elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201301
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: B737-700
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Turbine Engine
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: First Officer
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Ground Personnel
When detected: Taxi
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Approaching the gate; Marshaller stopped us 2 to 3 feet short and reported flames coming from Number 1 engine. Although; there were no cockpit indications of a fire; we accomplished the Engine Fire Checklist per QRH and were then towed to gate.


Second narrative: Arriving at gate the Marshaller pointed at the aircraft and was behaving in a very excited manner. By this time; the Marshaller was out of my sight. The Captain opened his window and we were told we have a number one engine fire. Memory action items and QRH were completed as well as CFR were notified. Maintenance told the pilots they heard an 'odd' noise from the engine and came out of the break room to take a look. During flight; the crew noticed no abnormal operation of the engine. The flight crew never received any fire warning indications in the cockpit and one fire bottle was discharged.


Synopsis: B737 flight crew is informed during taxi in to the gate that the left engine is on fire. The engine is shut down per QRH procedures with one fire bottle fired but no fire indications.
Date: 201212
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: B757-200
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Cargo Pit Compartment
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Technician
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Airframe; Maintenance Powerplant
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Maintenance
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Chart Or Publication; Aircraft; Human Factors; Manuals
Primary problem: Manuals

Narrative: Reference MM 26-16-02-directs Mechanic to 'put the spacers below the blower mounting pads'. Reference Illustrated Parts Catalog (IPC) 26-16-01 Items Number 35 (Spacer) and Number 40 (Gasket). IPC Item Number 35 must be installed in a specific manner; as flipping it will restrict airflow; possibly causing the blower to fail prematurely. Item Number 35 in the IPC is a spacer with a cutout in it to allow airflow through the spacer; but this is not specified in the MM or IPC installation instructions. [Recommend] providing clarification and clear graphic showing exactly how the Item Number 35 should be oriented under the blower; as currently there is no clear direction and incorrect installation is quite possible and easy to do; as the location is not easy to remove/replace (r/r) the [vacuum] blower; with limited access.[During] ETOPS pre-departure check.




Synopsis: A Line Mechanic reports about the lack of specific orientation of spacers and gasket for cargo pit Smoke Detector Assembly vacuum blowers in their B757-200 Aircraft Maintenance Manual (AMM) and Illustrated Parts Catalog (IPC). Incorrect installation will restrict airflow and possible premature blower failure.
Date: 201307
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: B757 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: After completing my walkaround; I entered [the] jetbridge to our aircraft and prepared to reboard the aircraft. At this time; I noticed a safety issue with the loading bridge. There was a huge gap on the left side of the jetbridge where the jetbridge was 'notched out' and did not contact the side of the plane. Approximately a 16'x32' section of the transitional 'lip' on the left side of the jetbridge was missing; which provides the transition from the jetbridge to the plane. Additionally; the jetbridge canopy on the bottom left side was not in contact with the side of the aircraft to provide an effective barrier. The resultant gap was large enough that a teenager or small child could easily fall through to the tarmac below. Additionally; because the inside of the jetway was dark and the outside sun so bright; the 'hole' was brightly illuminated and could easily attract someone's attention. At the time; passenger boarding had not yet occurred; and the Captain was still in Flight Operations. As I had further preflight duties to complete inside the aircraft and could not remain in the jetbridge; I asked a nearby man whether or not he was a Supervisor (he was not wearing any identification). I voiced my concern regarding the jetbridge to which he replied; 'It's never been an issue before.' I replied that made no difference whatsoever; it was what it was; and in my mind; it represented a safety hazard to the passengers. I remarked the Captain should have a look at it to render his decision and until the Captain arrived; would he please not board any customers.




Synopsis: B757 First Officer reported noticing an unsafe condition on the jetway/aircraft interface; a gap large enough to allow a child to fall to the tarmac.
Date: 201502
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: EWR.Airport, NJ
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class B PHL
ATC / advisory: TRACON PHL
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Passenger Misconduct; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Passenger Electronic Device
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Over the course of the entire flight; we experienced frequent and multiple ACARS interruptions with 'ACARS NO COMM' messages.  In most cases; reselecting the ACARS comm frequency did not help - we also had to cycle COMM3 from DATA to voice and back to DATA.  On the PHLBO3 STAR into EWR; in VNAV PATH with A/P A engaged; the path was maintained; but the programmed speeds were not (the forecast descent winds were generally accurate).  Approaching 10;000; I switched to LEVEL CHANGE in order to slow to 250 knots as the A/P was attempting to descend at 271 knots.It's possible that both were caused by interference; so I requested a PA to insure that all cell phones were switched off or in the airplane mode.  After this announcement; there were no further issues.




Synopsis: B737 Captain reported possible interference from cell phones in the cabin that could account for the electronic anomalies they were experiencing during the flight.
Date: 201304
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 6
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Landing
ATC / advisory: CTAF ZZZ
Aircraft component: Nacelle/Pylon Firewall
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Trainee; Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Student
Human factors: Other / Unknown; Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Hard landing resulted in 3 bounces (porpoise)... speed was a little high; probably due to absence of any wind. After second bounce appropriate action would have been to go around. In [the] future a go-around should be made for any deviation from normal. Visual examination after taxi back to ramp area did not indicate any damage. Damage was discovered by Maintenance. Firewall damage. Flight was the fourth by a student pilot; solo.




Synopsis: C172 student pilot experiences a bounced landing resulting in damage to the firewall; discovered by Maintenance after the flight.
Date: 201705
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Night
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Dispatcher
Reporter qualification: Dispatch Dispatcher
Human factors: Time Pressure; Workload
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Dispatch
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Staffing; Weather
Primary problem: Staffing

Narrative: Upon arrival of my shift; there had been no additional desk opened. I have signed up for text notifications. There was no text sent regarding the opening of an additional desk. These texts go out when the overtime list has been exhausted. This indicates that there was no attempt made to cover/provide an additional [shift] desk. [I had] 48 releases; 16 airports dispatched to; 24 airports dispatched from; does not include alternates.  I sent the workload help message [early in the shift]. Poor staffing. Known workload increase on [some] shifts still not addressed. Issue has been brought to management's attention multiple times.




Synopsis: Air carrier Dispatcher reported that lack of staffing increased workload to an unacceptable level. Management has been advised many times with no resolution.
Date: 201904
Aircraft: No Aircraft
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Chart Or Publication; Human Factors
Primary problem: Chart Or Publication

Narrative: Survey regarding the Charts+ program: I picked two airports at random to fly to and from;  FLG to DRO.  The low route is FLG V291 INW V95 RSK V95DRO and the high route is J10 from FLG VOR to RSK VOR.  I compared Charts+ with Jeppesen.  On the High En route chart; the Charts+ shows an MEA [Minimum En-route Altitude] at F180 but it is missing the Maximum Authorized Altitude (MAA) of FL400.  Not all the J routes have an MEA listed either.  At J44 _ J110 from RSK VOR to ALS VOR there are no MEA listed at all.  On the Low En route charts the MEA is sometimes missing as well.  From FLG to INW on the V291 the MEA is 10;100.  But it is not consistently labeled on that segment on Charts+.  From INW to RSK on V95 Charts+ shows two different MEAs.  One MEA is at 11;000 to CASTI and 13;000 after.  Jeppesen shows 3 different MEAs.  INW to CASTI MEA 8;700 is Southbound and 11;000 is Northbound.  Jeppesen also shows an MRA [Minimum Reception Altitude] 9;600 at BUTTE.  There is no mention of this MRA in Charts+.  From CASTI to DERMA Jeppesen has an MEA of 13;000 and a MOCA of 11;400; but the Charts+ does not show the MOCA of 11;400.  Jeppesen has DERME to RSK MEA of 13;000 Southbound and 8;300 Northbound.  Charts+ has nothing listed for any MEA between DERME and RSK.  The leg between RSK and DRO has no MEA listed at all on Charts+.The Jeppesen GRID MORA over RSK shows 11;800 and Charts+ has 11;400.  Why is there a 400 foot difference?  Just to the East of RSK; Jeppesen has 11;500 and Charts+ has 10;400.  Why is there an  1;100 foot deference? For basic IFR flying; a pilot needs to have MEA; MRA; MOCA [Minimum Obstruction Clearance Altitude]; and MAA [Maximum Authorized Altitude] for the route of the flight.  I feel that it would be unsafe to fly with Charts+ with so much of the basic information missing.Charts+ is not ready to go live.  There is missing information that could cause a violation or an unsafe flight.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported discrepancies relating to charting issues.
Date: 201605
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: P31.TRACON, FL
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 1 Eng; Retractable Gear
Operator: Military
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class E ZJX
ATC / advisory: CTAF NBJ
Aircraft component: Aero Charts
Component problem: Design
Reporter organization: Military
Reporter function: Instructor; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Situational Awareness; Workload
Anomaly: Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Automation Aircraft TA; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Chart Or Publication; Procedure
Primary problem: Chart Or Publication

Narrative: NBJ and NFD are two training fields used heavily by joint service military primary flight training based in NAS Pensacola and NAS Whiting field. On an almost daily basis; GA aircraft transiting the area enroute to PNS; JKA; CQF and 5R4 fly directly over these military fields below 1500' AGL and directly through the patterns with several active aircraft. Most GA pilots would never do this over a civilian field; but for some reason have no qualms about doing it over these fields; even though they are on the VFR charts. They are both under low Class E airspace; yet GA pilots are not using See and Avoid or they would not be flying through a pattern occupied by multiple aircraft. Maybe since they don't see an associated VHF CTAF to call for position reports or just plain ignorance; GA pilots seem to think these fields are inactive. In fact they are heavily used on a daily basis and several near mid-airs occur in any given week. Something as simple as adding a note on the chart with the pattern altitudes; a distance to avoid around these fields; or to contact PNS ATC for traffic reports on these fields may alleviate some of the problem. If not; something unfortunate will happen.




Synopsis: A military instructor pilot reported NPA and NDZ outlying training airports NBJ and NFD are subject to daily VFR civilian traffic over flights below 1;500 feet without CTAF traffic calls. Both airports are heavily utilized and traffic conflicts occur daily. Better VFR charting notices may help.
Date: 202109
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B777 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Cabin Furnishing
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Reporter qualification: Flight Attendant Current
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Procedure; Aircraft; Company Policy
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Seat belt signs were inoperative in J class. Flight Attendant's Rest area air supply warning light was illuminated. FA panel also inop; concerns that evacuation command buttons also inop.Operation should have a safety first approach rather than an on time performance approach.




Synopsis: Flight Attendant reported concerns over inoperative seat belt signs; crew rest area air supply; and inoperative flight attendant's control panel.
Date: 201211
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Pitts S-1 All Series
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Landing
ATC / advisory: CTAF ZZZ
Aircraft component: Brake System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Flight Engineer; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Ground Excursion Runway; Inflight Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Other Landing Roll
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: During landing rollout the aircraft pulled hard to the right. It appeared to have the right brake locked up. Efforts to arrest the right turn with left rudder inputs proved ineffective. It veered off the runway to the right side at about 20 to 30 mph. After traveling through the grass for about 50 to 70 feet the left main gear collapsed. The aircraft came to rest on the right main gear; the tailwheel and the left lower wing tip. There appears to be no damage other than to the left main gear. A tire skid mark from near the runway centerline to the runway edge follows the path the right main gear traveled. No tire marks were observed on the runway which would have matched the path of the left main gear.




Synopsis: A Pitts Special pilot was unable to prevent a runway excursion when the right brake apparently locked up on the landing roll. The left main gear collapsed when the aircraft came to a halt off the runway.
Date: 201507
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: JFK.Airport, NY
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: 1
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Bonanza 33
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class B JFK
ATC / advisory: Center ZNY
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Airspace Violation All Types
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Procedure; Human Factors; Airspace Structure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: I filled an IFR flight plan in Worcester for a flight to North Carolina. Prior to filling my flight plan I consulted with FSS for 45 minutes. I was advised to file an IFR flight plan not only because of the weather but also because of the NOTAM regarding the restricted airspace over the NY TCA [VIPTFR]. As I was approaching the NY TCA I could hear the controller talking to other aircraft but not responding to my calls. I continued to fly on my flight plan waiting to be contacted by NY. Finally after 20 minutes I became worried so I contacted Washington Center to request a frequency. I was then informed that I had penetrated the restricted airspace in NY. I was given a phone number to call when I landed. In the meantime the secret service contacted the airport and told them that I was to wait until an agent arrived to interview me regarding this incident. While I was waiting I contacted the phone number given to me. I spoke to NY Control and a secret service agent. At the airport agent interviewed me. I relied the same information as that contained in this report. I am very concerned because the NY ATC lost me in their system and were not monitoring me. This was not an intentional act on my part. I relied on the system. I was on an IFR flight plan. I was aware of the TFR followed the IFR flight plan as directed.




Synopsis: BE33 pilot on an IFR flight plan reports losing radio contact approaching New York airspace. He had been made aware of a VIP TFR over New York prior to departure and had expected ATC to keep him clear of the TFR. Once communication is established with ZDC he is asked to copy a phone number and is interviewed upon landing at his destination.
Date: 201408
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 145 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Air Conditioning and Pressurization Pack
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Attendant; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Passing 18;000 FT during climb; we noticed a 'thud' and our ears popped. We immediately directed our attention to the pressurization; and all looked normal. Within a minute; the Flight Attendant called and asked what the noise was and that there was a sound of rushing air in the cabin. We then noticed a strong burning odor and decided to divert to ZZZ which was 15 minutes away. The odor lasted for about 2-3 minutes. There was a slight amount of smoke that could momentarily be seen coming out of the side vents; but it didn't last more than 30 seconds. We ran the QRH; notified dispatch; and landed without incident. On the descent; we recognized that the cockpit had gotten warm; leading us to believe there was an issue with PACK 1 (as PACK 2 had been MEL'd at the gate prior to pushback).




Synopsis: Passing FL180 during climb; an EMB-145 Captain noticed a thud and ears started popping. Pressurization appears normal; but smoke and a burning smell are detected in the cockpit and cabin. Crew elects to divert to a suitable airport.