elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 202105
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: LAS.Airport, NV
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class B LAS
ATC / advisory: Tower LAS
Second aircraft: Helicopter
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Human-Machine Interface; Distraction
Second reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Anomaly: Conflict Airborne Conflict
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach; Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Airspace Structure; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: On approach to land in LAS from vectors; and cleared for the visual my Captain had just turned final at approximately 3;800 feet and was on a stable descent to land. At about 1;150 feet our RA dinged 'traffic' which indicated about 200 feet below us. We couldn't see the traffic. At 940 feet to land (3;000 AGL); we had an RA warning go off due to a helicopter. The warning was to our right. We still couldn't see the traffic; but the warning soon turned into an announcement from our aircraft systems to 'pull up' at 940 feet on the RA. My Captain immediately decided to call for a go-around and we executed the maneuver appropriately; were radar vectored back to land; chose the left runway to allow for some additional distance; and landed safely without incident.Cause - A busy weekend post COVID time when the helicopter industry was seeing a lot more activity. This particular situation was out of our control to avoid. We don't generally have issues with helicopter traffic; and in this situation at such a busy airspace; we could not disregard the RA instructions so low to the ground and at such a critical phase of flight. Considering the busy nature or the weekend and the idea we are experiencing such high post-COVID activity in Las Vegas; perhaps we as a crew could have suggested the left runway for some extra separation; but it's never been an issue in my time flying before.


Second narrative: On visual approach fully configured turning final at approximately 3;700 feet; when rolled out on final an RA was enunciated and a subsequent go-around was performed. We returned to fly visual to the left runway with no further issues. Helicopter traffic operating too close to the active runway approach path. Either keep helicopter traffic further west or make the left the primary runway for south landing traffic.


Synopsis: Air carrier flight crew on short final to LAS reported a go-around due to a TCAS/RA Alert for a VFR helicopter.
Date: 201811
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 170/175 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Weight And Balance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Hazardous Material Violation; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: After takeoff my First Officer remembered to tell me that he noticed some HAZMAT that was being loaded onto our aircraft during the walk around. Surprised by this I looked on our copy of the load manifest. There was no actual mention of the shipment in the cargo weight information on our cargo load report. There was a note at the bottom however declaring its existence. Since the shipment was not documented in the normal section of the load manifest both flight crew members failed to enter the 11 pounds in the ACARS performance calculations. It wasn't until after takeoff when my First Officer mentioned having seen the shipment that I looked more carefully at the load manifest.




Synopsis: E-175 Captain reported being informed after takeoff of HAZMAT being loaded in cargo with no aircrew preflight notification.
Date: 202006
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Haze / Smoke; 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Cessna 210 Centurion / Turbo Centurion 210C; 210D
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class G Y
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Ground Event / Encounter Object
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Other Takeoff
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged
Contributing factors: Airport; Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Aborted a takeoff. Didn't consider the wet grass. unable to stop. lost control and slid into a cattle fence. no injury or major damage but could have been worse. Didn't plan well enough for the hot / humid weather and the wet grass.




Synopsis: C210 Pilot reported loss of control during RTO due to wet grass runway.
Date: 202009
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Aeronca Champion
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
Aircraft component: Reciprocating Engine Assembly
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Engineer; Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Human factors: Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Ground Event / Encounter Object
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Diverted
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: My aircraft engine started having a loss of power at 1000 ft. AGL I was too far from the airport for what I considered a safe return. I circled a remote road twice planning on how I would accomplish an off field landing with partial power. I executed a safe landing on the road and on rollout a mailbox contacted the left forward strut and dented the strut and a slight dent in the wrap around cowling. I then taxied up the driveway and parked in the grass to tie down the aircraft. I returned the next day and disassembled the aircraft and returned it to its hangar at ZZZ.




Synopsis: Aeronca pilot reported reduced engine power which necessitated an off-field landing.
Date: 201312
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Trailing Edge Flap
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Company Policy; Human Factors; Weather
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Inbound aircraft arrived at gate during snowfall. Inbound crew left flaps at 15. The Captain performed the walk around including a flap well inspection. I arrived at aircraft as Captain entered Jet Bridge. He was followed by the fueler who asked if he could fuel the aircraft with the flaps down. Captain informed me that he had inspected the flap areas and observed no contamination.  He decided to send me outside to clear the flap area while he raised the flaps. After I gave the Captain the all clear he raised the flaps. I observed no anomalies during flap retraction. The time from the Captain completing the exterior inspection until the flaps were raised was less than five minutes. We taxied to remote de-icing pad with flaps up. De-iced with type 1 and anti-iced with type 4. We then taxied to the runway with flaps retracted and set flaps to 15 just prior to takeoff. Taxi from de-ice pad to active runway was accomplished on surfaces that were treated and plowed. Runway was not contaminated. We performed a Flaps 15; 26K max power takeoff.  Flight was uneventful. All flap limit speeds were observed. A 30 flap landing was accomplished at destination.  After landing the flaps were retracted with no abnormal cockpit indications. As we were scheduled to keep this airplane; I began an exterior preflight inspection. I noticed that both inboard trailing edge flaps appeared partially extended while other flaps and slats were retracted. I informed the Captain and Maintenance. Once Maintenance arrived they had us fully lower the flaps and then discovered damage.  I am confident that we complied with all appropriate procedures. I do not know what caused this event; therefore I am unable to give a clear suggestion.  At a minimum we should review procedures to see if there is anything we should change regarding snow/ice operations.




Synopsis: B737-800 First Officer reports discovering inboard TE flap damage during preflight after bringing the aircraft in from a snow and ice impacted airport. The aircraft had been received at that airport with the flaps extended and were inspected prior to retraction at the gate. No anomalies were noted in flight.
Date: 202105
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ORD.Airport, IL
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class B ORD
ATC / advisory: TRACON C90
Second aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Time Pressure; Situational Awareness; Workload
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict NMAC; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Automation Aircraft RA; Automation Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Chart Or Publication; Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Airspace Structure

Narrative: ORD was on a very busy east flow arrival push.  The weather was severe VFR and there were numerous aircraft on 1200 codes flying underneath the ORD finals.  I was working the north final.  A VFR aircraft who I believe departed ZZZ1 climbed up to 3900 feet which is 100 feet below the base of the Class B.  I did not see the aircraft approaching my final because of all of the overlapping data blocks from the south two finals.  When the conflict alarm sounded; I saw the traffic and issued a traffic alert to Aircraft X who climbed 800 feet to avoid a collision.The Class B airspace around ORD does not match the current arrival/departure procedures.  On East Flow; the low-side runway is required to turn final at 4000 feet in accordance with the facility Standard Operating Procedure.  The floor of the Class B airspace is 4000 feet; so there are constantly conflicts with VFR aircraft climbing up to 3500 feet or higher in that area.  When doing simultaneous approaches; there is nowhere to go when there is a conflict. The floor of the Class B airspace west of ORD should be 3;500 feet until 25 miles west of ORD.




Synopsis: C90TRACON Controller reported they did not notice an unidentified VFR aircraft climb to 100 feet below the Class Bravo airspace on a conflicting route with air carrier traffic conducting a Visual Approach resulting in a NMAC.
Date: 201404
Aircraft: B757-200
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Hydraulic Main System
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Aircraft had a Left Hydraulic System leak about 10 minutes into flight.  All fluid was lost and the left hydraulic system subsequently failed.  Landing required alternate extension of flaps to a non-normal setting of 20 degrees; alternate landing gear extension; and landing without nose wheel steering.  Crew declared an emergency and returned for landing.  The approach and landing were uneventful.  The aircraft was towed to parking. The crew is unaware of the cause of the hydraulic leak.




Synopsis: B757 Captain experiences a failure of the left hydraulic system ten minutes into flight and returns to the departure airport.
Date: 201408
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Falcon 2000
Operator: Fractional
Operating under: Part 135
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
Aircraft component: Wheel Assemblies
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Fractional
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Airframe; Maintenance Powerplant
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: General Maintenance Action; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Approximately early afternoon; August 2014. I (as Maintenance Controller X) received verbal information from the Assistant Chief Pilot (ACP) on duty that a Dassault Falcon 2000 had landed at ZZZ1 and had a situation with their Nose Landing Gear (NLG) wheels.  He informed me that they had stopped the aircraft on the taxiway; removed the passengers; and were having the aircraft towed to the ramp. Approximately 15 minutes later I received a call from the PIC of the aircraft and he explained what had transpired. He said that they had a normal and uneventful landing and while taxiing back to the ramp; they heard a grinding/vibration type sound coming from the nose gear area of the aircraft. They informed the Tower that they were going to stop on the ramp; exit the aircraft; and investigate. He said that he exited the aircraft and from what he could see the NLG wheels/tires and vicinity looked normal. He returned to the aircraft discussed the situation with his Co-Captain and they continued their taxi to the ramp. Immediately after attempting to taxi for the second time they received a call from the Tower informing them that they had what seemed to be smoke coming from the NLG area. They immediately stopped the aircraft; removed the passengers and had the aircraft towed the remaining way to the ramp. Once on the ramp and after closer inspection; the Captain noticed that it looked as if the outer wheel bearing on the Left-Hand (LH) side NLG Wheel Assembly was missing. Maintenance Control researched for any maintenance that had previously been accomplished to the NLG components and found that both NLG wheel assemblies had been replaced three days earlier. The aircraft had operated for three days and flown seven cycles since the wheels were installed. The aircraft was immediately taken out of service and a repair plan initiated. No recommendations at this time; pending causal findings. Nose Landing Gear Wheel Assembly Bearing failure.




Synopsis: A Maintenance Controller was informed by a Captain about a grinding; vibration type sound coming from the Nose Landing Gear (NLG) area of a Dassault Falcon 2000 aircraft after landing. Captain had stopped his taxi; examined nosewheel; began taxiing again and was informed by Tower that smoke was coming from the NLG. Outer wheel bearing missing from left nose tire wheel half.
Date: 202201
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Aircraft component: Coalescer Bag
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Reporter qualification: Flight Attendant Current
Human factors: Troubleshooting; Physiological - Other
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Illness / Injury; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Attendant; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: We had just prepared the cabin for landing when we all got a call from the flight deck. I was FA (Flight Attendant) 04 on a 737 so my jumpseat does not have a phone. FA 02 told me that the FO (First Officer) was feeling nauseous and requested a sick bag. FA 01 and FA 03 secured a cart up front and passed an empty trash bag up to the flight deck. The flight deck asked if we could smell any strong odors in the FWD cabin; LAV; or Galley. All four of us (FAs) went to the FWD lab and galley to smell check; it smelled like a strong air freshener to me. FA 02 admitted that she got light headed after smelling the strange smell and we then went to our jumpseats. After landing and the flight deck door being opened; FA 01 and FA 03 say that they could smell the strong musty odor that the pilots were complaining about. The pilots had to open the windows in the flight deck once parked at the gate to air out the strong smell. I did not have any signs of discomfort or injury except for pain in my right arm and slight twitch of my right eye.




Synopsis: Air Carrier Flight Attendant reported a fume event during descent characterized as strong musty odor in the forward cabin area. First Officer and flight attendants reported experiencing physiological symptoms once parked at the arrival gate.
Date: 201509
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Weather elements / visibility: Thunderstorm
Aircraft: B737-900
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Aircraft component: Oxygen System/Crew
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: As I was storing my oxygen mask prior to our descent; the plastic O2 supply fitting to the regulator snapped in half making the mask inoperative. We decided to replace the mask with the second observer oxygen mask vs descending due to a line of thunderstorms below us. Per the Captain's directions; I disconnected the first officer's oxygen and replaced it with the observer's mask. I checked the mask and it checked out fine. We proceeded without any further problems. We then entered the discrepancy in the log book and informed maintenance.




Synopsis: B737-900 FO reported his oxygen mask malfunctioned in flight and was replaced with the observer's mask.
Date: 202003
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Workload; Distraction; Confusion
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: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Air Traffic Control Separated Traffic
Contributing factors: Procedure; Airspace Structure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Aircraft X going to ZZZ was at 110 10 miles west of ZZZ1. We need to miss Area X sectors because they are closed because of coronavirus. ZZZ approach wants them at 110 and they will miss airspace. I had another aircraft 7 miles in front of Aircraft X they took down. I called them with handoff because they weren't taking it. Controller claims I was flashing at wrong sector but we only flash to X. I then asked for lower; Controller said unable and to switch the aircraft. Aircraft X came back after 30 seconds and I switched again but they violated Sector X because we aren't allowed to get lower. ZZZ approach idea that they will descend doesn't ensure anything. Dumb procedure for this unusual time.




Synopsis: Center Controller reported unusual traffic flows due to COVID-19 and its effect on the normal workload.
Date: 201909
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: A300
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Pneumatic Valve/Bleed Valve
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter function: Technician
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Airframe; Maintenance Powerplant
Human factors: Training / Qualification; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Maintenance
When detected: Routine Inspection
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Logbook Entry; Incorrect / Not Installed / Unavailable Part; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Incorrect / Not Installed / Unavailable Part

Narrative: Tech Replaced Bleed valve per AMM; Ops Leak Check Good. Same Part number was installed as removed. During final check paperwork close out; Tech was having difficulty completing parts transaction in the computer system. At this time I was approached for assistance. After discussion of the part used; Technician who completed task and review of Pratt and Whitney IPC it was decided the part was effective and the computer had incorrectly flagged as not effective and transaction was completed. Part was in fact not effective and parts computer transaction was completed in error.Closer attention to the sometimes confusing IPC's; show greater caution when computer flags a transaction. Less reliance on part number off as supporting part number on. Closer attention to published procedures. AMT Verifying parts to IPC; prior to installation.




Synopsis: Technician reported that confusion over a bleed valve part number caused an incorrect part to be installed.