elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201910
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 170/175 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant In Charge
Reporter qualification: Flight Attendant Current
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Equipment Problem Dissipated; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Captain called flight attendants and asked if we were smelling anything; I thought there might be a slight oil smell. [Flight Attendant] called 2 minutes later to say he could smell something. I called Captain with that information. Captain said he thought the smell was starting to leave. When Captain first called I did suggest that they put their oxygen on. About 10 minutes into flight after conversation; it was decided to continue. After landing we asked for medical to make sure everyone was fit to fly back to ZZZ1.




Synopsis: ERJ-175 Flight Attendant reported slight oil smell to Captain during cruise which dissipated shortly thereafter. After landing Flight Attendant requested medical evaluation.
Date: 201401
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: BNA.Airport, TN
Flight conditions: Mixed
Weather elements / visibility: 13
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-700
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class C BNA
ATC / advisory: TRACON BNA
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Airport; Chart Or Publication; Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Captain was flying pilot. We were progressing on the SWFFT ONE Arrival to BNA/Runway 31. ATC cleared us to the ONUGE intersection and to track in the Localizer to 31; which we did. An opening in the cloud base gave us a view to a Runway 31. I reported to Tower field was in sight. Tower immediately replied cleared the visual approach to Runway 31. Aircraft was level at 4;000 feet MSL and the glideslope had not even started to come down. Visually the runway appeared in front of us through the broken layer of clouds. We were getting much too high for a stable approach. I stated to the Captain something was wrong; but I was confused by what I saw outside and what the ILS was telling me. Captain called for the gear down and I lowered the gear handle. I think the Captain keyed the radio and told the BNA Tower we were too high for the runway and turned the aircraft to the left; off the Localizer. We might have lost 100 in altitude as well; but the Tower responded that we were not high and asked if we were lining up on Smyrna's runway? Captain immediately turned the aircraft back to the right and centered up the Localizer again. He quickly climbed back to 4;000 FT and followed the ILS approach to Runway 31. I responded to the Tower something like; 'Yes; we lined up on the wrong runway.' At that point; I could see BNA Airport further ahead on the horizon. We flew the visual approach to Runway 31 at BNA with no further incident. We rushed through the instrument briefing prior to our descent into Nashville. It was the first time for me to fly that arrival from the southeast and land on Runway 31. The Captain failed to mention there was a note on the approach plate about confusing MQY Runway for BNA's runway ten miles to the southeast. I failed to see the same warning too. Every approach should be given enough thought about what could happen besides the standard mechanics of Localizer frequency; inbound course; runway elevation; etc.


Second narrative: Narrative 2 contains no additional information.


Synopsis: Air carrier flight crew; cleared for a visual approach to Runway 31 at BNA; confused MQY for BNA until advised by ATC.
Date: 202112
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: PA-28 Cherokee/Archer/Dakota/Pillan/Warrior
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Throttle/Power Lever
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Instructor; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor
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 Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: I was on a training flight with a CFI applicant; we departed ZZZ at XA:30 local time; and traveled down the coast towards ZZZ1. After several touch and go's; we departed the area and proceeded northeast; to the local practice area off ZZZ. The student demonstrated slow flight and a power off stall. After the completion of the power off stall; I instructed the student to demonstrate a power on stall; as he set up for the maneuver; he told me the throttle was stuck in the current position that it was in. (Roughly 2300 RPM.) The throttle could travel forward to maximum or back to the position it was being stuck in; but not lower then that power setting. After trying to troubleshoot by adjusting the throttle friction and to overpower the throttle being stuck; it was determined that it could not be fixed in air. I then contacted Approach [Control] and requested radar vectors to ZZZ. I informed Approach that we would have to pull the mixture once over the runway at ZZZ in order to land. We flew the plane to ZZZ; and landed without incident or any damage to the airplane; person; or property around XC:00. Upon getting the plane back to our maintenance shop it was determined that our airplane sustained a carburetor failure. The accelerator pump fuel needle dislodged and blocked the butterfly valve inside the carburetor throat. This in return; blocked throttle movement.




Synopsis: PA-28 flight instructor reported a stuck throttle due to a carburetor failure resulted in an immediate landing.
Date: 201210
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: B767-300 and 300 ER
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Cabin Entertainment
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Technician
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Powerplant; Maintenance Airframe
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Maintenance
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Manuals; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: While dealing with a First Class seat problem; I noticed but it didn't register until later in the day (after filing a related report for pulling the Circuit Breaker) that the Seat Electronic Control Unit (ECU) I was working on had 3 electrical connectors on the top; two of which had electrical connectors in them. The third; however; was not used and also did not have a cover on the exposed connector. Is that third connector supposed to have a cover? I cannot confirm; but I was told by [another] Technician that the same ECU works on the 2 and 3 seat (B777) configurations; which leads me to believe the exposed connector might be live. Contact the manufacturer or the respective engineer to determine if covers would be appropriate or necessary; and if yes; correct this during overnight maintenance or B-Check level maintenance visit.

Callback: The reporter indicated that his Company Review Board had contacted him and that they are working with Engineering and Management personnel. The Review Board has confirmed that the associated maintenance specification indicates that the unused electrical receptacle should have a cover installed.



Synopsis: A Technician noticed that a B767 ECU Seat had an exposed connector. A Company review of the finding noted the unused electrical receptacle should have a cover installed.
Date: 201605
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: PA-28 Cherokee/Archer/Dakota/Pillan/Warrior
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Vacuum Pump
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Workload; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Aircraft
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I [was] on an IFR flight plan.  I lost my vacuum pump shortly before reaching [the] VOR.  At first I thought I could manage using the magnetic compass but I am a single pilot without autopilot and became overwhelmed with trying to follow directions being given me by [the Controller].  I explained I was unable to comply with a quick change in course to a VOR [because] I was unfamiliar with [the] route.  I found myself talking over the Controller's instructions trying to explain my situation which only made matters more confusing because I wasn't hearing the instructions being given me and they weren't hearing my responses.  I told them several times I had lost gyro compass but apparently that was when they were also broadcasting to me.  This resulted in the Controller asking what was wrong; thinking I might be a student pilot.  In order to get the proper attention of the Controller I finally asked if I needed to declare an emergency for him to have time to talk to me and help me with vectors.  He asked what the problem was and finally heard me declare that I had lost gyro and needed time to respond and vectors to [destination].  At that point he agreed so he dedicated the time needed to get me to [destination] safely.The conclusion I draw from all this is I should have recognized the Controller was dealing with too many planes to be able to give the attention to me needed for safe flight.  I should have gone ahead and [advised him] when the communications became confusing so the Controller could spend the time needed on me.  In the future I will not wait so long and I recommend that pilots in training need to be made aware that any time they need the immediate attention and help of a Controller they should not hesitate to [speak up] so he is able to focus on your needs.




Synopsis: PA-28 pilot reported difficulty complying with ATC clearances while trying to navigate using the magnetic compass after losing his vacuum pump.
Date: 201807
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Night
Aircraft: B737-700
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Aircraft component: Turbine Engine
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Rejected Takeoff; Flight Crew Returned To Gate; General Maintenance Action; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Aircraft
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: After [the] throttle [was] advanced for takeoff; aircraft behind us reported a fire coming from the right engine. Tower asked us if we heard the report and we replied no. He said the aircraft behind us reported we had fire coming out of right engine. We asked if he still saw it; he said no then quickly changed his response to an emphatic 'YES; YES!' We had no indications of any abnormalities in the cockpit; but I decided to reject the takeoff based on this observation. We had Fire Department meet the aircraft and no fire or other abnormality was noted and we had them follow us back to the gate. Logbook entry was made and we deplaned passengers to another aircraft and made our way to [destination].




Synopsis: B737-700 Captain reported rejecting takeoff due to fire coming from right engine.
Date: 201412
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: HIO.Airport, OR
Flight conditions: IMC
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: Small Aircraft
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class E P80
ATC / advisory: TRACON P80
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Distraction; Confusion
Anomaly: Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Aircraft X was on vectors for HIO ILS RY 13 approach. I issued the approach clearance after vectoring them through the final for in-trail spacing. I got a good readback for the clearance and altitude to maintain. Approximately 2 minutes later I noticed the track jump; but since we use FUSION radar with only two primary radar inputs I assumed it was related to the radar. When the track did not return after a few seconds; I verified they were on the approach. I realized they were off course and descending through the MVA so I issued a Low Altitude Alert and climbed them to 040. They descended to 030 in a 035 MVA before climbing back up. I canceled the approach clearance and issued vectors to re-join the approach. They flew through the localizer again; and after I corrected their heading to join I issued a new approach clearance.I believe flight training was in progress and the weather was IMC. I don't know what caused the aircraft to veer off course; I'm just glad I caught it.




Synopsis: P80 controller vectors aircraft onto final and notices the track jump. Controller thinks the jump is related to FUSION radar. Issues another heading and the aircraft finally gets on final after third attempt. Aircraft enters lower MVA due to not turning correctly.
Date: 201202
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: TEB.Airport, NJ
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Citation Excel (C560XL)
Operator: Fractional
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class B EWR
ATC / advisory: Tower TEB
Aircraft component: FMS/FMC
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Fractional
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Human factors: Distraction; Workload; Situational Awareness; Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: Deviation - Speed All Types; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: We departed from TEB on the TEB8 departure. After takeoff; I engaged the autopilot coupled to NAV to fly the SID. As the aircraft was leveling at 2;000 FT MSL; we both noticed the airplane was turning the wrong direction from the required turn and I engaged heading to arrest the turn. While I was busy with the heading control; the aircraft accelerated to approximately 220 KTS and since we were under the Class B airspace; I immediately powered to idle to slow the aircraft to 200 KTS and resumed the SID. The rest of the flight proceeded uneventfully.

Callback: The Reporter stated that the takeoff that day was to the north and the aircraft had not yet started the turn to the west when the tract deviation started. The Honeywell FMS had acted oddly on the several other flights this crew had with this same aircraft and the Reporter is uncertain why it turned the incorrect direction. The crew reviewed the programming at cruise and found the information was entered correctly for the departure they were on.



Synopsis: A CE560XL turned to an incorrect heading after the automation was engaged on the Runway 6 TEB 8 SID and while the Captain was correcting the track error the aircraft accelerated to 220 KTS.
Date: 201909
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Oxygen System/Pax
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Technician
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Airframe; Maintenance Powerplant
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Procedure; Manuals; Logbook Entry
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Aircraft went into service with all passenger O2 (Oxygen) test stop buttons deployed. I worked on Passenger Oxygen Masks Inspect Zone 231 and Zone 232. I inspected masks; cleaned them; and closed oxygen panels. Test stop buttons were in stowed position at the end of my shift.




Synopsis: B737 Technician reported that aircraft was released for service with passenger oxygen test stop buttons deployed.
Date: 201404
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 50
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Amateur/Home Built/Experimental
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Other post flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I attempted to put my tent in the cockpit of an open cockpit aircraft. However; when I taxied to get fuel I realized the tent caused an unacceptable risk to flight; limiting the control movement. I...lashed [the tent] to the N-Brace of the plane. I was concerned about the safety of flight and asked an FAA examiner for advice. He advised me to balance the external loading. Following that advice; I secured a camp style chair to the opposite side to balance the drag. I was not aware at the time that attaching external loads may be a problem. I was not advised that a problem may arise just by attaching any load outside the cockpit.




Synopsis: Pilot of an Experimental; Amateur-Built biplane secured a tent to the N-Brace on one side of the aircraft. Upon the advice of an FAA examiner; pilot 'balanced' the external load with a camp chair secured to the opposite side.
Date: 201208
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: MEM.Airport, TN
Light: Night
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class B MEM
ATC / advisory: TRACON M03
Second aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Departure
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Distraction; Training / Qualification; Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Air Traffic Control Separated Traffic
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was training a Developmental on east departures during a south flow late night shift. We observed a target depart Runway 18R--a westbound departure runway--instead continue south then turn southeast. This put the aircraft in confliction with our departure off Runway 18L. I immediately overkeyed my Developmental trying to get hold of our departure so I could turn him away from the traffic cutting in front of him. Our flight was not on my frequency; however the 18R departure did check on with me; and I immediately turned that straying aircraft away from my traffic.Memphis should terminate the use of the RNAV SIDs; and start using issued headings off the airport. Let the Departure Controller issue the clearance to join the cleared RNAV SID. Don't rely on the pilot to go to the right initial fix. If they programmed their FMS wrong they're in a critical phase of flight and in close proximity to other departures. By the time a controller notices the wrong heading; the aircraft may be switching frequencies and might go to the wrong frequency. Maybe distracted by the wrong heading and trying to correct; or getting a TCAS RA from the traffic they cut off.




Synopsis: An 'eastbound' MEM Departure Controller took prompt action to redirect a 'westbound' air carrier departure off of Runway 18R who had apparently programmed the wrong RNAV SID and was conflicting with the reporter's legitimate eastbound departure aircraft off Runway 18L.