elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201503
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: LAX.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: A319
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class E SCT
ATC / advisory: TRACON SCT
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Workload
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Speed All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; 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
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I am relatively new to this aircraft with about 350 hours in type.  Additionally; the First Officer (FO) had about 150 hours in type.  After flying the SEAVU2 Arrival with significant delay vectors and speed control; both fast and slow; from TNP all the way in to final approach; we were given 3 different runway assignments (25R; 24R; then 24L).  On third assignment; after being cleared visual approach to 24L; we were then told maintain 250 kts.  Due to significant wake turbulence from preceding aircraft; we told the controller we were unable to maintain 250 kts.  The situation at this point was that we were in night VMC; passing through about 4;000 feet; trying to reprogram the FMS; maintaining visual separation from aircraft we were to follow; aligning with the new runway and ensuring we did not impinge on the south side flow to 25R.  The controller expressed displeasure at our inability to maintain 250 kts.  Further coordination resulted in a speed of 230 kts but frequency congestion prevented better communication of the situation.  Additionally; the workload was too high to continue into the final approach fix at 250 kts.  While I sincerely appreciate the job the SOCAL controllers do in getting us in to LAX; I have a reasonable expectation to be in a position to make a stabilized approach.  That expectation would not have been met if we complied with the controller's request.  Either we are all working to achieve stabilized approaches or we will continue to have pilot/controller difficulties.




Synopsis: A319 Captain reported difficulty complying with ATC speed request because of workload which was heightened by multiple runway changes and wake turbulence from preceding aircraft.
Date: 201912
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: Mixed
Aircraft: A320
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Check Pilot; Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Determine source and solution for odors/fumes.


Second narrative: If not already done; maybe a closer monitoring of the aircrafts that show continuous symptoms on this issue.


Synopsis: A320 flight crew reported a fume event.
Date: 202006
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Tower, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: UAV - Unpiloted Aerial Vehicle
Operator: Other 107
Operating under: Other 107
Flight plan: None
Mission: Other Structural Inspection
Flight phase: Other All
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
Reporter organization: Other 107
Reporter function: Other / Unknown
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Other Person
When detected: Other after mission
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I completed DRONE inspection at location [within ZZZ Class C airspace]. I failed to research airspace. The violation was discovered through my company's monthly airspace review. In the future; I will always make sure that I review the airspace before flight.




Synopsis: Remote pilot reported a failure to research airspace and operated UAV in restricted airspace without authorization.
Date: 202108
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Turbulence
Light: Night
Aircraft: A300
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: Air Data Computer
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Check Pilot; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Approaching ZZZ (50 minutes into flight); Captain's airspeed tape went to zero and altimeter jumped to 250 ft. high at FL340. FD (Flight Director); AT (Autothrottles); and AP (Autopilot) went away accordingly. Captain's airspeed slowly recovered and failed multiple times. Priority handling was asked with no firetruck response needed. Diversion was coordinated with Dispatch to ZZZ. First Officer's data was always correct. Approach and landing were uneventful. ZZZ Approach and Tower were very helpful with groundspeed calls to verify airspeed. The courier compartment was wet when we arrived at the plane and an E&E Inspection was accomplished for water intrusion before departure. [This was probably caused by] ADC failure.




Synopsis: A300 Captain reported diverting due to unreliable airspeed and altitude indications.
Date: 202009
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: DFW.Airport, TX
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 5
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Medium Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
Airspace: Class B DFW
ATC / advisory: Tower DFW
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Ground Incursion Taxiway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Contributing factors: Airport; Human Factors
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: After cleared to cross runways 35C and 35L on Taxiway Zulu by the Control Tower; we were told to taxi to the ramp via Juliet; Yankee. We were not asked to contact Ground. We turned right to follow the arrow on the taxiway sign to Juliet; turned left on taxiway Yankee; and taxied to the ramp. As we turned onto the ramp; we saw a sign that said JY (Juliet Yankee; which intersected with Yankee from Zulu; which went to the ramp. Nobody said we had done anything wrong; nothing was said on the radio; but I found the signage very confusing at the Ramp with taxiways Juliet and Yankee right next to taxiway Juliet Yankee. I do not go to DFW often; but the taxiway naming in that area could be improved.




Synopsis: Flight crew reported a taxiway incursion at DFW airport and cited taxiway signage as a contributing factor.
Date: 202007
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Reporter qualification: Flight Attendant Current
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Illness / Injury; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Passenger Misconduct
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Passenger X came on [and] complained of feeling motion sickness [and] asked for motion sickness med. I replied we don't carry [them]. She then asked for aspirin. I gave it to her. She went to the restroom several times during flight; at one time she stated that she [soiled clothing item] and she needed to discard it.  I gave her a sick bag to put [it] in.  I also told her she needed to put a mask on while on plane. Every time she used [the] restroom she did not have a mask on or in her seat.  She did not have a seat mate; [since] I had moved him during boarding. I also asked her 3 times to put her mask on in her seat.  Halfway through flight she began to feel better but on landing asked for sick bag.




Synopsis: Flight Attendant reported a passenger refused to comply with COVID-19 mask requirements in flight.
Date: 201602
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: B777-200
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Pneumatic System
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Technician
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Airframe; Maintenance Powerplant
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Maintenance
When detected: Routine Inspection
Contributing factors: Equipment / Tooling; Procedure
Primary problem: Equipment / Tooling

Narrative: I was assigned a Fan Air valve Remove and Replace. We proceeded to get all the Maintenance Manual (MM) references called out for in the paperwork. When reading the paper work in the MM it calls for the installation of long and short collars on the Thrust Reverser (TR) actuators. The issue is that in all the references attached; and the references for doing this job; the collar part numbers are not listed anywhere. The TR open up and deactivation process; also do not show these collars. In the Boeing Illustrated tool and equipment manual shows a massive sling; which we don't own here. The tool crib found TR locks that worked; but not listed anywhere.The second issue we had that day; is that on the TR open up; states that a minimum of 2 pieces of equipment are necessary to hold the cowl open. I do not believe that the structure is strong enough to be used as one of the hold open pieces; when someone is working in that area (Up inside the fan air valve area); and that a lock MUST be installed to prevent bodily harm. We do not currently own the sling that's called out for in the reference; and the second part number was not able to be found by stores either.  I have supplied ASAP rep with all references listed above. Please help; before someone gets harmed; and or killed under the cowling.




Synopsis: When accessing the Fan Air Valve; Maintenance was unable to secure the Fan Reverser in the open position per the Maintenance Manual because the proper tooling was unavailable.
Date: 202010
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: TJSJ.Airport, PR
Light: Night
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class E TJZS
ATC / advisory: Tower TJSJ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight

Narrative: While approaching the initial fix (IF) TNNER for the San Juan; Puerto Rico ILS Runway 10; we heard a commercial airline pilot ahead of us report that his cockpit had been illuminated by a green laser near TNNER.  Approach Control warned us of this laser strike. We asked for clearance to proceed to waypoint REMSY (IAF) instead of TNNER (IF) to allow us to avoid the area where the green laser strike had been reported. Immediately after being cleared to REMSY; our cockpit was illuminated by a very bright ground based green laser coming from the 1:30 clock code position at about six to eight miles from our position. We reported the green laser strike to ATC at approximately (XA:33) Z. The Approach Controller asked if either pilot had sustained any eye injury. We responded that we did not believe we had sustained any eye injuries. I estimated the laser to be approximately four miles southeast of TNNER; or 260 degrees at 8 NM from the SJU VOR. I estimate the source to be on the ground between the 436 feet tall tower and the 489 feet tall tower (shown on the SJU ILS Runway 10 Approach plate).  The green laser was an unnecessary distraction during a critical phase of flight (approach; configuration change; visually searching for arrival traffic; attempting to locate the runway visually; conducting the landing checklist; landing; etc.).  Law enforcement never met us at the airport to take a report. It did not appear that anyone at the FAA  or law enforcement were interested in gathering facts immediately after the event in order to pursue the perpetrators.  The San Juan; PR; TJSJ/SJU-1; (date); Station Information Page (SIP) 3.0; Note 6 says; 'Numerous LASER events have been recorded in area' as a warning to pilots. It seems like laser strikes have become so common in the area of the San Juan Airport that officials just accept this fact. Is law enforcement aggressively investigating these laser strikes in an attempt to hold the perpetrators accountable? Fortunately; tonight; the laser strike caused only a momentary distraction to the pilots. What happens when a persistent series of laser strikes causes the pilots eye injury; disorientation; and/or loss of aircraft with all passengers onboard. Will the FAA and law enforcement treat the event more seriously after such a catastrophic event?Will the FAA; FBI; NTSB; and/or law enforcement aggressively investigate and pursue the perpetrators who are pointing high intensity green lasers at commercial airline cockpits flying into San Juan Airport.




Synopsis: Air Carrier Flight Crew reports Green Laser strike on approach to airport.
Date: 201707
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZID.ARTCC, IN
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 1 Eng; Retractable Gear
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class E LOZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZID
Second aircraft: Small Transport
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown
Second reporter function: Enroute
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Airspace Structure; Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Aircraft X was on the ground requesting an IFR clearance. I instructed the aircraft to Hold for Release and then issued the clearance and to advise when ready for departure. After listening to the recording of the incident; I did not receive a read back of the hold for release. I then cleared Aircraft Y for an ILS approach. Right after Aircraft Y passed the final approach fix Aircraft X comes off of opposite direction. I immediately issued a traffic alert to Aircraft Y and he replied that he was looking for traffic. I then issued traffic to Aircraft X to which he replied 'we see the traffic passing underneath us.' I informed Aircraft X that his instructions were to hold for release. I also instructed Aircraft X to maintain VFR. I then advised him of additional traffic inbound to which he replied 'we're just going to cancel and return to ....'I should have been clearer to the aircraft on the ground that he is not released for departure due to inbound traffic.


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


Synopsis: Two ZID Center Controllers reported that an aircraft had been issued an IFR clearance that was supposed to hold for departure; but departed into traffic landing opposite direction.
Date: 201407
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 20
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: J3 Cub
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class G ZZZ
Aircraft component: Fuel Tank
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Rotorcraft
Human factors: Workload; Troubleshooting; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Inflight Event / Encounter Fuel Issue
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Equipment Problem Dissipated; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; Flight Crew Diverted; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: While transiting northbound approximately 200-250 yards off the coast (waterline); I experienced a slow loss of engine power. Turned toward isolated stretch of beach and prepared for a precautionary landing to the south as wind was from that direction. Throttle was wide open with about 1/3 power. I initially thought the cause could be carb ice. Very shortly after wheels touched power increased to what seemed to be full power. Lifted off and made a turn; approximate 30 degree; toward north and about two thirds of the way into turn the power reduced again. Turned back toward beach again and another precautionary landing. As wheels touched; aircraft bounced hard twice. Power was restored after approximately 3 second of rolling on mains; tailwheel never touched. Power seemed to be fully restored. I quickly deduced that there must be a partial fuel blockage. I pulled up straight ahead and climbed to approximately 500 FT to make a very gentle turn to the right toward a nearby airport. I was able to climb to approximately 800 FT but had two more episodes of slow engine power loss during this phase. A violent back and forth rocking of wings seemed to help clear the engine and power was at least partially restored. After arriving at the airport and checking all possible causes; the fuel tank was drained of remaining fuel; the line and valve were removed from the bottom of the fuel tank. The strainer in the tank was found to have a small amount of water and was partially plugged with a trash and a flaky substance. Parts were cleaned and reinstalled.




Synopsis: A J3 Cub lost power at about 800 FT just off the coast; so the pilot attempted a beach landing. Upon touchdown power was restored; (happened twice) so he maneuver vigorously to clear a fuel line; then flew to nearby airport where water and debris were discovered in the fuel tank.
Date: 201402
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZZ.Airport, FO
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: Citation X (C750)
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Initial Climb
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZZ
Aircraft component: Hydraulic System Lines; Connectors; Fittings
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Ground Event / Encounter Object; Ground Excursion Runway
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; General Evacuated
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: As we finished our before takeoff checklist we proceeded with a standard takeoff; power was set; gauges were checked and we proceeded with our rotation. As soon as positive rate gear up we heard loud noise as the gear was being retracted; then we had CAS message for hydraulic a low volume as well as rapidly decreasing. At 400 FT and within seconds of this occurring we lowered the landing gear. We proceeded with the checklist called Approach and informed them of the situation and request return to the station. We climbed to 2;000 FT and it was an unrestricted visibility night with no cloud cover. We were cleared to land on Runway 10. The checklist was followed for a hydraulic failure on the A System with no hydraulic volume. Since the primary breaks did not work nor were full flaps available or spoilers; according to the checklist; we proceeded using the emergency brakes which slowed down the aircraft to more or less 60 KTS. As we realized the runway was coming to an end we turned into the grass area to help stop the aircraft. We hit the PAPI light system for Runway 28 which was not illuminated. Once the aircraft came to a complete stop we checked on the passengers; as no one was hurt and we proceed towards the exit of the aircraft.




Synopsis: CE750 Captain experiences Hydraulic System A failure as the gear is retracted on departure. The gear is extended before complete system failure and the flight returns to the departure airport after complying with checklist procedures. Flaps and spoilers are inoperative with the loss of the A System along with normal brakes. The crew is unable to stop on the 11;000 FT plus runway using emergency brakes and a runway excursion occurs.