elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 202107
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: CLT.TRACON, NC
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Ferry / Re-Positioning
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class B CLT
ATC / advisory: TRACON CLT
Second aircraft: Small Aircraft; High Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Distraction
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: On a Part 91 repositioning flight we were leveling off at 3;000 feet in contact with Charlotte Approach activating our IFR flight plan. Weather conditions were clear with unlimited ceiling and unlimited visibility despite our destination airport JQF reporting a broken layer at 500 feet. We were loading and activating the approach for our destination airport and had it in sight visually. When I looked up as Pilot Flying out the left-hand window I saw a flash and looked behind the wing to see a high wing aircraft a my 8 o'clock position about 25 feet below me. We did not see the airplane in front of us at any time and had overtaken it as it was flying in the same direction. We were well within the 30 mile mode C veil of Charlotte International yet that airplane did not show up on ADS-B. No evasive action was taken because we had already passed it by the time I saw it. We queried Charlotte Approach if they had a primary target in our vicinity and they said that they did not have any target.




Synopsis: Air taxi flight crew reported NMAC with another aircraft not on ADS-B while in climb.
Date: 201503
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: SJU.Airport, PR
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Transport; Low Wing; 2 Recip Eng
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZSU
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Time Pressure; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Flying to San Juan; I was in cruise flight at 2;000 feet 10 nm from Plaza Carolina. Mid-morning local time ATC advised me of traffic at 12:00; 1/4 mile; 2;100 feet. Since I did not see the traffic I immediately started a precautionary descent. I again received the same advisory for traffic at 12:00; 1/4 mile and 2;100 feet. At this point I had descended about 50-100 feet when an Aero Commander passed about 100 feet directly above my aircraft in the opposite direction.




Synopsis: A light twin commercial carrier pilot approaching SJU reported a near miss at about 2;000 feet after descending in response to an ATC alert about approaching an approaching aircraft.
Date: 201308
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZTL.ARTCC, GA
Flight conditions: Marginal
Aircraft: A320
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class A ZTL
ATC / advisory: Center ZTL
Aircraft component: FMS/FMC
Component problem: Design
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Distraction; Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness; Workload; Time Pressure
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation - Altitude Crossing Restriction Not Met; Deviation - Speed All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; General Work Refused
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Procedure; Chart Or Publication
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: On the IVANE RNAV STAR; approaching MAYOS...FMS message [repeatedly advising] 'too steep path.' ATC repeatedly re-assigning speed. Aircraft was attempting to exceed depicted speeds in order to make altitudes. I did not feel safe. Using [my best] judgment and PIC discretion; I requested a different arrival.Why? The Airbus cannot reconcile [the complexities of] the IVANE [STAR]. The STAR is poor; no better than KELLS. Add in tailwinds and ATC continuously vectoring us off the arrival and continuously re-assigning speeds. We reduced speeds also because of turbulence. [Finally I] requested ATC re-clear us on the MAJIC STAR. ATC did so. Problem solved.Lots of task loading; turbulent conditions; argumentative ATC. And then later; as I was trying to get home afterwards; my Chief Pilot calling my standby/spare/children's cell phone and leaving me messages to call him on Sunday night when I am OFF! ALL of these things put me 'in the red.'




Synopsis: An A320 Captain expressed his disgust for the IVANE RNAV STAR into CLT advising its complexities exceeded the capabilities of his autoflight system; compelling it to exceed required airspeeds in order to attempt to comply with the associated altitude restrictions. Further difficulties were provided by the demands of ATC to comply with the published restrictions and/or to reassign airspeeds; vector or otherwise interfere with the flight crew's efforts to comply with the published constraints of the arrival. They ultimately refused the IVANE and requested and were assigned the MAJIC; a less complex; non RNAV STAR.
Date: 201309
Aircraft: B767-300 and 300 ER
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Aircraft component: Aircraft Furnishing
Component problem: Improperly Operated; Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Other / Unknown; Inflight Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Violated 2 possibly 3 FAR's: 1. Blocked own jumpseat with parked service carts. Official procedure is to park 2 half carts each at 1L and 1R blocking 1L aft and 1R jumpseat. Also must park beverage cart in cross aisle blocking 1 Center L and 1 Center R jumpseat. Service lasts approximately 3 to 4.5 hours due to extent of service and number of passengers. 2. Three of 5 parked carts are unattended (unsecured-there are no tie-downs) during service. By definition each aisle flight attendant can only attend 1 cart each. Galley flight attendant and purser are setting up and breaking down 3 tier carts in galley therefore not able to attend and position either of the unsecured parked carts. Had to violate FAR's to accomplish. Approximately 2 hours into flight experienced moderate turbulence and Captain instructed all flight attendants to take seats/suspend service. We pushed all half carts into galley moved beverage cart to side so that all 4 flight attendants could take seats. All 4 half carts rolled around in galley due to flaws in braking systems. This is the case with ALL of the half carts and most food and beverage carts on reconfigured 767's as well. Half cart brake only works if pushed backwards: they will roll forward and sideways with brake set. One half cart started rolling down aisle toward cabin. I and Flight Attendant in 1L aft had to physically hold onto carts to keep them from leaving galley. I have video of this phenomenon. Luckily no one was hurt. Three possible FAR violations: could not deploy all 4 required restraints for cart positions 3L or R/F and 311 R/F. If rear restraints deployed front restraints cannot be deployed: will not fit. Only deployed front restraints.




Synopsis: A Flight Attendant working in First Class reports that possibly 3 FAR's were violated during cabin service in cruise flight because of malfunctioning and unsecured serving carts during turbulence.
Date: 201811
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Night
Aircraft: Ultralight
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Landing
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Returned To Gate
Contributing factors: Airport; Chart Or Publication; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Got up early and got a weather briefing; with marginal VFR expected at departure time; but forecast expected clearing up. Departed on a VFR cross country in marginal VMC conditions (ceilings). After departure; flew heading as required to avoid a few clouds. Later became apparent that the cross country would not be able to be safely completed; due to clouds developing below; rather than dissipating (could see that ground lights were becoming 'fuzzy'); and due to being dark; unsure what was above. Flew to a local airport (towered; but tower not open) I am familiar with and setup for [the] runway. On approach; everything seemed normal; except the runway lights were out. After landing; I noticed that all of the taxiways leading up to runway were barricaded. Came to conclusion runway was closed. Was able to taxi clear on an intersecting runway; and taxied to the ramp while it was still dark. Checked NOTAMs and found the runway was closed. The runway closure NOTAM was not in the weather. Additionally; there was not a lighted 'X' on the runway to designate that the runway was closed. No personnel were working on the runway; and no damage occurred.




Synopsis: Ultralight pilot reported landing on a closed runway.
Date: 201405
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Main Gear Tire
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Private
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Ground Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Airport
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: I was taking some friends up on a flight and did a practice approach in visual conditions with a touch and go; then went and did another practice approach. Performed a circle to land for Runway 20. There was a slight cross wind. Winds were 210-220 at 10 knots. Touched down on right main gear first with stall warning horn going on and then left main gear touched down; then nose gear. As I rolled out at maybe 25-30 knots or so I started to get severe shudder in the airplane and it started to pull to the left. I added heavy right rudder to correct. Tower cleared us to taxiway Charlie and taxi to ramp on his frequency. I reported that I was having control issues. I got the aircraft stopped and tried to turn to the right while adding power and right rudder the aircraft spun to the left. The Tower asked if we needed assistance I said yes or we could get out and push. Tower said stay in aircraft and he would send a tug. I looked out at left main gear and saw the tire was nearly off the rim. I alerted the Tower of my left main gear issue. The aircraft was towed to the FBO. I made sure to check all three tires as part of preflight. I did notice some wear on left main (but flyable) and the right main had been replaced within the last month or two. Nose gear was also in decent shape. All tires were properly inflated. I am not sure if this was a FOD incident during the touch and goes or wear on tire which caused the tire to blowout. The landing was at Vref 40 knots or slightly lower.




Synopsis: C172 pilot reports making several touch and go landings before landing and discovering the left tire is flat. Directional control problems are reported but the aircraft is kept on the runway and stopped.
Date: 201901
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B757 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Final Approach
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Other / Unknown; Inflight Event / Encounter Unstabilized Approach
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Third leg of OE (Operations Experience). New hire First Officer. First experience with Boeing. He had difficulties in sim phase. I had been advised this could be a challenging OE. It was that. However; in this instance; my error contributed: I was fully engaged with trying to get my student to properly fly an FMS Bridge Visual to Rwy 28R [and] I failed to set TCAS to TA as recommended. Student was Pilot Flying. We experienced an RA at around 1;000 feet MSL (due to my TA error); commanding a climb. He failed to respond/respect the TCAS climb guidance (he froze); despite my directives that he do so. I took the aircraft; hand-flying; to respond to RA (shocked that he was not responding to the RA despite my directives that he do so). The RA response took us out of a position to make a safe landing; so I called for a go-around. He failed to properly respond to go-around commands/call-outs. I was solo; attempting to fly; manage Mode Control Panel; respond to Tower heading and altitude instructions; and cleaning up the aircraft. At one point in the sequence; at/above 2;500 feet MSL; we entered a shallow descent; I am guessing in the 300-foot range. I immediately corrected the deviation. Shortly after my correction; Tower called us regarding the descent. Once stable; there were no further issues.




Synopsis: B757 Captain reported a new First Officer had difficulty complying with procedures and clearances in reaction to an RA and subsequent go-around.
Date: 201302
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: TEB.Airport, NJ
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Turbulence; 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Learjet 31
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class B EWR; Class D TEB
ATC / advisory: TRACON N90
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Engineer; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Crossing Restriction Not Met; Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Runway change TEB from takeoff Runway 1 to take off [on Runway] 24. Assigned the TEB 8 departure. [We] had 2;000 feet in the altitude alert. Supposed to level off at 1;500 [feet]. [We] caught [the] mistake and went to 1;800 [feet] on overshoot. Corrected as ATC noticed and leveled [off] at 1;500 [feet]. No conflict noted by TCAS or ATC.




Synopsis: LJ31 Captain reports exceeding the initial 1;500 foot altitude restriction on the TEB 8 departure from Runway 24. Runway 1 had been the expected runway for departure but had been changed to Runway 24 just prior to departure.
Date: 201411
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: FOK.Airport, NY
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class D FOK
ATC / advisory: TRACON N90
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Distraction; Confusion; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Airspace Violation All Types
Detector: Person Flight Crew; Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I was cruising VFR eastbound along the south shore of Long Island at 3500 MSL; and receiving VFR traffic advisories from New York Approach with a discrete squawk code.  After passing 87N I informed the controller I was descending to 2500 MSL in order to avoid scattered clouds.  I subsequently informed the controller I would be reversing course to return westbound along the south shore; and did not note a change in altitude.I overlooked that my course and 2500 MSL altitude would have me crossing into the FOK Class D; which extends to 2600 MSL over the south shore.  In hindsight; while in two way contact with Approach for flight following I may have relaxed my airspace vigilance.  Upon inadvertently entering the FOK Class D the controller instructed to climb at or above 2600 MSL and to remain clear of FOK.  I then climbed to 2600+ to exit the top of the KFOK Class D.It is unclear to me whether this qualifies as a pilot deviation into the FOK Class D.  I was in two-way communication with the ATC controller responsible for FOK approach; and this controller was made aware of my intended altitude and flight path.  I did not however explicitly inform of intended transit through the FOK Class D and do not know if the approach controller coordinated with FOK tower; who would be the ATC facility 'having jurisdiction'.  It is unclear from the applicable regulations whether the Approach/TRACON controller also qualifies as the ATC facility responsible for the Class D; especially in a VFR advisory context (not IFR or other positive control).  Because of this ambiguity; in the future I will plan to explicitly inform the approach controller in advance of my flight path transiting Class D or C airspace; to either receive acknowledgment or instruction to remain clear.




Synopsis: Pilot reports of advising ATC while under flight following that he was descending to avoid clouds.  While doing so he entered a Class D airspace.
Date: 202106
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
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; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Hazardous Material Violation
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: Routine Inspection; Pre-flight
Result: Aircraft Equipment Problem Dissipated; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Passengers boarded & travelled from ZZZ to ZZZ1. In ZZZ1; the passengers then boarded a [make/model aircraft] and boarded through the aft with their carry on bags. I saw their bags and let them know they were too big to fit in the overhead bin. Passenger stated they were told to bring them onboard as a carry on. FA A and I were trying to accommodate the bags and were then told by the Gate Agent they were smart bags & since the battery couldn't be removed; the bags would need to come off. The pax were deplaned along with their bags. FA A stated the passengers were with us (along with their bags) on the previous flight. I did not see them board with their bags on the original flight.




Synopsis: Air Carrier Flight Attendant reported passengers were denied boarding due to carry on smart bags with non removable batteries.
Date: 202102
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Aircraft: Light Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Fractional
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Distraction; Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: With new guidelines for wearing mask on position. (With no one around) I am having multiple read back errors. Aircraft X miss read his restriction and frequency. The issue was corrected.When there is no one is close proximity controllers should not be made to wear mask.




Synopsis: Center Controller reported multiple read back errors while wearing a mandated face mask.