elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201907
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: A320
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
ATC / advisory: Ramp ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant In Charge
Reporter qualification: Flight Attendant Current
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: Aircraft Equipment Problem Dissipated; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Flight Attendant smelled an odor mid-cabin during our safety demonstration on Flight XXXX. She notified the rest of the cabin crew of the smell; and I along with Flight Attendant went to inspect the area. We also opened the air vents in our galleys; which reeked of exhaust. We notified the pilots; and contacted maintenance personnel. Although maintenance mentioned they did not smell anything unusual; three of us confirmed an unusual odor. While taxiing out; we smelled a pungent smell of exhaust.


Second narrative: During the safety demo I was standing at row 21. I began to notice an odor that smelled like warm tires. I smelled it for the duration of the safety demo and afterwards went forward to have the A and B come back to see if they smelled it too. They did and we decided to notify the Captain. We were still waiting at the gate for baggage so he called maintenance. We could smell it in the aft cabin as well as coming from the air vents in both galleys. Maintenance could not smell anything. The smell was not overwhelming but it was present and would come and then dissipate; or we just got used to it and would get another whiff. After they ran their tests they said they couldn't find anything wrong. The smell seemed to have lessened and we decided to go. The B FA (Flight Attendant) felt dizzy after smelling the air vents and I had throat irritation.


Synopsis: A320 cabin crew reported indistinguishable odor in the passenger cabin prior to pushback from gate. Odor was reported to the Captain who requested maintenance action.
Date: 201212
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: CZYZ.ARTCC, ON
Flight conditions: Mixed
Light: Night
Aircraft: Light Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turboprop Eng
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Cruise
ATC / advisory: Center CZYZ
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: Single Pilot; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Human factors: Other / Unknown; Communication Breakdown; Fatigue; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Fuel Issue
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I requested 360 gallons of fuel and watched the meter reach 360. The agent paid for the fuel and took the receipt. I noted the fuel gauge was low but one of the needles was moving back and forth so I decide the start up and check again before takeoff. The aircraft is not usually filled with so much fuel. It was below freezing and it appeared the gauge might not be correct because I watched him put 360 gallons on the aircraft. I contacted Tower and asked if in Canada they use imperial gallons. He said possibly but there is not much of a difference between the two so I elected to takeoff. On climbout the fuel gauges stabilized at a much lower amount then would be if I got 360 gallons. I then asked Toronto Center if they use liters to fuel planes he said yes it is very likely but he would contact the FBO to find out. He passed me on to another center and then the message 'you were fueled with 360 liters not gallons' was relayed to me. This meant that I would land with just a couple hundred gallons for fuel so to be safe I decided to divert to get more fuel. I contacted the Center I was talking to and told them that I want to divert and asked for a suggestion of a location that has Customs. They said CMH is an option so I decide to divert there I asked ATC if they would contact Customs for me. They did and when I arrived at CMH there was an agent there and I got gas and proceeded to my destination. I was feeling sick; tired; I was flying all day; plane broke twice; I had to divert once because of maintenance already the same day. It was late; I have been to Canada once; I had a lot of paperwork to complete; I was by myself and it was late. I will correct future problems but catching the chain of events sooner.




Synopsis: A turboprop pilot requested 360 gallons of fuel departing Canada but was fueled with 360 liters instead. This error was confirmed when airborne and the reporter diverted for fuel. Illness; fatigue; and maintenance delays were cited as factors.
Date: 201204
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: PMP.Airport, FL
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; High Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Tower PMP
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Engineer; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Incursion Taxiway
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: Taxi
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Chart Or Publication
Primary problem: Chart Or Publication

Narrative: I landed at PMP to wait out rain showers that prevented me from continuing northward to my home airport. I taxied my aircraft to an FBO and sat in it for an hour and 13 minutes while it rained heavily with wind gusts. When the field became VFR again; I started up and prepared to call Ground Control; and noted that the Tower closed at XA00 local according to Miami TAC chart. I proceeded to taxi to Runway 15 (the only lighted runway) utilizing the parallel taxiway (Delta); which did not cross the lit Runway 15. Upon nearing the intersection of Taxiway Delta and Bravo; the Tower called me by my N number; and I responded; 'you closed 40 minutes ago.' They replied that they were open to XB00 local. They cleared me to the run-up area at the northeast end of Bravo; and when I called; 'ready for takeoff;' I was cleared for takeoff without further comment. No other traffic was taxiing; taking off or landing during this time. If the Tower hours of operation were until XB00 local; then the XA00 local closing time shown on the chart was in error. Remedy? Print correct closing time on chart.

Callback: The Reporter stated that ATC had been observing him since he landed and watched him taxi out but said nothing until his CTAF call. He felt that he had done due diligence and because the FAA printed information was incorrect he made an error.



Synopsis: A pilot landed at PMP during normal Tower hours of operation and after a weather delay; thinking the Tower was closed because of its Miami Sectional posted hours; taxied for takeoff using CTAF procedures but was called by the Tower and notified they were opened until XB00 not XA00.
Date: 201303
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: Marginal
Aircraft: B767-300 and 300 ER
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: PFD
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Approx 2 hours into the flight at cruise altitude [we] experienced a loss of the Captian's ADI. Screen went blank (Flat Panel) along with PITCH and ROLL flags on the First Officer's ADI. There were no other associated failures that could pinpoint the root cause of the failure. We were able to 'bootstrap' the Captain's ADI via the IRS alt switch; but due to a concern over the unknown cause of our degraded directional and attitude reference; we declared an emergency with Center and diverted. Overweight landing at 329;000; min sink rate landing; no auto brakes; min braking with a landing rollout of 11;000 plus FT. As a side note; a possible cause of the gyro failure was a lighting storm in the vicinity. The failure was coincidental with a period of St. Elmo's fire visible in the cockpit.




Synopsis: B767 pilot reports loss of Captain's ADI at cruise altitude on an ETOPS flight.  No associated faults are noted and the ADI is regained using the IRS alternate switch; however the crew elects to divert for maintenance.
Date: 201402
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZKC.ARTCC, KS
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class E ZKC
ATC / advisory: Center ZKC
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Distraction; Workload
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Center cleared us for the ILS 18L approach at MDH and told us to maintain 3;000 FT until established. It was the first IFR cross country for my student; and it was a very high workload flight for me to try to teach; watch over what the student was doing; help them set up for the instrument approach and understand what they needed to do; and there had been lots of other traffic throughout the flight. As we were flying towards CABBI intersection (the outer marker for the ILS) I looked down at my approach plate and at the radio to check what my student had started a descent down to 2;200 [FT] because he was apparently confused. I caught him and told him to go back to 3;000 [FT]; but as I did that Center yelled at us for being at 2;700 [FT] when we weren't established on the approach. We immediately climbed back.




Synopsis: An Instrument Instructor reported his IFR student began a descent to the final approach altitude early and was warned by ATC to return to the cleared altitude.
Date: 201910
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZID.ARTCC, IN
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Heavy Transport
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class A ZID
ATC / advisory: Center ZID
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Aircraft X was filed for the SMUKE2 RNAV STAR to IND; which was landing Runways 23L and 23R. Indianapolis Center clearance was 'Descend via SMUKE2 arrival landing southwest.' In the case of the GIIBS2 arrival; 'landing southwest' would be sufficient. However; on the SMUKE2; the routing for Runway 23L and 23R diverge at FIIRE; to an East and West downwind; respectively. A proper descend via clearance for the SMUKE2 would be 'descend via the SMUKE2 arrival; Runway 23L (or 23R).' 'Southwest' is insufficient guidance for the SMUKE2 arrival; and in the event of lost communication; the flight crew and ATC would be unsure what routing to follow based on the Assigned; Vectored; Expected; Filed hierarchy. Note 4 on the SMUKE2 arrival page states to expect a descend via clearance with landing direction from Center and a landing runway from approach. I questioned the clearance with Indy Center who replied that 'everyone else' does it. I requested clarification as to the routing after FIIRE; and Center took us off the arrival and assigned direct VHP VOR and 11;000 feet. This is potentially a normalization of deviance; and is certainly poor STAR implementation where crews are cleared to descend to an altitude (6;000 feet); but beyond their known routing. Descend via procedures need to be linked to a specific routing in the event of lost communications.




Synopsis: Heavy Transport aircraft Captain reported being assigned the SMUKE2 STAR to IND without a runway transition; resulting in confusion.
Date: 201309
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ORL.Tower, FL
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class D LEE
ATC / advisory: TRACON MCO
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew; Person Observer
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Weather; Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Flying an IFR flight plan in and out of IMC. Were on GPS 31 approach to LEE. Descended to approximately 700 before reaching MALKE (minimum 860 FT). At the time we were in VMC and I fell into a visual approach mode without realizing it. I busted minimums. My passenger; an IFR rated private pilot; brought it to my attention. I leveled and maintained altitude as I crossed MALKE. At this time I received a call from Tower with altitude alert.




Synopsis: An IFR single engine pilot on the LEE GPS 31 approach became VMC prior to MALKE then forgot his IFR status and continued he descent until reminded by a passenger about the IFR MALKE crossing restriction.
Date: 201810
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: A320
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: Horizontal Stabilizer Trim
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: At cruise; got a status message 'Cat 3 single only' inoperative systems 'Cat 3 Dual'. Moments later it cleared. Moments later; got an ECAM FLT/CTL ELAC 1 PITCH FAULT. Complied with our procedures and completed the ECAM. Its status message was the same: 'Cat 3 single only' - inoperative systems 'Cat 3 Dual'. Next A/P 2 disengaged. We engaged A/P 1. Moments later; A/P1 disengaged. We started to hand fly the aircraft. Shortly thereafter we got ECAM FLT/CTL ELAC 2 PITCH FAULT. and complied with our procedures and completed the ECAM. Now we were in alternate law and knew we were going to land in direct law. We noticed the pitch trim was giving short bursts and realized that was what kicked the A/P off. At this point; we [asked for] the longest runway at [destination]. I tried calling Dispatch and [Operations] on the Dispatch frequencies [listed in the manual] but it was too scratchy and [instead] used the ARINC frequency dispatch ACARS'ed us. Approach and landing was uneventful.Failure of ELAC systems.My first attempt was the new call app on our satellite equipped aircraft. It did not work. Then the dispatch frequencies in FM2. Had connection been better; communication with the Dispatcher and [Operations] would have occurred much quicker.


Second narrative: We also received an EGPWS terrain fault and a FMC 1 failure.


Synopsis: A320 flight crew reported loss of multiple systems apparently related to pitch trim malfunctions that resulted in reversion to alternate/direct law.
Date: 201810
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: LAS.Airport, NV
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class B LAS
ATC / advisory: TRACON L30
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Distraction
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I was pilot flying Aircraft X. All ground operations and preflight preparations were completed per SOP. We were given permission to lineup and wait on runway 1R at LAS. We could hear tower talking with helicopter traffic which is standard for LAS operations. Nothing in the communications caught my attention or in any made me or the CA (Captain) concerned. Takeoff roll and liftoff were uneventful. At approximately 500 AGL I began a left turn on the SHEAD 1 RNAV SID. We then received three separate 'Traffic' calls from TCAS. I [looked] down to my ND and saw three separate blips showing '-03' off the close left. I was in a 10nm scale on my display. I looked across the cockpit and picked up two helicopters low and approximately 400-500 feet lateral separation through the Captain's side window. I communicated that I 'had the traffic' to the Captain. We were still climbing on the SID and the traffic was not a factor as we were climbing and they appeared to be flying level parallel the Vegas strip.Once things had settled a little and we were headed south on the SID; the Captain communicated to departure that the helicopters were too close for comfort (I'm paraphrasing). The flight behind us joined in that assessment and departure said they would relay our concerns to tower.




Synopsis: B737 First Officer reported multiple TCAS alerts on departure from LAS.
Date: 201911
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: LRO.Airport, SC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Night
Aircraft: Skylane 182/RG Turbo Skylane/RG
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class E LRO
ATC / advisory: UNICOM CHS
Aircraft component: Autopilot
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Equipment / Tooling
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: I am submitting this to help others not have the same situation. I recently had a TruTrak autopilot installed in my aircraft. The AP (Autopilot) had done fine through the instrument flight; climbing and descending to altitudes as assigned with minimal over or undershoot. However; once on the GPS approach and aligned with the runway and with the runway in sight in the dark; I dialed in the step-down approach altitude for the fix I had just passed. I went inside and started cleaning up the cockpit; doing before landing checks; and dimmed the cockpit lighting. I glanced up and the runway was gone. I went to full throttle and initiated an aggressive climb as I saw the trees passing by. I looked for GPS obstacles and climbed back to the proper altitude and completed the approach. I [have] over a thousand [helicopter] hours [flying] in the dark. Due to the new automation in the aircraft; I came within seconds of controlled flight into terrain.




Synopsis: C182 pilot flying reported a controlled flight into terrain incident during approach due to newly installed autopilot malfunctioning.