elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 202006
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: UAV - Unpiloted Aerial Vehicle
Operator: Personal
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
Reporter organization: Other Part 107
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Other Person
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; General Police / Security Involved
Contributing factors: Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I am a licensed Part 107 remote pilot. While preflight checking my aircraft I was approached by [a] Police Officer informing me that I was operating in a restricted area.  I informed them that I was a Part 107 operator in I had filed a flight plan earlier in the morning using LAANC (via the Airmap app). After this exchange; [the] officer spoke with [police] Sgt. whom informed me that [the] Police Department would have their helicopter operating in the area.  I was requested at that time not to exceed 100 feet for my operation.  This was in alignment with my prior FAA LAANC flight plan.  And as such I continued my flight confident in both my LAANC approval; communication with local air traffic and while maintaining VLOS (Visual Line of Sight) on my SUAS (Small Unmanned Aircraft System) at all times.  After some time and completing my mission; I was approached by the officer who said that their helicopter reached out to the FAA and was unable to locate any flight plan filed.  I continued to partner with [the] officer during this time and shared any Part 107 license and my LAANC approval through Airmap (I have screenshots of this as well for review; if requested).  He informed me that ZZZ Tower or the FAA couldn't locate my flight plan. My concern rests in making sure other low flying aircraft in busy Class B airspace (particularly police/MEDEVAC/etc) are able to get updated information on registered SUAS flights in the area during operations.  I'm unsure of how the LAANC system failed to provide this information through whatever channel the police used. I phoned ZZZ Tower and spoke with an Air Traffic Controller whom informed me that they have no way of reviewing LAANC information after it is file.  If this is the case; how can local law enforcement leverage reviewing the LAANC system to validate legitimate authorized SUAS operations in the area.




Synopsis: Pilot of a SUAS (Small Unmanned Aircraft System) reported that while conducting a mission in controlled airspace; local law enforcement and ATC were unable to locate the filed flight plan.
Date: 201711
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: MIC.Airport, MN
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Tower MIC
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: Taxi
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: After being told by tower and my acknowledgment back to tower to 'hold short Runway 24' for landing traffic on 14; I saw the landing aircraft land onto runway 14 then I taxied my aircraft onto runway 24 without clearance. There was no other runway 24 traffic landing. Anticipated being cleared for takeoff.




Synopsis: General Aviation pilot reported taxiing onto the runway after receiving hold short instructions from the tower.
Date: 202102
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Aircraft: No Aircraft
Flight plan: None
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: Recently we were told we had to wear masks while on sector. Following the rules I was wearing a mask; and multiple aircraft could not understand what I was saying. Multiple times I was told to 'Say again' until I pulled the mask down to give the aircraft the transmission. After I pulled the mask down they said they could understand me better. This is a safety issue. If the aircraft can't understand what we are saying and takes the wrong altitude this could be disastrous.Since Coronavirus started we were told we only had to wear masks when we couldn't be socially distanced. What has changed? Why do we have to wear masks all the time even if we are socially distanced?




Synopsis: Center Controller reported communication issues with pilots while wearing a face mask.
Date: 201911
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Small Transport
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Distraction; Communication Breakdown; Confusion
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: ATC Tower instructed Aircraft X the following directions:Tower: Aircraft X cross Runway 8L at Echo Taxi Bravo Delta to 4L at Delta.	Aircraft X: Cross 8L Bravo Delta.Tower: Aircraft X; 4L at Delta Line up and Wait.Aircraft X: 4L at Delta Line up and Wait.Tower: Aircraft Y cleared for takeoff 4L at Foxtrot.I am already lined up and waiting on 4L at Delta one taxi way down the departure end of the runway.He then instructs Aircraft Y to do a 180 and exit 4L on foxtrot.I query tower; Aircraft X; 180 to 4L at Foxtrot?Aircraft X: 180 to 4L at Foxtrot?Tower instructs: Aircraft X to depart Runway 4L.In the air tower gives me a number to call.It is clear that tower instructed us to cross Runway 8L taxi via Bravo then Delta. There is no instruction to hold short at Delta other than when ground instructed us to hold 4L at Delta on our initial taxi instructions.Then Tower instructs me to taxi to 4L at Delta and 'Line up and wait for spacing.'I am lined up and waiting when Tower clears Aircraft Y for takeoff on Runway 4L at foxtrot. This is after he has instructed me to line up and wait on 4L. I am on the Runway 4L lined up as instructed; when he tells Aircraft Y to do a 180 and exit onto foxtrot. I repeated and queried tower 3 times: 'line up and wait[?]'; he came back 'Aircraft X Line up and Wait 4L Delta.'It is clear that Tower put me on the runway before Aircraft Y and then cleared Aircraft Y after I was already in front of Aircraft Y. I had the clear instructions from Tower; which I repeated clearly. And when I mistook Aircraft Y for my call sign I repeated the instructions again. This was the Tower's error and it could have been a disaster; since he cleared Aircraft Y for departure after we were already lined up and waiting thus could not see him when we entered the runway.Very poor job on the part of ZZZ Tower; thank goodness there was no accident.




Synopsis: Pilot reported that a Tower Controller instructed them to line up and wait while clearing another aircraft to takeoff on the same runway; resulting in a ground conflict.
Date: 201906
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: A319
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Ground ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Crew; Person Flight Attendant
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Gate; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: The aircraft was on terminal air conditioner for prior smoke/odor/fume event. After both engines started a 'dirty sock' type odor was noticed in the cockpit. The smell dissipated somewhat during initial taxi. The flight attendants did not notice any odor in the cabin. We continued the taxi; but when we were #1 for takeoff; the odor was still present. QRH procedure followed and returned to gate.




Synopsis: A319 Captain reported a return to gate after noticing 'dirty socks' odor during taxi for departure.
Date: 201705
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: BOS.Airport, MA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: Medium Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class B BOS
ATC / advisory: TRACON A90
Aircraft component: ILS/VOR
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: We were setup on the ILS 27 approach into BOS. They were also landing 33L. The Final Approach controller issued us maintain 170 kts to RIPIT (FAF) during the approach we received Red X's 3 times which would indicate the Localizer isn't working on our instruments. This happened outside the FAF and we were visual and could maintain a visual with the airport that we decided that we wouldn't go around because it was VMC. We continued the Approach. Final asked what speed we were doing. I replied 170 kts. He then came back and said spacing wouldn't work and even if we slowed it wouldn't work. Cancel Approach clearance turn right 360 and maintain 2000 and that he would sequence us back. My Captain then replied over the radio 'Unable we were given red x's and we are having navigational problems.' After a few seconds the Captain then said 'we broke out we need to continue the approach' (we were already visual). Final says traffic to look out for 11 o'clock 800 ft. Captain replies traffic insight. Final says maintain a visual with the traffic cleared ILS 27. I then repeat back maintain visual and clear for the approach. Final asks if we were having issues with navigation. I reply we are visual with the airport. Final hands us off to tower. This whole exchange lasted for over 30 seconds from when he asked how fast we were going until we got the hand off to tower. We were 3.6 DME from the ILS when the other aircraft landed. The red X's appeared around 13.5 to 11.5 DME. Upon taxiing in ground had a number for the captain to call. The captain called the number and then after some time referred the guy to our chief pilot I wasn't able to hear what the whole conversation entailed I just heard what the Captain said to the person.




Synopsis: Air carrier First Officer reported navigation problems arose on final to BOS Runway 27 and they continued to a visual landing after ATC had cancelled their approach clearance due to traffic to Runway 33L.
Date: 201703
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Turbulence
Aircraft: A319
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Illness / Injury; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General Physical Injury / Incapacitation
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Weather
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: While climbing out at approximately 19;000 ft. MSL we experienced clear air turbulence. After ensuring positive aircraft control and relaying the turbulence report and PIREP to ATC the Captain received an interphone call from the Flight Attendant (FA)'s. I was flying with the autopilot engaged and monitoring the number one (ATC) radio so I did not directly hear the conversation(s) between the FA's and the Captain. As the Captain relayed the information to me directly it appeared we may have a possible flight attendant injury from the aft galley area. As the flight progressed the Captain continued to communicate with the flight attendants frequently to assess the situation and it appeared having medical personnel meet the aircraft would be prudent given the information the Captain was receiving via interphone from the flight attendants. When we arrived at [our destination] the medical personnel we requested were present in the boarding area. Passengers were deplaned normally from my perspective although I remained in the cockpit until deplaning was complete as there was a lot of activity in the jet bridge.




Synopsis: A319 First Officer reported clear air turbulence that resulted in a flight attendant injury.
Date: 201402
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Rain; Thunderstorm; Turbulence; 0
Light: Night
Aircraft: PA-31 Navajo/Chieftan/Mojave/T1040
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Weather; Procedure
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: Enroute line of frontal storms across track; approximately ZZZ-ZZZ1. Cleared to deviate right of track up to HDG 020 deg M. Was holding HDG 020 to fly through only available gap. Turbulence continuous moderate; but wasn't sure if there would be worse. In IMC and hand flying to minimize possible turbulence vs. autopilot induced loads on airframe ('g' and IAS outside limits). Was right between cells with a large storm to the left. MIA Center gave an instruction to turn left. Don't remember the new heading other than it would have put me into a TS cell. Instructed accompanying pilot to reply with 'Unable;' then I queried the instruction in case I had misunderstood. Had understood correctly; but a left turn was not possible due TS. Advised Center that I was still unable to turn as directed. Center advised that I would need to declare an emergency to disregard the instruction - so I declared. Unable to select TXDR 7700 at the time due to a need to adjust power settings to control speed excursions. By the time I could change the code I was clear of the immediate storms with a clear path for the rest of the flight; so I cancelled the emergency and turned to a newly assigned heading of (I think) 340 deg M.




Synopsis: PA31 Captain reports being unable to comply with an ATC heading instruction due to a thunderstorm and is instructed to declare an emergency; which is accomplished.
Date: 202112
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Second aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Instructor; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Workload; Situational Awareness; Time Pressure; Other / Unknown; Distraction
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Flight Crew; Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Separated Traffic; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: During some traffic pattern practice during the evening hours; our aircraft was on the Left downwind Runway XX when ATC cleared us to land. Another single engine aircraft was cleared to land #2 in sequence behind us. We saw the other aircraft on the North downwind and proceeded to configure to land and fly our base and final turns. I glanced down at the ADS-B traffic on my iPad and saw their aircraft was at 0 ft. vertical separation and appeared to be almost right on my own aircraft's position. They were behind our aircraft; so I could not see them right away; and only until the Tower called them to suggest they perform a 360 degree turn to create space; I noticed them pulling away from our aircraft to our left at our same altitude.




Synopsis: GA instructor pilot reported an NMAC while on final approach. The Instructor states being aware of another aircraft in the airport traffic pattern. When on final the instructor's ADS-B showed zero vertical feet separation with the other aircraft. It was then the Tower Controller instructed the second aircraft to make a 360 degree turn.
Date: 201811
Location: SCT.TRACON, CA
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B SCT
ATC / advisory: TRACON SCT
Second aircraft: UAV - Unpiloted Aerial Vehicle
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Distraction
Anomaly: Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: While on LUCKI 4 Arrival to SAN; we were distracted by an odd aircraft close to our track. It looked like a large drone. We were distracted discussing this aircraft and possibly missed something. Soon after ATC made an odd query as to our position as if we were tracking incorrectly; asked if we had the field in sight. I replied that we did and ATC cleared us for a visual approach. After landing they gave a phone number to call for possible deviation. SoCal implied we were off course/asked if field in sight/cleared us for a visual approach. I am unsure what was wrong. Need better communication with ATC.




Synopsis: First Officer reported sighting a drone while on initial approach to SAN; which caused a distraction and possible track deviation.
Date: 201810
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B757 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Flap/Slat Control System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Cleared to descend directly to 3000 FT on downwind and to slow to 210K. I called for flaps 1; then we got an EICAS LE SLAT DISAGREE. Flap indicator stopped halfway between 0 and 1. First Officer (F/O) pulled out checklist; I declared 'I've got the plane and the radios' and told ATC we had a mechanical issue and would like to level at 4000 FT and stay on heading. I asked for a long final once we got things squared away. Traffic was light; we were above a cloud deck; there were no weather issues and we had 10000 [pounds] of gas; about 1.5 hours worth. F/O tried retracting flaps but nothing happened as system was locked out (as designed). Checklist completed; F/O then contacted Dispatch to get landing data for abnormal landing configuration. While waiting for response; he wrote up the ELB for the EICAS message and looked up the landing data. ATC vectored us around in a big left turn oval. Didn't hear back from Dispatch; thought possible datalink problem; and opted to continue inbound without taking time to make voice contact with Dispatch as everything was under control and aircraft was flying fine. I gave the aircraft and radios to the F/O; then talked to purser; telling her of our issue; planning a normal landing in 10-15 minutes. Took back plane; F/O then told ATC [that we were] ready to be vectored inbound for landing; SOBs 170; 1.5 hours of fuel. I then had us extend flaps to 20; knowing it would take a long time using the electrics. F/O had time to type a last message to Dispatch that we...were inbound for landing; Dispatch responded he 'would inform everyone.' I dropped the gear...and slowed to approach speed; kept it on autopilot until 500 FT. Good landing between 1000 FT -1500 FT markers; full reverse; really didn't need Auto Brakes 3 after all.


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


Synopsis: B757 Flight Crew reported that the alternate flap procedure was used after an EICAS LE SLAT DISAGREE was received on a downwind vector for landing.