elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201902
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I have developed a technique on very light gross weight short haul (approximately 50 Passengers or less) flights to not delete the reduced thrust at 5000 feet AGL; but rather let the FMC take the reduction out by itself; which it accomplishes on its own incrementally by approximately 13;000 feet or so. This adds passenger comfort as the aircraft does not pitch up so severely and is quieter; and I'm wondering if it saves fuel. On very light weight flights there is plenty of excess thrust before the reduction goes away. I know there is a trade off for altitude by keeping the reduction in; but is there any fuel savings by keeping the reduction in on very lightly loaded flights? Is there a trade off by a certain takeoff weight that makes it worth it? If there is a fuel savings; why not make a policy in the FOM that says something like 'If aircraft gross weight is at or below ###; ### or ##; ### then do not take reduction out.' I know these light weight flights are the rare exception; not the rule; but on (day)-light travel days; and some originators and terminators; ferry flights; reposition flights and maintenance flights; we experience this and I think it has the potential to provide significant savings if it does indeed save fuel. Thank you for looking into this and I look forward to hearing back if this is viable or not.




Synopsis: Air carrier pilot reported a potential fuel saving technique to not manually delete the reduced thrust setting during the climb phase of flight.
Date: 201401
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B777-200
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: FMS/FMC
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Time Pressure; Human-Machine Interface; Confusion
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Relief Pilot
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: While on the RNAV arrival crew closed a discontinuity just prior to ILS in the FMC while approaching a waypoint early on the RNAV arrival. The aircraft began an uncommanded right turn which the crew noticed immediately and corrected back onto the arrival by disconnecting the autopilot. The next waypoint was in fact the next point in the FMC. ATC commented on our right turn but we were already correcting and reissued clearance.Automation failure. Three crewmembers verified that the FMC was programmed correctly for the arrival. Uncommanded turn occurred after discontinuity closed and close to the waypoint. Unable to explain why that would happen. Crew debriefed event and recalled an FCIF describing uncommanded turns while editing FMC close to a waypoint. Not sure if this is related.


Second narrative: [Narrative contains no additional information].


Synopsis: A B777 on an RNAV arrival executed an uncommanded turn after the crew closed a route discontinuity miles down track near the ILS while the aircraft was close to the next and already active arrival waypoint.
Date: 201205
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: A321
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
ATC / advisory: Ground ZZZ
Aircraft component: Turbine Engine
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Physiological - Other; Training / Qualification; Situational Awareness; Distraction
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Attendant; Person Flight Crew; Person Passenger
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: During engine start a strong smell of dirty socks was smelled throughout the airplane from the cockpit all the way back to the aft galley. The flight attendants and several passengers complained about the strong odor. I cycled the packs off and the engine bleed off to see if any changes in smell. There was no change and the strong smell continued. I shut down the engines and we deplaned the passengers. I believe the smell came from burning oil; either from the APU or engines.




Synopsis: An A321 Captain reported a strong dirty socks smell throughout the entire aircraft which did not dissipate after turning the engine bleeds and packs OFF; so the aircraft was deplaned and the flight canceled.
Date: 201504
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: CLT.Airport, NC
Weather elements / visibility: Thunderstorm
Aircraft: Regional Jet 700 ER/LR (CRJ700)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Fatigue; Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Weather; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: My captain and I had a situation arise where under circumstances out of our control; the captain and I had timed out of Duty time for the day while on the ground. We had completed 4 of 5 flights already and had only 40 minutes of so left of our 11.5 hours of available duty time. Completing our final flight was not possible under the given conditions. We proceeded to call into scheduling and notify them of this as they attempted to force a 2 hour extension upon the captain and myself after we clearly attempted to inform them that we were not in good condition for operating safely under another 2 hours of duty time. They continued to give excuses and ignore our advice as they used intimidation tactics to force us to accept the unwanted extension. There were other factors that were playing into all this than just our unfit condition to fly. The ramp was shut down to inclement weather; as well as a line of thunderstorms covered our entire route of flight. Making it very unsafe conditions for an already tired flight crew. Scheduling then proceeded to bring the chief pilot on the phone who started to explain that it was 'Company Expectations' that we accept this extension and that if we were to decline this extension that we would possibly be 'subject to company repercussions'. This left myself with no other option but to call in as 'fatigued '. This bullying tactic is more than just unsafe. It sets an unprofessional and hostile work environment to work in and should be considered unacceptable.




Synopsis: A CRJ700 First Officer reports being bullied by scheduling and the Chief Pilot when he refuses to accept a two hour duty time extension under FAR 117.
Date: 201306
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 145 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Flap Control (Trailing & Leading Edge)
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Fatigue
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: While being vectored for a visual approach our flaps failed in the 0 degree position. We notified Approach Control that we would like box vectors while we troubleshoot the malfunction. The First Officer ran the QRH and handled the radios while I flew the plane; with automation; and notified Dispatch via ACARS. We notified ATC of our situation; declared an emergency; requested emergency vehicles; and requested to land on [the longest runway]. After completing the QRH; I contacted the Flight Attendant; made an announcement to the passengers; and the First Officer notified ATC we were ready for the approach. We landed without any abnormalities aside from the high speed. The rest of the flight was uneventful.  Threats included a tired crew; odd hours; aircraft malfunction; night; high density altitude; high speed landing. I don't believe we made any errors that I was aware of. Fortunately I had started 5 hours or so after my First Officer and Flight Atendant; so I was well rested and not affected by fatigue. Due to delays; this event occurred at [very early morning hours]; which is what our bodies were operating on. Although my crew had expressed their fatigue; the F/O in particular showed no signs of it while dealing with this malfunction. I'm not sure what can be done to prevent this type of situation from happening. Our fleet is aging; and I'm flying with more MEL's then I did 5 years ago; but this type of malfunction could happen with a brand new plane. My First Officer and I both felt we were trained well for this situation; and we were thankful to have a 12;000 foot runway available!




Synopsis: EMB-145LR Captain reported flaps failed in 0 degree position on approach. Crew declared an emergency and landed on the longest available runway.
Date: 202104
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; High Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ1
Aircraft component: Trailing Edge Flap
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness; Workload; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Flight originated from ZZZ1 as a personal practice flight to do some air work; since I had not been flying as much as usual due to COVID-19 concerns and reduced flying time. Upon return to ZZZ1 about 10 miles out I began to reduce speed and attempted to go to flaps 10; the first notch of flaps on my aircraft. I could not get the flap handle to move; although it was fully operational on takeoff. I tried the flaps again several times and no movement. At that time; I was concerned with a possible split flap situation and did not want to force the manual flaps. I set the GPS for direct flight to ZZZ1 and contacted Tower to advise them of my issue and requested a straight into Runway XXL; the longest runway. Upon contacting ZZZ1 Tower I was advised that I was just inside the surface to 6;400 feet portion of the Class C airspace around ZZZ. My usual route of flight at 3;000 feet MSL would have taken me under the 4;200 feet to 6;400 feet portion of the Class C. Upon landing I called Approach Control as instructed and advised them of my error. In my focus on my flight control issue and in selecting a direct route to ZZZ1; I completely overlooked my position and wandered into the west edge of the Class C and wasn't paying attention to the position of my aircraft. This is the first time this has happened to me and certainly won't happen again. I have already had an A&P correct the flap problem.




Synopsis: GA pilot reported violating a Class C airspace while dealing with a flap malfunction.
Date: 202112
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ELP.TRACON, TX
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Light Sport Aircraft
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class C ELP
ATC / advisory: TRACON ELP
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Troubleshooting; Situational Awareness; Human-Machine Interface; Distraction; Confusion; Workload
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Exited Penetrated Airspace; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Aircraft; Software and Automation; Human Factors; Chart Or Publication; Airspace Structure
Primary problem: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings

Narrative: While on a leg from ZZZ1 to ZZZ2; my EFIS(Electronic Flight Instrument System) had a partial failure and while troubleshooting the issue; I inadvertently flew into ELP's Class C airspace. The GPS of the EFIS stopped working and in my installation; this GPS is the only source of position data. So when the failure occurred I was no longer able to see my position on the electronic moving map that I rely on for instantaneous position data. To help avoid this in the future; I will obtain a secondary source for instantaneous position data. After my initial troubleshooting failed to solve the problem (cycling avionics power) I began visually searching for landmarks to determine my position on a sectional chart; but by the time I determined my position (it took me several minutes since it was mostly desert) I had already flown in and out of ELP's Class C.




Synopsis: A light sport aircraft pilot reported loss of GPS signal.
Date: 201310
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: HOU.Airport, TX
Aircraft: B737-700
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground HOU
Second aircraft: Super King Air 200
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Ground
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Confusion; Communication Breakdown
Second reporter function: First Officer
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: A B737-700 contacted me leaving the runway. I instructed him to hold short of Runway 22 on Taxiway Mike. He read back the hold short instructions. Ops 5 was conducting driver training at the time. Ops 5 requested to cross the from the west side of the airport to the east side of the airport. I instructed Ops 5 that they needed to cross at a different location. Ops 5 then moved to a crossing that did not require him to travel down the runway; only to cross the runway. I then coordinated my crossings with Local Control; and instructed Ops 5 to cross Runway 17 and to hold short of Runway 12R on H. I then gave instructions to numerous other aircraft. I then saw the B737-700 taxiing extremely fast and realized he was not going to be able to hold short of the runway. I saw a Super King Air 200 on departure roll and yelled for the B737-700 to 'STOP STOP STOP STOP.' After listening to the tape; the Ops vehicle had drawn out his response and had come back with his hold short again without using his Ops 5 ID; and apparently the B737-700 took Ops 5 instruction(s). I never instructed the B737-700 to cross Runway 22. I never heard him change his gate or hold short instructions; I believe due to frequency congestion. Driver training should be done at less congested times.


Second narrative: After landing in HOU; we told Ground we were parking at Gate XX. Told to taxi via M and hold short of Runway 22. After calling Ops; we called Ground changing the gate to XX. The next transmission both pilots heard was 'hold short of 12L at H.'  We readback clearance with our call sign. Both the Captain and I verified we were to hold short of 12L. Approaching Runway 22; another Controller told us to stop. We stopped but our nose was past the hold short line. Captain spoke to the Tower Supervisor after parking at gate. The Supervisor confirmed communication problems. Preventative Measures; ATC needs to confirm readbacks. All parties use call signs like we did.


Synopsis: HOU Controller described a runway incursion involving an inbound air carrier; the reporter listing communications problems and airport driver training as contributing to the event.
Date: 201908
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: Airbus Industrie Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ramp ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Workload; Time Pressure; Distraction; Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control; Flight Crew Returned To Gate; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: This was day 2 with a double red eye flight. Aircraft was ready for pushback in Area X in ZZZ. Before start checklist was completed and we were cleared to 'release parking brake' by the tug crew. There was major congestion in the ramp and an Aircraft X was waiting to be parked behind us. It was a good 5 minute wait when the tug crew said; 'since we are waiting; can we load 5 more bags that just showed up' I agreed to the request. We noticed the cargo door open on the door page. After a couple minutes I queried the tug driver how it was going. No reply. Then the First Officer exclaimed - 'we're rolling' (the aircraft was rolling forward due to a slight incline) on hot mic I said 'cockpit to ground in a loud voice'; no reply. I then aggressively stepped on the brake pedals before the tug and airplane ran into a 6 foot concrete wall / berm. The maneuver was very noticeable to anyone on the aircraft. We probably rolled 8-10 ft. before stopping and came within 5 feet of the tug hitting the concrete wall. Shortly after incident; the Tug Driver/ Supervisor answered me on the hot mic. He apologized profusely. Apparently the Tug Driver/ Supervisor left the tug unattended to help load the bags without communicating to the flight crew. The parking brake on the pushback tug failed and aircraft began to roll forward. Gate return; performed After Landing Checklist and had Maintenance inspect for nose wheel damage. (Log book write up.) Fortunately; no damage was found and we departed for ZZZ1 about an hour late. Have more staff at stations. Also nonstandard leaving a tug with aircraft under the tug driver control. My understanding is when I release the brake as instructed. The Tug Driver is in charge of the movement of the aircraft.




Synopsis: Airbus pilot experienced aircraft commanded movement due to tug brake failure. Aircraft was undamaged.
Date: 202111
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: Large UAS; Fixed Wing
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class G ZZZ
Second aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Person Manipulating Controls (UAS)
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Visual Observer (UAS)
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: While conducting pattern work during a training flight at ZZZ; I was on final approach to Runway XX for a normal touch-and-go. At approximately 1.5 mile final and 500 feet AGL I was alerted by a second pilot that there was an aircraft converging at a 90 degree angle to our flight path from the south. The instructor called a go-around and I applied full power and climbed. Our [visual] observer called out the aircraft about the same time I began the go-around. While climbing on the upwind; Aircraft Y crossed over the airfield at approximately 400-500 feet AGL according to ADS-B data. The aircraft made several circles over the airfield and the adjoining [area] for approximately 10 minutes before departing the area to the south. The aircraft's flight path was erratic and we were unsure of his intentions so we held our aircraft at approximately 3;200 feet AGL while we tried to determine what he was doing. Our [visual observer] called out his position constantly and kept us in a safe position. When the aircraft finally left we ensured that it was departing the area for good before bringing the aircraft back into the traffic pattern and finishing our training flight. Had we required a go-around before touchdown we would have had an elevated risk of collision with the aircraft. The aircraft crossed over the middle of the airfield at low altitude right around the time we would have touched down. Estimated closest separation was about 1;000 feet basically right on top of the aircraft.




Synopsis: Large fixed wing UAS was conducting touch and goes when a Visual Observer saw an approaching aircraft. The UAS avoided the other aircraft until it could return to the airport safely.