elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 202010
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: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Reporter qualification: Flight Attendant Current
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Other / Unknown; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Company Policy

Narrative: The sanitizer bottle is kept in the windscreen in front of the X jump seat. On the bottle itself it says; store in a cool dry well ventilated area. If spill or leaks occur ventilate area of leak or spill.  Why is this product left on the aircraft?  We don't have a well ventilated area. This cleaner is constantly leaking.  We are not following the directions on the bottle for safe storage or use.Find a new cleaner or do not store on the aircraft.




Synopsis: Flight Attendant reported concerns with storing a bottle of sanitizing agent aboard the aircraft.
Date: 201902
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turboprop Eng
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Taxi
Aircraft component: Nosewheel Steering
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Ground Event / Encounter Ground Strike - Aircraft; Ground Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Ground Excursion Taxiway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: After landing; contacted Ground and was given instructions. After taxiing for about 3000 feet I was getting ready to turn right into the FBO. The aircraft suddenly made a hard 90 degree left turn; exited the taxiway into the grass where the nose gear sheared off. The nose gear shearing off caused both props to strike the grass.  After talking with the A&P who maintains the aircraft; he described the operation of the connection of rudder pedals to the nose gear. His best guess; without examination; is that the hollow tube may have been corroded and when retracting gear on takeoff the tube may have partially failed. Turning on the taxiways may have caused complete failure.




Synopsis: Small transport pilot reported the aircraft made a sharp uncommanded turn off the taxiway; resulting in nose gear failure and prop strike.
Date: 201512
Location: PUJ.Airport, GA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 15
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: PA-44 Seminole/Turbo Seminole
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class E ZTL
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I was taking my instrument check ride with a Designated Pilot Examiner (DPE) and was flying the RNAV (GPS) Runway 31 approach for Paulding Northwest Atlanta (PUJ). I was wearing Foggles and the DPE was acting as my safety pilot. After flying the approach I began to execute the missed approach; as planned; flying direct to YOBUY and climbing to 3;000 to hold. Midway to YOBUY the DPE said 'I have the controls'; to which I responded 'you have the controls' and let him take the controls of the plane. I did not know what was going on; as I had Foggles on; however; after he had taken us out of the area he explained that there were jumpers in the area and we had narrowly missed them. The RNAV GPS Runway 31 missed approach falls directly over the Polk Co Moore 4A4 airport where there is a jump site. We were not on an IFR flight plan nor were we using flight following; which could have helped with situational awareness of the activities going on in the area; however; it is also a horrible place for a missed approach point for those who are not familiar with the area.




Synopsis: PA-44 pilot reported encroaching on a jump site that conflicted with a practice missed approach.
Date: 201303
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: A330
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Pressurization System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew; Person Flight Attendant
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: While in a smooth ride at cruise; FL380; we all heard a muffled sound followed by pressure change in the ears. We looked at cabin pressure and saw that cabin altitude was starting to climb; slowly at first (250-500 FPM) and increasing to near 2;000 FPM. I called Center; declared an emergency and asked for an immediate descent to 10;000 FT. Center acknowledged the emergency and cleared us to a lower altitude. We initiated an emergency descent; followed the ECAM procedure and followed that up with the QRH. When we leveled at 10;000 feet we noticed that the cabin altitude had peaked at about 14;150 feet but had partially re-pressurized to about a 7;000 foot cabin altitude. The Second Officer advised the passengers they could take off the O2 masks and explained what had happened. We could see no evidence of aircraft damage or system problems on ECAM; only that the Number 2 engine HP bleed was open and Number 1 engine HP bleed was closed. We conferred with the Dispatcher and Maintenance Control on the SAT phone and determined; with their concurrence; we would continue to destination as; at that time; we were about 85 NM from landing. ATC gave us priority handling and we landed uneventfully. The flight attendants did an excellent job and got several compliments from the passengers.We made appropriate logbook write-ups--including that not all of the masks in the cabin dropped; even though we had pushed the manual O2 mask pushbutton. We split the duties among the 3 cockpit crew members; and felt we were very well trained to do this procedure.You will have to ask Maintenance what the cause of this incident was. They thought it might have been a ruptured duct or bleed issue. We did check the outflow valves and they were closed. Maintenance had checked the exterior of the aircraft before we opened any doors and found no apparent damage.




Synopsis: An A330 flight crew heard a muffled sound; felt a pressure change and noted the cabin altitude begin to climb rapidly. They declared an emergency; descended to a safe altitude where stable pressurization was regained and continued the short remaining distance to their destination.
Date: 201308
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: SFO.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B767-200
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class B SFO
ATC / advisory: Tower SFO
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Other / Unknown
Detector: Automation Aircraft RA; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Airport; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Captain was pilot flying. We had been cleared on the FMS Bridge visual approach to Runway 28R. ATC informed us that an RJ aircraft was on visual approach to 28L with our aircraft in sight and would follow us in. We initially saw him abeam of us before he turned onto final.  Approaching SAMUL I observed the RJ close to us but above and behind. Just prior to Samul ATC advised be that the aircraft we were following to 28R had slowed to 110 KTS and advised us to slow to slowest practical speed. VREF for Flaps 25 was 131. At 180 KTS flaps 15 I called for Gear Down Flaps 20 and began to slow to approach speed. Wind was reported at 17 KTS. I called for flaps 25 when the gear was down and slowed to 137. Inside Samul approaching F101D approximately 1;300 FT AGL we received a TCAS RA alert to climb. The VSI arc showed red from about 10 o'clock to 6 o'clock on the dial with no green guidance. Knowing that the RJ at last view was just above me and to my left I chose not to follow the RA climb command since any climb would place me in the RJ's flight path. I decided to accelerate the aircraft to 150 knots to gain lateral separation from the RJ since I could not see him. I turned the TCAS to TA and continued the VMC approach to a stabilized approach and landing. After landing and shutdown I called SFO Tower Supervisor to advise him of the RA alert and that I thought the RJ had not provided enough visual separation as they had been instructed to do. SFO ATC continually pushes the limits on separation when visual approaches are in use. SFO ATC relies on flight crews to provide aggressive separation distances to make their arrival rates work.  It's almost akin to formation flying doing visual approaches to SFO.




Synopsis: B767 Captain on visual approach to Runway 28R reports a TCAS RA caused by the aircraft on the visual to Runway 28L. The reporter speeds up and continues the approach to landing.
Date: 202002
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: JFK.Airport, NY
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Dawn
Aircraft: A321
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Aircraft component: Pax Seat
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Dispatcher
Reporter qualification: Dispatch Dispatcher
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Security
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: While enroute the crew reported that row 11 seats definitely were too loose to allow anyone to sit in for landing. There was only 1 seat on the aircraft that was not occupied. In order to ensure that all occupants were safely strapped in for landing; it was decided to allow 2 Flight Attendants to occupy the 2 cockpit jumpseats while still having the required 4 Flight Attendants in the cabin. Then they moved 2 non revenue employees to sit in the flight attendant jumpseats. With the help of the Chief Pilot and the Flight Department it was decided that this was the best way to ensure the safety of our employees and customers. In addition; the Flight Department suggested that the Captain advise ATC. It was also suggested that the Captain ask the Cabin Crew to secure the loose seats as best they could in the interest of safety.Include dispatch procedures for allowing flight attendants in cockpit when forced by an emergency situation.




Synopsis: Dispatcher reported a seat row was loose and unusable; requiring two Flight Attendants to occupy the flight deck jump seats on landing.
Date: 201704
Aircraft: B737 Next Generation Undifferentiated
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Headset
Component problem: Design; Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Distraction
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Equipment / Tooling
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: See the original report for a detailed description of an incompatibility between the David Clark DC Pro-X headset and a small number of 737s. The original report was closed when maintenance responded with: '[Maintenance check] will be written to check wiring on AC XXX. Next steps will be determined based on the findings of the inspection of AC XXX.' I'm curious whether anything was found with the wiring. I also wanted to let you know that I found another airplane yesterday with the same problem. I've now identified four B737s.The headset will transmit on the flight interphone but will not transmit on any of the radios without loud squealing feedback. When the microphone plug is installed in the jack; the receive audio quality is very poor on the radios and the interphone. Pulling the microphone plug halfway out does not solve the problem. The headset works normally when plugged in on the FO side. I made an info-only log write-up on this plane. I also saw one other item in history reporting the same problem but without any explanatory details.




Synopsis: B737NG Captain reported the David Clark DC Pro-X headset installed in several aircraft will not transmit on any Captain side radio without squeal feedback.
Date: 201307
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Dash 8 Series Undifferentiated or Other Model
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)
Anomaly: Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: Other Post Flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: The passenger hit his head when leaving the aircraft on the aircraft doorway.




Synopsis: Dash 8 Flight Attendant reported a passenger hit his head when leaving through the aircraft doorway.
Date: 201712
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZLC.ARTCC, UT
Aircraft: Cessna Citation Mustang (C510)
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class D PIH
ATC / advisory: Center ZLC
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Workload
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Staffing; ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: A Cessna 510 was descending for PIH. I issued him 10000 feet and failed to notice that there was another 11000 feet area on his route. I was busy with multiple other traffic situations and DIJ departure/arrivals and didn't see that the C510 was in the 11000 feet area until he was already several miles inside it. The Terrain Alert Volume alert was not triggered that I saw. At that time; I issued the C510 the airport position; and he reported the field in sight; and was cleared for the visual. [I] recommend having a D-side; double check route before issuing descent clearance.




Synopsis: ZLC certified professional controller reported issuing descent; which put aircraft into a subsequent higher MVA.
Date: 201907
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: SAT.Airport, TX
Aircraft: No Aircraft
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Technician
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Airframe; Maintenance Powerplant
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Hazardous Material Violation; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Maintenance
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I shipped out a used part not realizing it was Hazmat. I did this because the Mechanic had placed the part to be shipped on my desk in a used box and I just shipped it out not doing a HAZMAT Rap on it. I also believe I made this mistake due to all the other duties that I was performing at the time and did not pay attention to this specific part when prepping it to be shipped.




Synopsis: Commercial Airline Mechanic reported shipping aircraft parts package without completing Hazmat shipping procedures for Company Materials.
Date: 201912
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: FLL.Airport, FL
Light: Night
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground FLL
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Confusion
Anomaly: No Specific Anomaly Occurred All Types
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Airport
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: I have mentioned this issue before via safety report; and even after the completion of the construction on FLL Runway 10L/28R; the problem has still not been addressed or fixed. FLL Taxiway Tango and Taxiway Bravo lack proper signage for the crossing Taxiway T1. Whether traveling east or west on Taxiway Tango or Taxiway Bravo; there is inadequate signage for the crossing Taxiway T1. If you taxi an aircraft or vehicle on either Taxiway Tango or Taxiway Bravo; there are no signs along the path that are positioned to identify Taxiway T1. All the rest of the crossing Taxiways (T2; T3; T4; etc.) have proper signage; but not Taxiway T1. I am not sure how it has escaped the attention of the FAA all these years. Hopefully; it does not fall in the category of 'It's always been this way; and that everyone; of course; knows through experience; that the unmarked taxiway is T1.' There is a T1 sign as the jet is facing south; but not if the jet is facing east or west. Before the new Terminal (Gates A3; A4; A5; A6; etc.) was built; aircraft did not travel east/west on Taxiway Tango or Taxiway Bravo east of T1; so there may have been no need for the T1 signage. However; now aircraft do travel east and west on Taxiway Tango and Taxiway Bravo in the vicinity of crossing Taxiway T1. Bottom line; it would be nice to have appropriate signage for Taxiway T1 visible while taxiing east or west on Taxiway Tango or Taxiway Bravo in the vicinity of Taxiway T1. The risk of not having the proper signage is possible Pilot errors in following the assigned taxi instructions or hold short instructions from ATC. Thank you for considering this modification to the signage in FLL.




Synopsis: Air Carrier Captain reported that a lack of proper taxiway signage at FLL airport resulted in confusion.
Date: 201902
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: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb; Initial Climb
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant In Charge
Anomaly: Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Right after takeoff there was a burning smell throughout aircraft. Passengers and FAs (Flight Attendants) could smell it. I had gotten out of [the] jumpseat prior to 10;000 along with the other FAs. Call lights were going off. Pilots called and said to let them know if odor does not go away in 5 minutes. The odor did go away. Check out the aircraft.




Synopsis: Flight Attendant reported burning smell throughout the aircraft. Notified flight crew.
Date: 202108
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Haze / Smoke
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Cardinal 177/177RG
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class G ZZZ
ATC / advisory: CTAF ZZZ
Aircraft component: Nosewheel Steering
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Human-Machine Interface; Workload
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Ground Event / Encounter Object; Ground Excursion Runway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Other Landing Roll Out
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: During landing; overcorrected on the steering left; and went off the runway to the left; and R/H stabilator tip hit a runway light.




Synopsis: Pilot reported a runway excursion due to over correction of steering on landing rollout.