elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201209
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: LAX.Airport, CA
Light: Night
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ramp LAX
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: Check Pilot; Instructor; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Airport
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: After push back and disconnect in LAX; I attempted to taxi the aircraft but could not get aircraft to move despite using the most power allowed per procedure. Apparently there is a hole or depression in the asphalt that is well known to the ramp tower but perhaps not our push crews. This is dangerous as a crew unfamiliar or distracted could use too much power and damage equipment or seriously injure someone. This needs to be repaired or a disconnect spot painted on the ramp.


Second narrative: After pushback and engine start; tug was disconnected; area cleared. Called for taxi and Captain (IOE) attempted to Taxi. I advised Captain of the maximum N1 thrust and what the book said if we could not achieve breakaway with these thrust settings. After several attempts; we were unable to achieve taxi. We stopped; parked the brakes and called operations for a tow. Upon receiving a tow forward about 15 feet; the tug driver informed us we had been sitting in a 'hole' that has been getting progressively larger. They were already aware of this; but inadvertently parked in it. This hole is located around spot 2. We pushed out to taxi out C9 alleyway. We were towed forward and proceeded to taxi normally. We broke away from ramp with less than 35 percent thrust. This needs to be fixed. This will occur again. An unsuspecting Captain or a tired one will inadvertently apply too much thrust and may end up damaging something behind them. It obviously is not a new hole.


Synopsis: Air carrier flight crew reports a depression in the C9 Alley way near Spot 2 at LAX; that traps a stationary aircraft preventing it from moving with maximum allowable congested area thrust.
Date: 202112
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Challenger 300
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Hydraulic Main System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; General Maintenance Action; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Climbing through approximately 12;000 feet; I noticed a cyan CAS message: R HYD ENG PUMP FAIL. Shortly after pointing it out; it changed to amber CAS messages: R HYD PRESS LOW and SPOILERS FAULT. NAME requested a level off at 14;000 feet and ran the appropriate checklists. We then determined we should to head back to ZZZ and we requested lower to burn fuel before landing. We burned fuel off for about 30 minutes before heading back to ZZZ and landing Runway XX.




Synopsis: Challenger 300 First Officer reported a right engine driven hydraulic pump fail CAS message during climbout. The flight crew elected to perform an air turn back and precautionary landing at departure airport.
Date: 201204
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-700
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Fuselage
Reporter organization: Contracted Service
Reporter function: Inspector
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Airframe; Maintenance Powerplant
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Diverted; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Chart Or Publication; Aircraft; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Chart Or Publication

Narrative: I gave an 'OK to Close' on a work card for panel number 194e on a B737-700 aircraft [while] following a contract customer's Air Carrier Maintenance Procedures Manual (MPM) procedures for that inspection. After the aircraft had been in service for several months; the flight crew experienced a pressurization issue and diverted the flight for investigation. During troubleshooting by the air carrier's mechanics; it was discovered that four drain valves under panel 194e were not installed. These valves were removed in April 2012; In Accordance With (IAW) Routine Check Card XXX. The installation of these valves were signed for by a Mechanic and a Quality Control (QC) Inspector (not myself); [approximately] five days later on the same card. The 'OK to Close' inspection requirements for this area is to look for FOD and obvious damage; I found neither at that time. The area of the inspection was on the aircraft exterior skin just aft of the main wheel well. The belly drains in question are common to the aft cargo bay. I was made aware that there was an issue months later.

Callback: Reporter stated the inflight pressurization issues that later developed on the B737-700 aircraft were due to the lack of lower fuselage drain valves that would normally close under cabin pressurization had they been reinstalled. Company Quality Assurance (Q/A) recognized they had to do something about the different Job Card procedure that contributed to the drain valves not being reinstalled.



Synopsis: A contract Repair Station Inspector reports about four lower fuselage drain valves that were not reinstalled on a customer Air Carrier's B737-700 aircraft. Flight crew had diverted due to a pressurization issue.
Date: 202007
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Cockpit/Cabin Communication
Component problem: Malfunctioning
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)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural MEL / CDL; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors; Procedure; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Maintenance in ZZZ onboard aircraft prior to departure.  Maintenance applied MEL 23-XXY (Flight attendant call chimes) at gate prior to departure.  We as the crew complied with MEL operational requirements prior to leaving gate.  Once airborne; we as the crew; realized that Dispatch did not add MEL to dispatch release.  Continued enroute to ZZZ1.Cause: Running late off of gate due to maintenance in flight deck during preflight.  First Officer first trip back after 6 weeks off.Suggestion: Call Dispatch and Maintenance Control on phone when MEL being applied to aircraft.




Synopsis: Air carrier First Officer reported not realizing that Dispatch did not add an MEL to the dispatch release until they were airborne.
Date: 201301
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Dash 8-200
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Inverter
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: We were at FL210 when we noticed the master caution light illuminate as well as the AUX INVERT light. I called for the checklist for this light. We were starting a descent at this point and after a minute or two of running through the checklist we noticed a faint odor that smelled electrical or like burnt plastic. We told ATC about it and I requested to continue our descent in case the odor increased. We continued the checklist for the AUX INVERT light while we continued our descent to 7;000 FT. The odor got continuously worse so I had the First Officer don his oxygen mask and I did the same. At this point we declared an emergency and requested to land as soon as practical. ATC advised us that ZZZ was very close so we decided to divert there. We ran the checklist for smoke in the cockpit even though there wasn't any visible smoke. I quickly notified the Flight Attendant about the emergency and to prepare the cabin for a normal arrival and that we would be on the ground in five minutes. We did not have enough time to call Dispatch to inform them because ATC vectored us right onto a six mile final and we landed without incident. The fire truck was waiting and followed us in to the ramp where we shut down.




Synopsis: A DHC8-200 AUX INVERT light displayed at FL210 followed shortly by the smell of an overheated electrical component. The emergency checklist was used and the flight diverted to the nearest suitable airport.
Date: 201907
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: A321
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Aeroplane Flight Control
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Distraction
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Aircraft; MEL; Procedure
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Dispatched with MEL ELAC [Elevator Aileron Computer] 1 fault...below 1;000 feet; FO disconnected autopilot and at 500 feet FO stated his control stick was not responding to his inputs.  I immediately took control of the aircraft and completed a normal landing since my controls were working fine and I deemed it safer than going around with a possible flight control/control stick anomaly. No associated ECAMs came on.Suggestions: Don't allow Dispatch with an ELAC fault as allowed per MEL if it turns out this was related to MEL.

Callback: Reporter stated being unable to determine if the side stick failure was positively related to the ELAC 1 MEL; but feels it's a possibility.  Reporter stated being particularly concerned that there were no ECAM alerts associated with the FO's control stick failure.



Synopsis: A321 Captain reported being dispatched with ELAC 1 (Elevator Aileron Computer) fault; and on final approach at 500 feet AGL the FO reported his control stick was not responding to his inputs. Captain took control and landed normally.
Date: 201307
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZZ.ARTCC, FO
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: MD-11
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 91
Mission: Ferry / Re-Positioning
Flight phase: Cruise
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZZ
Aircraft component: Service/Access Door
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew; Person Maintenance
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Procedure; Aircraft
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: During post C-Check maintenance flight refueling panel detached and lodged in slats mechanism. Excess roll noted when retracting slats at speed 260 KIAS. This is a normal post maintenance flight check profile. Return to maintenance practice of placing speed tape over the panels prior to test flight.


Second narrative: This was a Part 91 Test Flight of a MD-11. During the Flight Test profile while the 260 KT Slat Check was being accomplished; normal slat extension was performed with no roll observed. However; during slat retraction the aircraft rolled 20 to 30 degrees left. Had observers go back to the cabin area and observed the left outboard slat mechanism was slow to retract. The remainder of the Test Flight was accomplished and uneventful. After landing and parking back at the vendor's location; post flight inspection revealed that the refueling panel on the underside of the left wing had come loose in-flight and lodged in the respective left outboard slat mechanism causing damage to both. Until just two and half years ago; the approved Vendor that accomplishes the Heavy Maintenance 'C' checks were allowed to use Speed Tape to seal and protect panels from coming loose during Flight Test profiles. Due to recent changes to Maintenance Policies and procedures; use of Speed Tape for the sole purpose of protecting these panels from coming loose is no longer authorized. The policies need to be changed to give the Vendor the authority to use Speed Tape for this specific purpose and mitigate the threat of these panels coming loose during flight test profiles and damaging the aircraft.


Synopsis: MD11 Maintenance crew reports the refueling panel door coming loose during a 260 knot slat check and jamming the slat. Previously speed tape had been used to prevent the door from coming off during this rigorous test.
Date: 201201
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: AVL.TRACON, NC
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Turbulence; Windshear
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Regional Jet 200 ER/LR (CRJ200)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class E ZTL
ATC / advisory: TRACON AVL
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Distraction; Human-Machine Interface; Workload
Anomaly: Deviation - Speed All Types; Inflight Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control
Contributing factors: Weather
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: There were clouds in the climb. Per our procedures I climbed through 8;000 feet at Vt which was 180 KIAS on this departure. We encountered moderate turbulence climbing through about 7;000 feet. The autopilot had a tough time keeping 180 in speed mode. It was unusually slow. At about 7;800 we hit a pretty good bump and the airspeed dropped about 30 knots in a second. The autopilot disconnected; the associated clacker sounded. The stick shaker engaged and the pusher engaged with the warbler. About 5 seconds later we got a STALL FAIL caution message that [went] away after about 6 or 7 seconds. Once we got above the tops a minute or so later; the ride smoothed out.




Synopsis: After departing AVL a CRJ200 encountered turbulence and a 30 kt airspeed loss at 7;000' which caused the stall warning stick shaker and stick pusher to activate.
Date: 201307
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Cardinal 177/177RG
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: UNICOM ZZZ
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Distraction; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Less Severe; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Observer; Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: When I was taxiing out I heard an ELT on 121.5. I asked another plane being fueled if he heard it too; but he said he only heard it when I transmitted; so maybe it was mine. I tested mine and didn't think it was on and kept taxiing out. I was at the runup area when I started programming my panel mount GPS; my portable GPS and my iPad. I also tried to figure out where the ELT was coming from. It must have taken longer than I expected because I didn't realize that the other plane was waiting to takeoff behind me. He came on the radio and said; 'You know; I'm burning 30 gallons an hour sitting here.' I immediately headed toward the runway to takeoff when he yelled over the radio 'STOP! There's an aircraft on short final.' I stopped and immediately saw the aircraft. Fortunately I did not enter the runway; but the plane on final had the good sense to go-around. When I took the active; I saw that there were three other planes waiting to depart behind the plane. Not only was I holding things up programming three different navigation units on a perfect VFR day; but I let myself get spooked into doing something that could have been dangerous. The lesson is not to let unimportant things distract you and never lose situational awareness.




Synopsis: C177 pilot; distracted by programming two GPS units and an iPad; and also conscious of traffic waiting behind him; started to taxi onto the active runway causing an aircraft on final to go-around at a non-towered airport.
Date: 201409
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: MEM.Airport, TN
Aircraft: A300
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Training / Qualification; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Hazardous Material Violation
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Pre-flight
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: DG [dangerous goods] paper presented to the crew had incorrect entries in the description of infectious substances loaded on the aircraft. The description presented to the crew stated: 'XXYYYY Infectious Substances Affecting Humans (CAT A).  This incorrect entry shows that someone involved did not understand the DG regulations or the documentation requirements.  A 'Category A' infectious substance is a substance which is transported in a form that; when exposure to it occurs; is capable of causing permanent disability; life-threatening or fatal disease in otherwise healthy humans or animals.  After an extended delay; DG personnel presented correct paperwork and the flight departed.




Synopsis: Captain reports being given a Dangerous Goods form for a substance; which is not authorized and should have been detected by the person doing the paperwork even though the entry was in error.
Date: 201205
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: Mixed
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Bonanza 35
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Autoflight System
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Distraction; Human-Machine Interface; Training / Qualification; Workload
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors; Weather
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Had been stepped down from 9;000 FT to 3;000 FT and was number 3 or 4 aircraft for the approach. Approach vectored me to intercept ILS 33 at the IAF. Instructed to 'turn to 360 degrees and maintain 2;500 FT until established; cleared for ILS 33; contact Tower.' I was using autopilot heading mode (steering with heading bug) turning to 360 with HSI pointer to 332 degrees (final approach course) and engaged vertical speed down and put landing gear down to get from 3;000 FT to 2;500 FT MSL. I then engaged NAV on S-Tec 60-2 which showed capture and completed the intercept of the localizer. My practice from training is to keep hand on landing gear until gear down and locked confirmation (single green and barber pole). [I] confirmed autopilot capture and control of localizer course; thinking that the autopilot would capture glide slope. Called Tower to report inbound on ILS 33; and then noticed aircraft still descending rapidly and below target altitude. Simultaneously; Tower called Altitude Alert at 1;500 FT and I should be at 2;500 FT. I immediately disengaged autopilot and climbed. At this point; was below ceiling with runway in sight with VASI guidance and adjusted altitude to 2 white/2 red. No issue landing. In reviewing post-flight; I should have controlled the aircraft by hand to the intercept altitude of 2;500 FT rather than using vertical speed and confusing NAV capture of Localizer with also engaging glide slope capture. I will fly with my instructor to practice autopilot scenarios as most of my approaches are hand flown.




Synopsis: A BE35 pilot descended to 1;500 FT before crossing the initial approach fix 2;500 FT constraint because he was using the autopilot Vertical Speed mode while managing the landing gear and monitoring LOC capture; but with glideslope capture not armed.