elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201511
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: MD-80 Series (DC-9-80) Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Attendant; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Equipment Problem Dissipated; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: I was the pilot flying and my First Officer was the Pilot Monitoring. We departed with normal procedures and call-outs. At 400 feet I; as Pilot Flying; commanded 'Heading Mode'. At approximately 700 feet I was alerted to a Master Caution light and a LAV SMOKE DET annunciation. I was able to hear the lavatory smoke detector and was then promptly contacted by the flight attendants regarding the alarm. Passing 1000 feet I called for 'Flaps Up. Climb Power. VNAV.' Once this was accomplished; I stated that I had the aircraft and radios and asked my First Officer to Run the QRH for LAV SMOKE DET annunciator. I requested a return to the airfield.The First officer completed the QRH procedure and the Return Checklist while we were on a left downwind leg for a visual approach. I contacted the Tower and was cleared for landing. At some point on final approach; the LAV SMOKE DET annunciator went out and the audible alarm coming from the lavatory ceased. All crew members in both the cabin and cockpit smelled the smoke during the [event].We confirmed that we were below our landing weight limitation and then I called for the gear to be lowered and the Landing Check accomplished. We landed without incident and taxied clear. We deplaned normally and had the fire department inspect the lavatory specifically and the rest of the aircraft generally. Flight attendants informed me that they saw a haze of smoke during the LAVATORY SMOKE DET. The last time I flew this aircraft I had a slightly dissimilar smoke in the cabin event. My previous event occurred 15 days ago. And another cabin smoke event occurred 5 days prior to that.




Synopsis: MD80 Captain experienced a master caution light and a LAV SMOKE annunciation at 700 feet on departure. A return to the field was requested while the First Officer performed the QRH procedures. At some point during the approach the LAV SMOKE DET annunciator went out and the smoke began to dissipate. The reporter indicated that he experienced a similar event 15 days prior in the same aircraft and another event 5 days prior to that.
Date: 201910
Local time of day: 1201-1800
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: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Time Pressure
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Hazardous Material Violation; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Dispatch
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Crew was ready for departure. Departure time had passed. The explanation given to me for our delay was a weight and balance problem with life rafts (Hazmat) being transported. Had it not been for the weight and balance issue; I would have been unaware that we had life rafts on the aircraft. We received the [Weight and Balance System] takeoff data ten minutes past departure time. When we received the [Weight and Balance System] data we proceeded with the normal procedures to get the aircraft off of the gate. I failed to receive the air bill for the Hazmat onboard. After arriving at the gate in ZZZ1 I was given a copy of the air bill to sign to be put on file. The Operations Agent should be sure to communicate that there is Hazmat onboard the aircraft. I should make sure that I have the paperwork before departure.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported receiving required pre-departure Hazmat documents on arrival at destination.
Date: 201212
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: HIO.Airport, OR
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Rain; Turbulence; 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: PC-12
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class E P50
ATC / advisory: TRACON P50
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Time Pressure; Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Weather; Aircraft
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Flying in IMC conditions we were routed around the Portland airspace for a landing at HIO RNAV approach to [Runway] 13. While on an assigned heading to intercept the [Runway] 13 approach the aircraft flew through the inbound leg and continued west. Shortly thereafter the autopilot disengaged. I took over the aircraft and began the process of reprogramming the FMS as the guidance to the RNAV 13 was no longer active. The aircraft was in the landing configuration so flaps; landing gear and power settings had to be managed at the same time. I was also aware that there was terrain ahead. Being a single pilot the workload was very high. The conditions at 3;500 FT were IMC with heavy rain at times. I re-programmed the FMS (a complicated job in this aircraft) to an approach to [Runway] 13 at HIO. I turned right to reconfigure a landing to [Runway] 13. The Controller gave me a right turn heading to avoid the terrain. Maintaining aircraft control while performing radio and avionics tasks was a challenge. I was able to re-align the aircraft to intercept the inbound to [Runway] 13 and the rest of the approach was uneventful.




Synopsis: PC12 pilot describes an RNAV approach to HIO in rain and turbulence that does not go as planned with the aircraft not intercepting the final approach course and continuing west toward high terrain. ATC issues a turn back; the FMS is reprogrammed; and a successful approach ensues.
Date: 201502
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Caravan 208B
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: CTAF ZZZ
Second aircraft: Beechcraft Twin Piston Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Airport; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We departed from runway XY. On CTAF; we announced departing the pattern to the south (track of 165 degrees direct to destination as cleared). An inbound Baron they were south-west of the airport entering the downwind for Runway XY. As RWY XY has a published right-hand traffic pattern; we assumed the traffic would be staying west of our position by several miles; and would be no factor. I ensured all exterior lights remained on and switched the recognition lights to 'wig-wag' mode to increase viability. Shortly after; while climbing to our clearance altitude; we made visual contact with an aircraft above us at approximately our 1-o'clock position and descending. I immediately began an evasive maneuver by descending and turning away. Once clear and resuming our climb; the Baron pilot asked who he almost hit with about 300 feet to spare. I informed him that Runway XY had a published right-hand pattern; and that his incorrect position report indicated that he should have been to the south-west of the airport and no conflict. Instead; his incorrect left-downwind entry placed him in our departure corridor. He responded by stating he was unaware that it was a published non-standard pattern for Runway XY.




Synopsis: A Caravan 208B flight crew departed Runway XY and turned to 165 degrees direct to their destination as cleared. When a Baron reported inbound from the southwest to the downwind for Runway XY the Caravan crew believed there would be no conflict; since Runway XY utilizes a right hand pattern. A 200 foot vertical and horizontal NMAC resulted when the Baron pilot; admittedly; was unaware of the non-standard right hand pattern and had instead proceed to the east to enter left traffic.
Date: 201407
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: VHHH.Airport, FO
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Gulfstream G200 (IAI 1126 Galaxy)
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Navigation Database
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors; Equipment / Tooling
Primary problem: Equipment / Tooling

Narrative: FMS Nav data base showed current except the date indicated was Nov. 1994 instead of 2014. The currency information was amber instead of white. Flight was carried out with no occurrence or deviations.




Synopsis: An overseas based Gulfstream Captain was taken aback while checking the Nav database during preflight to see that the Nav data appeared current yet the currency date year read 1994 vice 2014.
Date: 201402
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-700
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 Control System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Within approximately three minutes of level off at cruise altitude of FL400; we heard three to four loud thumps and the cabin began climbing between 400 to 500 FPM. The flight attendants were called and they verified that they heard the noise. They also noted that the cabin was louder than normal especially near Row 5 on the First Officer's side. As we begin to communicate with ATC for a descent; the cabin altitude had climbed to 9;000 FT. We began an ATC coordinated immediate descent for lower. This action preempted an altitude warning and potential emergency descent. As we began our descent the cabin began to climb at a higher rate; approximately 900 FPM. At about 9;500 FT cabin altitude; the cabin began to descend. The cabin stabilized [as the aircraft reached] approximately FL240. The pilot flying reviewed appropriate QRH checklists while the pilot monitoring coordinated with all appropriate outside agencies for the alternate. We diverted and landed without further incident.




Synopsis: B737-700 First Officer reports several loud thumps after leveling off at FL400 and the cabin altitude begins climbing. A descent is initiated and the cabin stabilizes as the aircraft reaches FL240. The crew elects to divert to a suitable airport.
Date: 202112
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ILM.Airport, NC
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
ATC / advisory: Tower ILM
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Confusion; Communication Breakdown; Troubleshooting; Workload; Physiological - Other; Time Pressure; Distraction; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Ground Equipment Issue; No Specific Anomaly Occurred Unwanted Situation
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Other final approach
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Airport
Primary problem: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings

Narrative: Night visual to Runway 6 in ILM. I am aware [the PAPI and glide slope for ILS Z RWY 6 are not coincident.] However; while on the glide slope for ILS Z RWY 6; the PAPI displayed high (3 white; 1 red) for the entirety of the approach. Additionally; there was a slight perceived bleed through of white on the red light and red on the white lights; meaning the colors washed together. This remained until the aircraft crossed over the threshold.The PAPI seems to be less than a 3 degree angle and would cause pilots who relied solely on the vertical information displayed by it; to be too low while conducting an approach to RWY 6. The ILS glide slope appears to be the most reliable source of vertical information.The PAPI needs to either be fixed or turned off. A pilot will naturally adjust their vertical path to that of their visual references; which in the last 500 ft. will be the PAPI (at night). This will cause aircraft to descend below the glide slope before reaching the Runway Threshold. The Company has done well in mitigating the issue with a [special] page as well as opening this issue [with our safety division]; but the FAA needs to be willing to step in and solve the issue; otherwise this is an incident waiting to happen.




Synopsis: Air Carrier First Officer reported there was a slight perceived bleed through using the PAPI of white on the red light and red on the white lights; meaning the colors washed together.
Date: 201209
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: B757-200
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Hydraulic System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness; Troubleshooting; Workload
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; General Declared Emergency; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Climbing out in VMC EICAS indicated a L HYD QTY (left hydraulic quantity) warning. This was confirmed by checking the L HYD QTY on the Status Page of the EICAS. The quantity continued to fall and a L HYD SYS PRESS (left hydraulic system pressure) warning was indicted on the EICAS. Completed applicable QRH procedures; discussed problem; procedures and options as a crew and then coordinated with Dispatch and Maintenance Control. Continued to our filed destination and declared an emergency with Approach due to time required for Alternate Flap and Gear extension and loss of nosewheel steering. Landed 36 and cleared runway to the left and stopped northbound on Taxiway. [We] terminated emergency with Ground. Coordinated with tug crew and was towed to parking the assigned spot. Completed shutdown procedures and debriefed as a crew and with Maintenance. After coordination with Company Maintenance; the problem was initially identified as component material failure of the Left Hydraulic System in the left wheel well area.


Second narrative: [Narrative 2 contained no additional information.]


Synopsis: A B757 EICAS alerted L HYD QTY then; L HYD SYS PRESS. The QRH was completed and an emergency was declared at the destination airport where alternate flap and gear extension checklists were completed prior to landing with no nose wheel steering.
Date: 201502
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: PAO.Airport, CA
Light: Night
Aircraft: Small Aircraft
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class D PAO
ATC / advisory: Tower PAO
Second aircraft: Small Aircraft
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Local
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Workload; Troubleshooting; Situational Awareness; Distraction
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown; Ground Incursion Taxiway
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: Air Traffic Control Separated Traffic
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: While working Local Control; the several tower members observed two pedestrians with camera equipment enter the movement areas multiple times. First; they walked questionable close to the movement area at the back of the Runway 31 Run-up. I am not sure if they entered the run-up or not; but they were watched as they continued walking towards Taxiway Zulu near Lima. They set up their camera equipment and then crossed Taxiway Zulu at Lima and went into the median between Zulu and Runway 31.At this point I stopped normal operations and sent two aircraft around; Aircraft X and Aircraft Y. I also held Aircraft Z short of Runway 31 and did not issue a takeoff clearance while pedestrians were in close proximity to the runway. I also advised an aircraft who was originally taxiing back to Runway 31 via Zulu to use extreme caution as the taxi path took them in close proximity to the pedestrians. While I was working the traffic; other controllers got in touch with Airport 1; another controller walked out to the catwalk and yelled for the pedestrians to move away from the runway back into the non-movement area. Once the pedestrians were clear of all movement areas I resumed normal operations. Airport 1 was able to get to the pedestrians as they were still on Lima to issue the deviations. Apparently the photographers were there at the request of an aircraft; Aircraft A; to take pictures while they flew the traffic pattern. They made a comment that they told the photographers to stay on the far side of the fence. I think if any pedestrians are being asked to be near the movement area; they should have an escort by someone who knows where pedestrians can or cannot go on the field.




Synopsis: PAO Controller observes people not authorized near a runway on a taxiway. Controller stops operation until a airport vehicle removes the people.
Date: 202111
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: VNY.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 1 Eng; Retractable Gear
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Taxi
Second aircraft: Small Aircraft; High Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Safety Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Incident occurred during taxi out. The pilot of our aircraft; on a personal sight-seeing flight; taxied from the VNY 'Prop Park' area via A2. We checked in with Van Nuys Ground at 'Checkpoint 1' which is short of Taxiway A in a non-movement area. Ground issued an instruction to pass behind two aircraft taxiing northbound on A to runway 16R via A; C. We requested an intersection departure from Taxiway D; which was straight ahead; in order to remain clear off the building congestion of jet traffic at the full length.Ground issued us instructions to pass behind the second jet and taxi to 16R via A; D. We correctly identified the second jet and taxied short of the runway on D without issue. At this point I identified a [high-wing light aircraft] in front of us; known to me to be a flight training aircraft. They had made the left turn onto A and were behind two business jets and unable to access the large run up area.We became preoccupied with a departure and takeoff briefing followed by an engine run up. During the run up; I noticed the [other aircraft] from earlier passing off our left and accessing runway 16R at D; a taxiway we currently were occupying. The pilot flying and I reacted with shock and the pilot flying stood on our brakes; idled the engine and we braced for potential impact. We were on the centerline of D and at the hold short bars. The [other aircraft] appeared to pass us with its left main gear nearly hitting the edge lights; and its high wing passed within 2 feet of our low wing with the [other aircraft's] wing strut coming imperceptibly close to our wing edge. It was extremely close; and I cannot fathom why the aircraft would do that.As we were preoccupied and only listening for our call sign; we did not hear what the instruction to the [other aircraft] was and I do not know if they were cleared to make this maneuver by ATC or did so on their own.




Synopsis: Light aircraft pilot reported a near-collision with another light aircraft on a taxiway at VNY airport.
Date: 201705
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: OMDB.Airport, FO
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Widebody; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ramp OMDB
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Cleared to taxi into gate. Initially thought we were not on centerline because we were getting either bad or no guidance. Moved the acquire left/right to acquire the taxi guidance. By the time I stopped the aircraft we were now slightly (approximately 3-5 ft) past the nose spot. Proceeded with a normal shutdown.


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


Synopsis: Captain of a large turbojet reported stopping past the parking stop point due to insufficient guidance.