; no damage was found on re-inspection. Conflicting AMM references as to what is an overspeed condition and AMM does not reference aircraft configuration at time of overspeed.




Synopsis: A line Aircraft Maintenance Technician (AMT) describes how conflicting Aircraft Maintenance Manual (AMM) references contributed to a landing gear 'Down' overspeed inspection not being accomplished on an A300 aircraft.
Date: 201912
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: SFO.Tower, CA
Aircraft: B777-300
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
Airspace: Class B SFO
ATC / advisory: Tower SFO
Second aircraft: A319
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Local
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Distraction
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: Taxi; In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance; Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I told Aircraft X to hold short of RWY 28L. The pilot read back the hold short instructions. At the same time a Controller was opening up Local Assist. Getting his chair; and was getting paper. In the process blocking the view of TWY H. Not an issue since I heard the feedback. Aircraft X slowly started to cross 28L. Ground Controller said 'He is moving.' I sent Aircraft Y around. Told Aircraft X to stop. Fabulous team work.Hard to say because if Local Assist had been opened 2 minutes later; I would have seen Aircraft X moving sooner. Ground did a great job of notifying me of the situation progressing.




Synopsis: SFO Tower Controller reported a runway incursion that possibly would have been missed if it weren't for the Ground Controller advising the Local Controller.
Date: 201407
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Aircraft: A319
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Aircraft component: Oxygen System/Portable
Component problem: Design
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant In Charge
Reporter qualification: Flight Attendant Current
Human factors: Training / Qualification; Physiological - Other; Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Illness / Injury
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: In-flight
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: When providing care for an elderly passenger who was having a seizure and after vomiting; the licensed medical personnel said to administer a POB (Portable Oxygen Bottle) after she finished vomiting and was lying on her side. The issue arose when trying to open and administer the new POBs that I believe are on the new A319 aircraft. Underneath the knob to open the flow of oxygen is a thick metal wire hasp that is very finely and tightly braided. It is braided so tight that anyone with their fingernails cannot open them! I tried using the MRT to pry it open to unbraid the hasp then to unscrew the flow valve to give it to her; but it took nearly 20 minutes to unbraid the first POB and it BENT the MRT! Then after giving the passenger the POB she started to get more color in her face and was feeling better until the first POB's oxygen ran out. When trying to open the next POB it took nearly another 20 minutes to pry this tight wire hasp open and it almost cost the woman her life because she started feeling ill again in the time between POB bottles. I believe there used to be a circular handle connecting the wire hasps that (in many of the other emergency equipment) makes it easy to open the equipment. I strongly suggest considering the safety of the passengers to start getting these handles added to the wire hasps on the POBs or the next ill passenger may not be so fortunate. It was very scary to not be able to open these bottles at the time as each moment was so pivotal in this woman going in and out of consciousness. Add circular (small coin shaped) wire hasp handle (as seen on the hasp of the First Aid Kit) to easily unbraid the wire hasps on the POBs -Issue a must read memo to prepare flight attendants.  Until hasps are corrected- provide pliers in the cabin to use to open the current new POBs.




Synopsis: A Flight Attendant reported that the safety wires preventing inadvertent emptying of portable oxygen bottles are her airline's new aircraft are nearly impossible to remove without mechanical assistance.
Date: 202007
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737 Next Generation Undifferentiated
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Portable Extinguisher
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Technician
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Airframe; Maintenance Powerplant
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Maintenance
When detected: Routine Inspection
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Incorrect / Not Installed / Unavailable Part; Company Policy; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: We ordered 2 water fire extinguishers from [the] stores and they both came with the next due date on the M175-e tag blank. One bottle was last checked [last year] on the front of the tag and if we use the ECRA 0510-XXXXX the weight has to be checked yearly. So; this extinguisher would require [a] weigh in [a few] days. [The] extinguisher was taken to inspection and reweighed and [to see if] there [was] a way to change the shelf life of [the] M175-E tag [to be] filled out for [the] next due date in a year.To prevent this; on Form #45-XXXX; [the] Non-Rotable Parts Tag that came with the extinguisher and has a shelf life limit of [a few years] - which is the next hydro due date? Is [the correct] date to the next weigh date or next hydro due date - whichever is sooner? Or do we need to create a next service weigh date program for stores so when we get an extinguisher from [the] stores that comes with more than 75 days on the next weigh date as per the B737 #2 SVC Card B737-XX-XXXX? This should be in effect for both the water and Halon fire extinguishers.




Synopsis: Technician reported receiving two portable fire extinguishers from the stores without parts tags filled out correctly.
Date: 201503
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: AUS.Airport, TX
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: 1.75
Light: Night
Aircraft: B737-700
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class C AUS
ATC / advisory: Tower AUS
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory
Contributing factors: Weather
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: On takeoff out of AUS; we received a windshear warning at 800-900 feet. We took off on Runway 35L; surface winds were 020/6. At approximately 800 feet AGL airspeed started to drop; so I lowered the nose to follow flight director guidance when we received a windshear warning. Winds were 190/32. Just as I advanced the thrust toward emergency the warning went away. We advised the Tower of winds and continued with a normal climbout. When time permitted we also advised Dispatch as well.




Synopsis: B737-700 Captain reported receiving a windshear warning and a loss in airspeed at 800 feet AGL after takeoff from AUS.
Date: 201307
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skylane 182/RG Turbo Skylane/RG
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Reciprocating Engine Assembly
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Fortunately; the incident to my knowledge did not cause any violations at the airport. The runway I landed on did not have any traffic. I was informed; after the Supervisor listened to the recording; that I clearly declared a rough engine which the Supervisor said the Controller said he did not hear. If I had continued down the base leg for [Runway] 25 as instructed; I would have been past [Runway] 16 and would have had a hard time landing any place. I had been listening to traffic and was aware no one was departing or landing on [runways] 16 or 34 so I radioed I was landing on [Runway] 16 due to an emergency (the engine ran rough again at that moment). I landed without incident and taxied to my parking space and called the Tower at their request. I was told the next day that I handled the situation properly and the Supervisor said they wanted to apologize for the Controller not hearing my request due to a rough engine. It sounded like the Supervisor was on top of the incident and taking steps to try to keep it happening again.




Synopsis: C182 pilot reports landing on an intersecting runway to the runway cleared to land on due to a rough running engine. The Tower is advised of the situation; but apparently did not hear the transmission and is upset about the cross runway landing.