elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201206
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: CUT.Airport, CO
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: A-1 Husky
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class E ZDV
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Distraction; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Other / Unknown; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: No FARs were broken and at no time did I feel that I; (the only occupant of the aircraft); anything or structure was in danger. I was on a long; cross country in a slow plane.... At CUT I picked up an FAA flyer about flying near Mt Rushmore- my intent was to fly by Mt. Rushmore and be on my way east. Upon departure from CUT I noticed a mountainside that had been exposed and knowing that the 'Crazy Horse' stone carving was near by; I diverted to investigate. I slowed the plane to 70 MPH and set in 20 degrees of flaps and reduced power to maintain a 300 FPM descent from 7;500 MSL. A quick look at my chart (on the iPad) showed a monument marker ahead but no restricted airspace around it. I decided it was best to keep a wide berth from the monument and to stay well above it. I decided on 2;000 FT horizontally and to stay above the high ground (7;242 FT) to the east. As I approached the monument from the southeast on a northerly heading; I encountered a sink that required I apply power to maintain level flight and; in addition; I turned toward the monument in order to stay away from the rising terrain to the east in case I was unable to out climb the sinking air. The sinking air caused me to break my personal preset standard clearance of the monument of 2;000 FT horizontally and to stay above the high ground to the east. My best estimate is that I got between 1;500 and 2;000 FT horizontally of the monument while maintaining 7;200 MSL- all legal; but not what I had planned. I soon cleared the ridge to the north with ample room to spare and was on my way east skipping my earlier plan to fly over Mt Rushmore. I am writing this as a way to remind myself to do a better job of planning and to not be suckered in by chance encounters with interesting objects on the ground calling me to 'have a look'; especially in a plane that does low and slow well because low and slow can turn into spin and die. My excitement to see the Crazy Horse carving from the air; a nimble slow flying and high performance aircraft and not following my plan to fly directly from CUT to the Mt. Rushmore Monument; all resulted in putting me in a less than desirable position that could have been avoided.




Synopsis: Pilot of a small aircraft encounted a downdraft while flying by a National Monument site and descended lower than planned; but did not violate FAR restrictions.
Date: 201902
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A KZAK
ATC / advisory: Center KZAK
Aircraft component: HF SSB
Component problem: Malfunctioning
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
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Equipment Problem Dissipated; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: We had a very difficult time communicating on our HF radios during our Hawaii crossing. Not only was it frustrating but very distracting. Being new to the aircraft it got me thinking what it would have been like to communicate anything in an emergency situation in the middle of the Pacific. The radios worked but we just spent a lot of time changing frequencies and trying to hear what OAK and HNL Radio was trying to say. The frustrating part is the technology is out there in CPDLC and we don't have it. Just hope we never have a major problem in this airplane out over the pacific.


Second narrative: Prior to DUSAC unable to transmit or receive on HF for position report. [Another airliner] was able to share our position with Honolulu. We were able to eventually establish contact using VHF at DRAYK. Unable to respond to SELCAL.


Synopsis: Air carrier flight crew reported the inability to transmit or receive via HF communications during an oceanic crossing.
Date: 201907
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-700
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Reporter qualification: Flight Attendant Current
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Passenger Misconduct
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Gate
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Human Factors
Primary problem: Company Policy

Narrative: We encountered a couple with a child over the age of two years old. They refused to buckle the child in the seat belt for takeoff. The flights that day had been very turbulent.After discussing the situation with the other flight attendants and the Captain; we returned to the gate. At that point; two Ground supervisors came aboard and talked to the passengers. The supervisor told the crew that he discussed the matter with the couple and they agreed to adhere to C.F.R(s).The child was buckled in and the plane took off. Once in the air; the child remained in the seat belt throughout the flight. A follow-up call was received from [the company] Supervisor. She explained that there was a new directive coming from Headquarters and that once we inform the passenger that they should buckle their child during takeoff and landing but we are not to enforce C.F.R. It would be to the parent's discretion if the child should be buckled on takeoff and landing. She explained that passengers could perceive themselves as being 'bullied' if they are required to follow these regulations and procedures. Our focus is on hospitality. I am reporting based on the new directive I am required to adhere to; even though it is a FAR violation as stated; 10. REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS REGARDING THE USE OF CRSs ON AIRCRAFT. a. Children Under the Age of Two. Under the provisions in parts 121; 125; and 135; during takeoff; landing; and movement on the surface; each person on board shall occupy an approved seat or berth with a separate seat belt properly secured about him/her. However; a person who has not reached his/her second birthday may be held by an adult occupying a seat or berth.




Synopsis: Flight Attendant reported concerns regarding the legality of a new company policy on the seatbelt requirements for children.
Date: 202005
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; High Wing; 1 Eng; Retractable Gear
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Navigation Light
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Distraction
Anomaly: 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; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I forgot to turn on my ADS-B for this flight.  Climb and descent phases were inside the ZZZ Class B veil; but not in Class B area.  I was using my MODE C transponder.I have an ADS-B that powers on with the nav lights.  I forgot to turn on the nav lights.  I'm still getting used to operating with ADS-B out.  I was also down for 2 months for my annual inspection; partly due to unavailability of my IA because of virus concerns.  As this flight was a post-maintenance flight and a windy day; I was concerned about the windy conditions and the best procedure for working with the Tower to climb overhead the airport for the initial climb and checkout.  (Working with the Tower was a non-issue; they are great).I need to revise my Pre-taxi; Runup; or Before Takeoff checklist to include ADS-B (the placard on my panel is apparently not adequate).  My checklists are laminated to back of my flight clipboard; so not easy to revise and still on the to-do list.




Synopsis: GA pilot reported forgetting to turn on Navigation Lights so the ADS-B would activate.
Date: 201603
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: BAe 125 Series 800
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: APU
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: On initial climb out while passing through 2;200 feet MSL a fire warning bell sounded. It was determined to be the APU. The memory items were accomplished and the APU fire bottle was shot. ATC was advised and the fire equipment was requested. The aircraft was stopped on the runway and evacuated. The aircraft was inspected by the fire crew and was subsequently towed in to maintenance.




Synopsis: A Hawker 800 Captain experienced an APU fire warning shortly after takeoff. The APU fire memory items were accomplished and the fire bottle was discharged before returning to the departure airport.
Date: 202104
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: PA-28 Cherokee/Archer/Dakota/Pillan/Warrior
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Final Approach; Initial Approach
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Second aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Instructor; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We were making right traffic for Runway XX.  We made a normal upwind; turned crosswind at 700 feet AGL.  When turning downwind; we rolled wings level and pilot flying; noticed departing traffic on our right climbing right to left on a near direct course with our aircraft.  The aircraft passed just out ahead of us (a couple to hundred feet out ahead) and just below (50-100 feet vertical separation).  I was the pilot monitoring/instructor pilot) called Tower to inform them of the near miss and we were told we could make a right 360 degree turn to rejoin the downwind which would have taken us over the runway and done nothing to help us avoid the departing eastbound traffic which was now off of our left side. No action was taken to turn the right 360 for consideration of other aircraft departing the runway and joining the downwind behind us.




Synopsis: PA-28 flight instructor reported an NMAC event during traffic pattern training. Reporter stated ATC's response was inadequate.
Date: 202007
Location: ZZZZ.Airport, FO
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Landing
Aircraft component: Exterior Pax/Crew Door
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Reporter qualification: Flight Attendant Current
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Other / Unknown; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: Other Landing
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Once I boarded the aircraft emergency equipment check was performed as well as monitor and challenge when arming and disarming doors. Upon landing one of the carts in the main cabin became loose and hit the aircraft door causing damage. Flight Attendant informed the Captain and he wrote it up on log book. Double check all the locks and brakes before taking off or landing to prevent injuries and/or aircraft damage.




Synopsis: A Flight Attendant reported an unsecured galley cart rolled into and hit the aircraft door during landing causing damage.
Date: 201701
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZZ.Airport, FO
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation
When detected: Other Take Off
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; Flight Crew Rejected Takeoff
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Human Factors; Manuals; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: During takeoff roll at approximately 120 KIAS; the Master Caution Light illuminated along with a red Takeoff Config light and audible warning horn. I elected to reject the takeoff. We taxied to the end; exited the runway and called Aircraft Rescue Firefighter (ARFF) to meet the aircraft. As we were waiting for the ARFF team to arrive main tires Number 1 and Number 2 failed. We deplaned the airplane via air stairs and had busses transport the passengers to the terminal.




Synopsis: B737-800 Captain observed a takeoff configuration error message at 120 knots and aborted the takeoff.
Date: 202011
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: No Aircraft
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Other / Unknown
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Troubleshooting
Second reporter function: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Ground Personnel
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Company Policy

Narrative: The break-room had dividers poorly installed on the round lunch tables; they were just set on the tables and move around freely. The dividers also have many sharp edges on them and someone will end up being injured and or cut on these sharp edges. Along with moving around; our department has actual man-sized employees here and the room that is being given to us to sit and have lunch is the size [for children].If this ridiculousness continues I feel that the training room needs dividers between all the computers and the break-room computers as well. There also needs to be dividers installed in between the seats along the wall as we cannot afford to remove any of these seats since our break-room is already too small for our size of group.I also feel that our vans and trucks need dividers that we move our employees in since masks are clearly not enough for this very 'deadly disease.'


Second narrative: As I came to the break-room for lunch I noticed that dividers were installed on our break room tables well after this supposed 'pandemic' hit us. Someone with obviously way too much time on their hands thought it prudent to install clear dividers on the tables. If this 'pandemic' is so very deadly as the media portrays it to be I suggest very strongly that we need to install these unnecessary dividers in our Super Tugs since we sit much closer in the cab of that than in a break-room for a few minutes while we eat lunch. Anything less than putting dividers is Unacceptable and will show that our lives do not matter to this company and prove that you can put a price on our safety.


Synopsis: Ground employees reported concerns regarding social distancing protections in their work environment.
Date: 202101
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Learjet 55
Operator: Air Taxi; Other Air Ambulance
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class E ZZZ1
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Air Conditioning and Pressurization Pack
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Upon reaching 10;000 [ft.] we ran our 10;000 [ft.] climb checklist; we noted that the pressurization system was not functioning normally and indicated approximately 7;000 [ft.] cabin altitude. We verified all the bleed air system were in the correct position. Shortly after that time we noted that there was smoke/fumes in the cabin. We [advised ATC] and began to turn back to ZZZ and initiate a descent. We ran the Cockpit Smoke Fire Fumes checklist. We intercepted and flew the ILS into Runway 09 at ZZZ and landed without incident.




Synopsis: Lear-55 Captain reported a cabin fumes event during initial climb resulting in a return to the departure airport.
Date: 201505
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZHU.ARTCC, TX
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Flight phase: Other Holding
Airspace: Class E ZHU
ATC / advisory: Center ZHU
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Troubleshooting; Situational Awareness; Distraction; Confusion; Communication Breakdown; Workload
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Separated Traffic
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors; Weather
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: Started working R70 at XA00Z. Not sure what time I got out. Weather in northern part of sector; causing deviations. I received a higher number than usual of arrival aircraft destined to I90; which TBD sequences.  Weather built up rapidly and somewhat unexpectedly within I90 terminal area.  By XA+20 (time estimated) I received word to hold out IAH arrivals. I started a holding stack over JEPEG. The holding stack filled up rather quickly; but; more arrivals were being handed off to me.  Shortly thereafter; sector 23 started handing off I90 departures; plus over flights. So; the number of aircraft in the sector started increasing rapidly.  I had to turn around and get my own tracker (stopped a controller who was going on break and asked him to track for me). Most aircraft from sector 23 were deviating; many towards the holding stack over JEPEG.Aircraft were being handed off from BTR-LO (sector 34) to me.Sector 37; 65 and 24 were asked to hold aircraft in their airspace. This was apparently done; however two of those aircraft were held in my sector. Don't know why. The volume of traffic was beyond acceptable levels. Apparently the sectors around me didn't know that I was that busy. The tracker and d-side were also extremely busy trying to keep the sector safe.  Heck; just keeping the data blocks separated was almost a full time job.I would like you to watch the replay of this sector from XA00Z until about XC+30Z (perhaps after that too.  I don't know what time I got out). I would like for you to draw your own conclusions as to whether that amount of workload is acceptable.I don't think it was acceptable. As a matter of fact; I believe that it was extremely dangerous. What I am wanting to know is; 'How did it get to that point'? It should never gotten that busy.




Synopsis: ZHU controller describes a session where he had to hold aircraft in his airspace due to weather effecting the arrivals into IAH. Controller describes that he feels the amount of traffic he was holding was unacceptable and extremely dangerous. Controller wonders how the session got that way.