elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201709
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: P80.TRACON, OR
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; High Wing; 1 Eng; Retractable Gear
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class E P80
ATC / advisory: TRACON P80
Second aircraft: Widebody; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Departure; Approach
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown
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 Separated Traffic; Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Airspace Structure
Primary problem: Airspace Structure

Narrative: I was working the north radar sector on a Runway 10 flow. We had not been on runway 10 for several months. I was on the end part of a busy session involving a lot of weird issues involving a TFR in the departure corridor and a heavy amount of VFR traffic. I heard an aircraft call up for flight following off of Scappoose airport and I didn't have time to answer him right away so I ignored him with the intention of getting back to him when I had an opportunity. Looking back I should have reached out to have him contact the final controller as he wanted to go south from SPB airport. But again; with the 10 flow in use; and not 28; I am used to working the SPB aircraft off of SPB. I finally radar identified Aircraft X and saw he was already in the approach corridor for Runway 10 at PDX and on a heading that would take him across final a few miles behind Aircraft Y on final into PDX. I immediately issued traffic and the aircraft reported that he had the traffic in sight. No incident occurred and I transferred control to the next sector.There needs to be a VFR corridor that takes planes around the PDX approach and departure corridors. Or we need an airspace reclassification. Literally every single day something like this happens; and it's only a matter of time before a serious incident occurs. Most of the time the VFR aircraft doesn't even call ATC and they just fly across the localizer at an altitude that puts it in direct conflict with an air carrier arriving at PDX. This happens dozens of times per day. I describe it as playing 'frogger' with 737s. You are constantly turning IFR jets to avoid unidentified 1200 code VFR aircraft. It is ridiculous and one day someone will make an unexpected turn directly back into an arrival that we vectored for target resolution and it will be a serious incident. The airspace needs to change and soon.




Synopsis: P80 TRACON Controller reported a recurring issue with unidentified VFR aircraft transitioning through the PDX Runway 10 final approach corridor.
Date: 201310
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: IXD.Airport, KS
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class D IXD
ATC / advisory: Tower IXD
Reporter function: Instructor; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: [I] was doing a training flight to IXD. After reporting the 2 minute left base for [Runway] 18; Tower cleared [me] to land. While [I] was on short final; Tower cleared a Cessna to depart on [Runway] 18. [I] reported 'short final' and heard Tower say; 'Cancel takeoff clearance.' The Cessna didn't reply and [I] was told to do a go-around. The two aircraft were about 300 FT in trail on departure and [I] was forced to aggressively slow speed to prevent a mid-air. The Cessna departed southwest and [I] made left closed traffic for [Runway] 18.




Synopsis: C172 pilot preparing to land reports a NMAC with a departing Cessna that had been instructed to cancel takeoff clearance. When the departing Cessna does not respond; the reporters landing clearance is canceled.
Date: 202112
Aircraft: B737-900
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: APU Pneumatic System & Ducting
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Technician
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Airframe; Maintenance Powerplant
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Maintenance
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate; Routine Inspection
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Incorrect / Not Installed / Unavailable Part; Procedure
Primary problem: Incorrect / Not Installed / Unavailable Part

Narrative: This report is filed to report a maintenance omission.Aircraft X arrived with an APU keel duct pressure seal missing. The aircraft was taken out of service because of the lengthy time required to correct this issue. This can lead to pressurization leaks/issues. There have been several other aircraft with the same issue.




Synopsis: Technician reported a clamp missing on the APU pneumatic duct pressure seal on a B737-900. The aircraft was removed from service due to the length of time required to install a new clamp.
Date: 201908
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Embraer Jet Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Dispatcher
Reporter qualification: Dispatch Dispatcher
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Dispatch
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Procedure
Primary problem: Company Policy

Narrative: ZZZ delayed flight without Dispatcher contact. Flight Attendant late. There are HOTS [Hold Over Time]; but no HOTS was assigned since the original Flight Attendant would now make the departure time based on the delay.




Synopsis: Dispatcher reported that a flight was delayed without Dispatch being notified.
Date: 201908
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Large Transport
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Other General Ramp
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Other / Unknown
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Hazardous Material Violation; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Ground Personnel
When detected: Taxi
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Returned To Gate; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Aircraft X; ZZZ- ZZZ1 was a Ramp Direct loading flight. Ramp lead failed to secure DG (Genetic Modified Organism) with 15 bags; yet loaded the DG cart by itself in rear Pit 6. Plane was pushed back prior to Ramp close out. Crew were #2 for takeoff when Ramp lead called CLP [Central Load Planning] to ask for help and that is when Ramp lead realized that the Cart in rear Pit 6 contained DG. Unfamiliar with her DG codes/loads; Ramp lead failed to follow FAA policy and caused a gate return; inconveniencing customers; crew and caused a 40 min delay. Not a single phone call from Ramp lead nor Ramp Supervisor was made to Load Planning during the loading or prior to push back to raise a question about this DG.




Synopsis: Airline Central Load Planning personnel reported having to 'gate return' aircraft due to Hazmat cargo configuration errors.
Date: 202012
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: LGB.Airport, CA
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Medium Large Transport
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class C SNA
ATC / advisory: TRACON SCT
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation - Altitude Crossing Restriction Not Met; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: We were descending on the DSNEE 1 arrival but had been assigned several speeds; the last was 200 KIAS. I had been using speed intervention (SPD INTV) to manage the speed but switched to Level Change after passing the last intermediary altitude restriction and being asked to expedite our descent through 5000' for traffic. I announced the new mode and verified 4000' in the altitude window (the final altitude on the STAR).After we were clear off traffic; SoCal cleared us for the ILS Runway 30. I closed the discontinuity in the FMS after MIDDS; checked with the Pilot Monitoring (PM) and executed it. My PM then prompted that we could set 1600' in the altitude window for the FAF at GUNEY. I did so but failed to verify that we were in VNAV. At 3800' the PM noticed we were below the 4000' restriction at GOOFY. I reversed the descent and started climbing back to 4000'. We ended up 300' low at GOOFY. At that point; SoCal gave us a heading to join final and a descent to 2000'. We complied with the new clearance; were re-cleared for the ILS; and continued without further event.The continued use of SPD INTV would have done the same job but protected us from descending below a coded altitude on the arrival. Next time I need to descend quickly; I will try to stay in VNAV if I am continuing on an arrival that connects with an approach with step-down altitudes. Also using VVMI to verify my level of automation after an altitude selection will trap this kind of error in the future.




Synopsis: Captain reported descending below the altitude for crossing GOOFY intersection on the DSNEE four arrival to LGB citing management of the flight guidance system to comply with ATC speed requests put the system in a mode that did not protect for crossing altitude restriction compliance.
Date: 201310
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: MD-82
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)
Human factors: Time Pressure; Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Other / Unknown; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: [When we] arrived at the gate the agents asked who we were; so we stated the working crew. The pilots were with us. The agents looked surprised about this. Unknown to us; they had already started boarding the aircraft. One Agent ran down the jetbridge to stop boarding. We stated that all passengers needed to deplane so we could do our emergency equipment checks; etc. The passengers deplaned aircraft and the Agent stated that a bag was still on board. We asked that the bag be removed by the Agent before we board ourselves. She needed to find the owner of the bag. After the passengers reboarded and the bins closed; the agent was ready to close the aircraft door. The first Flight Attendant stated no because we had Maintenance on board. The Agent did not seem to be aware of this issue.


Second narrative: When the flight attendants and pilots arrived [at the gate] we noticed 3 agents boarding the aircraft. The Captain said 'is there something we dont know about?' The Agent continued to board the aircraft. We told her we were the crew. She said 'isn't the crew down there?' We said we did not know; we had just arrived. She ran down the jetbridge. I told an agent I was the first Flight Attendant; but she did not look at my ID. I went down the jetbridge to find out what was happening. I saw 10 people on the jetbridge with the Agent and I told her we would need time to check out equipement. When I got on the aircraft; there were 15 people on the aircraft with no personel on board. We told her everyone had to get off. When everyone deplaned; there was still a bag on board. We told her she had to take that too. Three agents boarded an airplane with no flight attendants on board. Then; she tried to close the door without talking to the flight attendants and pilots. He told her do not close the door; we had a mechanical [issue]. She apologized.


Synopsis: Two flight attendants report how agents began to board passengers before the flight crew had arrived. They were surprised to discover that neither pilots or flight attendants were on board.
Date: 202112
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZZ.ARTCC, FO
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: Regional Jet 200 ER/LR (CRJ200)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class B ZZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZZ
Aircraft component: Oil Pressure Indication
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Troubleshooting; Situational Awareness; Human-Machine Interface; Confusion; Workload; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Inflight Shutdown; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: About half way through our flight from ZZZ-ZZZ1 we received a low oil pressure warning message that was intermittent. Following the QRH we confirmed and brought the affected thrust lever back to idle and the message went away. The QRH at that point directed us to monitor and we continued. In our descent the message came back while at idle and did not go away. Following the QRH again; the oil pressure was indicating low oscillating between 23-39 PSI and the oil temperature was abnormally low in parameters with the QRH directing us to shut the left engine down. We advised ATC and preformed the engine shutdown. Everything through the rest of the descent and approach was done to SOP however; we did realize that being task saturated we did make the mistake of not running the landing checklist and forgetting to arm the operating engines thrust reverser. The landing was completed and we taxied off the Runway XXR. We asked Fire Rescue to come check the planes left engine to be safe then continued our taxi in.The event occurred due to low oil pressure. I believe the complexity was increased due to the message going away and coming back so many times. When the messaged remained on we followed the QRH and shut the engine down just prior to turning downwind. This caused us to run multiple checklists later than we normally would; further increasing task saturation and complexity which led to the thrust reversers being forgotten/checklist being missed.




Synopsis: CRJ-200 First Officer reported during an inflight shut down of an engine for low oil pressure indication; checklists were not followed; resulting in the thrust reversers not being armed for landing.
Date: 201909
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: APU
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: Aircraft Equipment Problem Dissipated; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: After APU start and transfer of power/air to APU; I noticed a mildewy and 'dirty sock' smell in the cockpit. It was intermittent for about 20 minutes and cleared up before we departed. At the time I did not realize it was anything other than dirty air smell. Approximately 9 days after the flight; I was reading the ALPA publication 'Positive Rate' and there was a link to articles referencing bleed air leaks and oil leaking into the bleed air system. I realized then that we had experienced this and how serious it is. Upon further research I see that this same airplane (Aircraft X) had been written up for the same issue on [date]. Cause: It sounds like the cause could possibly be oil leakage into the bleed/pack system. Suggestions: I suggest highlighting the cause of the dirty sock/mildew smell through communications to all fleets/pilots. Please stress how toxic of an event this can be and that it needs to be written up.


Second narrative: When the APU was started and the air was transferred to the packs from the APU; we noticed a dirty sock smell. The odor lasted for about 20 minutes and eventually cleared up prior to push back. Aircraft X has been written up before for same issue. After discussing with my Captain and reading a publication from ALPA; we concluded we may have had a possible fume event with the air system on this aircraft. Cause: Could be a possible oil leak from the APU into the Bleed Air System.


Synopsis: Airline flight crew reported 'dirty sock odor' during preflight after transferring packs to APU.
Date: 201604
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: MYNN.Airport, FO
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Light Transport
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Tower MYNN
Second aircraft: Beechcraft Twin Piston Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Ground Conflict; Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Airport; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: [We were] instructed to taxi to runway 14 and hold short at the end. Upon reaching the end we were next to depart. While holding short [a Beechcraft Twin Piston] was crossing the threshold of runway 14. MYNN tower told us 'behind landing Beechcraft line up and wait'. We began our taxi onto the runway and I told the Captain I have traffic on final about 4nm out and we may want to inquire. He looked and determined that our traffic was the one that was clearing the runway down field.We continued our taxi and the pilot on final questioned tower as why we were now taxiing into position. Tower said [callsign] you were told to line up and wait after the Beechcraft has landed. I replied the Beechcraft has landed and is clearing the runway. Tower said no not that one the [Beechcraft Twin Turboprop] that is on a 4nm final. Seconds later tower cleared us for immediate takeoff with a right to a heading of 290. Once airborne we heard nothing more about what had transpired. The rest of the flight was uneventful and went off without a hitch. We discussed what had happened. We could not believe tower gave us a clearance to taxi onto an active runway AFTER the plane on 4 mile final lands. And both planes are Beechcraft. The clearance to line up and wait was a retroactive clearance based on an event that had not happened yet. That was a first. I have never experienced anything like that.




Synopsis: An Air Taxi First Officer reported receiving an ambiguous ATC clearance which caused them to misidentify the landing aircraft; resulting in a runway incursion and ground conflict.