elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201912
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Reporter qualification: Flight Attendant Current
Human factors: Physiological - Other
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Illness / Injury
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Equipment Problem Dissipated; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: During takeoff started to smell a dirty sock smell; asked Flight Attendant 1 if she smelled anything odd. She confirmed she did. Dirty sock smell became stronger. Asked Flight Attendant 2 if they smelled anything in their area (aft galley). They did not. Flight Attendant 2 came up to see what the smell was; confirmed she smelled dirty socks. While discussing with Flight Attendant 1; I excused myself feeling lightheaded/dizzy and speedy heart palpitations and went to back of aircraft to get away from the smell. Flight Attendant 4 then went to FWD galley and confirmed he smelled odor. Flight Attendant 2 came back to galley not feeling well and Flight Attendant 4 as well. Flight Attendant 1 was experiencing lightheaded. I let the pilots know what the situation was (odor/location/symptoms) asked if they could check on it for us. They couldn't conclude anything at that time as smell dissipated. We grabbed an O2 from the back of aircraft and breathing that helped a bit; was used by Flight Attendant 2; Flight Attendant 4; and me. Did not experience odor on descent. Experienced cough after incident. Flight Attendant 2 still felt lightheaded; Flight Attendant 1; Flight Attendant 4 and I felt better by end of flight except for my cough.




Synopsis: B737-800 Flight Attendant reported strong 'dirty socks' odor in cabin during flight resulting in physiological issues.
Date: 201702
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Reporter qualification: Flight Attendant Current
Human factors: Physiological - Other
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Illness / Injury
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Routine Inspection
Result: General Physical Injury / Incapacitation
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Equipment / Tooling; Human Factors
Primary problem: Equipment / Tooling

Narrative: I would like it on file that I have worn the [new] uniforms for the last time. They have caused me itchy skin; itchy eyes; nose bleeds; scratchy throat and sinus issues. My husband had small rash like bumps on his chest and arms. My uniforms are now packed in my garage. The local college in my area has a forensic department. They have agreed to run tests on my pieces. I have seen my coworkers break out in rashes; hives and what appears to be third degree burns. Recall the uniforms.




Synopsis: Air carrier Flight Attendant reported experiencing physical allergic symptoms when wearing the new company uniforms.
Date: 201409
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ACY.Airport, NJ
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Aircraft: Cessna 152
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class C ACY; Class E ACY
ATC / advisory: TRACON ACY
Second aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Reporter function: Instructor
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Conflict Airborne Conflict
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure; Airspace Structure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: I was on an IFR flight with a student heading into Atlantic city airport.  We requested the GPS 4 approach into the airport.  The controller told us to cross JEDOB at 2000 and we were cleared for the approach.  We crossed JEDOB intersection and started our descent down to 1700 feet as the approach calls for.  My student was under the foggles and I was looking outside for traffic.  We were currently out of the clouds in VMC conditions.  I noticed and aircraft moving left to right at a high rate of speed and had very little time to react.  It came within approximately 500 feet horizontally and 100 feet vertically of our aircraft. I immediately took evasive action and descended.  There was no report of the aircraft from air traffic control.  I asked the controller if she was showing an aircraft near us and she then responded affirmative and pointed it out and asked if we had the traffic in sight.  I told her affirmative and that it was a close call.  I believe the incident occurred in class C airspace but depending on where we were on the approach it could have been right outside in class E airspace.  Regardless we were on and IFR flight plan and were given an approach clearance.  In addition our aircraft was to the right of the other aircraft and legally we had the right away. I don't know if the controller was working the other aircraft or if it popped up on radar at the last minute.  If she was working that aircraft I think she needed to a better job monitoring the situation; given how close both our aircraft came.




Synopsis: C152 Flight Instructor reports an airborne conflict with another aircraft requiring evasive action. The reporter had just been cleared for the GPS 4 approach to Runway 4 at ACY and was out of 2;000 feet for 1;700 feet. ATC apparently saw the other aircraft but did not provide a warning.
Date: 202107
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: SCT.TRACON, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Haze / Smoke
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Medium Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Climb; Climb
Airspace: Class C ONT
ATC / advisory: TRACON SCT
Second aircraft: Small Aircraft; High Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict NMAC
Detector: Automation Aircraft RA; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: While we departed Ontario; CA on the RAJEE3 departure; ATC asked us to maintain 7;000 feet. Close to the RAJEE checkpoint ATC called two targets:1) [A] Small Aircraft; 12 o' clock; 7 miles; 6;500 feet. 2) A Medium Large Transport 8;000 [feet] at 10 o' clock.We responded searching for the Small Aircraft and called the Medium Large Transport in sight. ATC again called our attention to the Small Aircraft 12 o' clock five miles to which we responded searching. Many other calls not related to us continued over the frequency when we received an RA from the TCAS indicating adjust vertical speed. Looking at the VSI the vertical speed showed to remain level. We spot the Small Aircraft on TCAS converging but only visually picked out the aircraft less than 1/4 mile (hazy outside) at 10 o' clock (not 12 o' clock) passing directly underneath us 300 feet. TCAS indicated clear of conflict as the Small Aircraft passed to our five o'clock. The next call from ATC was traffic passing behind us and climb to 13;000 feet. Meanwhile; the Medium Large Transport passes over us.We indicated to ATC that we received a TCAS RA and that the Small Aircraft passed 300 feet below us. ATC departure acknowledged and passed us to center. ATC could have vectored us off the SID to avoid the conflicting traffic.




Synopsis: Air carrier flight crew reported NMAC with another aircraft during climbout from ONT airport.
Date: 202007
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Ferry / Re-Positioning
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Crossing Restriction Not Met; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: On DATE while proceeding from ZZZ to ZZZ1 on a ferry flight with an employee's daughter onboard; we were diverted to ZZZ2 for a passenger recovery flight. We were proceeding direct to ZZZZZ on the RNAV GPS Approach. We were instructed to hold at ZZZZZ as published at an altitude of 6;800 ft. due to an aircraft that would be crossing our missed approach path until ATC made radio contact with the traffic. Approximately 5 NM prior to ZZZZZ; we were cleared for the approach. I proceeded to set 3;700 ft.; the FAF Altitude; in the ALT window; armed the VPATH and the APP mode. The aircraft proceeded to descend to cross ZZZZZ at or above 5;400 ft. A few minutes later; just prior to MREEE; at approximately 6;000 ft. we received a LOW ALTITUDE ALERT from ATC. He requested that we climb back up to 6;800 ft. We had the field in site and were established on the approach so; we cancelled our IFR flight plan and we were then cleared for the visual approach. We did not receive any TERRAIN WARNINGS; there was no yellow displayed on our PFD/MFD in regards to terrain. At the time; the SIC was on the CTAF frequency announcing our position and commencement of the RNAV GPS approach. Upon further query; ATC stated that they had asked us to maintain 6;800 ft. until ZZZZZ before commencing the approach. I did not hear that altitude restriction and only read back the cleared for the approach authorization. I'm not sure why we had that restriction; as we were in VFR conditions. All the high terrain was to our southeast; there was no other traffic in the area or displayed on our TCAS and 5;400 ft. was the crossing altitude for MREEE on the approach. The safety of the crew; passenger and aircraft was never in question and we had situational awareness throughout the approach.




Synopsis: Captain reported missing an ATC communication; resulting in Low Alt alert and a Missed approach and go around.
Date: 201409
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: PA-32 Cherokee Six/Lance/Saratoga/6X
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Initial Approach
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Electrical Power
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Captain; Instructor; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Engineer; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Weather
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: We were on an actual IFR training flight. During the ILS approach we lost communication; navigation and heading reference systems. We had no prior indications of power failure. We squawked 7600 and used my cell phone to communicate with tower. I informed them of our situation and intentions to use two battery backed up VFR GPS's to navigate a self vectoring final approach and descent. They coordinated with approach control. One was an iPad with approach plates with Geo referencing. I self vectored to ILS final and descent points to landing; very successful. Light gun control was used for landing clearance. I would advise all IFR pilots to have a backup GPS that powers independent from aircraft power. Also; I think approach control phone numbers should be on all IFR approach plates and; at least; RCOs (remote control outlets) for IFR clearances where available.




Synopsis: PA32 instructor pilot experiences a power loss in IMC; rendering communication; navigation and heading reference systems inoperative. A cell phone is used to communicate with ATC and an iPad with approach plates and geo referencing is used to successfully complete an approach to landing.
Date: 201904
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: A320
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
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: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Chart Or Publication; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: In final turn for visual Runway 29 at night at 600 ft pointing at North Bridge fully configured exactly on vertical profile; ATC issues low altitude alert followed by EGPWS caution obstacle call out. Bridge tower was in sight so we continued.




Synopsis: A320 Captain reported receiving low altitude alerts on approach and continued with obstacle in sight.
Date: 201401
Local time of day: 1201-1800
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: Galley Furnishing
Component problem: Failed; Design
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Reporter qualification: Flight Attendant Current
Second reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Illness / Injury
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Diverted; General Declared Emergency; General Physical Injury / Incapacitation
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Equipment / Tooling
Primary problem: Equipment / Tooling

Narrative: I was in the aft galley by myself during the cruise portion of the flight. The coffee pot was making a hissing noise; and the burner was filled up with coffee. I lifted the handle of the coffee maker and hot coffee grounds exploded out onto my chest and face. I received medical assistance on board the plane. The aircraft diverted. It was met by medical personnel. I was taken to the hospital. I received second degree burns to my face and chest.   Had there been a crew bulletin or warning from/by the company explaining that this can happen with the coffee makers; I would have taken precautions. I found out that in January 2013; the FAA let airlines know that this was something that could happen. Everything I read was exactly what happened to me.

Callback: The reporter stated that after this event she saw a news item about exploding aircraft coffee makers. Her Company had not put out any information about this potentially serious event.

Second narrative: I was flying 'B' position. 'C' came to the back while I was setting up galley for service and said she was going to go take her drink orders. Before I went into the cabin; I did start the coffee pot and everything seemed normal. I did not hear any strange sounds. When I went to take drink orders; 'C' was in the aft galley. Just a couple of minutes later into my orders; I heard a scream come from the back. I then stopped and went to see what was going on. I found the 'C' face and chest covered in coffee grounds. She was crying and said that the coffee pot was making a strange sound; so she lifted the handle and the coffee grounds exploded on her. I then called the 'A' and Captain to let them know what had just happened. 'A' came to the back and made a PA for a Doctor. A Doctor who happened to be a burn specialist came to the back and assisted the 'C' He then spoke to the Captain and said she will need medical attention and go to the hospital when we land. Then Captain then made the decision to divert.


Synopsis: A B737 coffee maker produced a hissing sound while dripping coffee; so the Flight Attendant opened the coffee tray and received second degree burns from exploding coffee grounds. An emergency was declared and the flight diverted for medical attention.
Date: 201711
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: MMUN.Airport, FO
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
ATC / advisory: Center MMFR
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: No Specific Anomaly Occurred 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: Upon arriving into MMUN ATC cleared us to fly the BUBUN 1B RNAV Arrival expecting 30L; with a subsequent descend via clearance. The EFB Jeppesen App contains these STAR Arrivals; but not all points; and there are no Jeppesen approaches that tie into these arrivals. As our routing was toward LOPKA; I selected the LOPKA transition. Upon reviewing the points on the LEGS page I noticed many other points after LOPKA. These points establish a base turn and final approach segment; but nothing within our JEPP-FD products contain these points. We were subsequently cleared direct to a point (don't remember which) that was on the final segment for 30R; cleared the visual 30R. In order to get clarity on where this point was I assumed (correctly) that we needed to load in the EPNEL1B STAR/OTSOL transition for 30R. Only then were we able to verify this point was actually on final for 30R. The MMUN STARS need to indicate all points that comprise the RNAV Arrivals. With the higher potential for communication issues (ATC Controller accents/dialects) we need better clarity on the waypoints that we may be sent to.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported that Jeppesen RNAV Arrival charts for MMUN do not include the additional waypoints after the transition points.
Date: 201706
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZSE.ARTCC, WA
Flight conditions: Marginal
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Bonanza 36
Operator: Personal
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZSE
ATC / advisory: Center ZSE
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute; Instructor
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Automation Air Traffic Control
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Chart Or Publication; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was conducting OJTI (On Job Training) on combined sectors with a Radar Assist. The Radar Assist took a call from Approach regarding Aircraft X; who was at 5000 feet. Approach was asking if we were OK with Aircraft X at 5000 feet on his present route because the pilot wanted to stay as low as possible to avoid any potential icing. From my viewpoint it looked good. I heard the Radar Assist and Radar trainee discuss the 5000 foot Minimum IFR Altitude (MIA) in that vicinity and they seemed to concur on Aircraft X being good.A few minutes later after Aircraft X the MSAW (Minimum Safe Altitude Warning) begin to flash '058'. I quickly leaned in and noticed that Aircraft X had actually been inside the 5800 foot MIA for a few miles already but for some reason the MSAW (Minimum Safe Altitude Warning) didn't alert until now. He was about to re-enter the 5000 foot MIA anyway but we were already planning to climb Aircraft X for higher MIAs further ahead; so I told the Radar trainee to climb him to 071 feet as planned. This was sort of a glancing penetration of the 5800 foot MIA in this area; where the 5000 foot MIA was just west and south of the aircraft while the higher 5800 foot MIA sort of juts out from the east for a few miles. I would estimate he was about 2 miles inside the higher MIA for approximately 6-7 miles before climbing above it. In addition; the MIA values and boundaries were recently updated the area.Our MIAs and the associated boundaries are quite complex. It certainly reminded me of the importance of being extra vigilant in monitoring the proximity to these boundaries; especially while training and due to the recent changes that went into effect.




Synopsis: ZSE Center Controller reported they allowed an aircraft on a direct route to fly below the Minimum IFR Altitude.
Date: 201903
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: LFPG.Airport, FO
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Turbulence
Aircraft: MD-11
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Initial Approach
ATC / advisory: Tower LFPG
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Distraction
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: This was the second leg of a two leg evening. On final; ATC had asked us to maintain 250 KTS till glide slope intercept then slow to 180 KTS. The airplane was fairly light; 385;000 LBS. During the speed reduction; the airplane got a little above the profile/glide slope and Pilot Flying used vertical speed to re-intercept the glide slope. During this attempt to re-intercept the glide slope; we got busy performing other flight/checklist duties and failed to notice that the airplane had failed to capture the glide slope from above and descended 300 feet below the glide slope. (This was the second time this evening with this particular airplane that it failed to capture the glide slope on the first attempt). We immediately corrected back to intercept the glide slope and was fully captured on the glide slope by 2;400 MSL (2;200 AGL). We continued the landing to a very nice landing. ATC didn't mention the deviation to us at any time.  Failure to notice that the airplane hadn't captured the glide slope Do not get pre occupied with the checklists.




Synopsis: MD11 Captain reported the aircraft failed to capture the glideslope during approach to landing. Flight crew recovered and landed uneventfully.