elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201510
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 20
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: PA-28 Cherokee/Archer/Dakota/Pillan/Warrior
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Engine
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Instructor; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Fuel Issue
Detector: Automation Aircraft Terrain Warning; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Was practicing a simulated emergency approach and landing with student pilot. Came down to 800 feet AGL when I told the student to break off and go around. As soon as full power was applied; there was a complete loss of engine power. I took over controls and began to descend for an emergency landing while quickly running through the engine failure checklist. Student pilot had switched the fuel selector to OFF position (located on left side of cockpit). Fuel selector was quickly turned back ON and engine power was restored about 200ft AGL. As soon as I started my radio call to [advise ATC] engine power was restored. Normal power and climb was started and had no issues throughout climb. We safely headed back to [home airport] and experienced no further issues throughout the flight. Conclusion was made that while student pilot was going through the simulated engine secure checklist; he was supposed to point at fuel selector to simulate turning the fuel selector off but actually turned it off. Fuel selector is located on the left side of cockpit and is slightly out of view by person sitting in the right seat.




Synopsis: PA-28 flight instructor reported his student shut off the fuel supply during a training scenario that resulted in loss of engine power until normal fuel settings were achieved.
Date: 201509
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Caravan Undifferentiated
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Ice/Rain Protection System
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Technician
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Airframe; Maintenance Powerplant
Human factors: Physiological - Other
Anomaly: Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Illness / Injury; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Maintenance
When detected: Routine Inspection
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Equipment / Tooling; Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: During the testing of the TKS system on aircraft I began to feel nauseated by the fumes from the fluid as well as a headache. I had this happen during the last time we ran testing on the TKS system of another aircraft; this is twice now I have had these 2 symptoms due to exposure. [Suggest] a better way to ventilate the area (cargo pod) while working in the area to have air flow to allow fumes to move from the area. Proper respirators for this specific task along with the proper protective clothing to avoid exposure of the fluid on the skin.




Synopsis: A Maintenance Technician reported becoming nauseated during ground testing of the TKS system on a Cessna 208.
Date: 201511
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: SFO.Airport, CA
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class B SFO
ATC / advisory: Tower SFO
Second aircraft: B777 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: NorCal put us on the approach 3 miles behind a 777 with no wind. I slowed as much as I could to stay way behind it and open the gap. However his approach speed was very slow; and I couldn't get back much further that 3.5 miles. We hit his wake at about 100 feet; it was manageable yet rough. Made a nice landing despite flopping around. I had briefed [the First Officer] if it got too rough I was going around and reviewed the GA procedure.


Second narrative: [Narrative 2 Contained No Additional Information].


Synopsis: B737-800 flight crew reported encountering wake turbulence 3.5 miles in trail of a B777 on approach to SFO.
Date: 201203
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: CLT.Airport, NC
Weather elements / visibility: Rain
Light: Night
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ramp CLT
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Confusion; Physiological - Other
Anomaly: No Specific Anomaly Occurred All Types
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Airport; Human Factors
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: Taxiing into the gate in CLT on this morning; I identified what I feel is a definite safety hazard. Finding the gate during night (dark) conditions in CLT can be a challenge; but at night during periods of rain it is very nearly impossible to do safely. There are several factors that cause this: 1. The ramp is wet and glossy; and the lines that are painted are not reflective. They do not stand out at all when the ramp is wet. 2. The flood lamps are rigged to shine on the parking spots at exactly eye level to the crew trying to park the airplane. The effect this has is to make a marshaler nearly disappear in the super nova white glare of the construction lamps we use to light to parking spots. 3. Those same lamps' light reflects off of the wet ramp; making it even more impossible to discern where the actual parking spot might be. 4. The marshaling provided by our ramp staff is of uneven quality at best. On this particular morning; I never saw the taxi line until I was on top of it. The marshaler used non-standard hand signals to indicate where the parking spot was. Of course; my night vision was completely shot by staring into the huge construction lamps. I understand that CLT is in a perpetual state of construction. That being said; this is no excuse to have such a dangerous parking set up. Repaint the lines; reconfigure the lights with some pilot input and have the ramp staff retrained on proper marshaling procedures.

Callback: During a callback conversation with this reporter; the following information was offered: this gate has two parking positions making determination of the intended parking spot very difficult; especially with questionable marshaling techniques.



Synopsis: Captain reports being blinded by the ramp flood lights during parking at an express gate with a wet ramp.  The parking maneuver is complicated by non-standard marshaling signals.
Date: 201302
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: MD-82
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Main Gear Wheel
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Ground Event / Encounter Object
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Procedure
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: We rejected our takeoff below 80 KTS for a 'Wheel Not Turning' light. The light extinguished within a few seconds after the rejection and we taxied back to the gate. Upon arrival at the gate we got a brake overheat light. I informed the ground crew to stay away from the main gear area and confirmed with a ground crewmember that the nose wheel was chocked. After completing the parking checklist I then left the cockpit to talk with ARFF. Passengers were preparing to deplane because of the potential fire hazard and the First Officer was entering the event in the logbook per my instructions when the aircraft insidiously began rolling backwards until the forward entry door contacted the jetbridge. Neither the First Officer nor flight attendants said they felt the movement. I don't know if the aircraft pushed the chocks along instead of resting against them or if ramp slope or size of the chocks or some other factor was causal. The aircraft stopped against the jetbridge just as insidiously as it had started rolling. No one was actively deplaning at the time and no one was injured. I directed ground crew to attach a tow bar and pull the jet forward. The passengers were directed to take a seat until the jet was repositioned and then they deplaned uneventfully.


Second narrative: [Narrative 2 contained no additional information.]


Synopsis: After rejecting a takeoff because of a 'Wheel not turning' warning the flight crew of an MD-80 was further surprised when; at the gate prior to deplaning passengers; the aircraft rolled backwards striking the jetway with an open entry door despite having had the nose wheel chocked by a ground crewman.
Date: 201409
Location: EGGX.ARTCC, FO
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B757 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
ATC / advisory: Center EGGX
Aircraft component: FMS/FMC
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Confusion
Second reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: When we passed RESNO entering NAT E at coast out; the flying pilot selected R1 to enter a one mile slop for the track.  The aircraft was in LNAV and we noticed the aircraft flying through the one mile offset track and not turning to intercept it.  The flying pilot selected heading select at this time to roll out; so as not to get off course. This was when we noticed that the next point on our map display; N56000 W02000; was still white and had not turned magenta when we passed RESNO.  Even though the 20 West point was on our map; with the route line leading to it; it had dropped off the legs page.  We re-installed N56000 W02000 on the legs page; so we could re-engage LNAV. As we were doing this we got a SELCAL that our RESNO CPDLC report which was sent when we passed RESNO reported that N57000 W03000 was our next waypoint; instead of the 20 West point.  We confirmed that we were going to N56000 W02000.  All route confirmations and checks; distance and courses; were done correctly before entering the track. The 20 West point was on the legs page correctly when we checked it before passing RESNO; and it was on the map display the whole time.


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


Synopsis: B757 flight crew reports the aircraft not tracking the desired course to the next waypoint on NAT E and heading is adjusted manually. While visible on the ND the next waypoint is not on the legs page and is not reported as the next waypoint to Shanwick via CPDLC. The missing waypoint is reentered and the crossing continued without further difficulties.
Date: 201702
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZOB.ARTCC, OH
Aircraft: A330
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Pneumatic System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
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 Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Equipment Problem Dissipated; General Physical Injury / Incapacitation
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: The captain and I smelled oil fumes (gym sock smell) climbing out. We went on oxygen. Around 18;000 feet the smell dissipated so we took the masks off. The smell came back on the descent so we went back on oxygen again.I was scheduled to split off the trip in ZZZ so I went home. I developed a bad headache within a couple hours; had very red eyes; and had severe fatigue over the next few days. It's now 31 days later and although the bad headache abated; I've had a dull headache every day since this happened. Excedrin and Advil don't help. I've never had a headache last this long although I have had headaches after fume events in the past.[Suggest] proper maintenance of engine or APU bleed air source.




Synopsis: A330 First Officer reported smelling oil fumes in the flight deck. A few hours after the flight he reported severe fatigue and a headache that has lasted 31 days.
Date: 201508
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZDC.ARTCC, VA
Weather elements / visibility: 15
Aircraft: Gulfstream IV / G350 / G450
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class A ZDC
ATC / advisory: Center ZDC
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Procedure; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: We took off from TEB [and] we were cleared to climb to FL400. About to cross FL340 we experienced a very heavy wake turbulence trying to roll the plane to the right; so the auto pilot was kicked off. I tried to keep wings level and in about 15 seconds we were out of it. On the TCAS we had a plane on same airway; 10 to 11 miles ahead of us; and that's why I think air traffic controllers [should] advise pilots when a heavy jet is ahead [of] a lighter jet to avoid these situations.




Synopsis: G-IV Captain reported encountering wake turbulence at FL340 from another aircraft about 10 miles ahead of them.
Date: 201906
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: PDX.Airport, OR
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class C PDX
ATC / advisory: TRACON P80
Second aircraft: Small Transport
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Air Traffic Control Separated Traffic
Contributing factors: Airport; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: While I was working Final I was sequencing multiple aircraft to PDX including both base legs and straight in aircraft. While vectoring Aircraft Y for the ILS Approach I had to vector him around a VFR aircraft in the approach corridor. After vectoring him around that aircraft and vectoring him onto the final approach course his approach speed reduced by at least 50 knots. While this was going on I was vectoring Aircraft X for the visual approach to the parallel runway. I turned Aircraft X to a 30 degree intercept and while this was happening was when I realized that Aircraft Y's final approach speed had reduced dramatically. As Aircraft X was turning to final I lost standard separation.I recommend that the Portland Class Charlie extends to the east and west to avoid conflicts from VFR aircraft. I also need to use speed control more appropriately and not give up altitude separation between aircraft that I am sequencing to final.




Synopsis: P80 TRACON Controller reported losing separation between two in trail aircraft when the first aircraft was vectored off the approach to avoid unidentified VFR conflicting traffic.
Date: 201809
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Night
Aircraft: Airbus 318/319/320/321 Undifferentiated
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Trailing Edge Flap
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Technician
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Airframe; Maintenance Powerplant
Human factors: Fatigue; Situational Awareness; Time Pressure; Workload; Communication Breakdown
Second reporter function: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Maintenance
When detected: Other During Maintenance Operation
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged
Contributing factors: Staffing; Human Factors; Environment - Non Weather Related; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: During installation of right hand #2 spoiler installation it was required to raise flaps to check the clearance of the spoiler to the flap when flaps are up. I was in the flight deck running the flaps and was given go by ground mechanic. I proceeded to raise flaps increment at a time and then during the flap retraction process I was told hold and lower flaps back down. I took them down and shut down hydraulic power and went down to see what had happened. The 2 mechanics were there looking at the flap and found that it was damaged by a spoiler lock left in area. [We were] tired due to hours awake and pressure to get the job done and aircraft back into service. Always a push with no time and manpower. [We need] manpower and time on aircraft to get jobs done. Scheduling is not planning out proper time for manpower.


Second narrative: We were putting in a servo actuator on the right wing one Aircraft X. We had to perform an operational check and check of the dimension on the gap between the flaps and spoiler. Was standing beside [the] r1 door heard a cracking noise; didn't know what it was. Yelled at the mechanic running the flaps to stop and bring them back down immediately. Found the spoiler lockout pin in #1 flap track canoe. Found damage on the leading edge of the flap. Noise was loud due to hydraulic pumps running to operate the flaps and no power in the hangar so we are using a ground power cart.


Synopsis: Airbus maintenance crew reported that the trailing edge flap was damaged when a flight spoiler lock-out not removed prior to retraction.
Date: 201706
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Pneumatic Ducting
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Technician
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Powerplant; Maintenance Airframe
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Technician
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Vehicle
Detector: Person Maintenance
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate; Routine Inspection
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was assigned to Aircraft X. Per flight crew request of an open Aircraft Maintenance Logbook item of possible right wing overheat condition. When I arrived at the aircraft; the flight deck was occupied by the flight crew. After conferring with the flight crew and reviewing the log book; it was determined an inspection of the right hand wing leading edge flaps was required to check for possible damage. The flight crew agreed to operate the flight controls while we technicians positioned ourselves under the wing. Only after I established communication with the flight crew through wireless headset did I ask the flight crew to extend the leading edge flaps to full extension. We were under the right wing facing forward monitoring the movement of the leading edge flaps preparing for our inspection of the leading edge of the right wing. Moments later we heard a noise. We then noticed that the trailing edge flaps had continued to extend. The noise we heard was the sound of the flap track fairing tail cone coming in contact with the safety railing of our maintenance vehicle. We did not intend for the trailing edge flaps to be extended and were unaware that the trailing edge flaps were being lowered behind us. I communicated to the crew immediately to stop flap movement upon becoming aware of this damage.


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


Synopsis: Maintenance technicians reported that after requesting the flight crew to lower the leading edge flaps; the trailing edge flaps were also extended; making contact with ground equipment.