elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201808
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict NMAC; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Automation Aircraft RA; Automation Aircraft TA; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: While within the class B airspace; 10 miles North of ZZZ; we called the airport 'in sight' and were cleared for a visual approach to ZZZ runway XX. As we began our descent from 4;000 MSL; we noticed a target on TCAS 500 ft below our altitude approaching our path from the East. We stopped our descent while looking for the traffic. Then the [TCAS] commanded a climb as the aircraft neared our location. We began a climb as the aircraft passed below us. When TCAS stated clear of conflict; we continued our approach to ZZZ. I reported our conflict to ZZZ tower; and we were cleared to land on XX. VFR traffic below the Class B airspace combined with our clearance for a visual approach contributed to our conflict within 500 ft vertical. We never saw the other aircraft. [TRACON] was busy; but a warning that the aircraft was below us and converging on our track to the airport could have delayed our descent; and avoided the conflict.




Synopsis: Small Transport pilot reported a TCAS warning on initial approach.
Date: 202008
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: B747-400
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Gear Extend/Retract Mechanism
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Fuel Issue
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Contract maintenance noted a leaky hydraulic line on the right body gear and were replacing the line when I was conducting my preflight. I asked them about the repair and they said that they were finishing up. They signed the repair off and we pushed taxied and took off without incident until the first officer attempted to raise the landing gear. He could not get the lever past the off position and a 'GEAR TILT' caution message displayed on the EICAS.  We informed ZZZ departure that we needed to work a landing gear issue; and requested to level off at 5;000 feet.  I believe ZZZ TRACON [advised] an issue on our behalf; since thereafter they referred to us as an emergency aircraft. We completed the QRH for 'GEAR TILT' after advising departure of our issue; then consulted with our dispatcher and maintenance control via satphone; and determined that the best course of action would be to jettison fuel to below max landing weight and return to ZZZ. We calculated our maximum amount of fuel to be on board when landing by subtracting the zero fuel weight from the max landing weight. Since we were so close to the field we elected to jettison down to our max landing weight before returning to the field. We calculated 85.3 tons of fuel to be the maximum amount of fuel we could have on board considering a zero fuel weight of 210.4 tons and a max landing weight of 295.7 tons. We decided to be cautious and jettison down to 83.0 to ensure we were well below max landing weight. We ran the fuel jettison checklist in the QRH; and jettisoned fuel as per procedure. We were receiving radar vectors during this time. After our jettison was complete; we returned to ZZZ and conducted an ILS to Runway XXL landing without further incident. Bill contract maintenance when they make a mistake and cost the company money.




Synopsis: B747-400 First Officer reported an EICAS GEAR TILT message on takeoff; resulting in fuel jettison and an air turn back to a precautionary emergency landing.
Date: 201708
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Turbulence; 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: SA-227 AC Metro III
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Workload
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: When I entered the approach environment at ZZZ; Approach Control had me increase speed to 210 knots. I was then told to slow to 180 knots or less on the downwind segment. Shortly thereafter; I was given an altitude change (9000 feet to 8000 feet) and a 180 degree heading change. As I inputted all those into the altitude select and OBS; the airplane started the turn and began diving for the ground at a high rate. I disconnected the autopilot and began a recovery but not before I descended to around 7000 feet. During this time; the sink rate and pull up visual and aural warnings were going off.After landing and securing the aircraft; I called my mechanic and explained what happened. He said that when the plane was going 210 knots at that low altitude; the autopilot trimmed the airplane for that speed; which is trimmed pitched down significantly to maintain level attitude. When I slowed the plane to below 180 knots by reducing power and deploying 1/4 flaps; it further pitched the nose forward. So; when I commanded the 180 degree turn and descend; the airplane configuration along with the turbulence in the area at the time probably overloaded the autopilot servos; causing it to be unresponsive.I have never flown the plane at 210 knots in the approach environment in this airplane. I've been advised not to do that again due to the above situation possibly reoccurring.




Synopsis: SA-227 pilot reported entering speed changes; altitude descent; and 180 degree heading changes in rapid succession causing aircraft to nose dive and activate aural warnings.
Date: 202101
Aircraft: No Aircraft
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I had the idea in my head from somewhere in my training about what medicals were due for what type of operation. And if you are not confronted with it you don't really look into it. You feel you know the answer. In the course of running my business I got a database to track currencies; compliance; inspections and flight and engine times. While I was loading the database and setting up alerts and warnings I noticed that I may have; in the past; been flying commercially on a third class for a couple of short periods. I am not sure since I do not have all my old medicals to check. And by the past I am talking about 4 to 5 years ago. Remembering exactly what happened is difficult. Because of this incident I am super vigilant now about medicals; although because of COVID; I had to use an extension on my last medical. My database now warns me when I am getting close to my medical due date. I have gotten the idea out of my head that I can let a second class turn into a third class.




Synopsis: Reporter reported possibly flying commercially with a third class physical several years ago.
Date: 202004
Aircraft: No Aircraft
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Off Duty
Reporter qualification: Flight Attendant Current
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors; Procedure; Company Policy
Primary problem: Company Policy

Narrative: New jumpseat relocation has a negative when it comes to safety and security concerns. Compromising our ability to communicate in an emergency and security situation by being away from the interphone and private conversations that occur on the jumpseat cause issues and does nothing to promote social distancing because we still work together and there is no way to avoid that aspect on the airplane.What's [the]  purpose when you have to sit next to people and the whole row is not blocked anyways. It doesn't change anything and I am concerned this is throwing safety out the window. Safety demo and oxygen and life vest should be demonstrated regardless. In addition; we need to address oxygen masks with personal masks on their faces. This needs to be addressed immediately.




Synopsis: Flight Attendant reported concerns about safety and security issues relating to new COVID-19 jumpseat arrangements and social distancing guidelines.
Date: 202109
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ORD.Airport, IL
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 20
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B ORD
Second aircraft: UAV: Unpiloted Aerial Vehicle
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Passenger
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: Airspace Violation All Types; Conflict NMAC; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Unauthorized Flight Operations (UAS); Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Passenger
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: I am a 20+ year CFII who was a passenger on [a] paid commercial flight from ZZZ to ORD. Just before our aircraft transitioned from a heading of approximately 120 heading to 090 just northwest of the KURKK intersection; I happened to be looking outside and saw an object pass by about 200 feet below and 250-300 ft away from our flight. The object was black and had red and green highlights. In the moment; my brain registered this as a drone with typically dim position lights. The encounter was understandably fast given our speed and I know my memory isn't going to provide much detail and may be biased; but we were dangerously close to something. I cannot rule out that it was a balloon; but it would have been the most rectangular balloon I'd ever seen. I also happened to have Foreflight open on my phone at that moment as I like to watch where we are in flight. About 10 seconds after seeing the object; I used Foreflight's option to mark a position and will gladly share screen shots and such if needed.Since my phone was in airplane mode and had a limited view of the GPS constellation; there is likely considerable error in that data. Still; where it shows on the map matches the location I saw out the window as I distinctly remember seeing the Twin Lakes Recreational Area in Palatine; IL. Our aircraft did not seem to make any course changes other than the move to 090. So; I don't know if the crew saw the object. Obviously; we landed without incident. I tried to connect with the crew to share my observation; but they were already out of the aircraft. One thing I noticed in this process... I had no idea how to make a report in the moment. Despite being a commercial CFII and 107 operator; I didn't know where to turn to be helpful. I'm sure there was a better; faster reporting option; but I had forgotten the best route. So; I'll add that to my list of things to review for my flight review next week. I hope this data is helpful in some way.




Synopsis: A seated passenger reported observing a UAS while on an air carrier flight on final approach to a Class B airport.
Date: 201307
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B777-200
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Pilot Seat
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Technician
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Airframe; Maintenance Powerplant
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Maintenance
When detected: Routine Inspection
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Procedure; Chart Or Publication; Human Factors; Manuals
Primary problem: Manuals

Narrative: While working B777-200 today; I noticed the Captain's seat front rail stops were not correctly positioned; and when I checked the forward limit switch; it was broken off. After noticing the discrepancy; I placarded on MEL 25-1a; the Captain's seat power functions inoperative. As said before; it appears the figures and explanations on seat installation are not clear enough. Evening; ETOPS Pre-Departure Check (PDC).

Callback: Reporter stated he was working a PDC Check on a B777-200 aircraft. Revisions to the Maintenance Manual Seat Installation Procedures and Figures (Diagrams) will be made soon to clarify the correct installation position of the Front Rail Stop Limit switch. Because the limit switch (micro-switch) on the lower frame of the Captain's seat had been installed upside down; the micro-switch could not ride up on the ramp on the seat rail stop fitting to interrupt electric power to the seat motor. As a result; the limit switch on the seat frame was literally cut in half and allowed the seat motor to continue driving the seat forward to the rail end stops. The limit switch is not a Line Replaceable Unit (LRU); the seat has to be replaced.Reporter stated there are eight different ways to install the stops while the limit switch is only installed on the inboard side of the seat frame facing outboard. The Maintenance Manual is being misinterpreted due to the unclear procedures and drawings Maintenance has to use for the installation.



Synopsis: A Line Aircraft Maintenance Technician noticed during a Pre-Departure Check on a B777-200 aircraft; the Captain's seat forward limit switch was broken off. The front rail stops were also not correctly positioned. Unclear procedures and drawings in the Aircraft Maintenance Manual allowed for misinterpretation of installation.
Date: 201508
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 5
Light: Night
Aircraft: B767-300 and 300 ER
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural MEL / CDL
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Our aircraft was dispatched with MEL XA-XX-X-X ADP Controller - Auto Function. The MEL operational procedures directed us to turn ADP ON - on ground prior to takeoff; and inflight prior to flap extension. On climb out; through about 10;000 feet we turned the ADP OFF. Later in the climb; (around FL180); we received an EICAS msg C HYD SYS PRESS. We ran the QRH procedure for this message; which directed us to turn the ADP ON; and note whether SYS PRESS was restored or not. The msg remained; so the procedure then directed us to turn this pump off; along with the C1 and C2 electric pumps. This left us with the Center Hydraulic system inoperative; which would require an alternate flaps and gear extension at destination; and flaps 20 landing. We then contacted dispatch and [Maintenance Operations] to discuss our situation and options. The current weather and forecast at our destination was VFR. The extra time enroute would allow for a lower weight landing; using less runway. The runway at our destination was sufficient for our planned landing weight and configuration; so we elected to continue to our destination. Further along in the flight we noticed that the destination weather was reporting a 1;000 feet ceiling. Our dispatcher then issued an [Amended Release] listing the addition of an alternate with recomputed fuel burns and reserves. It later occurred to me that our dispatcher may not be aware that if we were to divert after an unsuccessful approach at destination; that we would have no way of raising our gear; therfore our fuel burn to our alternate would be higher. I then contacted dispatch and advised of this possibility; and was subsequently issued a second ARTR with a revised fuel burn to our alternate with the aircraft in a Gear Down configuration.


Second narrative: [Report Narrative Contained No Additional Information].


Synopsis: B767-300 flight crew reported the Dispatcher may have overlooked an important planning factor when they were dispatched with an MEL for C Hyd Sys inoperative.
Date: 201703
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZFW.ARTCC, TX
Aircraft: Medium Transport
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZFW
ATC / advisory: Center ZFW
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Developmental
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Distraction; Confusion; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Air Traffic Control Separated Traffic
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: D10 called to coordinate Aircraft X direct to GYI airport and I approved it. If they said he would be assigned 030 I missed it. The higher MVA is just across the facility boundary and aircraft had penetrated before I realized he wasn't climbing. I issued a climb immediately and the pilot reported he had ground and airport in sight.




Synopsis: ZFW Center Controller reported about an aircraft altitude at transfer that was below the Minimum Vectoring Altitude.
Date: 201204
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Airbus Industrie Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Local
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Other / Unknown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Automation Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Runway XXL had been closed for maintenance. The airport called to tell me that the runway was open and I amended the IDS to reflect the runway open. However; I forgot to change the runway to open on the ASDE-X. An A310 was inside 1 mile final and the ASDE-X alarmed for the closed runway. I quickly fixed the runway status on the ASDE-X to show it open; as it should be. The alert went away and I allowed the aircraft to land. I now know that I was required to send the aircraft around. There are already adequate procedures for updating the runway status. This has made me realize that I should start using the checklist. This would have been a good time to have some leeway with ASDE-X alerts.




Synopsis: After re-opening a closed runway; Tower Controller failed to note the runway as open on the ASDE-X programming and allowed an aircraft to land after an alarm was broadcasted. The reporter acknowledged his failure to use the checklist.