elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201601
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZMA.ARTCC, FL
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-700
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class A ZMA
ATC / advisory: Center ZMA
Aircraft component: Autoflight System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Confusion
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation - Speed All Types
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Descending from FL300; we were in VNAV with a programmed speed of Mach .780/284 knots. I was running the landing numbers and we were in a normal descent rate. In the scope of 10-15 seconds; the plane went from .780 through .82 and right to the clacker. There was no wind shift; nor was engine de-ice used. The First Officer disconnected the autopilot and (too) abruptly pulled back on the speedbrake. It was as if the plane thought it was higher than it actually was; and sped up to compensate; which threw us right under the bus. This isn't the first time I've seen this occur; but this was the most abrupt. The rest of the flight was uneventful. Either lower the cost index or adjust the software to handle this reoccurring problem.




Synopsis: B737-700 Captain experienced an over speed during descent in VNAV with the speed programed to .78/284 for no apparent reason. Speed increased from .78 to .82 Mach; without turning on the engine anti ice or a wind shift.
Date: 201810
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: DAL.Airport, TX
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Cessna Citation Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Fractional
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class B DAL
ATC / advisory: TRACON D10
Reporter organization: Fractional
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Departing KDAL 13L SWTSR3 ROLLS transition; we leveled at 4;000 feet. The clearance was written down by the PIC after being sent by PDC. Once I received our release; I copied the clearance he wrote on it.The PDC clearance was:SWTSR3 ROLLS J52 THEN AS FILED ATC INSTRUCTIONSCLEARED SWTSR3 DEPARTURE ROLLS TRSN CLIMB VIA SID EXP 400 10 MIN AFT DP; DPFRQ SEE SID SQUAWK: 2345The PIC stated after the event that he confused the EXP for and accept and that to level at 4;000 [feet] initially.The Departure Controller asked us why we were level at 4;000 [feet] and I said that was our clearance. He told us to climb and said that we were to climb via the SID.I am not aware of any traffic conflicts. The flight continued normally.The PDC has contractions that; while standard; confused the PIC. Are the contractions absolutely necessary? DAL is a large airport and like most if not all has PDC capability. I should have backed up my PIC and reviewed the PDC to double check.




Synopsis: PDC issued to flight crew was misinterpreted and flight crew leveled off at 4;000 feet when they were cleared to climb via the SID.
Date: 201512
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: BUR.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Challenger 300
Operator: Fractional
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class C BUR
ATC / advisory: TRACON SCT
Reporter organization: Fractional
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Confusion
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert
Contributing factors: Chart Or Publication; Airspace Structure; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Chart Or Publication

Narrative: On the CEEME2 STAR after PIRUE at 11000 cleared direct to BUDDE (ILS 08 FAF) and to cross BUDDE at 3000. Enroute and descending to 3000; ATC said advise when you have the airport in sight. Level at 3000 and not at BUDDE yet we spot the field. Pilot not flying advised ATC of the field in sight and we were cleared for the visual runway 08. Pilot flying selected FMS guidance panel to HDG and we proceeded to the field and decent to landing visual on runway 08. After landing and taxiing in with BUR ground we were told that SoCal had called and wanted to remind us of the mandatory 3000 at BUDDE. It was not a problem just a warning of the restriction. Reviewing the ILS 08 BUR approach plate has a ball note#2 that is for LOC only mandatory 3000 at BUDDE. We were cleared and doing a visual to BUR runway 08? I believe when a pilot is cleared a visual that you are no longer on an instrument approach and therefore are subject to VFR.I feel that there is a lack in clarity and assumptions are being made. If we were to still proceed to BUDDE then cleared for the visual that should have been said. Then the crossing BUDDE at 3000 would have been executed and we would have initiated the decent after BUDDE. But we were cleared for the visual prior to BUDDE. Plus the mandatory 3000 is on the LOC only for runway 08.




Synopsis: An aircraft being vectored for an instrument approach reported the airport in sight and was cleared for a Visual Approach. TRACON relayed a message to the aircraft that they had a mandatory crossing restriction even though it no longer applied due to them conducting a Visual Approach.
Date: 201910
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: A320
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Other Preflight
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant In Charge
Human factors: Physiological - Other
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Attendant; Person Flight Crew
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: When [I] reported to aircraft prior to boarding; I was alerted of strong odor by copilot & FA (Flight Attendant) #4. #2 was onboard; Captain was in cockpit. Maintenance was called and  aircraft put out of service. Copilot said he was seeking medical. 3 of us FAs met with medical. It took us hours to get approval from insurance & transportation etc. We got tested for carbon monoxide at Hospital approximately 3 & 1/2 hours after exposure. Yet the test was positive for carbon monoxide poison. Doctor told us the normal highest is 1.5; I tested 2.0; #4; 2.1; #2; 2.3.




Synopsis: A320 Flight Attendant reported strong odor during preflight resulting in Maintenance taking aircraft out of service. First Officer and three flight attendants received medical treatment.
Date: 202105
Location: SEA.Airport, WA
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Confusion
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Procedure; Chart Or Publication
Primary problem: Chart Or Publication

Narrative: After getting our clearance to depart SEA via the Mountain Departure 16L; the airport switched runways to north departure on 34R. ATC [then] gave us the Seattle 7.  After looking at the FMS it appeared that it coded a 345 heading after departure but no intercept of the 341 radial off SEA as shown on the plate.  Thus I used raw data and flew the departure with heading select and tracked the radial manually. I believe there is an error with this departure because a 345 initial heading diverges away from the 341 radial instead of towards it. This may be why the FMS does not show an intercept because it is not possible to intercept on a 345 heading.  This should be 341 or something similar to the Mountain Departure which is basically the same.




Synopsis: Air carrier First Officer reported the Runway 34R SEATTLE 7 SID initial departure heading out of SEA diverges from intended outbound course.
Date: 201602
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: MD-80 Series (DC-9-80) Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Fuel Temp Indication
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural MEL / CDL; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General Maintenance Action; General Release Refused / Aircraft Not Accepted
Contributing factors: Company Policy
Primary problem: Company Policy

Narrative: [A week prior] I flew this aircraft and wrote up the right fuel heat as inoperative. Maintenance cleared the item as 'operations checks okay'.Today; I flew a [position ferry flight with a] mechanic on the flight. During the arrival the right fuel heat did not work. I called [the mechanic] to the cockpit and showed him that the fuel heat was not working. No rise in fuel temperature along with no blue fuel heat light. He checked circuit breakers and all were in. Beyond a doubt we all could see clearly that the fuel heat was not working! I told [the mechanic] that I would write it up and did; 'right fuel heat inoperative'; I put into the book.I briefed Captain who was flying [the return leg] with passengers; that the right fuel heat was inoperative. I then left to get lunch. About 15 minutes later; I get a message to call the Captain. He queried me about the write up further asking if I got a fuel temperature rise when I applied the fuel heat. I stated that there was no rise in fuel temperature. The Captain told me that they deferred the indicator. This was clearly and knowingly an improper deferral since maintenance knew that the fuel heat was not working at all. When I found out; I went back down to the plane and spoke with the mechanic and the Captain. The mechanic said that Maintenance Control told him to use that deferral. The Captain did not accept that deferral and as a result maintenance changed out the valve; which they took off another aircraft.Emphasize safety first in this company and not cut corners just to get a flight out and on its way.




Synopsis: An MD-80 pilot reported that following a logbook write up for a fuel temperature control problem; Maintenance personnel deferred the indication. Communication between the pilots prevented the flight from departing.
Date: 202106
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: A320
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Coalescer Bag
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant In Charge
Reporter qualification: Flight Attendant Current
Human factors: Physiological - Other
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Illness / Injury
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: During the boarding process; the F/O came out of the flight deck and asked me (FA 1) to go into flight deck and to let [the flight crew] know if I smelled anything. I smelled the musty dirty sock smell.  I informed the F/O that I smelled the musty odor.  The Captain made an announcement to have the passengers deplane the aircraft.  After all passengers deplaned; the entire flight crew went to the gate area.  I called for a manager to meet us. The FA 2 complained of dizziness; FA 3 complained that her chest felt heavy.  I was experiencing a bad headache initially and some minor coughing within the next hour of event.  Upon driving home from the airport; approximately 2 hours from fume event; my throat became sore (difficulty with swallowing) and the cough became worse.  I decided to go to Urgent Care to be assessed.  They gave me a prescription with a follow up appointment for a re-check of respiratory issues.




Synopsis: Flight Attendant reported Captain directed everyone to deplane during boarding due to a fume event.
Date: 201711
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Light Sport Aircraft
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Inflight Event / Encounter Fuel Issue
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: After filling my fuel tanks to max capacity (24 gallons usable) I departed VFR [for a three leg flight]. Total distance is 203 miles and I determined while planning that it would take 2 hours total flight time. After landing uneventfully at ZZZ1 and attending [a local exhibit]; I departed for what I determined would be an approximately 30 minute flight to ZZZ. I looked at the sight gauges for the wing fuel tanks; and it appeared to over 1/3 tank and by my estimation; I should have more than 1 hr of fuel. After departing ZZZ; I was approximately 20 miles to the NW of ZZZ my engine sputtered and then ran smooth. I at first thought maybe the carburetor had iced and applied carb-heat. The engine smoothed out and then started to die and then start running again. By this time I was approx 12 miles to the NW of ZZZ; and had the tower frequency there already on my active radio. I called the tower and informed them that my engine had stopped and I was going to land next to the interstate. I landed on an empty highway that was just finished with construction and had not opened yet for public use. It was approx 5 lanes wide and completely clear of people; vehicles; overhead power lines; cables and any debris.  I landed uneventfully; uninjured; with no damage to property or plane. After landing; upon inspection; it appeared that the sight gauges for the fuel tanks both showed completely empty. My fuel computer/analyzer showed there to still be 5.2 Gallons remaining; which if were true would equate into approx 40 minutes remaining. To prevent this from happening I will not rely on flight-fuel computer or sight gauges. I will also use a 'fuel-dipstick' that will visually verify the actual remaining fuel quantity.




Synopsis: Carbon Cub pilot reported an off airport landing due to fuel exhaustion.
Date: 201808
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: PC-12
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Gear Extend/Retract Mechanism
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Human factors: Troubleshooting; Workload
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: I was the Pilot Flying for this flight and First Officer was Pilot Monitoring. We departed Runway XX out of ZZZ. We got our clearance for takeoff and started; everything was normal; we attempted to retract gear; heard gear motor and shortly after that; we got CAWS [Caution and Warning System] HYDR came on. My First Officer pulled the QRH out to run checks associated with that CAWS. Landing gear lights remained three red. On visible check; the gear [was] out and down but not locked. We followed checklists; QRH; and Company procedure. Gear was able to be brought down with emergency gear extension handle; two pumps. We made decision to return to ZZZ as a safety precaution. We told ATC we were returning to ZZZ. They asked the issue and ATC declared [priority handling] for us. We received vectors and landed with no issue and three green indicated.




Synopsis: Pilatus PC-12 Captain reported a failure of the landing gear to retract normally; necessitating an alternate extension method and return to the departure airport.
Date: 201604
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: IMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: HS 125 Series
Operator: Fractional
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Pressurization System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Fractional
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: While climbing through FL270; a muffled thump was heard from the aft cabin. We then noticed a loss of cabin pressure with a cabin climb rate of approximately 2700 FPM. Cockpit masks were donned and cabin masks were manually deployed. Center was notified of the cabin depressurization and the need for an immediate descent to 10;000 feet. We descended to 10;000 feet. QRC and QRH procedures were completed. The passengers were observed with masks on and were informed of the situation and that we would provide more information soon. At 10;000 feet we elected to divert to an airport approximately eighty miles ahead. I notified the passengers that their masks could be removed and of our divert. They seemed calm and ok with our decision.The flight was then completed uneventfully and upon inspection in the rear bay; a significant bleed air leak was detected with the APU running. An almost identical event happened a few years ago in another Hawker. I do not recall the tail number. The 'thump' was also heard just prior the depressurization.




Synopsis: HS-125 series Captain reported experiencing a loss of pressurization. The crew initiated an immediate descent and diverted to a nearby airport.
Date: 201512
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: IAD.Airport, DC
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Rain
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class B IAD
ATC / advisory: Tower IAD
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Fatigue; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation - Speed All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Unstabilized Approach
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Aircraft
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: On glide slope ILS Runway 19C IAD; configured; everything normal. Weather 600 OVC RVR 6000+. Autopilot turned off about 1000 AGL; auto throttle still on. Approach was completely normal and stable until at 700 MSL (about 400 feet AGL) all at once the Captain's side (mine) flight director disappeared; FO's still visible; FO called Rwy in sight; I disconnected auto throttles; and the GPWS called glide slope; airspeed showed 8 kts slow; I added plenty of power to correct; we made an adequate and safe landing. But what happened when the FD disappeared? Instantly we were low and slow yet I remember changing nothing. One second everything was normal and stable and the next instant we were low and slow. I don't know what happened to cause the FD to disappear and the GS to go haywire (interference in the critical area?). There was no wind shear to explain away the airspeed loss. Pilot error? I don't know what I did since it was stable the whole way down and required little input. Yes I was ridiculously tired today but neither the FO nor I noticed any radical changes made by me. It was recovered safely and otherwise no big deal except the GPWS GS warning.




Synopsis: B737 Captain reported a low altitude unstable condition occurred rapidly and without obvious cause on an approach to IAD.