elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201808
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 15
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class G ZZZ
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness; Distraction
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Making straight in approach to ZZZ Runway 23 on arrival. At 5 mile out; I saw a paraglider to my left at pattern altitude near the airport coming in opposite direction. During my approach the paraglider crossed my flight path from left to right and appeared to be continuing beyond my flight path. The paraglider was at least 1.5 to 2 mile in front of me at this time. At 2 miles from the airport; the paraglider appeared to again be traveling on my reciprocal course and well to the right of my approach course to RWY 23. At approximately 1.5 miles as I continued my approach; while keeping a close eye on the paraglider; I could see I would pass to the left of the paraglider but his distance from my approach course was no longer increasing as it had been moments before. At this point I was 800 to 1;000 ft AGL and about to pass the paraglider traveling in what I thought was the opposite direction. As I passed the paraglider I then saw that the paraglider was traveling in the same direction; not opposite as I had thought; to my flight path and slightly converging. I passed within 400-500 ft to the left and 100 ft below the paraglider before it occurred to me that the paraglider could have been on his own approach to the airport. The dusk conditions at the time made it difficult to determine the paraglider's direction of flight (toward or away) from my aircraft. To prevent this situation; upon seeing the paraglider cross in front of me; I should have discontinued my approach to ZZZ; altered course to the left as the paraglider was passing toward my right and entered an upwind pattern entry (right traffic is designated for this RWY) for RWY 23. I'm still not sure if the paraglider was making his approach to landing; if he was; he was making a left traffic pattern at the time of the event. I made a normal landing and was tying down my aircraft when I stopped to watch the paraglider land a few minutes later. Neither aircraft were required to take evasive action.




Synopsis: Cessna Pilot reported a NMAC with a paraglider.
Date: 202008
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant In Charge
Reporter qualification: Flight Attendant Current
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Distraction; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Passenger Misconduct
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Company Policy; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: All passengers in this party did not comply with mask policy.  They were not eating or drinking and had to be reminded to put their mask on.  They would put a beverage on their tray and not be drinking but say they were actively drinking just; so they would not have to wear their mask.  The children rang their call button over and over wanting more items.  When the crew would approach we'd have to ask them to put their mask on.  We had repeated interactions with this whole family.  Again; most times their mask was off or not covering their nose.  PA's were made to remind guests of our mask policy.  They blatantly disregarded under the guise of drinking; or a few members would go by to gather trash they might put it on but take it off the moment we passed with trash.  This is a safety risk to others onboard and crew. They should not be allowed to fly with us if they cannot follow the CDC guidelines for everyone's safety.  Once the mask requirement is gone then they can fly with us.  We need to make a hard stance on this issue.




Synopsis: Flight Attendant reported a family was not wearing face masks and had to be reminded often during flight.
Date: 201910
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZZ.ARTCC, FO
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B777-200
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZZ
Aircraft component: Recirculation Fan
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: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Crew; Person Flight Attendant
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Aircraft Equipment Problem Dissipated; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Approximately 1:20 into flight; a strong electrical burning smell accompanied by unusual noises from the mid galley were reported to the flight deck. This was confirmed by a flight deck crew member. We air interrupted and returned to ZZZ [advising ATC]. The smell confirmed to dissipate after selecting recirculating fans; gasper switch and lFE/seat switches to off. A successful over weight landing was completed in ZZZ. Possible failure of recirculating fans contributing to strong electrical smell with unusual sounds. No suggestion except to say flight deck crew and cabin crew performed duties as true professionals.




Synopsis: B777-200 Captain reported  'strong electrical burning fumes' accompanied by 'unusual noises.' Flight executed an uneventful return to departure airport.
Date: 201507
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 12
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: M-20 J (201) / Allegro
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Oil Storage
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Workload; Situational Awareness; Training / Qualification; Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Other / Unknown
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: I was 15 Mile NE of a suitable airport at 10;000 MSL; 2.5 hours into a 4:50 Hour flight when I noticed Oil Pressure dropping rapidly. I requested vectors to the nearest suitable airport and was given clearance to descend to 3000 feet and vectors to the airport; 15 Miles South. I turned and started decent to approximately 6500-7500 feet when I told ATC I would stop descent to stay in gliding distance if the engine quit. The remainder of the flight was uneventful and I landed on Runway XY. Upon examination the Oil Quick Drain Valve was found broken off. Its threads were still in the Oil Pan but the drain was gone. We don't know why this happened. I can't suggest any steps to avoid recurrence. Prior training I had in handling emergencies was very helpful as was layout of engine indicating instruments being right in front of pilot allowing easy scan and my habit of doing so.




Synopsis: A M-20J pilot noticed his oil pressure drop rapidly at cruise; so diverted to a nearby airport. There he discovered the Oil Quick Drain Valve broken off but the threads still in the oil pan.
Date: 201910
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Weather elements / visibility: Windshear
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew FLC Overrode Automation
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors; Company Policy; Weather
Primary problem: Company Policy

Narrative: I was the Pilot Flying on the leg. The windy conditions had been a subject of discussion and mentioned during the briefing of the arrival and approach. During the descent we had some light chop and the surface reports were easing up as we made the descent on the RNAV Approach. We were fully configured; on speed; Vref +15; [with] the runway in sight [and] the autopilot off. At about 1;500 ft. AGL on final; we received a 'wind shear ahead' warning. Since it was a lot smoother ride than anticipated and I didn't have any other cues about wind shear with either the airspeed or vertical speed; it took me a couple of seconds to interpret the warning in which time it went away. Since we remained on speed and profile after the warning went away; I continued the approach and landed.In debriefing the approach; we both agreed that a go around should have been initiated; but that a lack of other cues was a factor in a few moments of hesitation about whether initiating a go around was necessary. I felt like we otherwise had good monitoring; cross checking; and communication about the aircraft state throughout the arrival and approach. So often; wind shear training in the simulator is accompanied by the cues that help us identify the onset of wind shear; wind shift; airspeed vertical speed etc. I need to brief or at least tell myself to be ready to go around when directed by the predictive computer.


Second narrative: [Report narrative contained no additional information.]


Synopsis: B737 flight crew reported landing instead of initiating a go-around despite receiving a brief wind shear warning on final.
Date: 201807
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Taxi
Aircraft component: Hydraulic Syst Valve
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Gate; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Release Refused / Aircraft Not Accepted
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Company Policy
Primary problem: Company Policy

Narrative: Taxi out after cleared for takeoff; we got an EICAS message and associated panel light. We canceled our takeoff clearance; contacted Maintenance Control and taxied back to our gate. Wrote up the discrepancy (R TAIL HYD VAL) and (Tail FLT Control OFF light illuminated on rear auxiliary panel). Maintenance decided to defer the write up. Captain refused the airplane and requested that the problem be fixed. Maintenance Control got aggressive and adamantly refused to fix the airplane even though parts and manpower were readily available.This industry seems to always want to relearn lessons of the past over again. We enjoy safety because of the sacrifice of others. When events like this happen; it may be good for those involved to reflect back on [past aircrafct accidents]. All have learned sobering lessons on deficient Maintenance procedures or practices. Our mechanics were ready to fix the airplane; yet were unable to do so because Maintenance Control would not authorize anything other than a deferral.




Synopsis: Air carrier First Officer reported that Maintenance Control refused to repair the aircraft so the aircraft was not accepted by the flight crew.
Date: 201507
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: AVL.Airport, NC
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Medium Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class C AVL
ATC / advisory: Tower AVL
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Automation Aircraft Terrain Warning; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: While on approach to AVL I was the pilot flying. We were cleared for the Visual approach for Runway 34. During the descent; we got the 'TERRAIN' aural warning from the GPWS; followed by 'PULL UP' and two 'whoops.' I evaluated our position above the terrain; determined that we probably got close to a mountain peak that we flew over and applied power to level off; and re-intercept the glide path. The flight continued without incident.At the time of incident; I wasn't expecting or anticipating a GPWS warning; and thought that we were in a viable position to approach and land; the visibility was 10+.




Synopsis: An Air Carrier First Officer leveled off following GPWS 'PULL UP' and 'TERRAIN' warnings while turning final on a visual approach to AVL Runway 34.
Date: 202103
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: A321
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Powerplant Fire/Overheat Warning
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Inspector; Lead Technician
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Airframe; Maintenance Avionics; Maintenance Powerplant
Human factors: Troubleshooting; Time Pressure; Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown; Workload
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural MEL / CDL; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Maintenance
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Aircraft; MEL; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Aircraft X was ready to depart ZZZ. Mechanic called maintenance for a Class 2 Air Bleed message on ECAM; the CA (Captain) just wrote up. I issued MEL 36 XXX left wing loop B fault without checking history. I thought the aircraft was on a thru flight since it was way late in the afternoon. After the aircraft departed; a ZZZ Crew Chief called maintenance and informed maintenance that the aircraft was in ZZZ all night with a Drop Dead MEL 36XXX C/N XXXXXX L/PXXXXXXX. This aircraft did not make one flight without new fault. NO NEW MEL should have been issued.I did not look at history. I thought the aircraft was on a Thru FLT. Maintenance did not say anything about history; which is was just sign-off. I was in a hurry to dispatch the aircraft. I did not take a Class 2 maintenance message as a serious fault. Wing Loops do fault very often.Always review history and do not get in a hurry. Ask the Mechanic to also review the log book.




Synopsis: A321 Mechanic reported overlooking requirements for a MEL and allowing the aircraft to fly in an unairworthy condition.
Date: 201912
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: Climb; Initial Climb
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Engine Vibration Indication
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Departing ZZZ; Number 2 engine LP VIB indicated 4.0 yellow. Executed engine vibration checklist which didn't eliminate the vibration. We requested priority handling and returned to ZZZ to make a normal landing.




Synopsis: EMB-175 Captain reported excessive vibration indication on Number 2 engine; resulting in an air turnback to the departure airport.
Date: 201202
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Night
Aircraft: P180 Avanti
Operator: Fractional
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Gear Extend/Retract Mechanism
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Fractional
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: During a visual approach when the landing gear was selected down the nose wheel failed to illuminate a down and locked position light. We requested to continue in the pattern from the Tower and leveled at pattern altitude. I tested the lamp circuitry via the lamp test panel and did not get a nose wheel light in either the up or down position. All hydraulic pressures were consistent with a down and locked nose wheel. I recycled the gear three times. On the third time the nose wheel down and locked light illuminated. Had I not received the light so quickly I was prepared to run the Abnormal Checklist.I advised Tower that our problem had been resolved but; at the Tower Controller's request; we declared an emergency to have the support trucks standing by. Since all indications were normal; we ran the normal Before Landing Checklist with the gear down and locked. We made a normal landing and taxied to parking. I believe the situation was an intermittent mechanical issue. I reported the event to Maintenance for investigation and repair.




Synopsis: The flight crew of a P180 cycled the landing gear several times before obtaining three gear safe lights. They declared a precautionary emergency in order to have equipment standing by for landing.
Date: 202007
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: No Aircraft
Aircraft component: Escape Slide
Component problem: Failed; Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Technician; Parts / Stores Personnel; Inspector
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Powerplant; Maintenance Airframe
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Maintenance
When detected: Other receiving inspection
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Incorrect / Not Installed / Unavailable Part; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: In the stores warehouse a delivery of slides came in to be received. Receiver opened the box to a very strong odor from the box and heat. Once the box was fully opened; it was determined that mold was growing in the box and is present on the slide. This part was made serviceable by a vendor; part was made serviceable on date; XXXX-X form tracking number X. Part was immediately discarded and local management was informed.Interesting issue that this slide was made serviceable by the vendor on date. Two days later it arrives on the dock with mold. I believe this box and slide have been stored outside in the elements at the vendor facilities and was not inspected IAW FARs and GPM prior to being shipped.




Synopsis: During receiving inspection; the Inspecting technician discovered that an escape slide was stored incorrectly and had mold growing on it.