elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201606
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: HNL.Airport, HI
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground HNL
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Workload; Time Pressure; Communication Breakdown; Confusion
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: On pushback HNL ground control cleared us to push and hold short of Taxiway Z. I informed the tug driver of this; he acknowledged; and began our pushback. Within a minute; HNL ground control cleared us to continue to push onto Taxiway Z; tail west. I advised the tug driver of this. He acknowledged and advised me we were cleared to start engine 2. I directed the First Officer to start engine 2. During pushback and approaching Taxiway Z. the tug driver beginning turning aircraft tail westbound onto Taxiway Z. The FO and I; almost simultaneously caught a glimpse of a widebody aircraft off our right side on Taxiway Z. I immediately told the tug driver to watch out for the aircraft behind us. I had no immediate response from him verbally or by the slowing of the pushback so I then told him 'stop the push; stop; stop'. On the 3 stop command he stopped the pushback and said he was sorry. I observed the wing walkers; who are on tugs both behind the tug driver. The wing walker on aircraft right was watching the tug driver and not his side of the aircraft. It's hard to guess how close we came to the right wing of the widebody aircraft; but it was close in my opinion. After aircraft behind us cleared the push continued without further incident.Causes: Ground pushback crew not paying attention and in the wrong location during pushback. Ground crew training and oversight lacking. First Officer's head was semi heads down during pushback. ATC clearing us to push onto a taxiway that was not clear.




Synopsis: B737-800 Captain reported being pushed back onto HNL Taxiway Z noticed a widebody aircraft off their right also on Taxiway Z. The Captain commanded the push crew to stop and noticed both wing walkers were riding the tug and not paying attention to traffic.
Date: 201402
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: SAN.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 5
Light: Night
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Other Unwanted Situation
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Other Not stated
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Chart Or Publication
Primary problem: Chart Or Publication

Narrative: Safety Concern: There is an enforceable; safety related discrepancy between instrument approach procedure (IAP) 'Notes' on company issued commercially provided SAN LOC27 and the same FAA/NGA procedure. FAA/NGA LOC27 contains the restriction: 'When Runway 27 VGSI inoperative; Straight-in and Circling minimums NA at night.' The current commercial IAP does not contain this restriction. Omission of this note may lead planners/dispatchers/pilots to think that without operative PAPIs; they are legal to fly the localizer approach. Omission of the note also removes a critical warning flag to pilots; which indicates that there is unlit; adverse terrain or unlit obstacles penetrating a 20:1 plane in the visual segment of the approach. Collectively; these two consequences of the note omission means that if a pilot tries to fly the approach without operative VGSI; he/she is exposed to more risk by removing the one and only visual aid used to ensure avoiding/clearing obstacles that may not be seen during darkness.




Synopsis: A reporter advised the commercially provided IAP chart for the LOC 27 at SAN does not include the restriction against use of the Straight-in and Circling minima at night when the VGSI (PAPI) is out of service which is published on the government produced chart.
Date: 201903
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: Initial Approach
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Illness / Injury; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Attendant; Person Passenger
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Upon descent into ZZZ (after 'Prepare for Landing' and during sterile cockpit); myself (#4) and the #2 were in our jumpseats in the aft galley and began smelling something very strong. The #2 asked me; 'do you smell that?' I replied; 'Oh my god; I do! I was about to ask you the same thing.' It smelled chemically and like dirty socks. We both thought it was someone's feet or our own and joked about it until we started feeling 'strange.' At that time; I heard a guy coughing in the cabin and I looked up thinking to myself; 'dang; he must be smelling it too.' When I looked up; I saw the #1 walking through the cabin to the aft galley. When she got to the galley; she asked; 'do y'all smell that dirty sock smell?!' We both said; 'yes! We have been talking about it!' None of us had ever smelled anything like it before and the #1 said it was making her feel like she was going to pass out. She asked if she should call the flight deck and let them know. I told her yes. She called the flight deck and they replied (according to her); 'it's just south Florida.' Nothing else was done about this event and we didn't feel the best after the flight. Our flight was already over 4 hours delayed and the pilots were reassigned. I would like to hope this didn't affect their decision to not follow procedures due to them being tired. We felt 'strange.' I felt nauseated when I got to my hotel room; the #1 and #2 both expressed dizziness to me at times. It wasn't handled by procedures we don't feel like by the flight deck.




Synopsis: A320 Flight Attendant reported strong odor in cabin and subsequent health issues during initial approach to landing.
Date: 201205
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: A321
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Distraction; Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Other / Unknown; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Other Takeoff roll.
Result: Flight Crew Rejected Takeoff; Flight Crew Returned To Gate; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We rejected takeoff at 60 KIAS but our speed increased to 75 KTS during abort. We received no HOT Brakes message after the event. We stopped on the runway and had emergency crews check for deflated tires and possible hot brakes; none were noted and we taxied to the gate. Subsequent inspection by maintenance found no problems and the following take-off and landing were uneventful.I was pilot flying and during takeoff roll I inadvertently pressed the brakes while correcting for drift. My feet were not in their normal position due to distraction.Contributing factors included a short single-engine taxi; late receipt of our final weights and being number one for takeoff. Then we missed the turn when cleared to line up and wait and had to make a 270 degree turn back to the runway; which further exacerbated the situation.My corrective action for the future boils down to 'don't press the brakes during the takeoff roll.'




Synopsis: Rushed by pre-takeoff duties during a short taxi the First Officer of an A321 inadvertently used brakes to correct for drift on the takeoff roll which triggered a low speed RTO due to autobrake initation.
Date: 201703
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Speedbrake/Spoiler
Component problem: Design; Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Technician
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Airframe; Maintenance Powerplant
Human factors: Troubleshooting
Second reporter function: Inspector
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance
Detector: Person Maintenance
When detected: Routine Inspection
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Installed new speed brake cable per instruction of work card; the cable needs be routed by hand not pulled using old cable.  I was made aware today that the cable was riding on top of pulley guard.  Cable is routed by hand left without tension until ratio changer is installed; the cable is only visible by mirror on back side of pulley.


Second narrative: Inspected speed brake cable routing and found no discrepancies. I was informed at a later date that one of the cables was found to be routed over a pulley cable guard instead of under the pulley cable guard. The cable is only visible by use of a mirror from the rear of the pulley and moves when the pulley is moved and so it appears to be routed correctly. This was my first time to inspect this cable installation.


Synopsis: Maintenance Personnel reported a speed brake cable was not routed correctly during installation.
Date: 202006
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Training / Qualification; Situational Awareness; Distraction
Anomaly: Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: While on a heading of 150 to intercept final; at 2;300 feet and inside of ZZZZZ. We were cleared for the visual for XXC. We were using the ILS/LOC XXC as back up. My intent was to stay in NAV mode; white needles to intercept and then hand fly the remainder of the approach. As we approached the final course; the white needles were not moving as I expected and while 'heads down' to confirm that the automation was set correctly the Captain said to turn. I looked up and realized we flew through the final course. I believe I turned off the autopilot; but hesitated in turning because I was unfamiliar with the airport. The Captain took control and corrected; ATC advised us of the course deviation; I replied that we were correcting. Once the Captain got us re-established on final he gave me control back; we were above 1;000 feet AGL; and we landed uneventfully.Scan breakdown; my failure to look outside when distracted by the automation. This was also my first time flying into ZZZ so when I looked up; it took a few seconds to orient myself. On our debrief; both the Captain and I realized neither one of us sequenced the FMS when ATC started to vector us for the approach. This caused the issue with the white needles not moving. This trip was to maintain landing currency; I have not flown since the early April. I was also ZZZ1 based [flying] the Aircraft Y type. This trip was on the Aircraft X type; which I have not flown in a while.Basic airmanship: Aviate; Navigate; Communicate. Good scan discipline. Follow SOP in regards to the automation. Anticipate problems when flying into unfamiliar airports.




Synopsis: Air carrier First Officer reported experiencing a course deviation and stated being away from flying was a contributing factor.
Date: 201906
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ORD.Tower, IL
Weather elements / visibility: Windshear
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 145 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class B ORD
ATC / advisory: Tower ORD
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Local
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Confusion; Communication Breakdown; Distraction; Time Pressure; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Airspace Structure

Narrative: Aircraft X declared a go-around due to windshear on short final to Runway 27R. As the Local Controller; I issued go-around instructions of runway heading climb to 2;100 feet; which is the MVA in that immediate part of the airspace. There was a heavy jet departure from Runway 28R crossing my traffic's departure path; which I was aiming to stay 1;000 feet below for wake turbulence. Then I advised the other Local Controller; position 3LC; and they coordinated my go-around instructions into their airspace at 5;000 feet and 040 heading. I then issued these instructions to the Aircraft X pilot; no response; then issued a landing clearance to a short final arrival; answered a question about my instructions to my Supervisor on the shout line; then re-issued the turn and climb to the Aircraft X pilot; this time with a read back. By this point in time; Aircraft X was 2 miles off the departure end of the runway; and had entered an airspace with a MVA of 2;500 feet while flying at 2;100 feet. No loss of separation or wake turbulence occurred; flight continued without incident.Ensure that heavy jet traffic are not turned too early toward other runways to protect for possible go-arounds. Advise Supervisor to not use a shout line or perhaps wait longer to inquire the busy controller. Prioritize pilot read backs of critical instructions over other duties.




Synopsis: ORD Tower Controller reported an aircraft conducting a go-around flew below the Minimum Vectoring Altitude because they did not hear their go-around instructions the first time they were issued.
Date: 201207
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: B737-200
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Turbine Engine
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: Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; Flight Crew Inflight Shutdown; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: During initial climb; at approximately 400 FT MSL; we experienced vibration from the right side of the aircraft with a slight yaw right. No warning or master caution lights were observed. Engine instruments appeared normal but the vibration was evident. We declared an emergency and requested radar vectors back to the airport while assessing the situation. As flaps were retracted the vibration diminished. Engine instruments were again observed and confirmed that the number 2 engine was not developing normal power. I called for the engine failure and shut down checklist and complied with ATC instructions. When the thrust lever to the right engine was closed; the engine vibration came back until the engine start lever was closed shutting down the engine. Once the engine failure and shutdown checklist was completed; we continued with the one engine inoperative landing checklist; contacted Dispatch to relay pertinent information and requested it be relayed to our maintenance crew. When these tasks were complete we advised ATC that we were ready for approach and confirmed that emergency crews were standing by. Approach and landing was uneventful. We then requested that fire crews do a visual inspection of the engine prior to taxiing to the gate.




Synopsis: When a B737 flight crew experienced engine vibration and loss of power shortly after takeoff they performed an inflight shutdown; declared an emergency; and returned to their departure airport.
Date: 201401
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: PHL.Airport, PA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: A319
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B PHL
ATC / advisory: TRACON PHL
Aircraft component: Gear Extend/Retract Mechanism
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Communication Breakdown
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; 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: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: The First Officer called for Flaps 3; Landing Checklist. I started the checklist and when about to call gear I saw the blue Cabin Check light on the upper ECAM. I pressed the call bell and waited for Cabin Check to go Green. I then continued the landing ECAM; signs Blue; Status checked. PM skipped gear call. At around 900 feet we got a GPWS Landing Gear Warning. I quickly put down the gear lever. We were stabilized and configured by 500 feet. I; as PIC; elected to continue the approach and uneventful landing.Probable causes included landing with Flaps 3. Poor cabin management caused distraction at inopportune time. I should have started the checklist over like I have done a million times before. It was never an emergency. I deemed it safer to continue since we were stable. We should start check lists over when distracted. Do not go beyond flaps two before the gear is down when landing flaps three. Take the cabin ready off the damn ECAM. We missed it four times in nine legs.


Second narrative: When landing Flaps 3; the landing gear should be put down prior to calling for Flaps 3.


Synopsis: An A319 flight crew; planning to land flaps three vice four; was distracted by a Cabin Check ECAM warning and failed to extend the landing gear. They received the landing gear EGPWS warning in time to extend the gear and stabilize by 500 AGL in VMC.
Date: 201506
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: LAS.Airport, NV
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: A320
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower LAS
Second aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Ground Conflict; Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Tower had us line up and wait on runway 25R.  After short wait; we were cleared for takeoff.  I increased thrust for takeoff and began roll.  Tower than issued this instruction 'cancel take off clearance; inbound traffic to intersecting runway'.  I retarted thrust to idle and stopped.  Approximately 1-2 minutes later we were cleared for takeoff.  Take off was made uneventfully.




Synopsis: After receiving takeoff clearance; A320 crew advanced thrust levers and commenced takeoff roll. Tower then cancelled their takeoff clearance. Crew stopped aircraft and 1-2 minutes later received a second takeoff clearance.
Date: 202109
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Dawn
Aircraft: ATR 72
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Weight And Balance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Hazardous Material Violation; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Routine Inspection; Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; General Work Refused; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Upon loading of the aircraft in ZZZ the DG (Dangerous Goods) paperwork was presented to me (Pilot In Command) for inspection. On the paperwork was a IDG (Inaccessible Dangerous Goods) package of Toxic (less than 1KG) that was to be loaded into an aft zone. While observing the loading of the aircraft this package was not seen or identified while loading. Since I did not inspect or see the package I had it removed from the DG paperwork. Upon reaching our destination I inspected the unload and found the package.The package was improperly labeled or inadequately labeled. There were no identifiable TOXIC labels on the package. The only way I was able to identify that this was the package in question was a DG inspection sticker and the shipping label had the toxic chemical printed on it.Better separation of DG and normal cargo prior to loading the aircraft would allow for a more proper inspection by all Pilots In Command.




Synopsis: ATR 72 Captain reported the transport of undocumented IDG [Inaccessible Dangerous Goods] that was supposed to be unloaded prior to departure.