elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201212
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Aircraft: B737-500
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Pressurization System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer
Second reporter function: Captain
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Inflight Event / Encounter Fuel Issue
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; General Declared Emergency; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Climbing through approximately 32;000 FT; the Cabin Altitude Warning horn sounded. The cabin altitude was approximately 10;000 FT and climbing. We first complied with the memory items. After putting on our oxygen masks and establishing communications; we asked for and received clearance to descend to 14;000 FT and then 10;000 FT. We then reviewed the QRH and completed the Cabin Altitude Warning Horn/Abnormal Pressurization Checklist and Emergency Descent Checklist.While descending; we completed the items on the checklists and saw that the pressurization was controllable and the cabin altitude had stabilized below 10;000 FT. We elected to continue our descent since we didn't know what had caused the cabin altitude to exceed 10;000 FT. There had been no abnormal indications or warning lights. We contacted Dispatch; discussed our fuel and status; and agreed to divert to a nearby airport and landed there safely.


Second narrative: [No substantive additional information was included in the secondary narrative.]


Synopsis: When they received a cabin altitude warning climbing through FL320 the flight crew of a B737-500 declared an emergency; descended to a safe altitude and diverted to a nearby airport.
Date: 201311
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Sierra 24
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Nose Gear
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: The plane I usually fly; a Cessna 172SP was in maintenance and I wished to fly. I reserved a Beech Sierra B-24 with a flight instructor to fly with me. I had flown this plane about a year ago and made 5 landings without incident. I was cleared to takeoff on Runway 12 and joined the pattern for Runway 9 right to make touch and go landings. I made two landings without incident. On the third landing the nose gear collapsed and the plane skidded to a stop. The nose gear assembly had sheared off and was lying on about the center line of Runway 9R about 100 yards behind where the plane stopped. There were no injuries to me or the instructor.




Synopsis: A Beech Sierra B-24 pilot reported that on the third landing with an instructor during re-qualification training; the nose gear collapsed and separated from the aircraft on runway centerline.
Date: 201701
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: AUS.Airport, TX
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
Second aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Single Pilot; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Ground Event / Encounter Ground Strike - Aircraft
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: The wind was reported 24 gusting to 31. The decision was made to fly due to the winds being down the runway. Taxi and position and hold caution jet blast instructions were accepted to runway 17R. The pilot may have taxied too close to the departing jet; receiving the jet blast. During taxi onto runway 17R the airplane became airborne approximately 5ft and started to turn to the right striking the right wing on the ground; then nosed over causing the prop to strike on the runway. There were no injuries. Tower was immediately notified and sent assistance. Pilot information was given to the tower. Corrective actions that could have taken place was to choose to fly on a non-windy day and give more way to departing large jets.




Synopsis: C172 pilot reported his aircraft became airborne when it entered an area of jet blast; rose about five feet in the air; then nosed over and incurred a prop strike.
Date: 201204
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Night
Aircraft: MD-11
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Oxygen System/Crew
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: First Officer got up to go to the restroom. I tried to don my oxygen mask; but when I tried to remove it the entire compartment that houses the mask came out in one piece; rendering the mask unusable because I could not remove it from the compartment. This occurred just prior to top of descent. Needless to say an event that would have required the use of oxygen would have been a problem. I would have had to use the mask in the observer seat behind me. Prior to departure a review of the maintenance history in the logbook showed that the Captain's oxygen compartment was replaced. My preflight inspection of the oxygen system does not include inspection of the compartment. Maintenance did not secure the compartment screws to insure the installation was complete. The compartment was placed in the slot but not screwed in. This can be prevented in the future by maintenance insuring that the compartment is properly secured. Next time I see a history of maintenance on my oxygen compartment I will check that it is screwed in completely.




Synopsis: MD11 Captain reports the entire oxygen compartment coming out of the side console when use is attempted in cruise. The retaining screws had not been installed after Maintenance had replaced the unit.
Date: 202004
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 170/175 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Aircraft component: Turbine Engine
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown; Time Pressure
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: After being cleared for takeoff on Runway XXL; I began to push the thrust levers forward; noted the (left) engine N1 stabilized at 40 percent; then continued to advance the thrust levers to take-off thrust. As the engine spooled up; the aircraft began to yaw and I immediately reduced the thrust to idle; realizing we had not started the second engine. During the pre-departure briefing; I had indicated that we would taxi on two engines since it would be a short taxi from our gate to the runway. Later; after we had pushed back from the gate and started the first engine; I failed to direct the First Officer to start the second engine before we began to taxi. I believe this first error occurred because I was preoccupied; considering when I would call for certain checklists (the runway/performance change checklist and the before takeoff checklist); since the taxi would be so short. When I called for the before takeoff checklist; I recall checking the takeoff parameters above the engine indications; but failed to see that the second engine was not running. I always re-scan particular items when ATC clears us for takeoff or to 'line up and wait'; one of these being the engine indications; to ensure that both are running as we cross the runway hold-short lines. Another item I scan at this time is the FMA (Flight Mode Annunciator); to ensure that I have pressed the TOGA button and the appropriate modes are displayed. In this case; I saw that the FMA was not populated; so I pressed the TOGA button to correct the problem. I believe this distracted me from re-scanning the engine indications as I was mentally reprimanding myself for forgetting to populate the FMA. It is very odd that I did; in fact; watch the left engine spool up without noticing that the right engine was not running. I had never realized that I have been fixating on the left engine during takeoff.The main causes are short taxi time; preoccupation with upcoming tasks; and failure to redirect my attention back to planned tasks after being distracted. The main things I need to do are to become more deliberate in ensuring tasks are completed and making certain I return my attention to the tasks at hand when I am distracted.




Synopsis: EMB-175 Captain reported failing to complete the checklists prior to beginning takeoff with one engine still not started.
Date: 201708
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: SNA.Tower, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: A320
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class C SNA
ATC / advisory: Tower SNA
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Local
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings
Primary problem: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings

Narrative: Our ASR-9 radar is out of service with some sort of temporary fix in place. The radar data tags continue to drop off completely then reappear. They also float off in directions that are not consistent with real time. The aircraft in the pattern are mostly NOT there; but sometimes pop back on the scope. I had [an air carrier] on final; and did not call traffic for the parallel runway because there was not a target to show he was there. I did not see him out the window either because he blended in with the clouds. When I finally did see him; I called the traffic; but it was a late call. [The air carrier] understandably complained that that was a lot closer than he would have liked. I complained to my supervisor about the radar again. They have a memo to everyone saying to use our best judgement; but in my opinion; that would be to go to non-radar procedures. How can we continue to call ourselves a Class Charlie airspace; when we are using unreliable equipment to do our job? I can't single-handedly go to non-radar procedures just when I'm working! We need specific guidance; NOT use our best judgement. We need to let the flying public know that they are NOT getting actual Class Charlie service all the time. It's intermittent at best. We need to go to non-radar procedures; or they need to find a much better temporary fix. We have been dealing with this for almost 2 weeks now; and it's unsafe.




Synopsis: SNA Tower Controller reported being unable to provide required Class C airspace services due to a radar outage.
Date: 201506
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: SFO.Tower, CA
Weather elements / visibility: Haze / Smoke; Cloudy
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: No Aircraft
Operator: Air Carrier
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Tower SFO
Second aircraft: Light Transport
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Ground
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Confusion; Communication Breakdown
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
When detected: Taxi
Result: Air Traffic Control Separated Traffic
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I had just taken the position GC1/2 combined. A tug was holding short of Runway 28 Right (10L approach) west end. I offered to Local/Local Assist when would be a good time to go around the west end. They said after Aircraft Z number two for departure Runway 28 Right. I acknowledged. Then as the number one aircraft was rolling the Local Controller held up the strip and said go after this one; I was assuming rightly that it was the aircraft rolling and Aircraft Z couldn't get out in front of the next arrival. I waited for the aircraft to get airborne and cleared the tug to continue via Z; B1-A. I continued to scan/work traffic and noticed that Local Control had another aircraft departing. Due to the low clouds and haze it was not easy to see the second departure Aircraft Y until they were approaching rotation.  At this time; the tug was off the departure on the end around taxiway.Retrain the Local Controller as they are very casual at their job; and do not follow the book/LOA/SOP's in any way shape or forum when it comes to these types of coordination.




Synopsis: SFO describes a crossing situation where the communications between Ground and Local became confusing.  Local held up a strip and said after this one you can cross a tug.  Ground thought it was the aircraft departing and crossed the tug.  Local had another aircraft in the lineup they were talking about which had been cleared for takeoff; but luckily did not depart until the tug had crossed the runway.
Date: 201201
Aircraft: B777-200
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Aircraft component: AC Generator/Alternator
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Reporter qualification: Flight Attendant Current
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown; Confusion
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Aircraft
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: After waiting an hour for the pilots to decide if the dangerous goods cargo was good to be transported we pushed back and took off.About 40 minutes into the flight we lost generator power. I immediately called the flight crew to inform them that all the power in the galley went out and the overhead lights flickered in the entire cabin. They informed me that they had a problem with a generator and were about to diagnose the problem. The same problem repeated a few more times as we lost galley power and lights in the cabin. Later the cockpit informed the Purser that it was safe to continue the trip. I was concerned that we were over land and that I did not feel comfortable flying across the Atlantic with one broken generator. Another Flight Attendant called the cockpit to ask them how safe it was to continue. The cockpit was evasive and never said whether it was safe or not. It led us to think that continuing to fly over the Atlantic and gambling with our lives on this issue was not being cautious enough; especially since we were still over land at the time of the generator problem.Later; another Flight Attendant informed me that the pilots told him that we have seven of these generators and that only one failed. Nevertheless; it did not put me at ease to think that we were going to fly over the ocean even after raising concerns about the dangerous goods on board. Was the airplane safe enough to continue its voyage? It is not for me to say as I have no control over the issue but it sure raised concern as to problems that can be resolved over land and not while over the ocean. Failed generators should not be taken lightly when planning to fly over the Atlantic.




Synopsis: After one generator failed shortly after takeoff; the flight attendants aboard a B777-200 headed for an Atlantic crossing failed to have their concerns about the safety of continuing the flight properly addressed by the flight crew.
Date: 201909
Local time of day: 1801-2400
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: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Physiological - Other
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Attendant; Person Flight Crew
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: During boarding; on aircraft (tail); a strong odor was noticed in the flight deck; reminiscent of vaporized oil while the APU bleed was selected. I noticed and told the Captain and as the smell increased in intensity; I walked off the aircraft due to feeling sick from the odor. I walked to the jet bridge and asked the gate agents and they confirmed the smell and that it was intense chemical odor. After; I asked the flight attendants and they confirmed it was quite noticeable throughout the entire cabin and one remarking that it smelled all the way to the aft galley. We decided to shut the air system off; however; due to the temperature it was jointly decided to deplane the aircraft and troubleshoot the bleed system. [Maintenance] came to the aircraft and troubleshooted the APU and then we decided to try and isolate the problem and made an attempt to see if the engine(s) selected with the packs would help. After starting an engine; we selected the packs without APU bleed; but still had the strong odor return to the aircraft. The Captain developed a headache; however; I began to feel better after the odor was vacated as of a couple hours later. We kept both flight deck windows open at this point forward to mitigate any more exposure to the chemical odor and to help clear the air further. Aircraft was swapped and we continued to our destination exercising discretion per 117. Odor was reminiscent of burning smell inside the engine; smelling of a vaporized solvent.




Synopsis: Air carrier First Officer reported strong odor in the cabin that was confirmed by flight attendants and the Captain. Maintenance action resulted in aircraft swap.
Date: 201712
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: LAX.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737 Next Generation Undifferentiated
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B LAX
ATC / advisory: TRACON SCT
Second aircraft: A330
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Procedure; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Spaced to join HLYWD arrival 9.5 miles behind A330 in no wind conditions. Not notified of type until experiencing moderate wake turbulence. Slowed and climbed above flight path but still was rolled into 45 degrees of bank in the process.




Synopsis: B737 Captain reported the aircraft rolled into a 45-degree bank after encountering wake turbulence 9.5 miles in trail of an A330 on arrival into LAX.
Date: 201912
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: B767 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
Aircraft component: Fuel Tank Cap
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Technician
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Airframe; Maintenance Powerplant
Human factors: Time Pressure
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Diverted; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Procedure; Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Aircraft X diverted to ZZZ with a left hand wing fuel leak. This was the second diversion in two days and the third in a month. Maintenance found the left hand wing overwing fill port leaking. Maintenance Control called an outside vendor group to do the repairs. The repairs required fuel tank entry per GMM 05-XX-XX item X Company fuel tank repair team will support all international locations. The company deviated from this policy. Company also sent a non-tank entry qualified inspector to perform the buyback task in AMM 28-XX-XX-XXX-XXX this AMM is also written wrong 28-XX-XX-XXX-XXX item X has you closing up the fuel panel after leak checks this item should be moved between item XX and XY.




Synopsis: Technician reported company deviated from approved maintenance procedures when repairing a fuel leak.