elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 202104
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 50
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class G ZZZ
ATC / advisory: CTAF ZZZ
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Instructor
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Ground Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence; Ground Event / Encounter Ground Strike - Aircraft; Ground Excursion Runway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Other landing roll
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: On completion of 9th landing (full stop; 3 point; 30 degrees of flaps) as aircraft rolled out (at approximately 25 mph) a gust of wind lifted the left wing and veered the aircraft to the left. Full deflection of the controls in an attempt to correct the situation had no effect. Aircraft drug the right wingtip; the right landing gear folded and the aircraft departed the pavement; nosing over and damaging the propeller. No injuries sustained by occupants.




Synopsis: Flight instructor reported experiencing a loss of aircraft control caused by a wind gust; resulting in departure from the runway surface and aircraft damage.
Date: 201506
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: SFO.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: A319
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class B SFO
ATC / advisory: Tower SFO
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Unstabilized Approach
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: While flying FMS Bridge Visual to 28R in SFO approaching the bridge ATC assigned us to slow to 160 knots. I leveled off and slowed; concentrating on calling flaps as soon as they were available as we slowed. I did not call for the landing gear; I don't know why; I somehow just got focused on the flaps. We ended up in a flaps full configuration; on speed and glide path when we got the gear not down warning at 750 feet. My first reaction was to call for gear down; then immediately realized we needed to go around and executed a go-around. In hindsight we realized we had not run the landing checklist.


Second narrative: [Report Narrative Contained No Additional Information.]


Synopsis: A319 flight crew reported they failed to run the landing checklist and were below 800 ft AGL with the gear still up. They executed a go-around and returned for a normal approach and landing.
Date: 201205
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: B767-400 and 400 ER
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Nose Gear
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Technician
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Powerplant; Maintenance Airframe
Human factors: Time Pressure; Workload; Situational Awareness; Distraction
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Maintenance
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Weather; Staffing; Incorrect / Not Installed / Unavailable Part; Human Factors; Company Policy
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: A B767 aircraft arrived at one of the gates after a Super Tug move from another gate. Upon arrival; a large gash approximately ten inches long was found in the center tread of the left nose tire. The airplane arrived at my gate during a very heavy period of international departures. I had been working on another aircraft in the area; when I was instructed to go and change the tire in question as well as work two open logbook items on clogged galley drains and a clogged sink drain. I had about 30 minutes to accomplish the tasks.I don't remember taking a wheel spacer off of the old tire; so it may not have been present to reinstall. I installed the new tire and torqued the nut to the appropriate values. There was no excessive play in the wheel assembly and the threads looked normal for a nose tire axle nut. I signed the logbook off at departure time and went to work another aircraft. It was a hot day. I had had a very challenging afternoon working on other aircraft earlier in the shift; the workload was very heavy; we are currently six Aircraft Maintenance Technicians (AMT)s short on international at this station; and I hadn't changed a nose tire in quite some time. I believe all of these to be factors in missing the wheel spacer.

Callback: Reporter stated there are two types of B767 Nose Landing Gear (NLG) axles in their fleet. One model has an internally threaded NLG axle which does not require a spacer; but the externally threaded type does. The B767 had flown three flight legs prior to a company Line Mechanic noticing the difference at one of their Stations. The wheel spacer was not missing but the axle nut washer was. He still doesn't know how the Line Mechanic recognized there was anything unusual with the previous nose tire installation.



Synopsis: The left nose tire assembly previously replaced on a B767 aircraft was missing an axle nut washer.
Date: 201301
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: A320
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Powerplant Installation
Reporter organization: Contracted Service
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Inspection Authority; Maintenance Powerplant; Maintenance Airframe
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Distraction; Situational Awareness; Workload
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Maintenance
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure; Chart Or Publication
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: As a Quality Control (QC) Inspector at Contract Maintenance Repair Station X; I inspected the installation of an [IAE] V2500 series engine on Customer X's Airbus A320-200 aircraft. I failed to verify the proper installation of a Retainer Assembly for the Forward Engine Mount. Reference Customer X's A320 Task Card 71-00-20; Item-19; Step-3.  The step by step sequence of Item-19 is broken because the Engine Hoist Assembly has to be removed to get the final torque of the mount bolts. With proper tooling; the sequence of this task would not have been broken; and this critical step would not have been missed. As an Inspector with RII authority; I should have been aware to the reason for this deviation in the Task Card. After investigation; it was found that this is a standard deviation for Repair Station X. [This] Repair Station is in the process of correcting this process. I don't recall this event that happened in January; 2013. At times there is only one Inspector on the floor with three aircraft in maintenance. This may have also been a factor. In the future I will be more diligent in my duties as an Aircraft Maintenance Inspector.

Callback: Reporter stated he was informed a channel type retainer clip was found missing at the Forward mount on a  Customer's V2500 engine. The channel clip is used to secure the engine mount bolts that are installed with bolt heads upside down; to prevent the mount bolts from falling into the engine's diffuser case if the mount bolts sheared or if anyone of the nuts securing the bolts came off.  The missing retainer clip was noticed during an A-Check by one of the Customer's Line Maintenance Technician's several months after he had signed-off the A320 aircraft's inspection for the 2nd part of the Engine Change paperwork.



Synopsis: An Aircraft Inspector at a Contract Maintenance Repair Station reports that a sequence of Task Card steps had been broken due to a lack of proper tooling during installation of a V2500 Engine on a Customer's A320 aircraft. He missed a required step to verify the proper installation of a retainer assembly at the Forward Engine Mount.
Date: 202110
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B777 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ramp ZZZ
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: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Hazardous Material Violation; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Weight And Balance
Detector: Person Dispatch; Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: After receiving salute and starting engines Ramp [Agent] came back out and gave us the stop signal. We acknowledged and they plugged back in and told us we had to be towed back in because they could not enter the ramp weights because the dangerous goods weren't properly secured. This was a surprise to us because we had received the No Dangerous Goods Planned message during preflight. During tow in we did an ACARS request and again received the No Dangerous Goods Planned message. Operations was unable to give us a satisfactory explanation and at one point said the DG (Dangerous Goods) cargo was 1;750 lbs. After a call to Dispatch and phone patch with load planning we learned that the weight was a lot less and because of the radioactivity level of the cargo a DG form was not required; even though it required specific loading by the ramp. It was confusing because ramp kept saying Dangerous Goods. We did find in the FOM where certain lower radioactive cargo does not require notification and it was confirmed by load planning that our cargo met that criteria.




Synopsis: B777 Captain reported tow back to gate to correct DG load configuration error. Additionally; Captain reported no NOTOC had been provided before pushback It was determined that a NOTOC was not required due to operating under DG a regulation exception.
Date: 201512
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B767-300 and 300 ER
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Cruise
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Dispatcher
Reporter qualification: Dispatch Dispatcher
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Dispatch
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: The flight crew accepted a direct routing to VHP causing them to deviate more than 100nm off of flight planned route. I sent 2 or 3 ACARs advising them of this and I received no response from the flight crew. I elected not to pursue this any further and instead submit this ASAP report as not only a company policy was violated but joint operational control was also compromised. Flight crews need to stop taking massive direct legs without prior coordination with [Operations]. The FOM verbiage is extremely dated. With these transcon legs and winter winds; it is even more important for the crew to discuss possible directs with [Operations] prior to accepting them so they do not get into a fuel starvation event. Better discipline on the crews and a cultural change within flight management. Pilots should not be allowed to do whatever they please.




Synopsis: Air carrier Dispatcher reported they were unhappy with a flight crew that accepted a direct vector that took them off the wind-optimized flight plan routing.
Date: 202106
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: LAX.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B LAX
ATC / advisory: TRACON SCT
Second aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Automation Aircraft RA; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: During the approach to LAX Runway 25L; between the IF and FAF; we had a TCAS resolution; the traffic was shown 400 feet below us; to the right side; so we had to perform the TCAS maneuver; first it told us to reach steady flight and then ascend; so we had to interrupt the approach and maintain 2000 feet; then we had to perform another approach through [Runway] 25L without any issues.




Synopsis: Captain reported TCAS RA during approach and took evasive action.
Date: 201904
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: A330
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant In Charge
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Illness / Injury
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Equipment Problem Dissipated; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: During takeoff roll; all crew members noticed distinct odor resembling 'bad feet/vomit/chemical.' This noticeable odor continued throughout takeoff and ascent and dissipated as we climbed towards cruise altitude. We called the flight deck during initial climb to report cabin conditions and check on their well-being. After reaching 10;000 feet; a pilot exited the flight deck to check cabin conditions and stated that a new engine had just been installed on this aircraft and that might be the source of the fumes. He asked if we were okay; and I told him I had a slight headache and burning throat. We continued on to [destination airport] with no further events. Upon descent; the odor gradually reappeared until we descended through 10;000 feet and worsened the closer we got to landing up and until we taxied into the gate. Upon gate arrival; I entered the flight deck where the odor was noticeably stronger than in the cabin. Mechanics boarded to assess the situation but by then the odor was gone. We exited the aircraft and proceeded to [next leg].




Synopsis: A330 reported foul fumes causing health issues. The fumes initially dissipated and returned on landing.
Date: 201601
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B767 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Taxi
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: After pushback was completed in the request for parking brakes to be [set] there was no further communication from the ground crew; but we observed that the tow truck have been moved away from the aircraft and eventually disappeared from our view. I was waiting for engine stabilization and at that time the first officer started his after start flow without waiting for the Captain's call for SET FLAPS 5; AFTER START CHECKLIST. That took me out of my normal flow but I told him to wait as per SOP. I explained the reason is that I needed to check the controls before he could start reading the checklist; [and] that for that the flaps had to be in takeoff position. So I called for F5 after start checklist; I waited for the flaps to reach the takeoff position and I checked the controls; then the first officer read the after start checklist. By now I realized that I had never gotten a salute from the ground crew and I realized the mistake I made by not waiting for this before calling for the checklist. We briefly talked about not having received the salute and the lack of standardization during pushback procedures on international stations. But before taxi I found this very unusual and I tried to talk through the flight interphone down below just wondering if someone was still by the nose of the aircraft and to my surprise the groundcrew person was still connected on the headset but there were no vehicles nearby. The situation [was] extremely dangerous; we could've run over this individual. At that time I told him to disconnect the headset so he did walk away from the aircraft. I gave them the salute but there was no vehicle next to him he walked all the way back to the gate. I am glad I made the call; this could have become a very very bad day for all of us. Later we talked about the importance of following SOPs strictly. Had the first officer not rushed into trying to get his flow done too early; and had I not allowed this [to] happen by waiting until the right sequence of events; we would've noticed there was no salute and that something was not right at that very moment; but anyway we learn from mistakes. We should not allow ourselves to [deviate even] just a little bit from SOPs as simple or silly that they might seem to be.




Synopsis: B767 Captain reported deviating from SOP during a pushback and release procedure at an international station.
Date: 201810
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: BUF.Airport, NY
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 BUF
ATC / advisory: TRACON BUF
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings
Primary problem: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings

Narrative: We were operating to BUF. ATIS advised us that Runway 5 ILS was in operation but coupled approaches were not authorized. As we intercepted the inbound course the autopilot was turned off but the flight director was left engaged. The flight director wandered a significant amount so it was disengaged. The ILS signal intermittently was lost several times outside the final approach fix and when the signal returned; the localizer needle wandered.  [Another air carrier] landed in front of us and when we reported our situation they informed the Controller that he had the same problem. When we broke out to visual conditions at about 500 feet we were left of course but within a perimeter to make a safe landing. We continued to land with no further incident.The weak signal was a known problem and aircraft were using this approach all day. Normally the approach would; in my opinion; be considered unstable and require a go-around but we had anticipated the deviation and would have been faced with the same problem in another attempt.




Synopsis: EMB-145 Captain reported the BUF Runway 5 ILS signal is weak and unreliable.
Date: 201712
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Landing
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Instructor; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Ground Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Ground Excursion Runway; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Weather
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Shortly before normal landing [Tower] announced wind 090 at 8 kts.  I proceeded with a crosswind landing approaching the runway with crosswind correction of left aileron and right rudder.  All was a normal landing up and until shortly before left wheel touch down. I can only guess it was a gust.  Left wing dipped dramatically down.  Fearing a strike I corrected right and the right wheel touched down. I over corrected left and aircraft veered left and stopped to the left of the runway in the grass.




Synopsis: C172 Flight Instructor reported a runway excursion following a crosswind landing.
Date: 201701
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: BTV.TRACON, VT
Aircraft: Regional Jet 200 ER/LR (CRJ200)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class C BTV
ATC / advisory: TRACON BTV
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors; Equipment / Tooling; Airspace Structure
Primary problem: Equipment / Tooling

Narrative: The aircraft had been switched to TRACON from Center. The aircraft was issued a vector towards final and descent to 7000 feet. As the aircraft was getting closer to the final it was issued a further descent to 5500 feet; this is very normal on an ILS Approach. The pilot read back 5500 feet. I turned my head to scan some strips that had printed out. I turned back and noticed the aircraft was indicating 5100 feet. I immediately told the aircraft to climb to 5500 feet which they did.The STARS R4.0 build has the capability to have altitude filters set in addition to the Minimum Safe Altitude Warning (MSAW) alarm. Unlike the MSAW alarm which only looks at projected path and the actual terrain this additional feature can be totally customization for specific areas in an airspace where a altitude 'hotspot' may exist and will flash the aircraft's datablock to help catch the controller's attention. This feature should be considered for use at BTV in specific area over both mountain ranges in our airspace.




Synopsis: A BTV TRACON Controller reported observing an aircraft descend below its assigned altitude and below the Minimum Vectoring Altitude.