elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201311
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: BAe 125 Series 800
Operator: Fractional
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Engine Electric Starter
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Fractional
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: After takeoff; we noted a vibration and rumble. We were unable to determine its origin and elected to return to our departure airport for landing. The vibration and noise continued after landing and got worse during the taxi in to the ramp. Post-flight inspection by Maintenance Control determined that the starter generator had failed. Small chunks of metal were removed from the faulty component.


Second narrative: We were unable able to identify the source of the vibration; although we believed the vibration was coming from one of the engines.


Synopsis: A BAE-125-850XP flight crew returned to their departure airport when a noticeable and increasing vibration and rumbling noise occurred shortly after takeoff.
Date: 201605
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: Widebody Transport
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Landing
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Speed All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Airport; Human Factors
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: Upon landing; an aircraft was sitting between the runways on the high speed turnoff AA. I decided to continue the roll out to the next turn off BB; as I would not be able to clear the runway; had I stopped behind the aircraft on AA. As we passed AA the tower instructed us to turn off on AA and follow the aircraft on AA which still had not moved. The clearance was given too late and we were unable to comply. We expedited to BB and turned off without delay. The tower instructed the landing aircraft behind us to go around. The tower gave us their phone number to call them.


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


Synopsis: Captain of air carrier extended the roll out on landing due to traffic of the exit taxiway. This necessitated a go-around by another approaching airplane.
Date: 201509
Location: LAX.Airport, CA
Aircraft: Widebody; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class B LAX
ATC / advisory: Tower LAX
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Chart Or Publication; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Crossing altitude at LIMMA and Glideslope altitude mismatch on ILS 25L LAX.  The step down altitude at LIMMA (D 7.5 ILAX) and glideslope altitude are both published as 1900 feet. But in fact multiple approaches have resulted in being about 100 feet above the actual glideslope if crossing LIMMA at 1900 feet. This is just enough to cause flight automation to miss capturing the glideslope and instead engaging in VNAV ALT approaching LIMMA; rapidly putting the aircraft in an unstable (high) approach state.




Synopsis: The First Officer reports that the charted crossing altitude at LIMMA on the LAX ILS 25L approach is above the glideslope which creates problems with capturing the glideslope and getting stabilized on the approach.
Date: 201208
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Exterior Pax/Crew Door
Component problem: Malfunctioning
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 Critical
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Attendant; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; General Maintenance Action; General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: After takeoff at approximately 4;500 MSL; noticed the aircraft was not pressurizing. At about the same time; the Number 1 Flight Attendant called and said there was a very loud air-leak sound coming from the forward entry door. Leveled off and analysis confirmed aircraft not pressurizing. No door warning lights illuminated and air conditioning and bleed panel was set up normally and normal duct pressure. [We] declared an emergency return; accomplished overweight landing and emergency landing QRH. Referenced the Landing Data Card. Approach and landing were normal and uneventful with touchdown VVI approximately 100 FT/minute. Rolled out to the end to avoid hot brakes and cleared the runway. ARFF confirmed aircraft looked normal and no hot brakes. ARFF followed to gate. Other option would be to burn off fuel and land below max landing [weight]. VMC dry and a very long runway available; considered the above option well within safety limits.




Synopsis: B737-800 Captain notices the aircraft is not pressurizing early in the climb; just before the forward Flight Attendant reports a loud air leak at the forward entry door. Flight returns to the departure airport for an overweight landing.
Date: 201402
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 20
Light: Night
Aircraft: Skylane 182/RG Turbo Skylane/RG
Operator: Government
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Propeller Blade
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Routine Inspection
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Another pilot working for my employer noticed a large chip in the propeller of our aircraft. The pilot reported this discrepancy to our Maintenance department and to our local mechanics. They concluded that the propeller could not be repaired and needed to be replaced. A replacement propeller was installed and the airplane was released by the Cessna Service Center for flight. This pilot; my aviation coordinator; took the aircraft on a post maintenance flight and found no additional mechanical issues; and advised me that the plane was returned to active flight status. Later that evening I took the airplane on an operational flight after conducting a thorough pre-flight. The plane flew fine with no additional issues. Two days later; the other pilot/aviation coordinator in further discussions with the Cessna Certified mechanics; and then our Maintenance and Flight Management personnel came to the conclusion; based upon their further review of the regulations; that the damage caused by ingested FOD (The chip was believed to be caused by a rock picked up during a taxi out on another flight) warranted an engine breakdown and inspection; and not just the simple replacement of the propeller. In hindsight; it was determined that I flew the airplane when I had not personally determined that the aircraft was airworthy based on the AD requiring an engine breakdown and inspection; and not just a propeller replacement; before my flight. I have learned that I; as a pilot-in-command; need to stay more abreast of the letter of the law in regards airworthiness directives; and maintenance matters; so that I do not depart in an airplane that was technically un-airworthy. I; as the PIC; am ultimately responsible for the aircraft.




Synopsis: C182 pilot reports flying the aircraft after the propeller has been replaced due to a large chip in the original propeller. Days later it is determined that the engine should have been torn down to check for internal damage in compliance with an AD.
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
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Other / Unknown
Reporter qualification: Other stock clerk
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Other Person
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Manuals; Procedure
Primary problem: Company Policy

Narrative: New Cargo system software went into production and approximately one week prior to implementation Stores personnel were trained on the new software application. Leadership mandated that all COMAT (Company Material) shipments be administered through the new software and as a result mandated that all parts for RON (Remaining Overnight) aircraft maintenance be shipped AOG (Aircraft On Ground) Status which is contradictory to the general procedures manual. When we asked for clarification so that we could identify what was a true AOG from a RON work package that was not we were given a memorandum signed by the stores manager which went further from the established procedures in the manual to the extent that we cannot identify a AOG COMAT shipment that is for a grounded aircraft or parts being sent for routine maintenance. We have specific guidance for managing AOG shipments in so much that we are required to physically hand the part to the Ramp Crew Chief and watch it be on-loaded; whereas a 'Must Ride' RON part can be left at the gate without interaction with Ramp Crew Chief. Stock Clerk personnel have been disciplined for not following the AOG guidelines even though the Clerk was unaware the part was a 'True AOG' because of management's mandate to ship all RON parts as AOG. Suggestions: Follow general procedures manual and ship aircraft parts for RON work as 'Maintenance Must Ride' and reserve the COMAT AOG status for aircraft grounded or discrepancies that if not competed will result in a grounded aircraft the will not be available for first launch as stated in the manual. The general procedures manual verbiage should be revised so that it is in line with current AOG and Maintenance Must Ride statuses due to the inception of this new system.




Synopsis: Aircraft parts stock clerk reported conflicting company procedures regarding the shipping of critical aircraft parts.
Date: 201504
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: LVK.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 50
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Ferry / Re-Positioning
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class E NCT
ATC / advisory: TRACON NCT
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Commercial
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Object; Inflight Event / Encounter Object
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: Departing LVK during climbout at approx 4800 feet we felt a bump in the airframe; and heard a thud. No other anomalies were noted; and after discussion and evaluation of the aircraft instruments and visual areas of the airframe; we continued on to destination. After landing I examined the aircraft and found a 3 inch long damaged area on the lower nose cowl; and scratch marks on the back of 2 of the 3 propeller blades near the propeller root and at a position consistent with the nose damage. No other damage was noted. The aircraft was subsequently inspected by an Inspection Authority (IA) [mechanic] and confirmed to be airworthy.I believe we struck a small UAV being operated in the vicinity of the Del Valle reservoir; in violation of the applicable FARs. If the device had been 1 foot higher; it likely would have impacted the windshield with devastating results.




Synopsis: Single engine small aircraft pilot reports a collision with an object; possibly a small UAV; at 4;800 feet over the Del Valle reservoir after departing LVK. Scratches on the cowling and two of the three propeller blades were noted on post flight.
Date: 201603
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: No Aircraft
Operator: Air Carrier
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Vehicle Driver
Human factors: Physiological - Other
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Ground Personnel
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Equipment / Tooling
Primary problem: Equipment / Tooling

Narrative: Super tug has a suspension issue; too bouncy. Injured testicle and back from all the bouncing on the super tug.




Synopsis: Super tug driver reported being physically injured by the stiff suspension and bouncy ride that it produces.
Date: 201412
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZMP.ARTCC, MN
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Balloon
Operating under: Other 101
Mission: Other unmanned balloon
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class A ZMP
ATC / advisory: Center ZMP
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness; Troubleshooting; Workload; Communication Breakdown; Confusion
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Air Traffic Control Separated Traffic
Contributing factors: Procedure; Aircraft
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Management allowed a scheduled unmanned balloon launch from AMW.  Poor coordination with affected sectors and other adjacent facilities could have resulted in an incident with balloon climbing through the PCA.  Controllers; including myself; working affected sectors had little to no information as to when the balloon launched; its current position; or altitude as it left the surface to climb to 100;000 ft.  The balloon was large; 44 ft in diameter; and had a fairly large payload and had no equipment on board to help with tracking its position or altitude.  Management made attempts to contact the POC of the ballon launch to get updates; however POC failed to answer phone calls.  As the controller working the affected high altitude sectors I had to give numerous aircraft vague position and altitude reports in regards to the balloon.  Although no aircraft had to deviate for the balloon the same scenerio could bring a different result next time.I understand that we have procedures in place to allow unmanned; untranspondered; balloons to enter the PCA; however these events need to have a larger scope of airspace protection.  We were allowing aircraft to traverse an area where we knew the balloon would be and did nothing to try and avoid an incident.  We also need to establish better lines of communication with the groups performing these activities while they are ongoing.  The POC involved in this report had to ability to give us lat/long and altitude reports; however since we were unable to get in contact with him after an initial phone call this information was unretrievable by ATC.




Synopsis: ZMP Controller describes a problem with an unmanned balloon that departs from an airport; since the Controller has no idea where it is to be able to give traffic advisories.
Date: 201510
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Dash 8-400
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Taxi
Aircraft component: Exterior Pax/Crew Door
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty); Flight Attendant In Charge
Second reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Upon attempting to open forward passenger door at arrival; door would not open because the handrail pins were incorrectly put in.  I think that the pins were incorrectly placed out of the gate on the early morning flight. Better training on the procedures of the Q400.


Second narrative: Station started boarding without asking if it was okay. There was only one Flight Attendant (FA) aboard at the time and that FA was away from the door. One passenger came aboard before the FA was able to stop additional passengers. This station NEEDS to ask or at least inform flight crew before boarding. Ensure that the station personnel inform/or receive permission to board passenger before the passengers are sent out.


Synopsis: Two Q400 flight attendants report separate anomalies on one of their flights. The B Flight Attendant reports the Customer Service Representative (CSR) sending passengers down without asking or informing the crew; and with the Lead Flight Attendant off the aircraft. Upon arrival at their destination; the A Flight Attendant wan unable to open the door because the handrail pins were incorrectly installed.
Date: 202101
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Air Conditioning and Pressurization Pack
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: Aircraft Equipment Problem Dissipated; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: We taxied into ZZZ; Gate X; with both engines running. After shut down the F/O (First Officer) started to operate the AC (Air Conditioning) packs off the APU bleed. Immediately after the switch we smelled fumes and a slight haze/smoke was noticed the AC; we believed the source to be the packs so we shut down both packs and APU bleed and the fumes and haze started to dissipate. The jet way was already pulling up so after discussing with my F/A's (Flight Attendants) and F/O we decided a normal deplaning would be best.I made a PA and informed the passengers there was not an [urgent situation]; and to deplane normally. After the aircraft was secure and checklist completed I asked Ramp to do a walk around then come to flight deck to inform me on anything suspicious that was discovered. I followed up with a walk around to look at packs for any noticeable damage or smell. The right pack had a hint of the suspicious smell left. We did not [request priority handling] because we believe we had identified and isolated the issue and at no time were flames observed just smell and slight smoke.




Synopsis: B737-800 Captain reported a fumes event during gate arrival. The crew secured both packs and APU bleeds and performed normal deplaning.
Date: 201508
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ATL.Airport, GA
Flight conditions: Mixed
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-700
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B ATL
ATC / advisory: TRACON A80
Second aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Distraction
Anomaly: Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: On approach to RWY 9R ATL. Encountered large (45 degree Angle of Bank) roll due to aircraft wake ahead. Aircraft entered CWR (Control Wheel Roll) which disengaged LNAV mode. Loss of LNAV was not noticed until late turn onto RWY 9R Localizer. Deviation corrected by Crew and ATC. Remainder of approach and landing was normal.




Synopsis: B737-700 Captain reported uncommanded 45 degree roll from preceding aircraft wake on approach to Runway 9R at ATL.
Date: 201207
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: No Aircraft
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Technician
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Airframe; Maintenance Powerplant
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown; Distraction
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Vehicle
Detector: Person Maintenance
When detected: Other During Maintenance
Result: General Physical Injury / Incapacitation
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure; Company Policy
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: At about XA:30am; I was working on the Ramp at ZZZ Maintenance Facility.  I was helping some mechanics with an engine change.   At the time; I had stepped away from the aircraft to attach a grounding cable to the grounding point on the Ramp.  At the same time; two other mechanics were attaching a pushback tractor to the engine stand they intended to use; about 40 feet away from me.  I was having trouble connecting the cable to the grounding stud; and while I was focusing on this I wasn't paying attention to the tractor.  Apparently the mechanics had hooked up the [engine] stand and were now towing it in reverse into position.  Out of the corner of my eye I saw the back end of the tractor at about the same time that it hit me.  I was knocked backwards and rolled on the ramp.  I wasn't sure if the tractor had stopped after it hit me; so I rolled out of its path to avoid being run over.   It took me awhile to clear my head and assess my injuries after I came to a stop; but eventually I came to the conclusion that aside from minor bumps and bruises including a bump on my head and a headache; I was more or less uninjured.




Synopsis: A Line Mechanic describes the chain of events that led to his being struck by an aircraft Tow Tractor while preparing for an engine change.