elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201906
Location: DEN.Tower, CO
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class B DEN
ATC / advisory: Tower DEN
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation - Speed All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Unstabilized Approach; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Weather
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We were flying into DEN 16R. ATC reported wind changes of 30 knots. The aircraft in front of us did not report any loss/gain. We were planning flaps 30 with plus 15. It put our Ref at 145 and Target at 160. We were configured and doing fine. The Captain was flying; and he kept having the speed creep up to max flaps speed of 180 (though we never exceeded it). I called him twice to check speed. He told me that he was keeping it fast because he was waiting for a drop of airspeed and he had 12000 feet of runway. I told him to check speed again. We were hugging the barber pole for flaps 30 speed. Which is plus 15 higher than our target. Again; he told me he was keeping it fast waiting for the drop of speed. I debated telling him to go around; and I should have. As we landed; I thought about being in DEN and higher Ground speed and issues with taking off exceeding tire speed. I would have never thought it was an issue on landing. As we touched down; I saw our speed of 205 ground speed. Our limitation is 195 tire speed. Rest of landing/taxi in was fine. We reported to maintenance and they changed all 6 tires. I spoke with the Captain on our next leg some more about it; and I mentioned that I told him to check speed twice. He told me when he heard that; he did not look at the airspeed. Below 1000 feet; he went heads up and didn't look at the airspeed again. When he heard me say check speed; he thought that he was only 5 knots faster than target; not hugging red line for the flaps. But he did not look in to check his speed.




Synopsis: B737 First Officer reported tire overspeed during landing at high altitude airport.
Date: 202009
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Sky Clear / Unlimit Vis; 50
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Second aircraft: UAV - Unpiloted Aerial Vehicle
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Instructor; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Human factors: Troubleshooting; Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Aircraft Equipment Problem Dissipated; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: 4;500 ft MSL ZZZ to ZZZ1; about 22 mile straight in for RWY XX at ZZZ1 over near the town. While flying my student asked me what the object was to our 10 o'clock headed our direction. As I looked over I thought it originally was a bird; then as it got closer I realized it was bigger and red. I first thought it might be a red ballon floating; but then I saw a red flashing light on the top and thought we might be getting close to hitting a tower; but saw nothing below the object. No tower; no string or ribbon; nothing attached below it. Upon closer inspection quickly as it passed by my left wing; approximately 2 wingspan away and just a couple feet high; it looked like a spinning top or dreidel; larger up top and smaller on the bottom; reddish orange in color with a flashing light on the top. I immediately notified Approach and they said they had nothing on radar in the area. I gave a description to the best of my ability in my surprised state. I also requested a phone number from them to speak with them when finished. Nothing else noted or resulted from the event.




Synopsis: C-172 Flight Instructor reported an uneventful NMAC event with an unreported drone during training flight.
Date: 202001
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 145 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Illness / Injury; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Passenger; Person Flight Crew; Person Flight Attendant
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: At cruise the Flight Attendant said she smelt something bad in the back from the galley to zone B. We smelt it too and began to troubleshoot the situation. We noticed that the packs were still set to warm from the morning flight. Together we thought the smell could be a pack working too hard. We began to cool the cockpit and cabin; and the smell was no longer with us upfront. The flight attendant said she could still smell it and some passengers could now also taste it. She also said that passengers and herself were dizzy. So we worked with ATC to return to ZZZ.We believe the smell was caused by the packs and they needed to be cooled down.When the flight attendant said her and passengers felt sick we determined using all available information it would be best to return to ZZZ. There was a more than 100 knot head wind to ZZZ1 with an ETA of 48 minutes and only 22 back to ZZZ.We worked together as the whole crew using all available resources both inside and outside the aircraft to come to the decision to return to ZZZ.




Synopsis: EMB-175 First Officer reported that fumes in the cabin resulted in a return to the departure airport.
Date: 201510
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 170/175 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Weight And Balance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Upon landing and doing my post flight walk around it was brought to my attention that the rear cargo bin was loaded with 42 United States postal bins. Neither the Captain nor myself new anything about freight when leaving; nor was anything on the Cargo Load Sheet. During my preflight walk around I was unable to get to the rear cargo bin because of equipment and the lav truck. Better communication [is needed] between ramp and the flight deck. Revising ramp procedures to make it required to open all cargo bins upon the unloading process.




Synopsis: EMB175 First Officer reports discovering on post flight that the rear cargo bin was loaded with 42 United States postal bins that were not reflected on the load manifest.
Date: 201411
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Departure; Approach
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Confusion
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance
Contributing factors: Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I overheard an ELT being reported.  Soon after; there were search aircraft launched in response to the ELT.  This caused me to recall an instance from my shift the night prior; during which I was working departures and also overheard two ELTs being reported.  I became concerned that there had been no action taken the night before.  While I was not directly involved in taking the reports or reporting them to the Front Line Manager (FLM); I did overhear part of the communication.  While working departures; I heard the ZZZ1 controller verbally advise the FLM that she received a report of an ELT.  She then informed the FLM that another aircraft was also reporting an ELT near the same location.  I recall the FLM asking 'What altitude?' and she responded that the second aircraft was around the same altitude.  I remember looking into ZZZZZ airspace just to see the aircraft she was referring to and seeing two aircraft around 5000 FT.  I assumed these were the two aircraft she had just reported.  After hearing the news that the search and rescue aircraft did; in fact; locate a downed aircraft.  I became concerned that the previous night's ELT reports had not been reported beyond the FLM or taken seriously which; in my mind was upsetting.  I don't know for a fact that these ELT reports were directly related to the aircraft accident that was found a day later but the potential is enough for me to report my concern over the possible disregard of ELT reports. Ensure that all ELT reports are escalated to the appropriate level of management in order to ensure the timely response of search and rescue crews in the unfortunate case of an aircraft accident.




Synopsis: TRACON Controller describes hearing an ELT on the previous shift and remembers hearing being reported to the FLM on duty.  The next shift he hears about another ELT and wonders if it was the same aircraft from the night before.  The Controller wonders if the FLM took actions to locate the ELT.
Date: 201304
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: B757-200
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Oxygen System/Crew
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Technician
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Powerplant; Maintenance Airframe
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Maintenance
When detected: Other During Maintenance
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Airport; Human Factors; Manuals
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: I had to replace the Crew Oxygen (O2) bottle on a B757-200 aircraft.  Maintenance Manual (MM) 12-15-08 requires the airplane to be 'grounded correctly' per MM 20-41-00.  MM 20-41-00 states 'the airplane must be statically grounded to a common; approved; identified ground.' The [static] grounds at the ZZZ Maintenance Hangar are clearly marked and dated.  However; the grounds at company terminal are devoid of markings. This leads one to question the validity of these grounds for aircraft maintenance.  Facility Maintenance tested a sole ground on Gate X (where the B757 resided); using the values found in the Servicing Manual. After it was determined this ground was indeed 'approved;' the O2 bottle was replaced. There isn't a uniform marking system for the aircraft grounds at ZZZ Hangar and terminal areas. [Recommend] the Terminal grounding points on all gates be inspected for [static] resistance then marked as 'approved' grounds.




Synopsis: A Line Mechanic reports about the lack of a uniform marking system for aircraft static grounds at their company terminal gates.  The Aircraft Maintenance Manual (AMM) required the static 'grounding' of a B757-200 aircraft prior to removing and replacing the Crew Oxygen (O2) bottle.
Date: 201309
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Night
Aircraft: B777 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Taxi
Aircraft component: Vertical Stabilizer/Fin
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Other / Unknown
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Ground Event / Encounter Object
Detector: Person Ground Personnel
When detected: Other During Tow Operations
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Airport; Aircraft; Equipment / Tooling; Weather; Human Factors
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: One of our air carrier's operational objectives is to move as many aircraft as possible; especially wide body; with a Towbarless Tow Vehicle (TLTV) for [jet] fuel savings. Chicago's ORD [Airport] policy for towing aircraft with a TLTV currently does not restrict it from use below 1;200 FT Runway Visual Range (RVR). With the exception of snow and ice; [Company] Management requires tow operators to use the [TLTV] vehicle regardless of weather conditions. The routine tow route in Chicago crosses thru the critical ILS zone for Runway 9R approximately 1/8 of a mile from the runway end. Due to the slow movement of this [type of] tow vehicle; movement thru the critical ILS zone takes much longer than via conventional [aircraft] taxi movement. This can result in shadowing of the [Approach] coupler; causing a missed approach or the possibility of a tail strike with the height of a B767 or B777 tails. Whenever the weather is bad; [recommend] restricting towing operations when the airport is landing aircraft below 1;200 FT RVR.




Synopsis: An air carrier employee reports that towing B777 and B767 aircraft using the Towbarless Tow Vehicles (TLTV) takes much longer than taxiing aircraft resulting in extended shadowing of the ILS Approach Coupler for Runway 9R at Chicago's ORD airport. The routine tow route crosses thru the critical ILS Zone for Runway 9R approximately 1/8 eighth of a mile from end of runway.
Date: 201210
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 50
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: CV 580
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Pressurization System
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Check Pilot; Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Physiological - Other
Second reporter function: Relief Pilot; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; Flight Crew Diverted; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: While climbing through approximately 17;000 FT recognized hypoxia symptoms; donned oxygen masks and commenced descent and returned to departure airport for an uneventful landing. During the flight portion; inability of flight crew member to perform normal duties occurred as well as navigational and altitude deviations.


Second narrative: While climbing to assigned altitude of 22;000 FT; around 17;000 FT MSL I realized I was getting symptoms of hypoxia and donned the oxygen mask. From there we descended and landed back at the departure airport for an uneventful landing. During the flight portion; inability of flight crew member to perform normal duties occurred as well as navigation and altitude deviations.


Synopsis: CV580 flight crew experiences hypoxia symptoms climbing through 17;000 FT; dons oxygen masks and returns to departure airport.
Date: 201204
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Light Sport Aircraft
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Glider; Flight Crew Flight Engineer; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Ground Excursion Runway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: On takeoff roll at about 45 KTS; the airplane hit a big bump in the grass runway; which put the airplane into the air. The airplane veered off the left side of the runway down into a swampy tree area. Nobody was hurt; but the Light Sport airplane sustained damage. Lesson to be learned very light airplanes are not suited to rough; bumpy sod runways.




Synopsis: Pilot of a light sport aircraft reported losing control on takeoff roll when he hit a bump in the grass runway. Aircraft left the runway and sustained damage.
Date: 201703
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: Final Approach
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Deviation - Speed All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Unstabilized Approach
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Captain cleared for approach on downwind. Turned base at 3700 ft inside final approach fix. I called 1000 ft high in reference to FAF altitude. I do not recall all of the details precisely but I called a go-around for airspeed being 30 kts fast. The captain kept working the controls (all automation was turned off on downwind). He landed. The approach was not flown in accordance with SOP for a visual. We ended up high and fast which resulted in excess speed throughout the approach to a short runway.Better CRM between the crew could have prevented this situation.




Synopsis: B777 First Officer reported an unstabilized approach with a Captain that continued to a landing even though he called for a go-around.
Date: 201606
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZLA.ARTCC, CA
Weather elements / visibility: 50
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Challenger CL604
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Ferry / Re-Positioning
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class A ZLA
ATC / advisory: Center ZLA
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Automation Aircraft RA; Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: After finishing our maintenance checks; we were returning to home base. Descending from FL300 to FL250 ATC assigned a left (200 degrees - long way) turn direct to PMD; and asked for 'a tight turn if able'. Having only crew onboard; I elected to disconnect the auto pilot and perform a steep turn. I also reduced power/speed to minimize the radius of the turn. As I approached FL250; I didn't completely arrest the descent; and descended below assigned altitude. Also; while in the turn ATC advised of traffic climbing to FL240 (Gulfstream) perhaps 9 o'clock out of the turn. I saw and reported the traffic; but was later informed that I didn't quite maintain 5 miles (4.7) and 1;000 (700) vertical feet.In retrospect; I had no need to perform a steep turn; or disengage the auto pilot in A airspace. Even if I had elected to do so; a more timely response would have been to terminate the steep turn; to make the altitude capture easier.




Synopsis: CL604 First Officer reported an airborne conflict resulted when he overshot the cleared altitude in descent.
Date: 201207
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Citation X (C750)
Operator: Fractional
Operating under: Part 91
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Fractional
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Fatigue
Anomaly: Other Fatigue
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Work Refused
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: My crew was briefed for a 0430 show for a 0600 go for [3-leg] flight. In preparation for this early show and relatively long day; I went to bed at approximately 1915 and slept reasonably well awakening at 0330 for the 0430 show. Upon meeting my First Officer in the lobby; he stated that he was tired and wasn't sure if he could do the flight. We went to the airport discussing his condition and ability to perhaps complete the [first] leg at which time he could consider calling in fatigued. During my pre-flight; he stated that he was truly exhausted having gotten only a couple of hours of sleep the night before for a number of reasons including a noisy hotel on a weekend night. He called in fatigued. We were kept on duty until 0900 at which time we received a brief to report at 2345 that night to ferry [to position aircraft] for a 0500 flight arriving at about 0730. I explained to the Assistant Chief Pilot on duty at about 0700 that I was good to go for the day having gotten decent sleep and perhaps they could find me someone else to fly with in time to complete flight(s) on what was scheduled to be a busy. It was also a start day for the X; so I thought there might be other pilots available. This opportunity was not answered by Scheduling. In order for me to get at least 8 hours of sleep prior to the 2345 show and anticipating flying until about 0730; I would have had to gotten to sleep no later than 1445 at the hotel and slept through until 2245 giving myself an hour to get ready and report. This is simply not realistic under virtually any circumstance let alone having gotten up less than 12 hours before. Sleeping on demand is not human nature. As a result; I was forced to call in fatigued not being in any condition to safely fly an aircraft during the middle of the night when I had awoken around the time the day before that I was now supposed to fly. This; to me; is a clear example of punitive; unsafe scheduling and one that could have been avoided by either; 1) Finding me someone to fly with during the day during that time I was available (0430 to 1830) or; 2) by Scheduling us not according to the 14 hours off parameter but by having us report at a time more in line with what we were doing the next morning. Expecting a crew to report at 0430 and then again at 2345 the same day is simply unsafe.




Synopsis: A Fractional Captain reported an assignment that he felt was unrealistically fatiguing; so he refused the trip.