elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 202111
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Horizontal Stabilizer Trim Motor
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Lead Technician; Technician
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Airframe; Maintenance Powerplant
Human factors: Training / Qualification; Workload; Communication Breakdown; Human-Machine Interface; Situational Awareness; Time Pressure
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR
Detector: Person Maintenance
When detected: Routine Inspection
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Procedure; Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Aircraft X was in ZZZ for an RON (Remain Over Night). One of the cards assigned in the Bill of Work was Integrity Check Trimmable Horizontal Stabilizer Actuator (THSA) Ball Screw Shaft. During the inspection there were findings written up on Forms XXXXXX. Two of the items written up were 'Both THS actuator motors require replacement due to out of limit leaks'; and 'THSA lower claw stop rubber is deteriorated'. Both items were signed off by a supervisor; the leak as within limits; and the claw stop as 'cleaned rubber of discoloration; OK for service'. After these items were found to be signed off; they were written up again and repaired before the aircraft was returned to service.Signing off items by certain management individuals seems like it's becoming more commonplace; there is a lot of pressure that comes down from local upper management to the supervisors; to the point that it seems like it could be intimidation; the pressure then in turn comes down onto the crew chiefs and crew members. I have been in this station for a year now; and the pressure that I've seen come down on the crew members is dangerous; and can lead to larger problems. I feel that these items being signed off are in response to pressure from upper management due to extended out of service times.I feel that this has been going on for a long time; and will continue to happen unless there is outside influence to put an end to this.




Synopsis: Lead Technician reported a Maintenance Supervisor signed off aircraft discrepancies without actually doing the repair work.
Date: 201902
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Other / Unknown
Human factors: Distraction; Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Hazardous Material Violation; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Ground Personnel
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Gate
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Ramp finalized and pushed out flight without securing the dangerous goods. The ramp lead stated he forgot he needed to secure the Hazmat; I brought the aircraft back to the gate so they could move bags




Synopsis: Airline Ground Personnel requested aircraft return to gate to correct Hazmat cargo load configuration error.
Date: 201906
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: IND.Airport, IN
Weather elements / visibility: Thunderstorm; 10
Aircraft: Medium Transport
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground IND
Second aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical; Ground Incursion Taxiway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: After landing on runway 23L; ground instructed our taxi route as 'right on Charlie; left on Romeo; turn right on Hotel. Cross runway 32 on Hotel then right turn on Mike'. After turning eastbound on Mike taxiway; a [corporate jet] came directly opposite us moving westbound with taxi light on. I stopped at intersection Mike and Juliet and turned my taxi light off to indicate that I had stopped the aircraft. The [other aircraft] kept moving towards us; we flashed our lights but the aircraft continued to move towards us with its taxi light on. After approaching about 300 feet from our aircraft; I quickly applied thrust and moved left on taxiway Juliet to avoid a collision. Ground apologized to us and after calling Tower on the land line; we were cleared of any fault. The visibility was good with light precipitation.


Second narrative: [Report narrative contained no additional information.]


Synopsis: Corporate flight crew reported taking evasive action to avoid a collision with another corporate jet while taxiing.
Date: 202007
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach; Landing
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Training / Qualification; Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: On final approach to ILS XX; ZZZ; VMC conditions; I (FO; PM) omitted to contact Tower at ZZZZZ Intersection. Contributing to this omission might be my absence from flying for over 4 months; outside of simulator sessions.


Second narrative: On landing I noticed that we were not in contact with ZZZ Tower. Contact was made and we taxied to parking without incident. I later determined that Tower issued a landing clearance. Contributing factors included configuration change at the point we were to contact Tower; my focus on performing the landing; and insufficient monitoring of the FO's actions. Return 'Landing Clearance- Received' to the Before Landing Checklist.


Synopsis: Air carrier flight crew reported landing without contacting Tower.
Date: 201704
Location: IAH.Airport, TX
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B757 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class A ZHU
ATC / advisory: Center ZHU
Second aircraft: B737-900
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Procedure; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Descending via the TTORO arrival; vacating FL290; encountered moderate wake turbulence at FL285. Approximately 10-15 degrees of roll. PF disconnected autopilot and leveled aircraft briefly; then reengaged automation. Queried ATC as to the type of aircraft. Was a 737-900 7 NM ahead. The seat belt sign was off at the time. We spoke to FAs after the event and all was normal in the back.




Synopsis: B757 First Officer reported encountering wake turbulence at FL285 in trail of a B737-900 on descent into IAH.
Date: 201406
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: UAO.Airport, OR
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class G UAO
ATC / advisory: CTAF UAO
Second aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Aircraft component: Air/Ground Communication
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Instructor
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Human factors: Confusion; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: During a practice approach in visual conditions under VFR flight following at Aurora State Airport in Oregon the student was practicing landings from a straight in on short final to approach another airplane was seen on the runway landing in the opposite direction. We took evasive action by doing an immediate go-around and offset to the right. It was found that the volume control was set very low and the other aircraft's radio communications were not heard.




Synopsis: A student and instructor pilot aboard a C172 initiated a go-around on short final when they observed an aircraft landing opposite direction on the same runway. Because their communication radio volume was turned low they had not heard transmissions from the other aircraft.
Date: 202110
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 145 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation - Speed All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Other / Unknown; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Automation Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We were on a heading; level at 4000 ft. to intercept the final for RNAV Y XX into ZZZ; we were cleared for the approach. We suddenly received a terrain terrain pull up. We proceeded to pull up even though we were visual and there was no terrain that we were going to impact. We also received a stick shaker as we pulled up doing 210 kts. not configured. As we pulled up the terrain warning went away around 4400 ft. and we also pushed down slightly because of the shaker; which also went away. I believe we did everything correctly; I am not exactly sure why we received that warning.




Synopsis: EMB-145 Captain reported getting a terrain alert and stick shaker while intercepting the approach. The flight crew responded to both; which eventually dissipated.
Date: 202011
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Reporter qualification: Flight Attendant Current
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Passenger Misconduct
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: Passenger X was seated in XX3 during this flight. I asked Passenger X three times to wear his face cover (he had a bandanna). The third time I asked I had a face mask and informed him if his bandanna was giving him trouble he could have the face mask. He said no; he will wear the bandanna and he told me to get away from him. This conversation happened during Taxi and after our safety Demo. I informed the Aft FA [and] the Captain. The Captain said he will make an announcement reminding passengers about wearing the mask. After the double chime; the Aft FA informed me that XX3 took off his bandanna again. I called the Flight Deck and informed them that I was [giving Passenger X] the final warning. I explained to Passenger X. Once I finished he was very angry. He said that he is a veteran who is disabled; he breathed in lots of chemicals during the war and the best think he can do is use the bandanna to cover his mouth. He said he hopes that is enough to keep people from freaking out. I thanked him for his services to our country and empathy for his disabilities. Then he told me aggressively to leave him alone; he said he has not slept for 3 days and that I better not come back and wake him up again. I informed the Captain of everything that was said between Passenger X and I and he said that a CSR will meet us at the gate. I did not approach Passenger X again and he did leave his mask off for the remainder of the flight. I told the CSR everything when he pulled the Jet bridge up to the gate. During the Deplaning process he apologized for how he spoke to me. He said he hadn't sleep for 3 days and it is getting to him and he did have his bandanna covering his nose and mouth. The gate agent spoke to him after he deplaned.




Synopsis: Flight Attendant reported a passenger refused to wear a proper face mask citing a medical condition as the reason for not wearing it.
Date: 201408
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: PVD.TRACON, RI
Flight conditions: Mixed
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: SR22
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E PVD
ATC / advisory: TRACON PVD
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Approximately 7-10 minutes prior to the encounter with the UAV; the autopilot and oil pressure sensor began to malfunction. After joining V146 at PVD; a request was made to Providence Approach for deviation and landing so the problems could be addressed. After receiving the initial instruction to depart V146; descend from 8;000 to 4;000; and turn to a heading of 040; upon breaking out of a small cloud layer at approximately 7;800 FT the UAV passed very closely by the left wing. It was immediately necessary to increase my rate of turn to the right to increase the distance between my plane and the UAV. Given the occasional IMC while flying in and out of cloud layers; it was impossible to see and avoid the UAV at any point prior. With our flight path; speed; and changing direction; it was difficult to ascertain the speed and direction at which the UAV was traveling given the short duration of the encounter; but it appeared as though it may have been traveling in a southerly direction. The UAV was not of a style with wings or a tail; but rather a drum-shaped version grey in color. This is clearly a case that highlights a severe deficiency in the safe operation of the NAS. There was no way for ATC or the equipment in the aircraft to sense the presence of the UAV; and there was most certainly no way to see and avoid it while in IMC. Since this encounter happened at an altitude that was less than 10;000 FT above Class C airspace; an operating transponder was a mandatory piece of equipment. UAV's and their operators should at least be held to the same standards for certification and required equipment as all other aircraft and pilots when operating at such altitudes.




Synopsis: SR22 pilot reports encountering a UAV at 7;800 FT near PVD. The UAV was of a single or coaxial rotor design.
Date: 202105
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Ramp
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Hazardous Material Violation; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Ground Personnel
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate; Routine Inspection
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Container X arrived with fresh fish off Aircraft X. Number of the styrofoam boxes arrived broken and damaged. This shipment originated in ZZZZ and it is showing that this was loaded into Container X at the origin for [another flight] and continued onto ZZZ on Aircraft X. Possible fish blood/fluids leakage due to damage to the boxes while in transit. At the time of breakdown; some dampness was observed on the thermo-lining used in the interior of the ULD.




Synopsis: Air Carrier ground personnel reported upon aircraft arrival fresh seafood container damaged in transit resulting in spillage of 'blood/fluids' leakage.
Date: 202008
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Reporter qualification: Flight Attendant Current
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Company Policy

Narrative: We are unable to use crew rest facilities except for only one Flight Attendant while pilots are able to use both bunks in their crew rest and we are required to be separated. The 3 crew rest seats provided in seating area are not appropriate since it does not have a curtain to block the light and due to passenger placement; we are unable to remove masks for the time on crew rest which promotes fatigue and other negative effects of long term mask wearing. Unable to get adequate rest due to the COVID-19 restrictions the company has imposed while pilots operate as normal and with no mask restrictions.




Synopsis: Flight Attendant reported differences between pilot resting areas and those of the flight attendants.
Date: 201605
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: DAY.Airport, OH
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: Cessna 210 Centurion / Turbo Centurion 210C; 210D
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class C DAY
ATC / advisory: TRACON CVG
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Distraction; Time Pressure
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; 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: Procedure

Narrative: While getting Class B advisory and clearance with Cincinnati Approach I was not handed off to Dayton in time to avoid penetrating their Class Charlie airspace.




Synopsis: C210 pilot reported that while under flight following he was not handed off by CVG TRACON to Columbus TRACON in a timely manner to avoid DAY charlie airspace.
Date: 201301
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: MD-80 Series (DC-9-80) Undifferentiated or Other Model
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: Galley Furnishing
Component problem: Malfunctioning; Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Human factors: Troubleshooting; Workload; Confusion; Physiological - Other
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Attendant; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; General Physical Injury / Incapacitation; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Procedure; Aircraft; Manuals
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: While at cruise there was smoke coming from the first class galley ovens. We noticed the smell and communicated with the Number 1 Flight Attendant to find out what was going on in the cabin. The Captain selected venturi and climbed the cabin to help clear the smell from the cockpit. We were successfully able to clear out the irritating smell from the cockpit and continued on to destination.  Upon arrival we noticed the Number 1 Flight Attendant was most affected by the smoke; the Captain and I were irritated by the smoke. The Captain contacted Dispatch and medical treatment was arranged with the airport Fire/Rescue Paramedics. We are not positive as to the cause of the smoke; Contract Maintenance thought it was from cleaning solution being sprayed into the ovens to clean up a former spill and not wiping out the cleaning solution and the spill. Therefore; when the ovens got up to temperature he thought this caused the cleaning agent to burn causing the smoke. Maybe better checks and balances need to be put in place for completion of this type of cleaning and possibly finding a cleaning agent that would not cause noxious smells?




Synopsis: A MD80 pilot reported noxious fumes in the cockpit and forward galley believe caused by an oven cleaning solution residue which reacted when the oven was heated during cruise.