elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201208
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: PA-23 Apache/Geronimo Apache
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Reciprocating Engine Assembly
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Instrument
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Inflight Shutdown; General Maintenance Action; General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: While departing [to the east] on a visual flight rules flight; I experienced a loss of power on the left engine while on initial climb; less than 200 FT. I immediately advised Tower that I needed to return for landing. The Controller offered me a choice of runways. At that point I advised him that I would gain some altitude before making any turn back to the airport. Once I secured the left engine; I declared an emergency and requested Runway 27R. I was able to climb and maintain 250 FT and at that point I commenced a turn back towards Runway 27R. The Tower Controller cleared me to land Runway 27R and I was able to land the aircraft without further incident. Once clear of the runway; I was given clearance to taxi back to the ramp. I replied and attempted to concur with the clearance; but I was unable to make the taxiway due to the single engine taxi circumstance. At that point; the Ground Controller realized my position and reminded me of my taxi instructions; and that's when I immediately asked him to allow me to taxi via Taxiway Alpha; which was straight ahead. He acknowledged and re-cleared me to taxi via Alpha; to the ramp. Once at the ramp; before I signed off the radio frequency; I asked the Ground Controller I he needed for me to contact the Tower for a written statement. The Ground Controller advised me that it was not necessary and to have a good night. I then advised the aircraft mechanic and grounded the aircraft.




Synopsis: PA23 pilot experienced a loss of power just after takeoff and declared an emergency with the Tower. After securing the left engine the pilot is able to return and land opposite direction on the departure runway. 250 FT AGL is the maximum altitude attained during the flight.
Date: 201907
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Dash 8 Series Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Second aircraft: Small Aircraft
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Airspace Structure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Near midair collision with small aircraft. We were arriving into ZZZ from ZZZ1. We were on the ZZZZZ arrival; south bound; at 6000 ft. just outside of ZZZZZ1 intersection. ATC gave us a traffic advisory of a target at 1 to 2 o'clock less than a mile; no altitude. I was PM (Pilot Monitoring) and the FO (First Officer) was PF (Pilot Flying). We both quickly got the traffic insight at probably less than 1000 ft. away and climbing at approximately our altitude. They were traveling [east-southeast]; approximately 50-60 degree intercept to our course. The autopilot was immediately disconnected and the PF started a left turn and descent away from the traffic. The traffic continued on its course to within 500 ft. before obviously seeing us. The small aircraft made an abrupt turn and dive to his left to go behind us. The small aircrafts last minute maneuver relieved us from having to make a more aggressive evasive input to avoid the traffic. We ended up approximately 30 degrees off course and just over 300 ft. below our assigned altitude. ATC was notified; they assigned us a heading and we corrected back to 6000 ft. ATC apologized and stated the target was intermittent. At no time did we receive a TCAS TA or RA; before during or after the event. The TCAS was working normally as we had other traffic on display. It is our opinion the small aircraft did not have a transponder on. I believe ATC was observing a primary target. At the time we maneuvered away from the small aircraft it was done smoothly without abrupt nor excessive bank or pitch. I do not believe any passengers would have noticed anything out of the ordinary unless they happened to be looking out the window and saw the small aircraft dive away from us. It is however; in my opinion though; had the small aircraft not maneuvered away from us or had ATC notified us of the target any later; then it would have required an immediate and abrupt evasive action to avoid an imminent collision. It's hard to believe in this day and age that an aircraft can be operating in a high density arrival corridor; into busy airport; and not have an operating transponder. If they had a transponder this situation would have easily been avoided well before it was ever a danger.




Synopsis: Captain reported a NMAC with traffic observed visually.
Date: 201902
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Decathlon 8KCAB
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Second aircraft: Cessna Citation Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Aircraft X called UNICOM after engine startup and verified radio was working and received barometric pressure and reported runway winds. Pilot of Aircraft X had observed over the previous hour to flight that other aircraft were taking off and departing Runway XX.  Aircraft X then reported taxiing from hangars to Runway XX on CTAF. Aircraft X taxied past FBO noting several aircraft on ramp along with what later turned out to be aircraft 2. Aircraft X performed run-up in designated run-up area near the threshold for Runway XX. While taxiing up to threshold for departure; pilot of Aircraft X heard very broken communication from Citation with UNICOM. Aircraft X announced on CTAF that they were departing Runway XX with a downwind departure from the pattern. Aircraft X heard no other communication from Aircraft Y. On initial liftoff; Aircraft X saw Aircraft Y roll onto Runway XY and proceeded to depart runways. Aircraft X took evasive action banking to the right while climbing but staying below pattern altitude as [Runway] XX is right-hand traffic. After stabilizing the aircraft from the maneuver Aircraft X called Aircraft Y to determine if they were able to hear Aircraft X. There was no response from Aircraft Y. Aircraft X then called UNICOM on the same frequency to see if they could be heard and received a 5 x 5 report back. Later during the short flight in vicinity; Aircraft X also called out to another aircraft who was departing ZZZ to see if the radio was working properly and received a 5 x 5 report back. Later pilot of Aircraft X visited FBO where Aircraft Y taxied from to discuss what had happened. Pilot of Aircraft X learned that Aircraft Y taxied from the ramp directly to Runway XY and departed without stopping.




Synopsis: Decathlon pilot reported a near mid-air collision during takeoff with an opposite direction Citation that was not communicating on CTAF.
Date: 202201
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Wind
Light: Night
Aircraft: A300
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Other Fire Extinguishing System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Troubleshooting
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: On Final Approach on the ILS RWY XXL at XXX; the AVIONICS SMOKE ECAM Emergency Warning activated as the landing gear was extending. At the direction of the Captain (Pilot Flying); the First Officer (Pilot Monitoring) requested priority handling and requested Fire Fighting assistance with the initial check-in call to ZZZ Tower; and was cleared to land. Upon landing; we taxied clear of the runway onto Taxiway XX via XY. Aircraft was stopped; brakes set; and Emergency Evacuation Checklist conducted with the exception of using the slides. Initially thought we smelled fumes after landing and taxiing onto 2 taxiway. After engines and aircraft power shutdown; the smell appeared to dissipate. Fire Crew didn't find any hot spots and we coordinated for a tow to the gate.


Second narrative: On final approach for Runway XXL at 1;500 feet; Avionic Smoke indication on ECAM. Upon contact with ZZZ Tower; priority handling and requested Fire Rescue to meet us after exiting Runway XXL. I continued approach VMC to landing. Prior to landing no smoke or fumes present. Exited runway on Taxiway XX via XY and started to smell possible fumes so we shut down airplane on Taxiway XY. Fire/rescue looked over airplane and saw nothing. After shutdown no fumes present; we stayed with aircraft to gate while being towed.


Synopsis: A300 flight crew reported ECAM Warning; AVIONICS SMOKE on final approach. The flight crew requested priority handling and had ARFF check the aircraft on landing. They coordinated a tow to the gate with no other issues.
Date: 201203
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: OGG.Airport, HI
Flight conditions: Marginal
Aircraft: Caravan Undifferentiated
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class C OGG
ATC / advisory: TRACON HCF
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Supervisor / CIC
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: A C208 called R3 for IFR clearance to OGG approximately 7 miles north of KOA. Pilot was given clearance to CAMPS but went past it. The pilot was told about the weather at Kahului and given vectors for an ILS Runway 2 approach per the pilot's request. After being cleared for the approach; the pilot appeared to not be unable to lock on to the localizer and kept making wild swings through it. The pilot was eventually vectored off the localizer; because he/she appeared to be disoriented; and turned southbound. The Controller suggested the pilot go back to KOA or divert to LNY or HNL because those airports were VFR. The pilot said unable because of low fuel; and requested another ILS approach. The pilot was given the approach but appeared to be slightly right or left of center line on the entire approach and did not descend on the glide slope and ended up over the airport at 3;000. The pilot then turned south on what appeared to be a missed approach. When queried about intentions; the pilot said he/she had the airport in sight and wanted to proceed to the airport visually. The aircraft was cleared for a Visual Approach; but then asked for a vector to VMC. The aircraft was given a vector; but the pilot said that would put her in IFR conditions; and turned east toward higher terrain. The pilot was told repeatedly about the terrain and told to climb and turn southwest; but seemed to be confused about what to do. The pilot finally turned southwest and agreed to go back to KOA. When queried about fuel; the pilot said he/she had 300 pounds/40 minutes left. About 35 miles northwest of Kona the pilot said he/she was in VFR conditions; cancelled IFR; and left the frequency without advising the Controller.


Second narrative: [Narrative #2 had no additional information.]


Synopsis: HCF Controller described an event involving a VFR pilot requesting an IFR approach; chronicling a number of 'failure to comply with ATC instructions' instances that compromised safety and posed pilot competency questions.
Date: 202001
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
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: Parts / Stores Personnel
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Hazardous Material Violation; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Ground Personnel; Person Maintenance
When detected: Other Post Flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Upon receiving a large grab box from Contract Company in ZZZ; it was noticed Hazardous Material on the top Class 9 Lithium batteries was mixed in with other aircraft parts - proper paperwork was missing - only the original shipping paperwork was attached from ZZZ1. There was an unboxed rotate-able Part XXXXX36 on the bottom of the box - parts on top were just thrown in disarray. Cause: proper procedure for shipping Hazmat was not followed. Air Carrier X requires all rotate-able to be shipped in proper shipping containers or shipped in boxes that will give the part the most protection. Suggestions: Not knowing if this contract station has trained personnel - a field trip should have been sent to Contract Company to at least oversee if not accomplish these tasks.




Synopsis: Maintenance Personnel reported Hazmat goods transported by Contractor at outlying station incorrectly configured; segregated; and did not provide required documents. Reporter recommended that appropriate Hazmat training be provided to personnel.
Date: 201701
Location: MMMX.Airport, FO
Aircraft: B737 Next Generation Undifferentiated
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Inflight Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew; Person Maintenance
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General Maintenance Action; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: I arrived at aircraft; passengers were boarded and [I] briefed the lead flight attendant. [Another Flight Attendant] told me the inbound Captain wanted me to know the windscreen was scratched and should be written up. [Lead flight attendant] spoke up and said as they were boarding in ZZZ a mechanic came up and looked at the windscreen. He and the Captain decided it could be written up on the return flight. I assumed they meant the windscreen was dirty. I looked at the windscreen and saw the Captain's had marks covering the entire windscreen looking as if the wiper had operated without a rubber blade. The First Officer's windscreen was marked also but not to the same extent. I reached out to see if I could wipe away the marks. The marks did appear to be scratches. I wrote up the windscreen as scratched and the field of vision impaired. Local maintenance came up to look. The mechanic was a seasoned professional having worked many years in Mexico City. After inspecting the windscreen and finding what looked like sand in the wipers he concluded the windscreen had been damaged due to a volcanic ash encounter. I asked what about the engines? We went out and looked. Both inlets appeared scuffed along the edges and the bullet noses were stripped of paint in a spiraling spotted pattern. The mechanic stated the damage was consistent with an ash encounter. The condition of the engines in conjunction with the windscreen led me to write up the engines as showing evidence of an ash encounter. I then refused the aircraft to expedite the handling of the passengers. Flight was delayed until the next day when another aircraft could be brought to us. We returned without further incident.




Synopsis: B737-NG Captain reported discovering during preflight that the cockpit windows and the engines showed sign of damage from a volcanic ash encounter.
Date: 201207
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZZ.Airport, FO
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: B777-200
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZZ
Aircraft component: Door Warning System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Time Pressure
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; Flight Crew Rejected Takeoff; Flight Crew Returned To Gate; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Low speed abort.  Forward cargo door EICAS message.  Concurrent with selection of TOGA and engine run up to TO2 power; EICAS message 'FWD Cargo Door' appeared.  Takeoff was aborted at a speed less than 50 KTS.  Cleared runway; and taxied back to the ramp.  Subsequent inspection of cargo door revealed no obvious discrepancies.  During this ground interrupt the left engine was found to have lost the tail cone.  A search found the tail cone in the area just off the approach end of Runway XX.  There were no indications in the cockpit of an engine problem.




Synopsis: As takeoff thrust was set a B777's forward cargo door light illuminated; so the takeoff was rejected.  At the gate; no cargo door defect was found but the left engine tail cone was discovered missing.
Date: 202101
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: A321
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked; Taxi
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Crew; Person Flight Attendant
When detected: Taxi
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Aircraft Equipment Problem Dissipated; Flight Crew Returned To Gate; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: No corrective action needed. In the interest of safety we wanted to find the source of the smell and allay the concerns of the passengers and Flight Attendants.After engines started; before we started to taxi. FA called up and reported a burning smell from the aft part of the aircraft. Captain made the quick decision to call fire trucks and return to the gate for inspections. Fire department looked and found nothing. Hazmat team also came in with tools to check for hot spots and burning smells. All of their equipment came up empty. We received the all clear from the Fire department. With maintenance we did engine runups but could not recreate the smell. Maintenance signed off the logbook. We boarded the passengers again and flew to ZZZ1. The flight was uneventful.




Synopsis: A321 flight crew reported a fumes event during engine start-up and initial taxi-out.  The flight returned to the gate for inspection after a Flight Attendant also reported a burning smell in the cabin.
Date: 202005
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ALB.Airport, NY
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-700
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Parked
ATC / advisory: Ramp ALB
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private; Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Confusion
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Chart Or Publication; Company Policy
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: We were at the gate in ALB; briefing our expected departure off Runway 28. There was a simple special indicated in Jepp that we reviewed and briefed. When the weight and balance data arrived; we noticed a discrepancy between the Jepp info and the ACARS data. Jepp had a non-standard min clean up EO altitude of 1;400 ft.; but ACARS data indicated a right turn at 1;185 ft. and EO clean up of 1;285 ft. We noticed there was a Tower to the northwest of the field and errored on the side of caution; and used the higher of the two figures. Once in flight we were able to review the Frequently Asked Questions and saw a reference to use ACARS data over Jepp when there is a discrepancy. Either way this data for Runway 28 ALB should be corrected.


Second narrative: [Report narrative contained no additional information]


Synopsis: B737 flight crew reported confusion between company published departure procedure and Jeppsen chart.