elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201704
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Dawn
Aircraft: B737-700
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Fatigue; Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Distraction; Workload; Time Pressure; Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Captain
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Human Factors; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I acknowledged a reserve trip the evening before and went to bed. I was then woken by a two hour call-out for a different trip that pushed in less than two hours. I arrived at the gate to find the aircraft boarded and the Captain completing the walk around. He started the ACARS and FMC duties as I settled in and ran my flows. We [reviewed] the route and briefed the departure and other normal items and pushed back. As I did the After Start Flow; I noticed the transponder had no code in it. We had no clearance. I had not done it myself and we did brief the route. I called for the clearance; we reviewed it and started the taxi. At that point there was no [Set Takeoff Flaps] call and no prompt for the Before Taxi Checklist. We moved a very short distance when I noticed the mistake and began corrections. We set the brakes at the hold short line; ran the checklists; called for departure; and completed the rest of the flight normally.Don't board aircraft without Crew Members present. It creates pressure on all to perform extra to help out. Unfortunately it leaves gaps in the duties; and items can get skipped.


Second narrative: First Officer was called out on reserve for early morning push. Scheduling woke him up and moved up his report time two hours. He arrived five to ten minutes prior to push. I had tried to complete all of his tasks. He briefed the departure which I interpreted as the clearance. We pushed back and realized as the Push Crew was departing that we did not have a clearance. First Officer got clearance and we called for taxi. Within about 100 ft; we realized that the flaps were not set. Set flaps; did all checklists. No conflicts or problems.Scheduling should not move an assignment up earlier in the early morning for a reserve. That puts both of us in a bad spot. This forced me to do two jobs and forced him to rush to work after being woken up two hours sooner than his alarm. Although I emphasized that we were not going to hurry; we still missed the clearance which led to missing putting the flaps out at the correct time.


Synopsis: B737 flight crew reported procedural errors caused by the late callout of a reserve First Officer .
Date: 201908
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant In Charge
Reporter qualification: Flight Attendant Current
Human factors: Physiological - Other; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Illness / Injury; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Air quality issue. Before takeoff; [I] was informed by Captain that there were three pages of write ups on the aft galley smell. We didn't smell anything during boarding; so we said we were fine. The aft flight attendants said the stench came in really strong once the engines started revving for takeoff and the whole climb.  It was a rotten egg smell x100.  Similar to the smell of hydrogen sulfide.  During cruise; it wasn't as strong but there were times where the smell would come back for a few minutes throughout the flight. The aft FAs [Flight Attendants] said the smell came back even worse on descent. The B FA; C FA; and I all had headaches during flight.  I felt dizzy during parts of the service. Felt fine when I got off the plane until later that night I felt a little dizzy again.  When there's three pages of write ups on an odor; we shouldn't be flying that plane.




Synopsis: Flight Attendant reported a 'rotten eggs' odor shortly after engine start which steadily worsened. Flight attendants reported health issues. Aircraft has a history of odors.
Date: 201906
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: P50.TRACON, AZ
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class B PHX
ATC / advisory: TRACON PHX
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Distraction
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Procedure; Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: While descending on a radar vector from the north; left base; Runway 08; the First Officer and I witnessed a drone aircraft passing off the left wing of the aircraft. We were at 5;800M (approximately 3;700 feet AGL). It was difficult to ascertain the direction of flight or whether it was climbing or descending. Because there were no references/perspective; it was also difficult to figure out its size. I believe it was approximately 100 to 200 feet away based on the drones I've seen in the past; but that is just a guess. Both of us believe it had at least two propellers as the pylons were recognizable as we flew by. The vehicle was white and was square shaped. I had it in view as we passed by from the 10 to 8 o'clock position. Phoenix Approach was notified as we passed the drone--location and altitude were provided.




Synopsis: B-737 Captain reported encountering a drone while being vectored for landing at PHX.
Date: 201408
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: LAS.Airport, NV
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Embraer Phenom 300
Operator: Fractional
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B LAS
ATC / advisory: TRACON L30
Reporter organization: Fractional
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Confusion; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Procedure; Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: We received a clearance to fly the RNAV 19R Visual Approach. We were confused. All we had for approach plates on the current Garmin plates was the RNAV LNAV 19R. We thought the controller cleared us to intercept the RNAV VNAV course inbound and comply with those altitudes. We did not know at the current time that the Phenom 300 and the Garmin avionics do not contain the appropriate [plate] procedures. Once we tried to fly what we thought was the RNAV visual the Approach Controller corrected us and gave us vectors. First I should communicate a lot stronger with ATC that we were confused by the clearance. A better understanding that the Garmin is unable to perform the approaches would've helped as well.




Synopsis: EMB505 First Officer is issued a clearance to fly the RNAV 19R Visual Approach to LAS. Not finding this approach in the Garmin; he assumes he is to intercept the RNAV Runway 19R final approach course and fly visually to the runway. This is not correct and the Controller issues vectors.
Date: 201809
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: PHX.Airport, AZ
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B PHX
ATC / advisory: TRACON P50
Second aircraft: A321
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General Physical Injury / Incapacitation
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: On approach to Runway 26; outside the final approach fix; with autopilot engaged at around 3000ft. The aircraft exhibited an uncommanded roll to the right followed by an immediate roll left which we attributed to wake turbulence from the preceding A321. Both rolls were excessive but I am uncertain of the bank angle that was reached. After the roll left the Captain as Pilot Flying disengaged the autopilot and continued the approach and landed without further incident. It was soon after landing that we were informed that the #2 Flight Attendant was out of her seat in the rear galley and was injured during the event. Wake turbulence is difficult to predict especially without sufficient warning. We discussed the fact that a quicker disconnect of the autopilot to arrest the roll sooner may have helped. Also we were surprised at the fact that a Flight Attendant would be standing at that point in the flight.


Second narrative: At approximately FAF; the aircraft banked sharply. I turned off the autopilot; leveled the wings and resumed the visual approach and landing. On taxi-in; the flight attendants called on the intercom and said that the a Flight Attendant was injured. We called Operations and requested paramedics meet us at the gate. We asked Tower what aircraft we followed and were told that it was an [A321] and that they sometimes have more wake turbulence than a heavy. Tower asked if we had the aircraft in front of us in sight. First Officer said that we did. We changed runway FMC data for the third time after being cleared for the visual approach. PHX Tower should plan on ILS approaches at night unless pilot requests a visual approach. This would increase safety and separation.


Synopsis: B737-800 flight crew reported a Flight Attendant was injured during a wake turbulence encounter on approach to PHX in trail of an A321.
Date: 201904
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: RV-4
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Taxi
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Ground ZZZ
Aircraft component: Brake System
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Ground Event / Encounter Person / Animal / Bird; Ground Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Ground Event / Encounter Aircraft; Ground Excursion Taxiway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: After landing; I was taxiing to parking. The left hand brake line failed at the caliper. A direct tailwind caught right side of rudder and aircraft departed taxiway to the right. The right wing; about 1 foot inboard of tip hit pedestrian in the backside knocking him down. The force of the impact caused the aircraft to pivot sharply. The vertical tail surface struck [an aircraft] putting an approximate 2 inch dent around mid-span at leading edge. The nose of the RV4 came to rest under wing of [a second aircraft] without contacting it. Had I not shut off the RV4 engine; the prop would have struck the [second aircraft's] wing.




Synopsis: RV-4 pilot reported a brake failure and taxiway excursion.
Date: 201505
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: Citation X (C750)
Operator: Fractional
Operating under: Part 135
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Emergency Brake System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Fractional
Reporter function: First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Other / Unknown; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural MEL / CDL; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Aircraft; Logbook Entry; Procedure
Primary problem: Logbook Entry

Narrative: We arrived in ZZZ airport and discovered during post flight that the emergency brake and gear pneumatic vent lines were dripping hydraulic fluid onto the ground. The aircraft was AOG'ed. The next morning we were assigned the aircraft again as the discrepancy was cleared by technicians from ZZZ1 Service Center. The summary of the corrective action is that the lines were disconnected; vacuumed free of hydraulic fluid cleaned with alcohol and re-secured. Three flights were performed on the following day; ending our day in ZZZ2. On post flight it was discovered that the leak had returned in the gear pneumatic vent line.How it can be said that removing evidence of a discrepancy is an appropriate corrective action is ridiculous. This is an ever increasing trend at this company. Who directly is responsible in this case would be the individual who signed this off; but more importantly it appears to me to be an increasing cultural trend that is spreading from our Operator to all maintenance contractors.




Synopsis: A First Officer questions whether a logbook corrective action entry by Maintenance was appropriate or just ridiculous. He found the emergency brake and landing gear pneumatic vent lines dripping hydraulic fluid during a post flight walk around of their Cessna Citation X aircraft. Maintenance had disconnected; vacuumed; cleaned with alcohol; and re-secured the lines.
Date: 201601
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Aircraft: Q400
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: Oil Pressure Indication
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Inflight Shutdown; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: #1 Engine shutdown due to rapidly decreasing oil pressure. Loss of #1 oil pressure led us to shut down the #1 engine.




Synopsis: Shut down #1 engine due to loss of oil pressure.
Date: 201812
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: VNY.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Transport
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class D VNY
ATC / advisory: Tower VNY
Aircraft component: Autoflight System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Commercial
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Automation Aircraft Terrain Warning; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Departing Van Nuys Runway 16R on the Canoga 2 departure. Airplane was on VNAV and autopilot to fly the departure. After reaching the VNY 2.2 DME at 1700 feet AGL; airplane turned to heading of 213 degrees and airplane did not continue climb to assigned altitude of 4000 feet. Terrain warning system activated. Pilot took evasive action and turned to the right to avoid terrain.




Synopsis: Corporate Captain reported terrain warning activation on coupled departure due to autopilot malfunction.
Date: 202005
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Landing
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Ground Personnel
When detected: Other Post Flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Flying on a VFR cross country from ZZZ1 to ZZZ. I checked NOTAMs for the airport the evening before my flight and early in the morning before my departure. I took off from ZZZ1 at XA:50 local time and I landed at ZZZ around XB:30 local. I saw a working crew on the ramp as I taxied in. The line person parked me and told me I had landed on a closed runway. There were no markings on the runway to indicate it being closed. I asked when the NOTAM was published and she said it was published this morning. I looked at my ForeFlight and a NOTAM was published after I had departed ZZZ1. Had I gotten to ZZZ just a little later there would have been markings on the runway indicating that it was closed and I wouldn't have landed. My assumption is with the coronavirus; the airport manager wasn't certain if or when work would begin and didn't issue the NOTAM until the work crew arrived.




Synopsis: GA pilot reported landing on a closed runway; that was NOTAMed closed after pilot had already checked NOTAMs and had departed.
Date: 201301
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: TEB.Airport, NJ
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: P180 Avanti
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class B EWR; Class D TEB
ATC / advisory: TRACON N90
Aircraft component: FMS/FMC
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Flight Engineer
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: After takeoff from TEB I set the NAV button on to follow the SID. I started the After Takeoff Checklist items and found the FMS was not following the SID. I reset the FMS with the SID again. I told the Captain to start his turn to 280 heading. After changing to New York Departure they said we should have started our turn sooner. Looking at the FMS on climb out we found points to fly to but no course lines between the points. We reset the flight plan in FMS. I think the FMS lost this information because of a power loss during start up. After a normal preflight we started the right engine. After right engine start the GPU was removed; the entire plane lost power. I said that was not normal the battery should have powered the plane. I went outside to bag/battery door to see if battery was connected; it was not. When I arrived at the aircraft the Captain had opened the bag/battery area door and placed his bags inside. He said he did not check the battery to see if it was connected. We did not recheck the FMS after this power loss to see if it lost any data as we did not think of it at the time.




Synopsis: P180 First Officer reports a track deviation during the TEB8 from TEB resulting in a late turn to the 280 degree heading. A power interruption had occurred after the first engine start due to the battery not being connected; which apparently affected the FMC.
Date: 201212
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: SAC.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: SR22
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class D SAC
ATC / advisory: TRACON NCT; Tower SAC
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Private
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
Result: Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was directed to cross COUPS Intersection at or above 2;000 FT and cleared for the RNAV GPS Runway 2 approach to SAC. I was further directed that if I went missed approach to fly the published missed approach and to contact the Approach Controller on same frequency. After getting established on the approach I was directed to contact SAC Tower. Upon contacting the Tower; the Controller instructed me that upon reaching the missed approach altitude; I was to make my turn before reaching the approach end of the runway. I acknowledged the instruction; checked my chart and saw that the initial missed approach instruction was to climb to 3;000 FT direct HOGBI. According to my GPS; HOGBI was a heading of 019 degrees; directly the same as the final approach course. So; no turn would be required. I thought that odd; but didn't question it as I continued the approach and looked outside to try and resolve a traffic alert call out at same altitude two o'clock. In retrospect; I should have asked the Tower Controller for clarification; as the instruction to turn at the MAP was confusing. I continued the approach; and then at 500 FT; I called missed approach to the Tower and commenced to climb. The Tower Controller said for me to start my turn. I asked 'What turn? HOGBI is straight ahead.' He shouted that I was to turn immediately! He gave no assigned heading; so I turned right to a heading of 150; then told him I had been assigned to fly the published missed approach and asked what was up? He said that the published miss is not allowed and that I should have been assigned alternate missed approach instructions by the Approach Controller. He said he would call the Controller directly to clear it up. I was then told to switch to NorCal. Checking in with the Approach Controller; I told him my heading and altitude; then asked about the missed approach instructions; confirmed that I had been told to fly the published missed. He concurred and said I had not made a mistake and would not receive a violation. I then cancelled IFR and proceeded directly to LVK for landing.




Synopsis: A General Aviation pilot; on a RNAV GPS Runway 2 approach into SAC; was confused by the Tower's missed approach instructions given. They were contrary to the instructions issued by NCT TRACON.