elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201502
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: F-28 Enstrom Helicopter
Operator: Other Flight School
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
Aircraft component: Fuel Tank Cap
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Other Flight School
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Rotorcraft
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; 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 Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: The 'Low Boost' light illuminated climbing through 8;000 MSL. All other engine instruments were normal. Experienced an engine failure at 10;000 MSL. Unable to air restart after multiple attempts. Performed safe auto-rotation. Once on the ground I discovered the left fuel tank cap was loose. After tightening the fuel cap the aircraft restarted normally. After departing ZZZ; flew directly to ZZZ to add fuel and then direct to ZZZ. The instruments and flight were normal on return flight.




Synopsis: Helicopter Instructor experiences a Low Boost light climbing through 8;000 feet followed by an engine failure at 10;000 feet. An autorotation is performed to the nearest airport; where the fuel cap is found to be loose and then tightened. The aircraft starts normally and is flown to a nearby airport for fuel then back to base.
Date: 201307
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: PA-18/19 Super Cub
Operator: Other Flight School
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: CTAF ZZZ
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Instructor; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Training / Qualification
Second reporter function: Trainee; Pilot Flying
Anomaly: Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Ground Event / Encounter Ground Strike - Aircraft; Ground Excursion Runway; Ground Incursion Taxiway; Inflight Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Tailwheel training. Upon teaching wheel landings to a student; the stick was not moved forward to kill the lift for landing. Thus; rudder authority was lost and we skidded off the runway into a ditch. I had the controls immediately after we went for the ditch. I added full power to avoid flipping nose over in the ditch. We crossed this ditch and were heading towards another ditch on the opposite side of the taxiway. I decided to not chance a second ditch crossing and tried to keep it on the taxiway. At this point in time; the tailwheel locked and we rotated counterclockwise and the right wing skidded across the ground. The only damage was on the right wing tip next to the aileron.


Second narrative: First time in aircraft and type; student and instructor were practicing wheel landings in a PA-18. As the wheels touched; a few bounces occurred and the plane began to fishtail and spin. Action was taken to try to correct the spin but the plane's wings began dipping and wheels skidding. A complete 360 occurred on the runway and as well as a wing strike. Plane continued in the grass before control was regained on the taxiway. No injuries and slight wing damage but no other damage to aircraft.


Synopsis: A flight instructor and his student; practicing wheel landings in a PA-18 Super Cub; lost control on landing; performed a ground loop; departed the runway; powered across one ditch; avoided another and came to rest on a taxiway after scraping a wingtip. Minor damage and no injuries resulted.
Date: 201901
Aircraft: B777 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Chart Or Publication; Company Policy
Primary problem: Chart Or Publication

Narrative: I am writing about [notices regarding checklists] that were recently sent to all 777 crews. I think these changes compromise safety to our traveling public and our crews. At the very least; these changes will cause many items to be missed that were previously on the [electronic checklist] and at the worst is going to end the decade of non-accident travel that has been achieved by major airlines. The 777 fleet recently ended memory items and replaced them with a checklist for pilots to follow. Now the powers that be want to add memory 'flows' and eliminate checklist items. This is a terrible idea and safety will be compromised.Boeing and Airbus are completely different! Trying to 'Standardize' them to make transitional training is a huge mistake. We should follow Boeing procedures on the 777 and let Airbus have their own procedures. By having Captain 'flows' and FO (First Officer) 'flows;' we will not know if the other has missed something in their flow without a checklist to verify. The [electronic checklist] on the 777 has worked accident free since we got the airplane. Please don't risk lives making a change that is not necessary!If this change is allowed; I can promise that there will be a huge jump in missed items that affect safety. We will have takeoffs and landings with flight attendants still standing; and with pilots without shoulder harnesses. We will see some altitude deviations because the altimeter is not changed at transition. We will have other mistakes when the cruise checklist is eliminated. These changes are uncalled for! Boeing made this incredible plane. We should follow their procedures!I am writing this in hopes to prevent many safety violations and hopefully any accidents! Do not change the procedures that have kept our safety record so good for all these years.Do not implement this change. Let us continue to fly the airplane the way the manufacturer has recommended. Our record for safety on this airplane is incredible. Please don't put people at risk.




Synopsis: B777 First Officer reported a potential safety hazard by the company to try to standardize Airbus and Boeing checklists.
Date: 201408
Local time of day: 0601-1200
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
Aircraft component: Exterior Pax/Crew Door
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Other / Unknown
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Airframe; Maintenance Powerplant
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Maintenance
When detected: Routine Inspection
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Inspecting the [Cabin] Door 2-Right (R2) for Leak Check and discovered the plunger on the Pneumatic Assembly was previously locked out for [maintenance] servicing; preventing the Door [Emergency] Assist from performing properly should an emergency arise and the door slide activated. The individual that serviced the Door Assist [actuator] is apparently unaware that this lockout should be put back in the 'Normal' position after completion of servicing procedure.  [Recommend] to make the servicing of the Door Assist Assembly a Required Inspection Item (RII) so it requires an inspection due to the severity of the impact should the system be needed. Maintenance Supervisor.  Gate.




Synopsis: A Line Maintenance Supervisor discovers the actuating plunger on the Pneumatic Assembly for Door-2 Right Emergency Assist on an ERJ-170 aircraft was still locked-out from previous Maintenance servicing. The lock-out condition prevented door assist during door slide activation. Supervisor recommends any servicing of Door Assist include a Required Inspection Item (RII) prior to aircraft release.
Date: 201404
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Landing
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Cockpit Furnishing
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: During the flare; the yoke clip which was extended impacted the [seat belt] quick release knob and stopped any [further] back stick [motion]. This occurred at about three feet. I had just broken the sink rate and the nose was transiting too slightly above the horizon when the yoke clip impacted; I believe; just above the quick release knob and stopped into the metal tabs from the shoulder straps. I briefly thought of going around; but since I couldn't rotate; I ruled that out. Being in an -800; I was concerned now about trying to pull harder and having the yoke break free with an excessive nose up input and possibly having a tail strike. The pitch attitude was fine; but I knew I would get a firm landing; which happened; followed by a small bounce or skip. This all took place in about two seconds. Roll out was normal. Normally I always close the yoke clip to the flat position before landing and additionally my seat may have been a little more forward than normal. Note or caution in the AOM in the landing section. Recommend the yoke clip be in the down or flat position for landing. I know most of the yoke clips you can't even get to stay up.




Synopsis: B737-800 Captain reports his extended yoke clip contacting his seat belt quick disconnect during flare; restricting further travel and causing a firm landing.
Date: 201301
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: DAL.Airport, TX
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B DAL
ATC / advisory: TRACON D10
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Training / Qualification; Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT; Inflight Event / Encounter Unstabilized Approach
Detector: Automation Aircraft Terrain Warning; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Clearance; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors; Airport
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We were cleared for the visual approach to 31L at DAL heading for the Final Approach Fix. My First Officer started a turn for the airport inside the Final Approach Fix and that created a conflict with the building just east of the final. I knew this; but I let the approach continue for too long. I mentioned I thought we were a bit low for our position; and then the Caution Obstacle Aural warning sounded. Our flight path was taking us just inside the building but just close enough to trigger the caution. He started a normal go-around and immediately the caution was silenced as I saw the building was behind us. I allowed the go-around maneuver to be discontinued and that is my mistake. My First Officer handled the aircraft smoothly as no one knew we started a missed approach. In the future I will make sure the normal go-around maneuver is completed and be prepared to execute a terrain avoidance maneuver. I'm also aware of the 10-7 pages referencing this exact problem and I'm frustrated with myself for letting the approach continue to that point.


Second narrative: As pilot flying; while I was maneuvering to final on a visual approach to 31L; we received a CAUTION OBSTACLE from the GPWS. I immediately added power; arrested the descent; started a climb and made a right turn away from the obstacle. We received no other aural alerts; and I continued the approach and landed without further incident. I did not refer to the airport page regarding the obstacle southeast of 31L. Had I reviewed this page; I would have been at a higher altitude and turned final outside of the FAF rather than inside it; and the obstacle would have been no factor. In addition; I would have executed a go-around as directed by the FOM and the airport page.


Synopsis: An air carrier crew on a night visual approach to DFW Runway 31L received a momentary GPWS CAUTION OBSTACLE but discontinued the escape maneuver to continue the approach when the CAUTION ceased.
Date: 201702
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: Mixed
Light: Night
Aircraft: A319
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: Recirculation Fan
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Diverted
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Extract fan began making noise; eventually caused fumes in the cockpit; then during failure emitted smoke in the cockpit; tripped breaker and eventually failed. Smoke dissipated by 10;000. Descent as required in mountainous terrain; late at night; to the nearest airport. Landed underweight on longest runway. All checklists; performance; briefings were completed; flight attendants and passengers briefed; company messaged on ACARs. Fire and Rescue was waiting for us on landing; but not required. Problem began in flight; a ACARs message was sent to Maintenance. No reply during the remaining time in flight.  They could have assisted in pulling a breaker; eliminating the dangerous condition.  Suggest a faster way to get maintenance in flight.




Synopsis: A319 Captain reported an extract fan failed; caused smoke and fumes in the cockpit. Flight diverted short of destination.
Date: 201303
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-400
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Electrical Power
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: On takeoff roll; amber master caution light illuminated from an unknown source. Takeoff continued. At liftoff the number 1 transfer bus open light illuminated. Transfer bus was opening and closing rapidly; causing multiple primary instrument and navigation mode failures. Advised ATC and leveled off at 6;000 FT. Identified the light in the QRH and ran appropriate QRH checklist. Problem momentarily stopped and went into holding to burn off fuel to prevent an overweight landing. At that time the problem reoccurred with the bus continually cycling on and off; causing additional flight instrument and navigation failures. Elected to declare an emergency at that time and returned to the field; making an uneventful overweight landing. Upon landing the emergency was terminated; and taxied to the gate.




Synopsis: During takeoff; aircraft experienced an electrical malfunction; declared an emergency; and returned to land.
Date: 201301
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: A80.TRACON, GA
Flight conditions: Mixed
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Aircraft: PA-32 Cherokee Six/Lance/Saratoga/6X
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class B ATL
ATC / advisory: TRACON A80
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Air Traffic Control Separated Traffic; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: I was safety pilot; right seat; the pilot was hooded; [and] we were VFR below the ceiling. We were cleared for the ILS 20L approach to PDK and were established on the localizer at AABEE. The pilot had started descending from 4;000 feet. ATC ordered an immediate 500 FPM climb for traffic at 12 o'clock. I took the controls; pitched up and advanced the throttle. The pilot removed his hood and we both began scanning for the traffic; which was made difficult because of the pitch attitude. I reported the traffic was not in sight and moments later saw movement to my right. The other aircraft passed about 300 feet below us; 90 degrees to our course. I reported the traffic was no longer a factor. I turned the aircraft over to the pilot; he replaced his hood and continued the descent. ATC turned us over to the Tower. The traffic call was incorrect; we expected the traffic conflict to be directly from the front. The approaching aircraft was probably about 2 o'clock when ATC called. This seems like a small difference but the 12 o'clock call focused my attention in the wrong direction. The resulting tunnel vision caused me to miss the traffic until it was very close.




Synopsis: PA32 instructor; acting as safety pilot for the flying pilot under the hood; reports a NMAC near AABEE on the ILS to Runway 21L at PDK. The Controller had called the traffic moments before (in the wrong relative position) and issued a climb which likely prevented a midair collision.
Date: 201407
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ATL.Airport, GA
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Medium Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ramp ATL
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control
Detector: Person Ground Personnel
When detected: Other Pushback
Result: Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: During pushback and prior to engine start we told the push crew to 'tail us' at a 45 [degree angle per ramp control]. About half way through pushback the tug drive started calling; 'Set brakes. Set brakes. Set brakes!' As we were still moving backwards I asked him what was going on. I was told that; 'They forgot to hitch the tow bar to the tug.' The plane was now rolling straight back with everybody onboard across the ramp not connected to anything. I gently applied one brake to stop the plane without tipping it onto its tail. As a result the plane stopped straight back (as opposed to a 45) and way out in the center of the ramp. Nose wheel on our taxi line. Tail hanging out over the opposite taxi line. If there had been another plane in the lane behind us we would have smashed into it for sure. All ground crews should receive additional training on connecting the tug to the aircraft. Have a Supervisor check the connection of the tow bar between the tug and the aircraft prior to push as a back up/second opinion.




Synopsis: Only after pushback had begun did the ground crew realize the tow bar was not linked to the tractor and the aircraft was rolling backwards on its own and alerted the flight crew. The Captain was able to cautiously halt the backward motion and set the brakes before any contact occurred.
Date: 201711
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: Government
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Parked
ATC / advisory: Ground ZZZ
Second aircraft: EMB ERJ 135 ER/LR
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Instructor
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was the PIC of [a] Skyhawk. While conducting my run up at [the] designated run up area I had to take evasive action to prevent a ground collision with [an Embraer]. [The Embraer] failed to turn right onto [the] taxiway as instructed by Ground Control [and] instead continued straight and entered the run up area at high speed. This pilot deviation positioned [the Embraer's] left wing in a direct collision path with my tail section. After the fact I was informed by ATC that [the Embraer] had [asked ATC for priority] some time before landing due to a passenger emergency. One emergency almost caused two emergencies due to a pilot deviation.




Synopsis: C172 Instructor Pilot reported taking evasive action to prevent a ground collision with an Embraer.