elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201310
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: PCT.TRACON, VA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Light Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class E PCT
ATC / advisory: TRACON PCT
Aircraft component: FMS/FMC
Component problem: Design
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Confusion; Workload; Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Clearance; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Chart Or Publication; Procedure; Equipment / Tooling; Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: UNIVERSAL UNS1-E FMS. Cruising at FL230 with an ATC airspeed restriction of 250 KTS we were cleared for GIBBZ TWO RNAV ARRIVAL after passing HIROY Intersection. Set in the final level-off altitude of 7;000 FT. Had to initiate descent manually as the FMS VNAV had not yet activated. It finally locked in approaching JIMVE Intersection. ATC had us increase to 280 KTS with instructions to slow to 250 KTS at MOSLE Intersection. VNAV profile was progressing normally and autopilot initiated 11;000 foot level-off approaching MOSLE Intersection. Shortly thereafter aircraft started a slow climb. Deactivated VNAV Mode and used manual descent mode to get aircraft headed down again for 10;000 foot restriction passing MONNK Intersection. At this point the Non Flying Pilot went to obtain ATIS. The Non Flying Pilot returned immediately upon noticing aircraft was not going to level at 9;000 FT at BMICH as described below.Selecting VNAV mode again; aircraft pitch increased dramatically into a steep descent profile; continuing through the 9;000 foot minimum altitude published for crossing BMICH Intersection. Had to disconnect the autopilot and climb back up to meet 9;000 foot crossing restriction. Re-engaged autopilot and VNAV. Autopilot was able to fly a normal descent profile to the THZMN Intersection. There never seems to be an uneventful outcome to this RNAV Profile Descent with any of the flight crews in our department. There is a multitude of reports by all types of aircrew illuminating problems flying this particular RNAV Profile Descent. Possibly the speed changes; altitude restrictions; or equipment inabilities all play into the outcome. It seems evident that a simpler design is needed and soon.




Synopsis: A Corporate pilot flying an aircraft with a Universal UNS1-E FMS described the difficulty flying the GIBBS TWO RNAV with this FMS and states' flying this RNAV profile never seems to have uneventful outcome.
Date: 201606
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 50
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Cessna 150
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Private; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Weather; Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: [Center] requested expedited descent from 8500 feet to 3500 feet then 2900 feet. Five miles from airport engine stoppage occurred. Requested frequency change and received it from [Center]. Applied carb heat and rich mixture and engine restarted and proceeded to airport without further incident.




Synopsis: C150 pilot reported he was able to successfully restart the engine after it quit by applying carburetor heat.
Date: 202105
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZDC.ARTCC, VA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZDC
Second aircraft: UAV: Unpiloted Aerial Vehicle
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Airspace Violation All Types; Conflict NMAC; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Unauthorized Flight Operations (UAS)
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: On our flight to ZZZ1 from ZZZ we just crossed the shore of the Delaware Bay from ZZZ; about 11 nm east of DONIL intersection at 16;000 ft; XA:30; we flew past a drone that appeared to be stationary.  The drone; quad type; looked to be approximately 500 feet below our left wing. The encounter was reported to Washington Center.




Synopsis: Corporate flight crew was in cruise flight at 16;000 feet when they noticed a UAS about 500 feet below them and notified ATC.
Date: 201906
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: IAD.Airport, DC
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Medium Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class A ZDC
ATC / advisory: Center ZDC
Aircraft component: GPS & Other Satellite Navigation
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness; Time Pressure
Anomaly: Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew FLC Overrode Automation; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Airspace Structure; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: On the flight from IAD; after takeoff; the instruction to proceed LND VOR as part of the flight plan. After a short time after making our way to the previously mentioned navigational aid; ATC called us asking to confirm we were heading to the correct VOR. I was the pilot monitoring in the flight and because of the GPS outage; I had my needles in 'green' which is a ground base navigation as a backup for the FMS. We asked for vectors to proceed to the right direction and no issues or alerts associated. As we kept going along the route; we tried to navigate by VOR navigation only and the green needles in the two VOR's were giving us erroneous and unreliable information. ATC had to correct our course several times and at the end; the Captain advised that our plane was not the only one with this issue.




Synopsis: First Officer reported they were receiving erroneous and unreliable VOR information during a GPS outage.
Date: 201212
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZZ.ARTCC, FO
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: Falcon 900
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZZ
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Engineer
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown; Time Pressure
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; General Declared Emergency; General Police / Security Involved; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Smoke in the cockpit from an undermined source. Emergency declared. ATC vectored us to a suitable airport. Smoke cleared on final approach. Landed without incident. Detained by Government Officials until U.S. Embassy could workout exit VISAS. Departed via charter jet 23 hours later. Incident aircraft still at the divert airport awaiting repairs.




Synopsis: A DA900EX developed cockpit smoke from an unknown source so an emergency was declared and the flight diverted to a nearby international airport.
Date: 201911
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Cessna 402/402C/B379 Businessliner/Utiliner
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 135
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
Aircraft component: Fuel Booster Pump
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor; Inflight Event / Encounter Fuel Issue
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General Evacuated
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: In range; right engine fuel pump was selected to low; fuel flow increased above normal to about 150; the engine began to run rough and the plane sharply yawed. I then leaned the engine and it improved slightly. Upon landing; the power was pulled out and the engine roughness increased. We then made a 180 to back-taxi off the runway; the engine then shut down on its own; following the shutdown we had a strong burning smell. We called operations a few times to no answer. Given the strong burning smell; we decided it was safest to deplane. I then shut the plane down told the passengers to please exit the plane to the rear left. I exited through the crew door and assisted the passengers exiting. Once the passengers were away from the plane and safe; I then called Operations Control to notify them of the situation and for them to call ZZZ to get transportation for the passengers to the terminal. I then called Approach on the cell phone to let them know of the situation to prevent any inbound traffic conflicts.After speaking with Contract Maintenance at ZZZ; the cause is likely a faulty fuel pump.




Synopsis: C402 pilot reported deplaning aircraft after engine failure.
Date: 202103
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: B737-900
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty); Flight Attendant In Charge
Reporter qualification: Flight Attendant Current
Human factors: Other / Unknown; Communication Breakdown
Second reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Hazardous Material Violation; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Passenger Misconduct
Detector: Person Flight Crew; Person Flight Attendant
When detected: Routine Inspection; Pre-flight
Result: Aircraft Equipment Problem Dissipated; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Chart Or Publication; Procedure
Primary problem: Company Policy

Narrative: Passenger in 31A had a single wheel balancing board under 160[Wh] lithium battery. One section in our manual states it's good to go under 160[Wh]; however under the Dangerous Good section it states single wheel balancing device (eg; hoverboards) are prohibited. The Gate Agent; their Supervisor; and whomever answered the phone for [company] said it was allowed. We took the passenger and board. Good idea to have approved sticker!!!


Second narrative: During boarding a passenger came on with a one wheel pint (similar to hoverboard). We were not sure if this was prohibited. The passenger said they had called ahead and was told since the non removable lithium battery was less than 160 [Wh] it was allowed as a carry on. They also had already flown from ZZZ1 to ZZZ with it. They also told me their brother had flown earlier this year with one; no problem. In our flight attendant manual section 6.500 page 7 it does seem to be allowable if stowed overhead; which we did. After take off and upon further review of the manual we discovered in section 6.500 page 4 self-balancing devices (e.g. hoverboards) are prohibited.  We continued on to ZZZ1 landing safely without incident. It would be nice to have this clarified. The customer suggested a certificate of approval.  Clarification and certificates of approval for questionable devices.


Synopsis: B-737-900 Flight Attendant crew reported a communications breakdown between Flight Attendant crew and Customer Service Agent; Captain; Company SOP's/ Manuals regarding the air carrier's policy of transporting Lithium-Ion powered Hoverboards in passenger cabin.
Date: 201306
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: SFO.Airport, CA
Light: Night
Aircraft: A321
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Upon aircraft arrival at the gate; met inbound Captain during deplaning. He advised that on landing autobrakes had disengaged and faulted. He further stated that the ECAM and fault cleared after clearing the runway. He did not write up the fault either as a write-up or info only item. During preflight/postflight; faults were noted by Maintenance. In addition; significant brake temperature split was noted during preflight FHEAD check. Maintenance was contacted and write-up initiated. Due to brake temperature indications; concerns were that either there was no braking on the Number 1 brake or the anti-skid was inoperative for that wheel and was in full time release. Cause: Inbound Captain failed to write-up info only item indicating fault occurred and cleared. This would have; at the very least; triggered further investigation which found brake faults and MEL procedures were initiated. Significant delay was incurred on the departure due to time required to comply with the MEL. Suggestions: Reiterate the need for pilots to use info only write-ups when faults occur and then clear either with or without pilot action. Aircraft involved showed no recent history yet a 'placeholder' was found in the MEL book for Chapter 32 Brakes. Why was unclear.




Synopsis: A321 Captain reported the inbound Captain failed to make a logbook entry documenting a brake fault and a delay resulted.
Date: 201911
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: A319
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Human factors: Physiological - Other
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Illness / Injury; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: During descent into ZZZ. Me and a fellow Flight Attendant were sitting in our jump seats when a potent smell of vomit came over us. We looked in the cabin to ensure there were no passengers getting sick or waving us down for help. Everything was calm in the cabin and at that point the smell turned into a dirty socks/gym smell at that point the other Flight Attendant and I knew it was a cabin odor event. We called up to the Flight Attendant at the front of the cabin and asked she could also smell what we were smelling and she confirmed. From there on the smell turned into a more chemical fuel smell. At that point the landing gear and coming down and we were about to land. We as the crew decided to let the Captain know once we had landed and it was safe to call them. As soon as we started taxiing into our gate I called and inform the cabin of the smells and how we were feeling. We all started to feel a bit dizzy; very fatigued; nauseas and our heads were pounding. The moment we stood up to do our duty of disarming the doors we all felt very sick and something was not right. We went ahead and let a manager on duty know at ZZZ and have a manager and mechanics meet the flight so we could thoroughly explain what we had smelled and felt during the event. After we had talked to the Captain; the mechanics; and the manager we knew as a crew we had to get checked out because we were not fit to fly and none of us were feeling well by any means.




Synopsis: A319 Flight Attendant crew reported a fume event which resulted in physiological symptoms. Cabin crew received medical evaluation at destination.
Date: 201902
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B737 Next Generation Undifferentiated
Operator: Air Carrier
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Aircraft component: Turbine Engine
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: At rotate speed and immediately after liftoff a loud banging was heard and felt. We both suspected a blown tire but then I noticed the number 1 engine had 'redlined' at about that same moment ATC Tower called and said 'your engine is on fire.' I then realized we were experiencing a compressor stall/engine surge and I pulled the power back on the number 1 engine and then took control of the aircraft. We continued the special engine out procedure with a left turn and continued climb. The FO (First Officer) initiated the engine failure/damage check list. It was determine by us both that the engine had not failed and was not severely damaged so we elected the leave it running. We were informed the airspace had been cleared and we could return for landing whenever we wanted. We continued the engine out departure and climbed to a safe altitude. I transferred controls to the FO while I briefed the Flight Attendants and then the passengers. We then set up for a visual approach backed up by the RNAV. I took the controls back and we made a normal flaps 40 (overweight) landing. After we came to a stop we shutdown the number 1 engine and Airport fire rescue inspected the aircraft and tires for damage. We then proceeded to a remote parking spot for passenger deplaning. Maintenance log entries were completed.


Second narrative: [Report narrative contained no additional information.]


Synopsis: B737NG flight crew reported returning to departure airport after experiencing Number 1 engine compressor stall and surge.
Date: 201507
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Q400
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach; Initial Approach
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Flap/Slat Control System
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Fatigue; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT; Inflight Event / Encounter Unstabilized Approach
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Performed go around on visual approach.  It was initiated when message was received; 'TOO LOW CONFIG FLAPS'.  Flaps were set in 15 position with EGPWS setting at intended 35; and aircraft descended below 500 feet engaging EGPWS.  Successful and safe missed approach completed and flight landed on subsequent visual landing safely.While currently at flaps setting of 10; Pilot flying called for flaps setting of 35 instead of what we do normally from 15 to 35; so there was an expectation bias of only moving flap lever 1 notch.  Neither pilot double checked the flap indicator after flaps where assumed to be selected to 35 so a huge lapse in attention to detail.It was first day of 2 day trip that started with a XB:10 show; this was 5th leg close to 11th hour of duty.  Captain was originally scheduled for PM reserve this day but was switched day prior to AM reserve starting at XA:30 with the subsequent XB:10 show.  These added to lack of awareness due to crew possibly being tired.




Synopsis: A Q400 Captain reports requesting flaps to 35 from the flaps 10 position during a visual approach. The normal call is flaps 15 from flaps 10 and this is what the First Officer selects. The error is not detected until the EGPWS alerts at 500 feet; 'too low flaps' and a go-around is initiated.
Date: 201504
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: COD.Airport, WY
Aircraft: Citation Excel (C560XL)
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Horizontal Stabilizer Control
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Fractional
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: General Release Refused / Aircraft Not Accepted
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Pre-flight of an aircraft in COD. Aircraft appeared to be an older high mile CE-560XL. We felt a thorough inspection was warranted. When a ladder was used to clean the wind screen; I asked if I could use it to get a closer look at some of the more hard to reach places. With my partner and the line man watching; I checked the horizontal stabilizer. It moved both forward and aft and up and down. The captain decided we needed to call the company for guidance. We were able to contact an Assistant Chief Pilot (ACP) and asked for guidance. We were told to write it up as an Aircraft on Ground (AOG).




Synopsis: CE560XL Captain reported finding excessive wear in the horizontal stabilizer during preflight and refused the aircraft.