elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 202104
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: LAX.Airport, CA
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground LAX
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Distraction; Confusion
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Ground Incursion Taxiway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors; Airport
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: During a taxi for a gate return to Gate XX in LAX we encroached into the boundary of Taxiway B-7. Ground Control instructed us to hold short of B-7 Taxiway but there is no signage indicating the boundary of the taxiway when proceeding eastbound because it is an exit for aircraft landing west on Runway 25R. Recommend using clearly marked taxiways with signage for aircraft proceeding eastbound. For example in this case; Taxiway C-10. There was no conflict with other aircraft or vehicles. Another aircraft used Taxiway B-7 to exit Runway 25R while we were stopped and we followed them into the ramp.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported a taxiway incursion in LAX due to lack of signage indicating where the assigned taxiway starts.
Date: 201712
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: PA-24 Comanche
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Landing
Aircraft component: Landing Gear
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Taking my airplane up to test the new avionics installed. Upon completion; made a VFR approach to [the] Runway. Selected gear down abeam the runway markings; observe a green indicator; added flaps and configured the plane for landing. Upon touchdown the gear collapsed and the plane came to a rest shortly there after.




Synopsis: Private Pilot reported difficulties with landing gear extension. Pilot landed and gear collapsed bringing aircraft to a stop.
Date: 201412
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: MDH.Airport, IL
Weather elements / visibility: Haze / Smoke; 20
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class D MDH
ATC / advisory: Tower MDH
Second aircraft: Cessna Aircraft Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private; Flight Crew Instrument
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: I called the Southern tower 11 miles out and received pattern entry instructions. Descending from 3;500 feet. As I was around 2;500 feet I saw a Cessna aircraft coming in my direction; it looked like he was flying about 165 degrees as he approached MWA. He went directly over me; probable 400 feet clearance or less. The Cessna aircraft didn't take any evasive maneuvers; nor did I. I was talking to the tower at MDH and he was probably communicating with St. Louis or the MWA tower. My transponder was not turned on; as we don't have much radar coverage below 4;000 feet in our area. Perhaps if it was on he may have had an advisory.




Synopsis: Small aircraft pilot experiences a NMAC with a Cessna at 2500 feet approaching MDH. A transponder was aboard; but not turned on. No evasive action was taken.
Date: 201302
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Turbine Engine
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: Other Takeoff roll
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Rejected Takeoff; Flight Crew Returned To Gate
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Shortly after setting takeoff power; 22 KTS max; at about 60 KTS; loud bang accompanied by aircraft shuddering; and yaw to the right. FO called Tower to report we are aborting; Tower said they saw flames/sparks and launched the ARFF. Our first thought was that we had a blown tire; there were no fire warnings or fire bells and lights. Finally noticed the Number 2 EGT indication was RED and ENG FAIL was annunciated. Reduced thrust to idle shutdown Number 2 engine. Exited the runway and waited for ARFF. Got the all clear from ARFF; shutdown the Number 1 engine and was towed back to terminal after a 1:13 wait for a tug! Post flight inspection found engine completely seized up and would not rotate at all.


Second narrative: During takeoff roll right engine failed. CA was at controls and shortly after T/O power was set; almost at same time there was a loud bang; aircraft yawed to right; ATC called and stated she had seen sparks and flames; and engine fail lights came on in cockpit. CA closed throttles; closed right fuel lever and exited rwy. Speed was estimated about 50 knots. We then performed 'Eng. Failure/severe Damage Checklist' per QRH. ARFF responded and checked us out. CA decided to request tow to gate vice single engine taxi.


Synopsis: B737-800 flight crew experiences an engine failure at low speed during takeoff and rejects. ATC advised the crew that sparks and flames were visible and alerted ARFF. Aircraft is towed to the gate.
Date: 201707
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: MDW.Airport, IL
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-700
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Distraction; Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Airport; Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Prior to the Before Takeoff Checklist we noticed flaps were not set. We stopped and set the parking break and then set flaps. We then completed appropriate checklists.I have never made this error. Perhaps being more aware of threats. We were distracted by a possible runway change which never came to fruition.


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


Synopsis: A B737 First Officer reported taxiing the aircraft for departure prior to having the flaps set for takeoff.
Date: 202111
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: AC Generator/Alternator
Component problem: Failed; Malfunctioning
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Workload; Troubleshooting; Time Pressure
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Diverted
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: On our trip from ZZZ to ZZZ1; my crew partner and I noticed that the alternator failure annunciation light came on. We were cruising at 6;000 ft. in day VMC conditions. OAT was 10 degrees Celsius. We were leaned out for cruise flight and aircraft was performing as expected. Once the light came on; we verified with the ammeter; which was reading 0; that the alternator had failed. We immediately referred to the emergency ALT Annunciation Illuminated checklist and began going through it. As per the checklist; we turned the Alternators off; reduced loads; checked the circuit breakers and turned the Alternator back on. This was the first time going through the checklist and it seemed to work. The Annunciation light had turned off and the Ammeter showed a positive charge +11 and +12 amps.This held true for about 10 minutes and we noticed the Annunciation light came back on; and again the Ammeter showed O. We ran through the same checklist again and the annunciation light once again turned off and the Ammeter showed a charge of +11 amps. This time however; the charge only remained for about 1 minute and we decided that the Alternator had indeed failed. We decided to [advise ATC] as we didn't know how much time we had left on battery power. We had noticed that ZZZ2 had just passed off of our left wing. As we were talking to Center; we asked to divert to ZZZ2 and we made a landing on Runway XX. As I was PIC (Pilot in Command) and at the controls of this flight; I did notice a slight difference in engine power on Short Final. A little buffeting was felt through the controls as I throttled up but the engine continued to run until Engine Shutdown.




Synopsis: Small Single Engine Pilot reported an alternator failure. The pilot diverted to a nearby airport with assistance from ATC.
Date: 201411
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZAB.ARTCC, NM
Light: Night
Aircraft: Light Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class E ZAB
ATC / advisory: Center ZAB
Second aircraft: Medium Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Confusion; Distraction; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Aircraft X landing SDL.  Aircraft Y landing IWA.  I coordinated a stack (SDL lander at 11000 and the IWA lander at 12000).  LOA calls for both aircraft to be at 12000 and issued descent to aircraft 1 to 14000.  This aircraft had to level at 14000 due to the proximity of NAA airspace (13000 and below).  I issued the IWA inbound a descent to 15000.  When SDL inbound was clear of NAA; I issued 'descend and maintain 11000'.  When I observed the bottom aircraft descending out of 12800; I issued a descent to the IWA inbound to 13000.  I then went back and told the SDL inbound (the bottom aircraft) to cross SHOCK at and maintain 11000 and 250knots. When I observed the bottom aircraft descending out of 11800; I issued 'Cross SHOCK at and maintain 12000 and 250knots;' to top aircraft.  At SHOCK intersection; I observed the top aircraft at 12800 descending to 12000 and the bottom aircraft at 11300.  I asked the bottom aircraft to say altitude and he replied 11300.  I told him to increase his descent and he replied 'Traffic insight.'   I used the rule of observing an aircraft leaving an altitude before issuing the altitude to another aircraft; but I am second-guessing my application of the rule because I went back and issued crossing restriction after I issued the descent.My recommendation would be to educate the workforce on when they can and cannot use the rule 'Observed leaving an altitude.'




Synopsis: ZAB Controller uses altitude leaving rule and has a loss of separation.
Date: 201206
Location: LAX.Airport, CA
Aircraft: A320
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class B LAX
ATC / advisory: Tower LAX
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Local
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Air Carrier X was a FIXIT1 departure. This requires LC1 to issue a heading of 250 even though this is an RNAV departure and the 250 heading will take him off his RNAV route. I forgot to issue the 250 heading and Air Carrier X flew the RNAV departure and eventually turned heading 219 into DR1's airspace vs. DR2's. The FIXIT1 needs to be suspended immediately. The previous Controller also forgot to issue a 250 heading to a FIXIT and switched the aircraft to departure. Fortunately; the pilot had acknowledged the frequency switch he had not; and the LC1 Controller realizing their mistake reached out to the aircraft and was able to correctly issue a 250 heading. I am aware of innumerable other times where an OD has occurred; because the LC1 Controller did not issue a 250 heading. The FIXIT is set up for controllers to fail and nothing about the FIXIT promotes safety.


Second narrative: The aircraft departed on a FIXIT1 departure. Due to the shortcomings of the system this RNAV departure is to be issued a 250 heading. I missed issuing that heading. The FIXIT1 needs to be suspended.


Synopsis: LAX Controller described an airspace infraction when an aircraft departing on the FIXIT1 RNAV departure was not issued the required heading. The reporter noted that the RNAV SID sets controllers up for errors.
Date: 201603
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 170/175 ER/LR
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: Cockpit Furnishing
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Check Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Pilot Flying (PF) indicated that he need[ed] to use the lavatory. I called the Flight Attendants (FA) and informed them of the physiological needs of the First Officer (FO) and asked them to set up the security procedure for flight deck crews to use the lavatory. I then turned on the seatbelt sign. A few minutes later; the 'A' FA called and gave the cockpit code word for cockpit access.Upon opening the cockpit door; it immediately fell off its hinges and toward the FAs standing in the way per procedure. The FO was able to keep the door upright; as it was attached by a small cable. The 'B' FA then entered the cockpit while I donned the O2 mask. Upon returning to the cockpit; the FO and the 'A' FA were able to temporarily place the door in position where it could be used effectively and the cockpit door was closed securely and locked.Upon landing a discrepancy was entered in the logbook briefly describing the incident for repair to Maintenance.Door was tested FO operation and override locking before departure. Crew has no explanation for this event.




Synopsis: An Embraer E-175 Captain reported that while opening the cockpit door; it fell off its hinges.
Date: 201911
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: B737-400
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Attendant; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Just prior to top of decent; the First Flight Attendant reported a strong smell/fumes and reported it appeared to be getting worse. We could [smell] some of it in the cockpit also. I immediately notified ATC and requested priority handling and CFR equipment standing by. ATC immediately gave me direct ZZZ. I let the First Officer continue flying while I ran the emergency checklist for fumes and continued contact with the cabin. A strong smell continued all the way until landing. I conferred with the First Officer and flight attendants and they felt there was no reason to evacuate at that point and I agreed. However; I requested the firetrucks to follow us all the way to the gate just in case.




Synopsis: B737-400 Captain reported cabin fumes during cruise and requested priority handling at destination airport.
Date: 201510
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: KZAK.ARTCC, HI
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: MD-11
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Airspace: Class A KZAK
ATC / advisory: Center KZAK
Aircraft component: Fuel System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Fuel Issue
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: En route we received a level 2 'FUEL QTY FAULT' message.  It was identified as situation 2 due to tank 2 being 'X'ed on the System Display (SD). We ran the checklist which had us put the fuel system into manual. During the flight; we received a level 2 'FUEL OFF SCHEDULE' message.  The Captain was rescheduling the fuel from the upper aux tank into tanks 1; 2; and 3 manually with the fill valves.  While doing this; he accidentally pushed the fuel pump switch; turning off the boost pump to engine number 2.  He couldn't see this due to the positioning of his right hand pushing the fill valves. I looked up and noticed the fuel pump was off.  At that point I queried the Captain asking if he meant to turn it off.  He replied he didn't and either he or I turned it back on. I then looked at the engine 2 gauges and noticed they were rolling back. I mentioned it to the captain and he initially pushed the eng ignition ovrd switch and the engine relit. This was followed by a level 2 EICAS message 'SELECT FADEC ALTN'. We pulled out the QRH and ran the appropriate checklist. The aircraft returned to a normal state and we continued the flight without further interruption.




Synopsis: A MD-11 First Officer reported the number 2 engine rolled back in cruise flight when the fuel pumps for that engine were inadvertently turned off while troubleshooting a fuel system issue.
Date: 201606
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZAB.ARTCC, NM
Aircraft: Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class A ZAB
ATC / advisory: Center ZAB
Second aircraft: Heavy Transport
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Confusion; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Automation Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure; Airspace Structure; ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: These two aircraft were alerted in my URET to be a factor with one another. I had track control and communication with Aircraft X level flight at FL360 feet. Aircraft Y was climbing from ZLA center to FL390 feet. I pulled the aircraft up on my scope prior to ZLA handing off the aircraft. I was going to call and issue a control instruction for them to stop Aircraft Y at FL350 feet for traffic. However; before I did that the controller on the sector had entered an interim altitude in the data tag of FL350 on Aircraft Y on his own. At this point the ZLA controller was already talking to Aircraft X. There was no need for me to call and stop the aircraft's climb because they had seen the traffic. ZLA then hands Aircraft X off to me with FL350 in data tag as an interim altitude and FL390 as a final requested altitude. Aircraft X checks on with me climbing to FL390 feet (which I didn't hear until listening to the tapes after the fact). I thought he checked on climbing to FL350 feet. I issued traffic to Aircraft Y 'traffic 11 o'clock 10 miles Aircraft X Heavy at FL360' the Aircraft Y responds and says 'rodger; looking' or something to that effect. A couple hits later I see the Aircraft Y at FL353 feet; I verify with him that he is level at 35000 feet. He responds 'negative we are climbing to FL390'. I this point I realized ZLA's error and potentially my own in having missed a check on altitude. After getting off position and listening to the tapes I realized the aircraft did check on climbing to FL390 feet.  The ZLA controller loaded up FL350 in the data block and never stopped the aircraft's climb. I missed a check on and the pilot failed to acknowledge a traffic call and how it might affect him.




Synopsis: A Center Controller reported a handoff of an aircraft whose radar data indicated it was climbing to 35;000 feet. The aircraft was climbing to 39;000 feet; and conflicting with traffic at 36;000 feet.