elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201412
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZJX.ARTCC, FL
Light: Night
Aircraft: Military
Operator: Military
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Refueling
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class A ZJX
ATC / advisory: Center ZJX
Second aircraft: Medium Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Separated Traffic; Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors; Aircraft
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I had just sat down at the sector and was on position for no more than 5 minutes when the situation happened.  I was briefed that Aircraft Y was by himself on AR207NE.  Aircraft X was on course at FL310 requesting FL350.  Aircraft Y was on course (so I thought) at FL330.   Aircraft Y requested a descent to block FL260 through FL280 and wanted clearance for refueling with a tanker.  He said he was MARSA with the tanker.  I did not have the tanker and told him I had his request.  I put a 5 NM halo around Aircraft Z as Aircraft Z and Aircraft Y were diverging.  As soon as I had 5NM I climbed Aircraft Z and descended Aircraft Y.  I had already QU'ed [route check] Aircraft Y and it was showing right on course up AR207NE.  I noticed Aircraft Y turning left into Aircraft Z.  I turned Aircraft Y 30 degrees right; then I turned Aircraft Z 30 degrees left.  I then called traffic to both aircraft one at a time.  It appeared to show about 4-4.5NM at the same altitude at FL320 at the closest.  After getting separation; I asked Aircraft Y why he was turning.  He told me they filed for a delay at a fix and was cleared as filed.  My flight plan did not show any delay except a request for one in the remarks section.  When I told him I showed a request in my flight plan; he acknowledged that it was in his remarks section as well.  He said; 'My bad' and that he should have at least announced that he was going to make a turn up ahead.  The pilot thought he was cleared to enter a delay.  Whether he was or not; I do not know; but if he was; it wasn't communicated up the chain and the delay wasn't entered into the flight plan.  If he wasn't; it was a pilot deviation.Controllers need to make sure if they clear for a delay; they either forward the information or enter the delay in the flight plan if that was the issue.  Military tanker pilots need better training to make sure they have proper clearances and understand the difference between a clearance and a remark.




Synopsis: ZJX Controller reports a loss of separation due to an aircraft that turned off course into another aircraft route because the pilot thought it was allowed.
Date: 201910
Light: Night
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Fan Reverser
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Technician
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Powerplant; Maintenance Airframe
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Maintenance
When detected: Routine Inspection
Result: General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Incorrect / Not Installed / Unavailable Part; Manuals; Procedure
Primary problem: Incorrect / Not Installed / Unavailable Part

Narrative: This [Report] is filed to report FAA violation.Aircraft arrived IAH with both engines t-r hinge bump fairings in wrong configuration. These hinge bump fairings are to be installed only on inboard side of both engines.  But; on this aircraft the right engine inboard t-r hinge bump fairing was completely missing - see log XXXXXXX and sdr# XXXXXXX. The right engine outboard t-r was configured correctly with no fairings installed.... Now; the left engine inboard t-r was configured correctly with fairings installed. But the left engine outboard side also had t-r hinge bump fairing installed and this is wrong. The outboard side of left engine should not have this fairing installed - see log XXXXXXX. See attached pictures of both engines correct and wrong configuration; Illustrated Parts Catalog reference and amm reference. In a nutshell; the left engine has an extra fairing installed on outboard side and right engine is missing the required fairing on the inboard side.




Synopsis: Technician reported that incorrect parts were installed on both thrust reversers.
Date: 201302
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: VDF.Airport, FL
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Bonanza 35
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: DVFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class B TPA
ATC / advisory: TRACON TPA
Aircraft component: Altitude Alert
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Flight Engineer; Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Human factors: Workload; Troubleshooting; Training / Qualification; Confusion; Communication Breakdown; Distraction
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew FLC Overrode Automation; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Weather; Aircraft
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Normal flight from departure to destination. The ride had been bumpy the whole way; so we were interested in getting on the ground. We were tracking toward the IAF for the ILS to our destination. During the descent; ATC descended us to 3;000 FT; then to 2;000 FT; then amended the altitude to 2;500 FT; and started to call traffic. Right at the highest workload time (naturally); I hear a pop; and lose the electric trim and the altitude alerter (which; I found out; is powered by the same circuit breaker). Now I've got a handful of airplane that I have to switch to manual trimming; lose my altitude alerter; and ATC starts in with the vectors and calling traffic. Though an experienced pilot; I am used to 121 two pilot operations and have only started flying single pilot GA again recently. I was very surprised how one or two simple things can spike the workload almost instantaneously. I managed to keep the airplane on altitude and heading. We got cleared for the visual; at which time we canceled IFR; and proceeded visually; and had to do a 360 to space behind another aircraft on final. Moral of the story...watch the distractions. When they creep up on you; play defense.




Synopsis: A BE-35 pilot became very busy in bumpy air on the TPA IFR arrival when his Altitude Alerter and Electric Elevator Trim failed while ATC was issuing altitude changes and traffic.
Date: 201912
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: BUR.Tower, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 135 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class C BUR
ATC / advisory: Tower BUR
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; Situational Awareness; Workload
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Landing Without Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: JANNY5 arrival into BUR at night. Cleared to cross JANNY at and maintain 8;000 feet. SoCal Approach solicited Runway 15 visual approach (probably should have declined being at night). Crew accepted visual approach to Runway 15. We were given a descent to 6;000 ft. and a heading of 200. Turned to a heading of 200; bugged 6;000 ft. on the altitude select but failed to select a descent mode (another mistake). Cleared for the visual approach Runway 15 final at or above 3;000 ft. Crossed the mountains high and had to make a steeper than normal approach with S turns (another mistake). SoCal failed to hand the crew off to Burbank Tower (ATC error). Pilot flying was focused on the descent to get on profile for landing Runway 15. Pilot flying contemplated requesting left traffic for Runway 8 but decided to continue Runway 15 as we were getting on profile (should have requested left traffic to Runway 8). Pilot monitoring stated that a green laser light illuminated the cockpit and was distracted and failed to notice we were not handed off to Tower. Through 1;000 ft. we configured but were not quite stable. At 500 ft. we were stable and on profile. We landed at the 1;000 ft. markers and came to a stop on Runway 15. The pilot flying noticed that the RMU did not have the correct Tower frequency. We established communication with Tower and Tower asked if we saw his light gun signal to clear us for landing. We did; but after the fact as we thought it was a green laser illumination. Total Swiss cheese event that had many opportunities to break the incident chain. We technically landed with a clearance to land Runway 15; but it was unknown at the time of touchdown. Too many events as well as task saturation caused this incident to mature as it did.




Synopsis: EMB-135 Captain reported landing without contacting Tower following a high workload night visual approach to BUR.
Date: 201307
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: Marginal
Weather elements / visibility: 5
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: PA-32 Cherokee Six/Lance/Saratoga/6X
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Distraction; Time Pressure
Anomaly: Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Observer; Person Flight Crew
When detected: Other on ramp
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors; Weather; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: This incident occurred on the FBO ramp.  I was on a volunteer mission for Angel Flight to pick up children and take them to a special camp.  Upon landing; I taxied to the ramp and saw my patients waiting outside. I throttled to idle; set the parking brake; and set the throttle tensioner and did not shut the airplane down.  I quickly exited the plane; loaded the children and got back in the airplane.  The decision not to shut down was based on two valid reasons.  My airplane is extremely difficult to hot start when it has been immediately shut down. I was very concerned about severe weather which was approaching from the west and possibly being stuck [at this airport]. I was comfortable with the existing weather and was trying to leave in a timely and safe manner.  I was also concerned about the perception that the parents might have if I experienced extreme difficulty starting the airplane with their children onboard.  I fully recognize that leaving an airplane; even momentarily; is not without risk but I feel that the parking brake and throttle lock minimizes those risks.  I believe that it was necessary to leave the airplane running and always strive to be a conscientious and safe pilot; especially when doing volunteer Angel Flight missions. I would in most situations shut the engine down; but do not believe that any FAR Regulations require me to do so.  This landing and takeoff was without consequence and no other airplanes were involved. I completed my mission and returned home without incident. I am reporting this incident because an unknown pilot has reported this. He confronted me on the FBO ramp and became very aggressive toward me while I was loading the children.




Synopsis: PA-32 pilot left his engine running to board passengers for an Angel Flight due to concern that the engine was very difficult to restart when warm and weather was approaching the field.
Date: 202001
Location: ZZZZ.Airport, FO
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Security
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Pre-flight
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: I called Dispatch over 4 hours prior to my departure to share my concerns regarding flying through the Middle East. I wanted to be sure I was not being routed over RANAH on the Turkmenistan/Afghanistan border. I was told by the Dispatcher that RANAH was the planned route. I told her that I wanted to be routed over AMDAR further to the north. I felt the route through Turkmenistan was too close to the Iranian border. Only about 20 miles. I believe that under the current geo-political issues with the region; we should not be using this route. The Dispatcher did agree to change my route. However; I believe company policy should remove the southern route as a dispatch option.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain requested an amended routing from Dispatch during preflight preparations in order to avoid flying too close to the Iranian border.
Date: 201908
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Oxygen System/Crew
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Technician
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Airframe; Maintenance Powerplant
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Maintenance
When detected: Routine Inspection
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure; Company Policy; Aircraft
Primary problem: Company Policy

Narrative: Upon arrival at aircraft I found that the O2 pressure for the temperature of 32C for 3 people in cockpit was 695 PSI. The pressure gauge for the crew O2 read 700 PSI. This was close enough to the limit for 3 people in the cockpit that I was going to change the O2 bottle for safety reasons. However; with having a restraining order which states that I the AMT can be fined for creating delays I had to re-evaluate whether to change the crew O2 bottle or not. I ended up deferring the decision to the crew chief to avoid the possibility of a fine. The crew chief decided to let the aircraft go with the current pressure. I have been limited by the restraining order imposed by a federal judge to make border line decisions on safety issues due to the threat of a fine being imposed if such decision results in a delay.




Synopsis: Technician reported uncertainty in processes in determining whether or not to replace a crew O2 bottle that was five PSI over the minimum limit due to a restraining order in place.
Date: 201912
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class G ZZZ
ATC / advisory: CTAF ZZZ
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; 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: Airspace Structure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: While doing takeoff and landings at ZZZ; I had just turned crosswind climbing off of Runway XX; reaching pattern altitude I pushed the nose to level out and saw 4 aircraft coming at me head on. I pitched and turned left since the other aircraft were approaching from the right. They had departed from ZZZ1 which is 2 miles east and also has left traffic to Runway XX because of the close proximity. I was making normal radio position reports in the pattern; I did not hear any radio reports from that formation until after the incident someone said 172 in the pattern say your intentions; I replayed I was staying in the pattern at ZZZ and they should announce their intentions to enter the pattern. I landed and parked the aircraft. I talked to ZZZ1 Tower later and he said he was watching as it happened though he has no control.




Synopsis: C172 pilot reported an NMAC during departure with and aircraft departing an airport in close proximity.
Date: 201708
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: SFO.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class B SFO
ATC / advisory: Tower SFO
Second aircraft: B777 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Closely spaced parallel approach to SFO Runway 28R. Approximately 1/2 mile behind B777 landing 28L. Winds were 250 at 6 Kts. We noted a slight disturbance on the water surface in the Bay from the wake turbulence. It was a gentle progression and we discussed go-around procedures again and elected to continue the approach. At approximately 150 ft; FO noticed slight vibrations in the yoke (not stick shaker). Within one second the aircraft started rolling off to the left approximately 25 to 30 degrees left wing down and a go-around was already initiated at the first sign of roll off. After an approximate 5 kt loss; a go-around was normal. We returned for landing 28L without further incident.




Synopsis: B737 Captain reported executing a go-around after encountering wake turbulence at 150 AGL on approach to SFO Runway 28R from a B777 on the parallel approach to Runway 28L.
Date: 202110
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Flight conditions: IMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Gulfstream G650
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight phase: Climb; Initial Climb
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Air Data Computer
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Second reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
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: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Software and Automation
Primary problem: Software and Automation

Narrative: Scheduled flight was a completion test flight of a new Gufstream 650ER by the OEM from ZZZ. Brief; start; and taxi were uneventful. Immediately after takeoff from Runway XX; the PIC experienced a failure of the primary attitude reference and erroneous airspeed and altitude indications in the Heads Up Display (HUD) and the Pilot's Primary Flight Display (PFD). Initial assigned altitude was 3;000 ft. Approaching assigned altitude it became apparent that capturing and holding altitude would be difficult so a block altitude of 3;000 to 5;000 ft. was requested by the copilot and assigned by ZZZ Approach Control. An altitude of approximately 3200 to 3300 ft. was reached prior to ZZZ Approach Control granting the requested block altitude. ZZZ Approach Control vectored us for an uneventful ILS approach to landing on runway XY at ZZZ.


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


Synopsis: G650 flight crew reported erroneous airspeed and altitude indications after takeoff.
Date: 201811
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Cessna 402/402C/B379 Businessliner/Utiliner
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Taxi
Aircraft component: Brake System
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Instructor; Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Training / Qualification; Distraction
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Ground Excursion Taxiway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Aircraft
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: While conducting training; the trainee's brakes fully compressed and airplane veered off of the taxiway into the grass for a brief time. Using the copilot brakes we were able to get back into the taxiway without incident. No damage was found.




Synopsis: Cessna 402 instructor pilot reported a brake system anomaly while taxiing caused the aircraft to briefly depart the paved surface.