elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201701
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B767-300 and 300 ER
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground ZZZ
Aircraft component: Electrical Distribution
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Returned To Gate; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Immediately after engine start; we noticed a burning odor in the cockpit. It did not go away; and after a few seconds the FO (PF) noticed a small amount of white electrical smoke above the aft portion of the center console. We donned oxygen masks and began running the 'SMOKE FIRE FUMES' checklist. We communicated with the flight attendants to get their assessment of the situation; and determined the best course of action was to return to the gate and deplane the passengers. The ground crew was still hooked up to the interphone so we interrupted the QRH checklist and coordinated a return to the departure gate (about 1 airplane length away). We then called ground to roll CFR. We also coordinated with Ramp Control to ensure a gate agent would meet us upon our return. Once the aircraft was at the gate with the door open; we began deplaning the passengers through the 1L door. This proceeded in an orderly fashion.As the passengers were being removed; the odor was still present though less significant. CFR and maintenance personnel met us almost immediately after gate arrival. With CFR present; we decided not to finish the QRH procedure in favor of completely shutting off all electrical power on the aircraft; which we did. The emergency lights remained illuminated for the remainder of the deplaning. After all passengers deplaned; both pilots conducted a visual search of the aircraft including all lavatories to ensure no passengers remained. The Captain then released the aircraft to maintenance and CFR personnel; who remained on board. The Captain then gathered the entire crew in the jet bridge immediately outside the aircraft and conducted a debriefing.




Synopsis: B767 First Officer reported returning to the gate after observing smoke in the cockpit immediately after pushback and engine start.
Date: 201207
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: PDX.Airport, OR
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class C PDX
ATC / advisory: Tower PDX
Second aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Local
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure; Airport
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: A Cessna was pointed out to me doing an NDB approach into the Troutdale Airport. A B737 was on final for 28L and I noticed that they were at the same altitude; both descending; converging as the Cessna was north northeast bound to TTD and the B737 was on final. The B737 came over to me and I called traffic right away on the Cessna for him to which he reported that he had the Cessna in sight. I instructed him to maintain visual separation with the Cessna and he replied that he was already instructed to do so and would comply. There was no reason for these two aircraft to get so close. By the time I talked to the B737 there was approximately 1 to 1.5 miles between them at the same altitude and the distance shrunk by the time they passed. Final should have made a bigger hole for the Cessna to complete his practice approach into TTD; as well as call me to advise that the B737 had the Cessna in sight. This has been an ongoing problem with practice approaches into TTD with finals aircraft into Portland.




Synopsis: PDX Controller described a developing conflict event between a PDX Air Carrier arrival for Runway 28L and Cessna conducting a NDB Approach to TTD. The reporter noted the TRACON should have provided more spacing.
Date: 202201
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Hazardous Material Violation; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Weight And Balance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR
Detector: Person Dispatch
When detected: Taxi
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Aircraft Equipment Problem Dissipated; Flight Crew Returned To Gate; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We taxied out for takeoff and was notified by the West Ramp Control that ZZZ Operations wanted us to return to the ramp due to a concern with our Dangerous goods on board.After coordination with Ramp Control; we parked and shut down our engines to have ramp personnel access the aft cargo bin. I phoned Dispatch to notify them of our situation and to also request that Load Planning join our conversation. The Load planners brief was that one or both of the DG's were unsecured in the aft bin position 6 and needed to be moved to position 4.Ramp personnel moved and secured DG and said we were ready to depart.  We coordinated with Dispatch; Load Planning and confirmed on board fuel. Checklists were completed and we continued uneventfully.




Synopsis: Air Carrier Captain reported a Dispatch directed ground gate return to correct a Hazmat cargo load configuration error. Ramp personnel corrected configuration error and flight continued to destination with no further issues.
Date: 201410
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Regional Jet 200 ER/LR (CRJ200)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Throttle/Power Lever
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; Flight Crew Inflight Shutdown; General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: On initial climb out; leveled at 3;000 ft; then 5;000 ft; then 7;000 ft.  Leveling at 7;000 ft; Captain (CA) pulled throttles back and #1 engine remained at previous setting; then went to APR power setting; 89.3% N1.  Pilots suspected broken throttle cable.  Only QRH procedure available was for stuck throttle.  Had ATC give us vectors and remained at 10;000 ft; expecting to return to [departure airport] and do emergency landing.  Ran QRH for stuck throttle; shut down engine #1.  CA ran QRH and attempted contact with [company] radio.  No contact at 10;000 feet.  First Officer flew aircraft and declared emergency with ATC when CA finished with PA and ACARS message to maintenance.  Ran single engine scenario through and got vectors to runway (winds were 310 at 15G25).  Visual landing uneventful.  Met by fire department on second high speed turnoff.  Landed at 47;692 lbs.  After fire crew inspected aircraft; taxied back to gate. Cause: No errors or undesired aircraft states noted; other than unresponsive engine.  QRH should include procedure for suspected broken throttle cable; or unresponsive engine; even if part of jammed throttle procedure.




Synopsis: CRJ-200 First Officer reported encountering stuck power lever on climbout. The engine was shut down as per the checklist and they returned to departure airport.
Date: 201511
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: N90.TRACON, NY
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 15
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: King Air C90 E90
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
ATC / advisory: TRACON N90
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: ATC requested we descend and maintain 2000 ft ASL. We read back 2000 ft and set it in the altitude alerter window and armed it. While on autopilot we commenced a descent to 2000 ft in VMC. Once level at 2000 ft the crew discussed the close vertical proximity to the terrain below. At this point ATC contacted us and stated that a low altitude warning had been triggered and questioned whether we were at 2500 ft. We stated that we were at 2000 ft; in VMC; and that we had been instructed to maintain 2000 ft as well as having read 2000 ft back to the controller. We were instructed and we complied; to climb and maintain 2500 ft. A few minutes later the controller apologized and stated it may have been their mistake. The flight continued without further incident.




Synopsis: BE9 Captain reported climbing after ATC issued a low altitude alert on arrival to TEB.
Date: 201902
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Low ceiling; 10
Light: Night
Aircraft: Learjet 35
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown; Ground Excursion Runway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control
Contributing factors: Weather; Airport
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: I was flying from ZZZ1 to ZZZ. I got a weather update while refueling in ZZZ1. When we were about 10 mins before landing; I called the Tower and asked about runway conditions. The Tower told me that within the previous 15 mins a landing aircraft reported braking good. The controller reported the runway braking 5-5-5. I touched down on Runway 10 about 300 feet from the approach end. Initial braking was fair to good. About 2/3 of the way down the runway we were below 40 knots; I was applying full braking with some effect. As we approached the end of the runway we were slow enough that I felt I could turn onto the taxiway. The aircraft turned toward the taxiway; but the direction of travel did not change. We slid through a small bank of snow off the end of the pavement and came to rest with the aircraft perpendicular to the runway centerline; nose to the right; with the right main landing gear about 8 feet from the pavement. There was no damage; and no injuries.


Second narrative: I was operating as First Officer from ZZZ1 to ZZZ. The Captain and I reviewed the weather and found it favorable for the flight. Prior to landing; the Captained called the Tower and the Controller reported runway braking condition were 555. I recorded the ATIS prior to landing; it was winds calm; 500 OVC and 10sm visibility. We came in on the ILS RWY 10 and broke out above minimums. We continued the approach and landed between the number and the precision touchdown markers. Halfway down the runway; the Captain informed me that the aircraft was sliding and the airplane started to drift to the left. The Captain corrected to the centerline. The aircraft slowed down to taxi speed and the Captain attempted to turn onto the taxiway. The aircraft did not change direction and slid off the runway. The aircraft came to rest about eight feet off the end of the pavement.


Synopsis: Lear35 flight crew reported a loss of directional control while exiting the runway with reported braking action of 'good'.
Date: 201210
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ABQ.Airport, NM
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: Landing
Airspace: Class C ABQ
ATC / advisory: Tower ABQ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness; Physiological - Other
Anomaly: Other Runway Lighting Intensity
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Airport
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: The ABQ Control Tower has no ability to dim the Runway Touchdown Zone and Center Line lights on Runway 8. The light intensity is sufficiently bright as to make the runway impossible to see below 20 FT AGL with night VMC conditions. This makes it difficult to land in a normal manner and would make wildlife on the runway invisible due to windscreen glare. Turn the Center Line and Touchdown Zone lights off during aircraft operations not based on the usage of them.




Synopsis: A Captain reported the ABQ Runway 8 Touchdown Zone and Center Line lights are too bright and not adjustable and so they should be turned off during night VMC operations to prevent obscuring the runway environment on short final.
Date: 201507
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: S56.TRACON, UT
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 30
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Light Sport Aircraft
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E S56
ATC / advisory: TRACON S56
Second aircraft: UAV - Unpiloted Aerial Vehicle
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Instructor; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Workload; Situational Awareness; Time Pressure
Anomaly: Airspace Violation All Types; Conflict NMAC; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: The student was forced to maneuver our aircraft in order to avoid a radio controlled (RC) airplane being operated near the RC Park on the northwest end of Utah Lake. We were performing ground reference maneuvers over the Lehi/Saratoga Springs area at 5;500 FT MSL putting us about 1;000 FT AGL. While in a left hand turn the student saw the RC plane and reacted immediately by turning the aircraft to the right in order to avoid the hazard. As the student turned our airplane to the right I was able to see the RC plane approximately 200 feet above us performing maneuvers and dives to include a dive through our original flight path and altitude. The student wisely decided to move to a different area to perform his ground reference maneuvers. As I watched the RC plane maneuver I felt that it was intentional and that he was attempting to 'mess with us' or show off. Based on the size of the RC plane and the skill at which it was being operated I feel like the operator would have been somebody familiar with RC plane operations and regulations.




Synopsis: An Instructor reported his student took evasive action at 1;000 FT from a radio controlled (RC) aircraft; which was apparently being flown with intent toward and around their maneuvering aircraft. They were near an RC park northwest of Utah Lake.
Date: 201807
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZLA.ARTCC, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZLA
ATC / advisory: Center ZLA
Second aircraft: A380
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument
Second reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: A380 wake turbulence during cruise flight.We were at FL260 on the ANJLL arrival into LAX when we encountered moderate wake turbulence. The aircraft rolled left 15 degrees bank and then back to the right 15 degrees bank. The autopilot remained on. ATC was notified and acknowledged we were 10 miles behind an A380 that had descended in front of us. We offset our course upwind and slowed the aircraft for additional spacing. No passengers or crewmembers were hurt during the event. After landing; ATC was called by phone and we spoke with a supervisor; [who] said [they] would investigate how the events occurred. Dispatch was also notified. Suggesting a study be performed to provide ATC and crews on proper minimum spacing behind an A380.


Second narrative: Encountered wake turbulence 10 miles behind an A380. Aircraft bumped and rolled 15 degrees left. Then bumped and rolled 15 degrees right while on autopilot. Autopilot did not disconnect. No injuries with passengers or crew. Contacted ATC; slowed; and offset upwind. A380 was brought in [near] us and descended in front of us. Until the turbulence; we were not aware an A380 was near us. After landing contacted ATC by phone; called Dispatch and called flight safety. Suggestions: Provide more spacing behind A380 aircraft. Notify other aircraft when following or crossing behind an A380.

Second callback: Reporter stated that wake encounters with the A380 seem to a bit different from other aircraft types; with no initial 'nibble'; just an immediate roll.

Synopsis: B737-800 flight crew reported encountering wake turbulence at FL260 10 miles in trail of an A380.
Date: 201807
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: FA83.Airport, FL
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Observer
Contributing factors: Airport; Procedure; Chart Or Publication
Primary problem: Chart Or Publication

Narrative: The FAA sectionals show that Runway 27 has a left hand pattern for FA83. This pattern would put aircraft in close proximity to aircraft at Bob White Airfield X61; which lists Runway 9 with a left hand pattern. Two situations occur. [Information] at FA83 [says] Runway 27 is reported as a Right Hand Pattern; contrary to the FAA information. This is a safety conflict. I have observed aircraft flying both left and right hand patterns for FA83 Runway 27 before. The second; in calm winds or direct crosswinds (0 or 180) deciding to use 9 or 27 at X61 or FA83 could cause a significant conflict where pilots would be on head on patterns. X61 Runway 27 Left Hand Pattern with a FA83 Runway 9 Left Hand Pattern would put aircraft in the same airspace and potentially during crosswind to downwind turns.




Synopsis: Pilot reported conflicting traffic pattern information provided at FA83; resulting in inflight conflicts.
Date: 201905
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Aircraft: Jet/Long Ranger/206
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Second aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Captain; Single Pilot; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Automation Aircraft RA; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Aircraft; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: While returning from a patient drop off on a heading of 067 and 3500' a Cessna 172 passed just to the front of me and underneath me at less than 200' separation. Conditions were 5000 BKN; 10 M Vis with haze; wind 150@ 25kts.  I had just come from ZZZ and had been up with Approach.  Approach assigned me 3500' to get me above high speed jet traffic.  As this provided good visibility and more favorable winds I remained there until my decent.  The other aircraft was either not equipped with ADS-B or ADS-B Out may not be working correctly as I had no aircraft return or warnings visual or audio.  The first I saw him was through my chin bubble moving left to right; wings level in a slight climb.  I made several attempts to contact the aircraft on CTAF frequencies with no success. I immediately called [Dispatch] about the incursion. Upon landing I was provided the flight track and N number of the aircraft that passed underneath. I tracked it to a flight school in. I called the flight school and spoke to the instructor who confirmed he was in the aircraft performing maneuvers and had seen me on TCAS.  He claimed he had tried to avoid me but never saw me.  He told me his TCAS had me 200 ft above him.  At this point I ended the conversation and thanked him for his time.  Continuing this conversation beyond confirmation is not my responsibility. I know my systems were working very well because 10 min prior I had picked up high speed traffic flying [nearby] and was able to call it out to my crew.  I believe the flight school should address TCAS warnings and avoidance by more than 200 ft.  I have notified my [Chief Pilot]; I will submit safety reports as well.




Synopsis: B206L Captain reported NMAC while en route with radar services.