elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201304
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Rangemaster (Navion)
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Electrical Wiring & Connectors
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Time Pressure; Troubleshooting; Workload
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Climbing out; smoke was noticed in the cockpit. I had already established two-way communication with a Class C airport for transit clearance and was transmitting a discreet transponder code (with Mode C.) I alerted ATC of the situation and advised that I was turning off all electrical items -- hence NORDO and NO Transponder. Smoke was evacuated by slightly opening door. I did not declare an emergency. No priority was requested or accepted. I ultimately landed without incident at intended destination after briefly turning electrical back on and advising ATC of intentions. I was instructed to call ATC via telephone after landing and I complied. Due to the situation; I was in a Class 'C' Airspace without two-way communication or Mode-C though I did make ATC aware of the situation and my intentions. Problem preliminarily diagnosed as a heater diverter box which chaffed and made contact with a battery cable; heating the heater control cable melting its plastic shroud. Nothing caused a proximity conflict with any other aircraft; no other traffic was diverted to my knowledge.




Synopsis: A Navion Rangemaster pilot reported smoke in the cockpit so he secured all electrical and proceeded NORDO to his Class C destination where a shorted battery cable wire near the heater-diverter box was found.
Date: 201809
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: SBCW.ARTCC, FO
Flight conditions: IMC
Aircraft: B777 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Approach; Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Distraction; Time Pressure; Workload
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types
Detector: Person Flight Crew
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Was initially told to expect ILS 9R about 50 to 60 miles from landing. Then; some 10 minutes later and much too close to landing; [we] were given an almost never used runway and approach. The approach controllers accent and English was very hard to understand requiring her to repeat the new approach clearance 4 times before all three of us agreed that the new runway was now ' LEFT' and not the usual [Runway] 9R; and that the approach was RNAV 9L Zulu. This; in a very radio congested regime; required a lot of time. This added greatly to crew stress and time to rebrief a seldom used approach.




Synopsis: B777 Captain reported ATC increased the flight crew workload and stress level due to a communication breakdown and late runway change.
Date: 201506
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Citation Excel (C560XL)
Operator: Fractional
Operating under: Part 135
Flight phase: Taxi
Aircraft component: Nose Gear
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Fractional
Reporter function: Other / Unknown
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Powerplant; Maintenance Airframe
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Line service supervisor in ZZZ [for our contract service company] was towing a customer's Citation Excel in June and the pilot told him [that] putting the [tow] strap on the [NLG] chrome was incorrect. Pilot instructed him to put it in on the actual gear casing; where the tow bar would hook up. Line supervisor reported this was the first time he had a pilot tell him this. Lektro [Tug] training never said to tow the aircraft that way.I suggest that this procedure outline in the Aircraft Maintenance Manual (AMM) stating that the strap should be wrapped just above the fork be sent to all FBOs so they know the proper procedure when using the Lektro. And that the FBOs put this as part of their training.

Callback: Reporter stated he is a Maintenance Manager and was reporting about one of their Line Supervisors who was not part of Maintenance; but was towing one of their customer's Excel aircraft. The correct location for the fabric strap belt to be installed on the nose gear of Cessna Citation Excel's is just below the chrome area on the Nose Landing Gear (NLG) strut piston and above the nose gear fork that the single nose tire attaches to. Tow straps are not supposed to be wrapped around the chromed section of NLGs; at least not on Cessna Excels. He does not remember the model of Lektro tug used in the towing.  All of their FBOs have recently been informed about the correct tow strap installation on nose gears when using Lektro tugs. That info is generally found in the towing section of Aircraft Maintenance Manuals.



Synopsis: A Maintenance Manager reports that a pilot for their customer's Cessna Citation Excel aircraft had informed a Ramp Supervisor that wrapping a tow strap around the chrome section of the nose landing gear was incorrect. The Supervisor had noted to the Manager their Lektro tug tow training never said to tow the aircraft that way.
Date: 201310
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: IMC
Aircraft: MD-83
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Pressurization System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: At FL290 Cabin Altitude Warning Light came on. Emergency descent started; First Officer completed the QRH. Was not able to maintain cabin altitude in auto or manual. Masks dropped in cabin. Descended to 10;000 feet. Declared an emergency; and landed without any more problems. No passengers were harmed.




Synopsis: MD-83 Captain reported loss of cabin pressure at FL290. Unable to control cabin pressure the flight declared an emergency; descended to 10;000 feet and continued to a safe landing.
Date: 202102
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Flight plan: IFR
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Developmental
Human factors: Distraction; Workload; Training / Qualification; Situational Awareness; Confusion; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Environment - Non Weather Related; Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: ZZZ1 ARTCC went ATC zero from XA-XB:X0p local. Sector X was required to get ZZZ [Airport] arrivals down to 9;000 feet at ZZZZZ [Intersection]; near ZZZ [VOR].The reason for such an early descent was to get them below departures which were supposed to be at 10;000 feet southbound filed over ZZZ [VOR]; which kept them out of ZZZ [ARTCC] XY airspace that was ATC zero. The arrivals were given certain routing which had them go through ZZZ1 [ARTCC] XY ATC zero airspace. We couldn't turn the arrivals to stay out of that airspace because the departures were sometimes coming out at altitudes other than 10;000 feet; and we couldn't see limited [Data Blocks] because radar coverage stopped. Plus; this was the coordinated routing so we weren't sure that we should take them off of it anyways.  The paper that we were given that served as our 'briefing' on the event; had information to give the aircraft from Sector X to ZZZ Approach. This would have been fine; except ZZZ1 Approach was open and their airspace is between Sector X and ZZZ2 Approach.There needs to be better communication for the safety of the airplanes and controllers. Why were we allowed to fly through a portion of ZZZ1 [ARTCC] with the arrivals; but the departures had to wait. And; if we were supposed to turn the arrivals; or if we were allowed to climb the departure on contact; that needed to be better communicated to the Controller. also; when these route or procedures are being created; they need to have all facilities involved; so that the information we receive is actually pertinent and usable.




Synopsis: Center Controller reported an airspace deviation and cited confusion due to another Center going ATC Zero contributed to the event.
Date: 201310
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: MD-82
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Air Conditioning and Pressurization Pack
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Technician
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Powerplant; Maintenance Airframe
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Technician
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Maintenance
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: October 2013; fellow Mechanic; Mechanic Y and [I] were assigned a Pack Run (burn) Card 21-92-12 on an MD-82 aircraft. Upon completion of the pack burn card; Mechanic Y asked me to witness him removing caps from the Left and Right [pack] sense line 'Tee' fittings. I observed Mechanic Y remove caps and reconnect lines on both Left and Right System. [Recommend] incorporating into [Work Card] Kit two caps with red streamers to more easily see the caps still attached.

Callback: Reporter stated a Work Card for an Air Conditioning (A/C) Pack High Temperature run (burn) was accomplished as a precautionary measure because Maintenance had earlier found fluid in the APU intake of the MD-82 aircraft. The purpose of the high temp burn (run) was to check for and remove any odors or smells that may have occurred from ingestion of the foreign fluid into the APU; since bleed air from the APU is also used for operating the A/C Packs. Reporter stated there is a sign-off on the Work Card verifying removal of caps for the sense lines after completion of the Work Card. He did observe another Mechanic remove the caps; but the caps had been installed in the wrong location; which he did not know and never even thought about questioning.

Second narrative: Before starting [Air Condition] Pack burn [run]; I looked and did not see caps installed on sense lines. So I installed caps from my tool box on what I thought was the correct 'T' fitting on Left and Right side. Accomplished Pack Run Card 21-92-12. After pack run; I removed my caps from Left and Right [Air Conditioning Pack] 'T' fittings and reinstalled sense lines. At that time I had Mechanic X witnessed me performing this task.Recommend putting caps in [the Pack Run] Kit with red flags installed on ends.


Synopsis: Two Aircraft Maintenance Technicians (AMTs) were informed the end caps they had installed and removed during accomplishment of a Work Card for an Air Conditioning (A/C) Pack High Temperature run (burn) on an MD-82 aircraft were not installed in the correct location for the pack run.
Date: 201210
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: Cessna 150
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Final Approach
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; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Time Pressure
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Diverted
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: During pre-flight I estimated the plane had about 30 gallons of fuel.  I had just picked up a banner and was towing it for 2 hours around [the local area]. The weather was VFR: 54* 29.96.  After getting to 1;000 FT AGL; I contacted Approach and let them know I would be in the area for 2 hours.  During the flight the engine had a slight roughness occasionally.  The owner told me that the carburetor; mags; spark plugs had all been changed and that the roughness or hiccup should not be a problem.  On the final leg of the flight the plane began to run rough.   I checked everything and the plane cleared itself up.  I told Approach that the plane had just ran rough; but is okay now.  I told the Controller I would continue to my departure airport.  Shortly after that the engine got rough again and I turned back and told Approach of the engine roughness.  They gave me winds and cleared me to land on any runway.  I noticed I still had fuel pressure.  The engine was not making enough power.  I released the banner and landed in a large bean field.  I contacted Approach and told them I landed safely and that there was no damage to the plane or property.  I feel that you should land as soon as there is any abnormality.




Synopsis: C150 pilot reports a slight engine roughness while towing a banner at 1;000 feet.  Toward the end of the flight more pronounced roughness appears then clears on its own.  When the roughness appears again the decision to land at the nearest airport is made but decreasing power results in dropping the banner and landing in a field.
Date: 201910
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Clear; 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Citation II S2/Bravo (C550)
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
Aircraft component: Oil Line
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Shortly after take-off; we noticed a drop in oil pressure on the number 1 engine. We continued to monitor the oil pressure as it continued to drop. We notified ATC and requested a return to ZZZ. When the oil pressure reached its lower limits we proceeded to complete the engine shutdown per the engine shutdown checklist and [Requested Priority Handling] and made an uneventful landing. Maintenance discovered a crimped O ring which appeared to have been in an oil line since the last engine overhaul.




Synopsis: Citation 550 First Officer reported a loss of oil pressure caused an air turn back and emergency landing.
Date: 202010
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: Mixed
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Baron 58/58TC
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Fuel Line; Fittings; & Connectors
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: During my climb from ZZZ; I began to smell fuel in the cockpit. I asked Departure how far I was from the airport. I was planning to turn back to the airport. Controller suggested I land at ZZZ1 which was eight miles closer. I told him I thought it was okay and wanted to proceed to ZZZ. Shortly after; I see fuel start to drip from the cockpit panel to the floor. I then decided to land at ZZZ1 where I was on a short right base to Runway XX. I landed and was instructed to taxi to a safe area to exit the aircraft. When I shut it down; I had the fire extinguisher ready and door open. I shut down the aircraft and turned off everything including the fuel valves. Fire department and paramedics checked the aircraft and myself to make sure everything was safe. After they checked it out; we moved the aircraft. The fuel leak was coming from the steam gauge fuel line which is going to be replaced.




Synopsis: BE58 pilot reported a fuel leak from the interior panel resulted in divert.
Date: 201701
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: BIH.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Fog
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Medium Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class E ZOA
ATC / advisory: Center ZOA
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Confusion; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Weather; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was pilot monitoring and my captain was pilot flying. We were VMC conditions about to commence the approach into BIH. My captain had pointed out a few minutes prior that he could see MMH visually and it wasn't IMC. ATC cleared us for the RNAV 12 approach and he told me to cancel IFR with Oakland center. I thought that he had BIH in sight so I told Oakland center to cancel our IFR flight plan as he had requested.We began the approach VMC and descended to MDA. We noticed fog over the airport (below us) and then climbed to 13;000 feet (still VMC); and turned north. I contacted Oakland Center and told them we went missed and wanted to proceed to our alternate which was FAT. The controller was really confused and asked who cleared us for the approach and if we were VMC and had the terrain in sight. We had the mountains in sight. After several calls to him; he finally gave us an IFR clearance to proceed to our alternate FAT. Flight landed in FAT and was uneventful. FAT controller gave us phone number to call.




Synopsis: First Officer reported canceling IFR; performed a missed approach and requested a new clearance to their alternate.
Date: 202009
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZFW.ARTCC, TX
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skylane 182/RG Turbo Skylane/RG
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E Y
ATC / advisory: Center ZFW
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict NMAC; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Automation Aircraft TA; Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Near miss occurred while in IMC on an IFR flight plan. [I] was conducting training with student student flying and CFI monitoring. ATC Center advised traffic; replied 'Negative contact in IMC' center asked if we had him on TCAS; replied yes.  Asked if we wanted left or right; center gave us vectors for traffic acknowledged and complied with vectors.  At this point the vectors put us into conflict with traffic  coming in and out of the cloud bank glimpsed traffic very close less than 50 feet horizontal and vertical in between clouds on a collision course approx 10/11 o clock off the nose. Took aircraft from student and extreme evasive action was taken to avoid a collision.  Controller gave some sort of statement after the accident about sorry about that; those vectors put you on a collision.  Contributing factors ATC's failure to maintain separation of IFR aircraft in IMC from radar targets; second aircraft failure to maintain VFR.




Synopsis: C182 Flight Instructor reported ATC issuing a vector into traffic resulted in pilot taking extreme collision avoidance maneuver.