elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201409
Aircraft: B777 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Aircraft component: Cooling Fan; any cooling fan
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: 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: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Attendant
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Was in the bunk; on my break. IRO called on phone and reported FAs said they smelled electrical odor vicinity of B zone galley and also a grinding/motor noise. IRO on duty investigated and then; when IRO went back in flight deck; phoned me in the bunk. I got up and investigated. There was still a very slight odor; but the grinding/motor noise was imperceptible. As I was walking around the cabin doing further investigation; all video monitors froze. I then went to the flight deck with intention of de-powering the IFES and to SATCOM Maintenance Control. Just as I entered the flight deck; a status message labeled 'IFES Cooling Fan' illuminated. Through a process of vetting the problem with Maintenance Control and working a QRH procedure; we isolated the problem to the IFES Cooling fan and de-powered the IFES [In Flight Entertainment System]. The electrical odor was completely gone and flight continued to destination without further issues.




Synopsis: B777 Captain is informed during his break that the flight attendants have reported an electrical smell and a grinding noise in the mid galley. During investigation the IFE System shut down. As the Captain entered the cockpit a status message; labeled IFES Cooling Fan; illuminated. The system is depowered and the flight continued to destination.
Date: 201303
Aircraft: Gulfstream II (G1159)
Operator: Fractional
Operating under: Part 135
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Landing; Final Approach
Aircraft component: Headset
Component problem: Design
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: The problem continues on several G200 aircraft. The 1;000 feet to go audio warning cannot be heard with the company provided Telex 750 headset. The Telex 850 headset offers some noise canceling abilities and the tone can be heard a little better when this headset is available. The other pilot had his own noise canceling headset and had no problem with any of the aircraft audio alerts. I received a phone message which indicated that this ongoing problem has been sent to the Chief Pilot's office for a solution. Without a noise canceling headset the aircraft's alert system is compromised and situational awareness and safety is reduced. Recommend a viable noise canceling headset be provided immediately for the G200 so that all aircraft audio alerts can be utilized.




Synopsis: A pilot reported that the 1;000 feet audio alert cannot be heard on the G200 aircraft without a noise canceling headset.
Date: 202006
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: SA-227 AC Metro III
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Electrical Power
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Confusion
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Ground Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Ground Excursion Runway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General Maintenance Action; General Evacuated; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Procedure; Manuals; Logbook Entry; Aircraft
Primary problem: Logbook Entry

Narrative: Upon landing touchdown I applied [brakes] to slow the aircraft then shortly thereafter I realized that I didn't have brakes or nose wheel steering. The aircraft was heading off the right side of Runway 4 and nothing I did could change the aircraft direction or slow the aircraft. I elected to emergency shutoff both engines feathering the props and preparing for runway departure.  I pulled the elevator aft to put more pressure on the aft gear and coasted to a stop just outside the runway safety zone in the mowed grass. There were no injuries to passengers; nor damage to the aircraft or airfield. I was met by Airfield Safety who help me get a tug for the airplane and he took my information for all reports.  The airplane was towed to the FBO and remained there until I returned on date.  I returned to the FBO with my normal maintenance personnel and we determined that the cause of my issues was electrical.  The aircraft was made safe for a flight to ZZZ1 where further inspections could be preformed. The mistake I made was not getting a ferry flight permit before flying the airplane to ZZZ1.




Synopsis: Pilot reported not obtaining a Ferry Permit after loss of electrical power caused a runway excursion.
Date: 201704
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: A321
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Turbine Engine
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Rejected Takeoff
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: On take-off at ZZZ; we experienced a loud 'Bang;' yaw and shudder at around 110-130 knots. This was followed by an 'Eng 2 Fail' on ECAM. My Captain executed a high speed reject. I notified the tower and they rolled the emergency equipment. He notified the passengers to remain seated. After inspection by the fire department; we taxied back to the gate on one engine. I am only guessing; but apparently a stall on the #2 engine caused its failure on take-off. However; at the time it happened; we were both convinced we had blown one or more tires. Then the engine fail ECAM came up and we started to put it together. There was no way to avoid this event. The Captain executed a perfect high speed reject. The aircraft remained on the runway centerline and he notified the passengers immediately.


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


Synopsis: A321 flight crew reported a rejected takeoff due to an engine failure.
Date: 201706
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: D10.TRACON, TX
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Medium Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class E D10
ATC / advisory: TRACON D10
Second aircraft: Small Aircraft
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Altitude Crossing Restriction Not Met; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: During descent into DFW we were cleared direct to SEEVR and told to descend via the SEEVR arrival but to maintain 310 knots. We set in the bottom altitude for the window at SEEVR of 13000 and began our descent planning to cross SEEVR at 14000 to avoid leveling off. As we neared SEEVR ATC changed our clearance to cross SEEVR at 13000 and comply with the speeds at SEEVR then continue the arrival. We slowed to 270 knots and thought we were set up to cross SEEVR at 13000 but just before turning I noticed we were too high and just as I noticed ATC gave us a heading and an expedited descent to keep us clear of a skydive aircraft in the area.


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


Synopsis: Flight crew of large turbojet aircraft reported an issue with an ATC clearance to meet an altitude restriction.
Date: 201305
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: DEN.Airport, CO
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: A319
Flight phase: Climb
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Chart Or Publication
Primary problem: Chart Or Publication

Narrative: The waypoint shown in the MCDU flight plan is misspelled according the departure plate. Way point CCLYD on the BRYCC1 departure is spelled CCYLD in the MCDU flight plan. Needs to be reissued and spelled properly.




Synopsis: A319 pilot reports that the CCLYD way point on the BRYCC1 departure from DEN is misspelled. The FMC spells it as CCYLD and the Commercial Chart shows CCYLD. (CCLYD is correct.)
Date: 201603
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZLA.ARTCC, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Turbulence
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B757 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class A ZLA
ATC / advisory: Center ZLA; TRACON SCT
Second aircraft: B777 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Procedure; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: Two wake turbulence [encounters]. One on initial climb following a [heavy] B777 on takeoff. Upon ascertaining we would be following a 777 in T/O sequence; I stated to the FO prior to taking the runway that I will only go ahead with ample separation. At throttle up we had approximately 12 miles behind the 777 ahead. On initial climb; after the turn to 236 degrees at approx. 5000-8000 we had several clear ripples of wake turbulence. Estimating the climb gradient of the preceding traffic we maximized the climb and adjusted the path (widening turn back to LAX VOR). Upon passing LAX VOR turning eastbound; as we climbed through approximately 20;000 feet; the preceding aircraft was approx. 2000 above our altitude and established 24-26 miles ahead of us. I stated again to the FO the possibility of wake; and at that second experienced SUBSTANTIAL wake turbulence. Not a rolling moment (yet) but a very strong buffeting and noticeable wake experience. We advised ATC we will be turning to offset from our current track due to the wake. For expediency I clicked off the autopilot and turned approximately 30 degrees to the right with ATC almost simultaneously agreeing and advising for the turn. I was more proactive than ATC. No conflict was stated by ATC; however his response to us was very drawn out; lengthy; and slow. We needed to change track behind the heavy ahead ASAP. Our action prevented any further disturbance. SCT was the controlling agency; between LAX and DAG VOR.




Synopsis: B757 Captain reported two wake vortex encounters in trail of a B777 departing LAX.
Date: 201807
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 20
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
Aircraft component: Engine
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Inflight Event / Encounter Fuel Issue
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Crossing terrain elevation at 3000 feet on my way to ZZZ1; I experienced an engine reduction of power followed by complete loss of power. Prior to departure at ZZZ; the fuel was drained and found to be normal. The airplane gauge read 1/4 tank enough for one hour of flying. ZZZ1 was expected to be a 20 min flight in VMC. I contacted ZZZ1 Tower and declared a fuel flow problem. I entered 7700 into the transponder as per instructions from the tower. I knew I was near a grass strip and other safe landing areas. There were no towers or other power lines in the immediate area. I flew a straight in approach. My airspeed was adequate to approach and make a safe landing. I landed and was met by emergency responders. I called the Tower when on the strip and let them know I was OK and there was no damage to the airplane. I removed two gallons of fuel from the airplane. I flushed new fuel through the carburetor. I drained the fuel tank and carburetor twice. I added a total of seven gallons to the plane. I completed a full power run up for one and a half minutes. I was confident any contaminants were flushed and the engine was making full power. I left for ZZZ1 and contacted the Tower when 500 and climbing. I landed at ZZZ1 with no problems or issues.




Synopsis: GA pilot reported a complete engine failure that required a dead stick landing to an off-airport location.
Date: 201904
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: HWD.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Transport
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground HWD
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Airport
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: At Hayward Executive Airport; HWD; the aircraft was operated with 2 crew members; a Pilot Flying (PF) and Pilot Not Flying (PNF). The PNF was making all radio communications and doing the pre-takeoff checklist. On taxi-out to assigned Runway 28L; crew elected to use entire length including the displaced threshold. Hayward Ground Control said something to PNF about displaced threshold and hold short line. The communication was confusing and slightly garbled. The hold short line for the displaced threshold was on an extended taxiway in a very non-standard location; Z1; and was not very prominently marked. The markings were faded with no warning lights. The pilot taxiing inadvertently went past the hold short line; causing a runway incursion. When a hold short line is in a nonstandard location; I recommend that it be very prominently marked; even with caution lights as used at some airports to alert pilots of its location. It appears to be a problem at this airport.




Synopsis: Corporate jet Captain reported crossing hold short lines that were faded; not prominently marked; and in a nonstandard location at HWD airport.
Date: 202008
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: No Aircraft
Operator: Air Carrier
Mission: Other unknown
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Ramp
Human factors: Distraction
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Object
Detector: Person Ground Personnel
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: Loading one piece XXX lbs of freight; I stopped power-stow to check and had 1/2 to 1/4 inch clearance. It was dark and my glasses were foggy due to wearing mask and I could not see bolts protruding from freight which scratched cargo door.




Synopsis: Ramp Agent reported damaging the aircraft during cargo loading because the agent's eye glasses were fogging up due to the face mask.
Date: 201210
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: SFO.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Dawn
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class B SFO
ATC / advisory: TRACON NCT
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Training / Qualification; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Weight And Balance
Detector: Person Dispatch; Person Ground Personnel
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Procedure; Company Policy
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Shortly after takeoff we got an ACARS message that there were new weights to be used and again Dispatch ACARS'ed us to say that the ramp loaded an extra 1;500 LBS of cargo and did not advise Load Control. Based on the old numbers we took off 1;500 LBS too heavy. The good news is that we elected to use Runway 28L for safety (166K to weight) and it would have flown off on one engine. However; Runway 1 L/R would not have worked and might have put us in the bay (1L/R had us bleeds off max and no extra margin). Our crews trust the Company to give us the most accurate data. I have no idea how I could have been more vigilant other than weigh every bag myself. As an aside; we were to be dispatched ACARS inoperative (cross country; heavy weight and en route weather) and we had to fight to get it fixed. The fix took about ten minutes. If we didn't have the ACARS; we might have used the one's based on the skimpy data; not real time.




Synopsis: An Air Carrier aircraft departed SFO Runway 28R and was notified after takeoff that the weight and balance was 1;500 LBS light which meant a Runway 1 takeoff would have been dangerous at their high gross weight.
Date: 201902
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Weather elements / visibility: Snow; 3
Aircraft: PA-28 Cherokee/Archer/Dakota/Pillan/Warrior
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Landing
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Ground Excursion Runway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control
Contributing factors: Weather
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: On landing the airplane I started to slide on what I assume was an icy patch of runway as I tried to stop and slid off the left or north side of runway. I did a 90 degree slide coming to rest in snow just off runway with nose pointing West. I immediately called Tower and shutdown the engine. I was towed out by FBO and assisted by airport operations. The runway was shutdown while I was towed and airport operations informed Minneapolis Center. There was no damage to airport property or to the airplane.




Synopsis: PA28 pilot reported loss of aircraft control on landing possibly due to ice; resulting in a runway excursion.
Date: 201208
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: DCA.Airport, DC
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
ATC / advisory: TRACON PCT
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Workload; Time Pressure; Situational Awareness; Human-Machine Interface; Distraction; Confusion
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: This scenario involves the FRDMM ONE arrival into DCA; an arrival that has numerous altitude parameters and several defined speeds; obviously designed for a VNAV capable aircraft. With all programming confirmed and forecast winds loaded; we were vectored off the arrival three times and assigned different altitudes and airspeeds then directed to rejoin the profile and set up for the River Visual from the north to Runway 19. ATC needs to appreciate that the VNAV system calculates an energy optimized descent profile and when disrupted requires pilot intervention to re-establish. Additionally; the protocols for altitude protection are different when on the VNAV path and when using other descent options. Shifting back and forth between the two is labor intensive and increases the risk of violating an altitude/speed restriction. In our case the weather was VMC but the addition of weather avoidance considerations would have added another challenge to the process. We did a great job complying but found ourselves continuously programming; resetting parameters; and confirming we would be able to comply with the next restriction- two of us fully engaged for 20 minutes. It will only be a matter of time before a ball gets dropped. If cleared for a descent profile this complex; do not mess with it. If an aircraft must be asked to leave the profile; don't ask them to return to it. I will not accept this amount of mixed descent requirements in the future.




Synopsis: B737-800 Captain detailed the problems that arise when VNAV equipped aircraft are vectored off the arrival and subsequently asked to return to the published arrival.