elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201510
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZMP.ARTCC, MN
Aircraft: Citation X (C750)
Operator: Fractional
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZMP
ATC / advisory: Center ZMP
Reporter organization: Fractional
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Fatigue; Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was the flying pilot. We were in contact with Minneapolis Center and were issued a frequency change to a different sector. SIC made the frequency change and the female controller responded with something like '[callsign] Roger'. She was busy and there was other normal ATC chatter on the frequency that neither of us paid much attention to. After a little while I realized that I thought the controller had called herself 'Toledo Approach'; or possibly another 'Approach'. So we called and she said go back to our last assigned frequency. The controller on the last assigned frequency checked and by then we were in Chicago Center airspace and he gave us the correct frequency. After we checked in with Chicago that controller gave us a phone number for Minneapolis Center to call after we landed.I didn't think that we were out of communication more than 10-12 minutes but when I called and spoke with the person at Minneapolis Center he said we were NORDO for about 260 miles; or probably twice as long as I had thought.The only thing I would say to help the situation is better monitoring of the frequency on our part. A contributing factor was the response of the controller when we checked in on the incorrect frequency. She acknowledged the call but never told us that we had an incorrect frequency.  She was probably just so busy that she acknowledged us but then forgot about us as she was dealing with other traffic.We had started the day [very early]. Originally; when it first happened; I didn't think fatigue was a factor; but looking back it could have been.


Second narrative: [Report Narrative Contained No Additional Information.]


Synopsis: CE-750 flight crew reported they were off ATC frequency for about 260 miles when they copied an incorrect frequency.
Date: 201207
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Beechjet 400
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Electrical Power
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Time Pressure; Training / Qualification; Workload
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Equipment Problem Dissipated; Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: While climbing out of FL387 after departure a very loud POP was heard and soon shortly after smoke was visible coming up from under the co-pilots seat on the bulk head side of the aircraft. An acrid smell was observed; climb of the aircraft was stopped and transmission to ATC was made in regards of getting lower and deviating to a nearby airport. Smoke was only visible for a few seconds and dissipated very quickly. An emergency descent was performed; fire extinguisher was removed from the holder in case it was needed. No adverse electrical conditions were observed and no circuit breakers were open. Normal approach and landing were made. Emergency was not declared.




Synopsis: A BE-400XP developed cockpit smoke originating from the First Officer's side wall so the climb was stopped and a descent to landing at a nearby airport completed. The smoke dissipated and no popped circuit breakers were found.
Date: 202012
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZZ.Airport, FO
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Weight And Balance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: While preparing the aircraft for departure from ZZZZ to ZZZ I made contact with our Dispatcher to address a minor deferred maintenance item. While I was on the phone I learned we were getting new paperwork due to the ZZZ1 ATC Center shutting down for sterilization. The Dispatcher was still working on the details due to severe weather to the east of ZZZ1 and indicated that it would be sent to me and the normal station location when it was finished.The Load Master came in wanting me to complete the weight and balance so he could leave. I notified him that we needed new flight release paperwork and told him it should be sitting on his printer and to look for revision 1 at the top of the front page.The Load Master came in again later and indicated that he wanted to do the weight and balance paperwork. I told him I wanted to wait till I had the new paperwork in hand and reviewed. Eventually the paperwork showed up and once we reviewed and did a few more items to finalize the preparation I turned around to notify the Load Master that I was ready for the cross check. The person said that they were not doing the cross check at that station due to COVID-19. I was surprised by his answer and said something like 'REALLY?' And he repeated his original statement. I told him I had not been notified of this situation and he said it was to reduce exposure on the flight deck.I gave him the paperwork that was completed but did not have the check marks related to the normal cross check process with the Load Master. In hindsight; I am skeptical about the answer I received and decided I should make this report to make sure that this situation is truly their process. If it turns out to be accurate we should possibly notify any crews that will be going into ZZZZ.This flight was already scheduled later than normal due to crew rest requirements and due to the delay in receiving the hard copy of the amended flight release it was running approximately 10 minutes later than the newly scheduled time. It was obvious that they were under pressure to get us moving and I was attempting to keep things standard and attempt to not introduce the opportunity to have errors.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported a weight and balance change was not cross-checked due to COVID-19 company guidelines as cited by the Load Master.
Date: 201402
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: SCT.TRACON, CA
Aircraft: S-70/UH-60 Blackhawk/Seahawk/Pavehawk/Knighthawk
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Final Approach
ATC / advisory: TRACON SCT
Second aircraft: B757 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Departure
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Other / Unknown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Environment - Non Weather Related; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: H60 apparently entered into the protected 'Remnant' airspace behind the B757. Traffic was exchanged and reported in sight and the H60 was told to maintain visual separation from the B757; but I guess I was supposed to say caution wake turbulence. The helicopter was within the 'Remnant' airspace which is supposedly defined as 2;500 FT laterally from the path of the B757. There is no way for a controller to tell where this 'Remnant' exists; therefore there is no way to ensure that another aircraft remains outside of this so-called 'Remnant'! Lesson learned; I'll just say 'caution wake turbulence' in every transmission! Or; give us a tool to let us know where this protected airspace exists.




Synopsis: Controller did not issue cautionary wake turbulence advisory to an H60 passing the wake of a B757 because the Controller had no way of determining 2;500 feet remnant airspace.
Date: 201302
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZZ.Airport, FO
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: ATR 72
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZZ
Aircraft component: Turbine Engine
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; Flight Crew Inflight Shutdown; Flight Crew Rejected Takeoff; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: During the takeoff the Captain proceeded to place the power levers to the power set notch. We observed normal indications on the engine instruments. As we continued the takeoff roll the Number 2 Engine torque began to rise above 90%. Reaching 95% the Captain pulled the Number 2 Engine power lever back below the power lever notch. With the Number 2 power lever below the notch I observed the Number 2 engine ITT reach 775 degrees and called for 'Aborted Takeoff'. The Captain decided to abort the takeoff. Once slowed to a normal taxi speed while still on the runway we got a momentary flash of low oil pressure on the CAP and low oil pressure light on the Number 2 Engine oil gauge. The Captain decided to shut the Number 2 Engine down. When the Captain brought the Number 2 condition lever to feather a scraping noise could be heard coming from the Number 2 Engine. On the post flight inspection I found that the Number 2 Engine propeller would not rotate. The Captain proceeded to call Maintenance Control and reported the discrepancy.


Second narrative: When we got cleared for takeoff; I proceeded to place the power levers to the power set notch. I observed normal indications on the engine instruments. As we continued on the takeoff roll the Number 2 Engine torque began to rise above 90% torque. Reaching 95% torque I reduced the Number 2 power lever below the power set notch. With the power lever below the power set notch I noticed the Number 2 Engine ITT was at 775 degrees Celsius. I decided to abort the takeoff. Once slowed to normal taxi speed while still on the runway I got a momentary flash of low oil pressure on the CAP and low oil pressure light on the Number 2 Engine oil gauge. I decided to shut the Number 2 Engine down. When I brought the Number 2 condition lever to feather a scraping noise could be heard coming from the Number 2 Engine. When I placed the Number 2 condition lever to fuel shut off I noticed the propeller came to a sudden stop. On the post flight inspection I found the Number 2 engine propeller would not rotate. I proceeded to call Maintenance Control and reported the discrepancy.


Synopsis: An ATR-72 Captain rejected the takeoff when he detected the number two engine beginning to over torque. During the reject they shut the engine down when the low oil pressure illuminated as the engine seized.
Date: 202002
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 30
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Cheetah; Tiger; Traveler AA5 Series
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: While flying in the traffic pattern practicing takeoffs and landings; a helicopter flew towards me while I was on final approach onto Runway XXR. I had been cleared touch-n-go by ZZZ Tower; the secondary tower frequency; and was approximately 400 ft. AGL on a 1 mile final.I was established on the center-line and stabilized; trying to keep the Skyhawk I was following in sight when in the corner of my eye off my left; I saw something moving low towards me which did not look like a small GA aircraft. I looked more carefully and saw a large turbine helicopter climbing and flying towards me.I immediately began a right hand turn to make sure I had adequate separation and focused my eyes on the helicopter.Once the helicopter passed off my left; I informed Tower 'That helicopter almost hit me!' Immediately after the Skyhawk behind me also informed Tower that they too had a near miss with the helicopter.Tower apologized to us for the incident; and informed us the helicopter was deviating from ATC instructions.I re-established myself in a stabilized approach and landed without incident.After parking the aircraft; I called the Tower to get their half of the story. The Shift Manager informed me they were still investigating and had no information to give me other than that the crew of the helicopter was not following instructions.I reviewed the ATC transmissions from LiveATC.net myself; and I did not find anything particularly odd leading up to the incident.In my opinion it is likely that the pilot of the helicopter is not accustomed to airports as busy as ZZZ; which typically hosts eight or more small aircraft in the traffic pattern at any given time. It is also likely the pilot of the helicopter mistakenly told ATC he wanted a 'North Departure' when he actually meant a departure direct downtown which is on a North-Westerly heading. Finally the pilot of the helicopter could have mistaken downtown as a visual reference to due north as the helicopter was instructed to fly due north by ATC leading up to the incident; and fallen victim to that illusion.Thankfully the pilots in the traffic pattern and myself were doing their due diligence while in the traffic pattern by looking for traffic; even though we were operating at a controlled airport.Special thanks to the controllers who responded quickly with an explanation and apology.




Synopsis: Pilot reported a near mid air collision with a helicopter while in the pattern for landing.
Date: 201911
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 145 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Elevator Trim System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; Flight Crew Returned To Gate; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Climbing through approximately 4;000 ft. after takeoff from Runway XXL in ZZZ; we got a PTRIM MAIN INOP warning message. I called out the warning and asked the Pilot Flying how the trim felt. We verified both main pitch trims did not work and then used the backup pitch trim to alleviate the pitch forces on the yoke. As soon as I verified the Pilot Flying was good flying the aircraft; I started to run the QRH. ZZZ departure gave us a further climb to which I responded that we were needing to work out an issue and asked to level off and get a vector as we were most likely going to return to ZZZ. They had us level off and then shortly after descend back to 8;000 ft. and told us to continue on our present heading. Following the QRH we never engaged the autopilot and hand flew the aircraft using the backup pitch trim. After contacting Dispatch we decided to return to ZZZ but needed to burn excess fuel down to below our max landing weight as we were approximately 2;000 lbs. over. Coordinated with Dispatch and ATC to burn the fuel and then came in to land in ZZZ uneventfully and taxied to the gate.PTRIM MAIN INOP warning message. After warning message popped up; Pilot Flying said trim seemed slow to respond right before failure.




Synopsis: ERJ Captain reported that a pitch trim failure during climb resulted in a return to the departure airport.
Date: 201203
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: MGM.TRACON, AL
Aircraft: Baron 58/58TC
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class E MGM
ATC / advisory: TRACON MGM
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach; Departure
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Developmental
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was fairly busy with aircraft doing several different approaches; as is common here. A BE58 was at 5;000 MSL and within 30 NM of TATME which put him in the Terminal Arrival Area (TAA) of the RNAV Runway 36 Approach at ALX. He had passed conflicting traffic; so I advised him; 'Proceed Direct TATME; Cleared RNAV Runway 36 Approach'. He stated; 'Roger; and I'm ready for lower when able'. I stated; 'Roger; you are cleared for the approach.' I then proceeded to deal with other aircraft that required sequencing to the primary airport and vectors to final at other airports. I noticed that the BE58 did not descend; but upon reaching TATME; he made a course reversal and descended in the holding pattern. No other aircraft conflicted with him in the turn; but that possibility certainly existed since he made an unexpected 180 degree turn. He called later on the phone to get his next IFR clearance and indicated that he did not understand that he could descend with an approach clearance in the TAA. Pilot training is necessary. RNAV approaches with TAA's have been around for years. I thought that this was an experienced pilot. But he indicated that he did not know how to fly this charted approach. I also frequently have pilots that specifically request inappropriate entries (in the straight-in area; but request to go to a T-Fix and make two 90 degree turns). If I had not been dealing with multiple other pilots; I might have had the opportunity to discuss with him on frequency why he wasn't descending; but this is something that he should know.




Synopsis: MGM Controller described a pilots confusion regarding an RNAV clearance; TAA Airspace and the associated restrictions on descents; the reporter noting that more pilot training is necessary to familiarize flight crews with these types of procedures.
Date: 202110
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Ramp
Human factors: Time Pressure; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Hazardous Material Violation; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Ground Personnel
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Expedited bag sent from ZZZ to ZZZ1. Received with battery attached.




Synopsis: Air Carrier Ground Personnel reported a smart bag arrived improperly configured for air transport.
Date: 201508
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: RCTP.Airport, FO
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Widebody; Low Wing; 3 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower RCTP
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Fatigue; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Rejected Takeoff
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Relief First Officer (RFO) was PF. Just set max power and was crosschecking speeds when Runway Awareness And Advisory System (RAAS) said; 'Taxiway; taxiway'. I took the airplane and stopped; exiting on first taxiway. We thought we were at 30 knots max (though RAAS info says alert activates at 40kts). I had missed the Flysafe NOTAM about disconnecting the RAAS for TO. No traffic disruption or GA of aircraft on final. Minimal brakes needed; no reverse or spoilers. A very low speed abort. No write up as brake temps were normal. Turned back for normal TO with RAAS off.Missed NOTAM discussing threshold for 23L was a taxiway and to defeat RAAS. Voice saying; 'taxiway' was startling even though I knew we were on the runway. Elected to stop. Happy with that decision. More sleep; less errors.




Synopsis: Air cargo Captain reported rejecting takeoff in RCTP when they received a Runway Awareness And Advisory System (RAAS) warning 'Taxiway'. Captain stated they missed NOTAM to disable the RAAS on that runway; fatigue was cited as a factor.