elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201907
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Check Pilot; Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: During climb to FL380 started getting fumes of unknown origin in cockpit; smelled like something electrical burning or overheating. Asked the Captain if he smelled something; which he did. While investigating instruments and lights for 2-3 minutes; [the] smell started to dissipate. We started discussing possible causes and plan of action. Closest airports were ZZZ1; ZZZ2; and ZZZ. Got weather for ZZZ2 and ZZZ. After level off at FL380; the smell started to come back. Once the smell came back; [we] swapped roles and [requested priority handling]; requesting a divert to ZZZ due to familiarity and less traffic congestion. While I talked to ATC and started flying forward ZZZ; PM (Pilot Monitoring) started setting us up for ZZZ. After setting up approach notified [Operations Control]. Landed in ZZZ uneventfully; taxied off runway and got inspected by fire crews which didn't see anything on thermal scan. Taxied to ramp to have Maintenance check the aircraft.


Second narrative: During the climb phase; both of us started to smell a burning; electrical smell. It came very strong at first and then started to dissipate almost immediately. It was almost gone after 2-3 minutes. During that time we tried to troubleshoot what it might be. There were no indications of a problem. When we leveled off at FL380 the smell returned; not as strong as before but was definitely there and was constant. We had already looked at ZZZ2 and ZZZ weather by this point and [we] made a decision to divert to ZZZ. Once we were on the ground; we had CFR (Crash Fire Rescue) inspect the airplane. They couldn't find anything wrong; so we taxied to the gate and Maintenance took the airplane.


Synopsis: Large Transport aircraft flight crew reported intermittent burning electrical fumes during cruise. After troubleshooting the problem; the flight crew decided to divert.
Date: 201501
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: Landing
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Instructor; Captain; Check Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Distraction; Human-Machine Interface
Second reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation
When detected: Other FOQA (post flight)
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Equipment / Tooling; Human Factors
Primary problem: Equipment / Tooling

Narrative: Captain on OE was flying and was doing a practice CAT III approach; flaps 40; somewhat gusty quartering left crosswind within CAT III limits.  Approach was flown very well and landing flare started normally.  In post discussion; Captain admitted some distraction with the HUD guidance and that; coupled with the crosswind; flaps 40; and possible reduction in power by the auto throttles; resulted in a firm touchdown followed by the nose coming down firmly as well.  Having experienced a fair amount of firm touchdowns during OEs and line flying; this one did not seem out of the range of normal although the nose did come down fairly quickly which I could not stop.  The company recommended filing this ASAP.I always remind new Captains on the 737 to adjust the HUD lighting to the minimum they need to avoid their eyes locking on the HUD and not seeing through the HUD for landing.  I also remind them to avoid early power reductions either by their own hand or by the auto throttles when landing flaps 40.  I will continue doing that.


Second narrative: Company indicated a hard landing in ZZZ.The landing was firm but did not appear to be a hard landing. The approach was a practice CAT III during IOE. I was distracted by the HUD display during the touchdown and was slow to initiate the flare.


Synopsis: A B-737 flight crew was reported by company as having had a hard landing. The Captain under instruction reported being distracted by the HUD display.
Date: 201907
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Cessna 210 Centurion / Turbo Centurion 210C; 210D
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Positional / Directional Sensing
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Departing ZZZ; navigating via GPS and Aspen PFD HSI (Primary Flight Display; Horizontal Situation Indicator).  Inadvertent off course route up to 45 degrees due to incorrect heading display on the Aspen PFD; the primary navigation source for the GPSS steering on the autopilot.  ATC informed of incorrect route.  Corrected course and rebooted Aspen; with no resolution.  Elected to return to departure airport for further troubleshooting on the ground.  ATC provided no-gyro turn assistance. Visual approach to ZZZ with uneventful landing. Aspen was indicating correctly on run up and pre-takeoff checks. Problem with the displayed heading on the Aspen PFD continued on the ground; although to a lesser degree; while taxiing.  During consultation with avionics shop; realized a pair of speakers being transported had been inadvertently placed in the passenger cabin below the roof mounted magnetometer for the Aspen.  Confirmed heading interference via Aspen configuration screens with speaker movement. After removal of the speakers (large magnets); confirmed proper Aspen indications on the ground.  Refiled IFR flight plan and departed on 3.5 hour flight with no further abnormalities.




Synopsis: C210 Pilot reported GPSS unreliability due to speaker magnet interference with magnetometer.
Date: 201310
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: Regional Jet 900 (CRJ900)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Engine Air Pneumatic Ducting
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Procedure
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: We previously returned to the field due to an L Bleed Duct Warning. On this flight First Officer had a normal takeoff. At about 9;500-10;000 FT we received an R Bleed Duct Warning message on EICAS. We canceled and identified the message. The First Officer maintained the flight controls with the autopilot on and took the radios. I referenced the QRH for R Bleed Duct Warning. The first thing I saw in the QRH under R Bleed Duct was that after 30 seconds the aircraft would unpressurized and I completed the QRH procedure. The aircraft was climbing through 10;000 FT and I advised the First Officer to request a level off or descent. We requested a descent to the lowest safe altitude. Our initial clearance was for 9;000 FT. The cabin altitude continued to increase and was uncontrollable in auto or manual modes. We advised the Controller we were troubleshooting a pressurization issue and to standby. The warning message became a caution message. I made the decision to return to the field for the second time due to the abnormality of the situation with the opposite side system being affected; our pressurization issue; and taking into account the fuel required to get to destination at a lower altitude. The flight attendant's indicated passengers were very uncomfortable with the pressurization. We landed and returned to the gate without further incident. I contacted our Dispatcher to determine our course of action. Several hours later a decision to cancel the flight was made and a ferry permit was issued to fly unpressurized with bleeds and pack valves closed. We flew unpressurized without further incident. This was a maintenance issue. Upon returning to the field the first time; the Mechanic; First Officer; and I completed an engine run-up. The aircraft passed the ops check and was signed off by Maintenance.




Synopsis: After returning to the field for an L Bleed Duct Warning; CRJ900 flight crew experiences an R Bleed Duct Warning message on EICAS and elects to again return to the field for maintenance.
Date: 202102
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: TRM.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 70
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class E TRM
ATC / advisory: CTAF TRM
Second aircraft: Citation V/Ultra/Encore (C560)
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Instructor
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Other EASA/FAA
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict Airborne Conflict; Inflight Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter
Detector: Automation Aircraft TA; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control; Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: C172 was established in the left hand traffic pattern [at] TRM; RWY (Runway) 35; performing touch and go training. Position reports were made in middle of left downwind and left base. CE560 entering a wide downwind circumnavigated [us] on its base leg. Upon noticing being circumnavigated; CE560 was inquired by [us] to confirm having the preceding traffic in sight. Visual contact was confirmed. Whilst established on a 2 mile final [we] were overtaken on the right side by CE560 having offset its final approach track to the right; subsequently cutting in front of [us]. Seconds later at a height of approximately 150 feet. [we] were caught in the jet's wake and a temporary low altitude loss of control was perceived (bank angles of 45 degrees were noticed without control authority in roll). A go-around was initiated and control over the aircraft regained. Subsequent calls addressed to CE560 to address the issue remained ignored.




Synopsis: C172 instructor pilot reported encountering wake turbulence on approach to TRM from a CE560 jet that resulted in a low altitude upset.
Date: 201909
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
Aircraft component: Seatbelt
Component problem: Design
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Reporter qualification: Flight Attendant Current
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Equipment / Tooling
Primary problem: Equipment / Tooling

Narrative: I boarded the flight and started my safety checks which included pulling on the seatbelt. We were doing final safety checks when the Captain said for us to prepare for departure and me and 2 other flight attendants sat into our seat where we could. [We attempted to] fasten our seat belts. They were too small. 1 girl finally buckled hers but 2 right aft facing and myself could not latch the buckle because of our size and the extra small seatbelt. I knew that we had a few empty seats however; I didn't know where so her and I had to use seatbelt extensions. The harness also pulled out and did not retract. I normally would check to see if it would fit but this aircraft number was not listed on the memo for the seatbelt issue. For landing I took an empty passenger seat. I have called and discussed this with supervisors before.I'm asking for a [company] representative to call me because this is not the first time that this has happened. Thank you!




Synopsis: Flight Attendant reported Flight Crew jump seats do not have adequate seat belts installed.
Date: 202010
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: PA-28 Cherokee/Archer/Dakota/Pillan/Warrior
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Instructor; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Engineer; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Time Pressure; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Ground Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Ground Excursion Runway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Upon landing the student was going too fast to make a 90 degree turn on to the taxiway. The instructor did not have enough time to correct the rudder input. If the instructor had pushed on the rudder to correct the aircraft would have tipped. So the instructor kept the aircraft going straight once it was aimed off the runway. We went into the dirt and on to a taxiway. The aircraft did not hit any lights or signs. The aircraft did not appear to sustain any damage. The engine appeared to be fine. Taxi the aircraft everything seemed to be normal.




Synopsis: Flight Instructor reported student attempted to exit the runway too fast resulting in a runway excursion.
Date: 202104
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: UOX.Airport, MS
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 6
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Parked
ATC / advisory: CTAF UOX
Second aircraft: Helicopter
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private; Flight Crew Instrument; Other A&P
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Other Parked
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I approached UOX from the east-northeast on an IFR plan and was in contact with Memphis Approach on 128.5.  The controller was talking to other GA aircraft in the vicinity as well as two helicopters.  When I had UOX in sight I cancelled IFR for a VFR visual approach to Runway 27.  The controller advised no other aircraft in the vicinity of UOX.  I announced my position and landing intentions on the UNICOM frequency 123.0. Upon landing I left the runway; entered the taxiway/ramp area and taxied to a designated tiedown spot on the ramp. As I turned into the south facing tiedown spot; and still monitoring 123.0; I spotted two [helicopters] approaching in low formation. One of the helicopters announced on the UNICOM 'making formation landing; Runway 9; using the runway and taxiway'.  My familiarity with aircraft and helicopters made it clear that this was going to create a hazardous condition from propwash from those large helicopters. Due to an obstruction in front of my plane I could not taxi further away; nor was there time to take any evasive action.  I told my passenger to hang on; we could be flipped over; and I was on the controls and brakes.  The combined taxiway/ramp markings were just 140 feet from my aircraft. The propwash from the two [helicopters] was tremendous.  Our plane was shaken badly; cones marking reserved parking spaces were blown hundreds of feet to the south; materials in an open hangar on the south side of the ramp were blown around. Fortunately; my post incident inspection revealed that my actions on the controls prevented damage to the aircraft.  Had this landing of the [helicopters] occurred 5 minutes later; our aircraft would have been open; our baggage would have been out on the ramp; the plane would not have been tied down; and my [passenger] would have been blown to the ground.  At that point there would have been injuries and damage to the aircraft. There is no excuse for training to be taking place in this manner at a public airport.  There are important safety reasons for the separation of runways and taxiways.




Synopsis: General Aviation Fixed Wing pilot report his parked aircraft was severely buffeted by rotor wash from landing helicopters.
Date: 202006
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: DFW.Airport, TX
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Tower DFW
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: Confusion
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Airport
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: During my recent 3 day sequence; on two separate occasions I witnessed aircraft incorrectly holding short or attempting to hold short of 17R at DFW in between taxiways EG and EH.  The first time; we were the 3rd aircraft in line on taxiway L when Tower cleared the first Company X aircraft on L about to make the turn onto EH for takeoff.  That aircraft informed Tower they didn't think they had enough room to do so because there was a Company Y aircraft on their left holding short and there was a Company X aircraft holding short on EG.  After much confusion; Tower cleared the EG aircraft for takeoff to clear the area and then Company Y aircraft was cleared for takeoff.  The second time was today.  We were taxiing on L when the one aircraft in front of us was cleared for takeoff.  As I was about to make the turn onto EH; I stopped because another company aircraft had turned short of EG and was taxiing toward 17R to hold short to the right of an aircraft already holding short on EG.  When the short turn company aircraft saw I had stopped and Tower had scolded me to hurry up and make the EH turn for takeoff; that aircraft stopped.  I then turned and proceeded to takeoff.  I think what is happening is Captain's taxiing to 17R are expecting to see 3 hold short points at EG; EH; EF with 3 aircraft holding short side-by-side.  However; EF is currently closed for construction.  They mistakenly think the last hold short point is EF; but that is actually now EG.  To deepen the trap; I think they are also seeing the painted EG taxi box in the hold short area which they must think is pointing them to an EG hold short point even though there is no taxi line there to 17R.  The painted EG taxi box is intended to direct aircraft on L to start their turn there onto EG.  Both instances were disconcerting and after seeing it happen twice in as many days.  I think this pitfall needs to be shared with others.  I think a short warning message about this to pilots might be helpful and possibly a temporary DFW hotspot be implemented.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported construction related taxiway markings confusion at DFW airport in the vicinity of Runway 17R and taxiways EG; EH; EF.
Date: 201406
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: I90.TRACON, TX
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 145 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class B IAH
ATC / advisory: TRACON I90
Aircraft component: FMS/FMC
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Training / Qualification; Confusion
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We were given the DRLLR one arrival on takeoff. We were rerouted to a different arrival and later given DRLLR one again. We entered the 26R approach in our FMS and some point around DRLLR; we were given the 26L runway assignment. We changed the FMS to the new runway and verified it. We arrived at the DOMNO fix and our plane continued on its present course and did not turn. As the NAV system changed to roll mode; we were TCS'ing the plane to the left to get it back on course. The Controller then questioned if we were turning and replied we were already in the turn. He stated that a lot of Company planes were having issues with changing runways in the FMS and it was causing a problem. After we were back on course and going through 7;000 FT; the Captain stated we were to stop at 7;000 FT for VLDEZ. I TCS'ed the plane again and started a climb back up to the new altitude of 7;000 FT. The Controller was busy with other a/c and we did not hear anything about the momentary altitude change. IAH changing runways and having two different altitudes for the same arrival is a major threat. Our current FMS software during changing runways is also a major threat since the system does not work right. Not accepting any runway changes or arrival changes once we are on the arrival.




Synopsis: EMB-145 First Officer reports being switched from 26R to Runway 26L during the DRLLR RNAV arrival. When the runway is changed the transition drops out and is not re-entered by the crew; resulting in a track deviation at DOMNO.