elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201908
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: SFO.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: A321
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class B SFO
ATC / advisory: TRACON NCT
Second aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Procedure
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: Wake upset during climb; turned off course to avoid further wake and it took several minutes to notify ATC of route deviation due to frequency congestion.  ATC was helpful once they understood what we needed.  Fortunately we were in an area with sparse traffic and therefore no risk of losing separation. It's all in the timing and altitude between aircraft; conditions were perfect and we flew into the wake. We turned off course to get out of continued wake. Wake events in climb or cruise are very rare and therefore surprising; beyond creating an algorithm to predict an encounter and adjusting traffic accordingly there is not much to do.




Synopsis: A-321 First Officer reported a wake turbulence encounter while climbing out from SFO.
Date: 201911
Location: AVQ.Airport, AZ
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class E ZAB
ATC / advisory: CTAF AVQ
Second aircraft: Gulfstream Jet Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; Flight Crew Rejected Takeoff
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors; Aircraft
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I and my instructor had completed run-up at Runway 12 and announced our roll on Runway 12 with left crosswind departure. All traffic; including an inbound jet at about 6 nm northwest were using or planning to use Runway 12. Once we were rolling on Runway 12; Aircraft Y that had not yet been on frequency; announced 4 mile final straight in for Runway 30 (note that Runway 12 is the calm-wind runway; and the wind was calm). I presume Aircraft Y had been with TUS TRACON until that time; then switched to advisory and announced intentions without taking existing traffic at AVQ into account. I aborted my takeoff roll on Runway 12 and announced that I would return to the run-up area for Runway 12 (back-taxi; since that was the quickest option to clear the runway from where I was). Once on the ground on Runway 30; Aircraft Y announced 'clear of 30' while still rolling on the runway. I am convinced that my action to abort takeoff might have prevented an accident. I am also convinced that the pilot of Aircraft Y either did not fully appreciate the situation or was operating under the belief that being in a fast jet exempted him from following proper procedures. Related to this; AVQ is an accident waiting to happen; especially during this week every year when the pattern is loaded with corporate jets for an annual event. AVQ needs a tower; or at a minimum a temporary tower during special events.




Synopsis: C172 Pilot reported that an aircraft announcing final in the opposite direction resulted in a rejected takeoff and evasive action.
Date: 202003
Location: ZZZ.Tower, US
Aircraft: PA-32 Cherokee Six/Lance/Saratoga/6X
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Other unknown
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: GPS & Other Satellite Navigation
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Other unknown
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: I left on a VFR flight using GPS guidance for navigation. The direct route took me through class D airspace. Using the GPS to stay clear of this airspace was planned before departure. After departing the GPS was working OK and was on course to stay clear of any controlled airspace. Some time thereafter the GPS lost signal and stopped moving but the map showed I was still clear of any conflict as it was not updating to show my exact position. This leading me to be closer to the airspace than my GPS screen showed. After the entering of controlled airspace and realizing the GPS was not updating and after a close inspection of the GPS it was determined that a loose connection of the antenna wiring was causing the GPS to lose its signal and this was corrected and this problem should not happen again. The reason for the conflict was equipment failure and a way to prevent this from happening again would be to have a backup GPS or have flight following so ATC can also back up your route of flight. Personally I am going to just IFR from now on and not rely on one source of navigation.




Synopsis: PA-32 Pilot reported possible airspace violation due to GPS failure.
Date: 201907
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Tower, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-700
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Flap Control (Trailing & Leading Edge)
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness; Time Pressure; Workload
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation - Speed All Types
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: On the RNAV Visual Runway XXR into ZZZ at around 1;800 feet AGL; I asked for flaps 15. I glanced at the flap indication 15 and LE FLAPS EXT light green. A few seconds later received an Airspeed Low call out from the aircraft. I checked my airspeed at around 175-180; so I glanced at the flap setting which showed flaps 15. The problem we had was the green LE FLAP EXT and the yellow LE FLAP TRANSIT where alternating between yellow and green. We executed a go-around and requested extended vectors to run the checklist. I informed the Flight Attendant that we had a flap issue and would be landing shortly in ZZZ. I also made a short PA to the passengers. At 10;000 feet on radar vectors; we got into the QRC. We ran the LEADING EDGE FLAPS TRANSIT Checklist. The interesting part was the LE FLAP EXT and the LE FLAP TRANSIT lights continued to alternate between green and yellow. The LE DEVICES indicated all devices in the green. We ran the checklist which directed a flaps 15 landing. Ran Perf WB for the 15 flap data for Runway XXR at ZZZ; and also ran break cooling data. Made sure we were both comfortable with our plan to land [Runway] XXR and taxi clear. We landed [Runway] XXR waited to apply brakes and taxied clear. Brake cooling directed us not to approach the gate for 30 minutes; so we held out until the 30 minute time had expired. I gave a call to Dispatch and Maintenance while we waited for our gate. Maintenance took the aircraft from us and ran a few tests. They found that leading edge flap #4 had an issue. They set the flaps to 15 and also got the alternating yellow and green lights with all LE DEVICES showing green. They did mention a code for LE FLAP #4 was showing a problem. The First Officer and I headed over to our next flight.




Synopsis: B737-700 Captain reported a mechanical problem with a portion of the leading edge flap.
Date: 201702
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: MSO.Airport, MT
Flight conditions: VMC
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 Climb
Airspace: Class D MSO
ATC / advisory: Tower MSO
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Automation Aircraft Terrain Warning; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Airport; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Weather at MSO was VFR. After turning final to Runway 29 at MSO; tower directed us to go around due to foreign object debris (FOD) reported on the runway by preceding aircraft taking off. A go around was performed and runway heading was given by tower along with altitude at pilot's discretion. An altitude of 4;800 feet MSL was chosen (traffic pattern altitude). We were directed to follow preceding traffic; so flaps 30 was selected to slow behind them and also to shorten turn radius. After turning downwind; we received an EGPWS 'Terrain; Terrain; Pull Up' warning and a positive pull up was performed to stop the warning (climb of about 50 feet). Positive visual separation was maintained prior to and during the event due to good weather. The visual pattern was continued to a successful landing to Runway 29.Caused by high terrain airport; poor ATC direction on go around; unfamiliarity with airport (first time at MSO).




Synopsis: Air carrier First Officer reported the Tower directed a go-around due to FOD on the runway; followed by a VFR pattern at 4800 feet causing a GPWS terrain warning.
Date: 201411
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-300
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Autopilot
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Rejected Takeoff; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: The Captain gave me control of the aircraft as we centered on the runway. I powered up to >40% and hit TO/GA. We received the autopilot disconnect horn and discontinued the takeoff and cleared the runway. We had a child guest in the cockpit during preflight and made the assumption that the child had pushed the autopilot button; which was then disconnected when TO/GA was pushed. Flew to destination where the Captain contacted Dispatch and Maintenance and the Chief on Duty. Told there was no discrepancy. Made an entry in the logbook.


Second narrative: After passing control of the aircraft to the First Officer for his takeoff; he added power and pressed the TO/GA button. The autopilot disconnect horn immediately went off so I took control of the aircraft and we rejected the takeoff at 5 to 10 knots. The horn was silenced by pressing the autopilot disconnect thumb switch. After exiting the runway; we discussed the situation and decided there was no aircraft discrepancy as we could not duplicate the event on the taxiway. My assumption is that the autopilot was inadvertently turned on while on the ground and pushing the TO/GA button disconnected it; therefore the horn. We departed uneventfully. Upon landing; we talked to Dispatch; Maintenance Control; and the Chief Pilot on Duty. It was agreed that even though there was no discrepancy; we should make an entry in the logbook.


Synopsis: B737-300 flight crew experiences an autopilot disconnect horn after the TO/GA button is pushed during takeoff. The takeoff is rejected and troubleshooting indicates that the autopilot must have been engaged at some time during preflight and not detected until the TO/GA button was pushed. A child visitor to the cockpit may have pushed the button during preflight.
Date: 201901
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Instrument and Control Panels
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Time Pressure
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 Landed As Precaution
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Smoke appeared to be coming from avionics while on downwind. Radio call to Tower was made informing of electrical fire; as well as intentions of taking the runway and that all communications would be lost as avionics would be turned off. Separation with aircraft cleared to land was maintained as Tower had informed me; just prior to the incident; the traffic I would be following was on a 3 mile final. Knowing the incoming traffics location combined with the severity of the [situation] led to my decision to take the runway. No injuries and no property damage occurred.




Synopsis: C172 pilot reported executing an immediate approach and landing following the appearance of smoke from the avionics equipment.
Date: 201911
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Human factors: Confusion; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Upon boarding the plane I saw the B Flight Attendant using a portable dust buster like vacuum to clean the cabin carpeting. I didn't know it at the time; but this was his personal device. After we took off and began service; I looked at it again and realized that if the device had a thermal battery fire; there was no way it would have fit into a containment bag. Prohibit Crewmembers from using/bringing personal battery powered devices that are too big for a containment bag on board the airplane.




Synopsis: B737 Flight Attendant reported that a crewmember brought onboard a portable battery powered vacuum cleaner that would not fit into a fire containment bag.
Date: 202009
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Reporter qualification: Flight Attendant Current
Human factors: Troubleshooting; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Illness / Injury
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: Other unknown
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: Stop or significantly reduce use of this sort [of spray] for cleaning aircraft. It is irritating to my eyes and nasal passages. I cannot imagine what [cleaners are] feeling using [it] all day.Stop using this spray for disinfecting it is toxic to people.




Synopsis: Flight Attendant reported the disinfecting spray used for sanitizing aircraft is irritating to eyes and nasal passages.
Date: 201706
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: A321
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Weight And Balance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Ground Ops were normal leading up to takeoff; including receipt and insertion of revised takeoff data due to Actual Weight having exceeded Planned Weight. First Officer initiated the configuration 1 takeoff with TOGA Thrust. Acceleration was normal and speeds V1 (162) and VR (169) were called out; rotation was effected at the appropriate rate to the appropriate attitude. The struts were felt to extend; but then the aircraft settled slightly back onto the mains. Accordingly; to avoid a tail strike; First Officer held the lift-off pitch attitude while acceleration continued that allowed the aircraft to lift off. With a positive rate-of-climb and gear retraction; the aircraft accelerated and climbed normally.It seemed to both of us that the 'picture' of what we saw at that pitch attitude should have resulted in becoming airborne sooner than what occurred. I do not routinely reference the report on the ACARS AIDS (Aircraft Integrated Data System) menu; but did so at cruise to find a difference between FMGC weight and FAC (Flight Augmentation Computer) weight of 5;000 lbs.Dispatch was advised of our lift-off anomaly and we inquired as to what parameters and QA (Quality Assurance) information could be reviewed. We were informed that an offload audit would be done at destination and that the chief pilot on duty had been notified about the QA monitor.




Synopsis: A321 Captain reported the aircraft did not become airborne as expected. Flight augmentation computer weights indicated a 5000 pound discrepancy (heavier) than the weight and balance calculations.
Date: 201206
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ORD.Airport, IL
Aircraft: A320
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower ORD
Aircraft component: FMS/FMC
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Gate; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: We aborted our takeoff at 70 KTS because the FMC V speeds dropped out of our ASIs. We went back to the gate to let Maintenance resolve the issue.




Synopsis: An A320 flight crew rejected their takeoff due to the loss of FMC generated V speeds on their ASIs.
Date: 201308
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Fatigue
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Routine Inspection
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Company Policy
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I called in fatigued for a pairing in August. I would like to note that my computer would not allow me to select more than one selection in the Fatigue Factors section. I would like to add daytime rest required hotel rest; reassignment; and start/finish time. Over that past 3 months; I have flown nearly 300 hours as a reserve Captain on the 737. Over that time; I have flown multiple redeye with a leg immediately prior to or a duty on the same day as the redeye. I have flown pairings that start later in the day and ones that start very early. I have flown trips that start early in the day and are then delayed to late in the night. I have had my days rolled and have been converted from early to late reserve. This summer I have flown more over the past three months than I ever have in any other 3 month period in my career! I never have had to keep up the operational tempo that the company as asked me to keep. This is not an unknown situation. It is mentioned in just about every ground school class I have attended; Reserves get abused in the summer! On my last flight I found myself making numerous mistakes that I wouldn't have normally made. I relied upon my First Officer for far more than I should have. I felt that I needed to rest. I learned from the fatigue video I watch as part of training that the cumulative effect of the fatigue I was feeling; as a result of the schedule the company has had me keep on; would only be resolved by rest.




Synopsis: B737 Captain describes the reasons for his fatigue call.