elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201502
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ORD.Airport, IL
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class E C90
ATC / advisory: TRACON C90
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Clearance; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Captain (CA) was Pilot Monitoring (PM). First Officer (FO) was (PF) Pilot Flying. She was on first trip on this aircraft since IOE. Aircraft was on autopilot; level at 4;000 feet on intercept heading 300 for the ILS 28C at ORD. Clear beautiful night. We had been cleared for a visual approach; speed 180 knots until SEIKA. We were on the glideslope with the localizer 'alive' when the FO selected 'approach'. The aircraft pitched up; increased power and began to climb. The FO was confused (and rightfully so) by this. I explained that it sometimes does this...'we'll talk about it later.' The FO disengaged the autopilot and descended the aircraft back to glideslope. We continued the approach and made an uneventful landing. We climbed above our altitude by about 350 feet during this anomaly.  Approach control made no call to us about the altitude excursion. This phenomenon has happened to me a handful of times; the first being on my IOE 6 years ago. It seems to happen (but not always) when the glideslope is centered and the aircraft is on an intercept heading to the localizer when selecting 'approach' mode. While most have been a relatively benign 100 to 200 feet climb; this one was the most aggressive I've seen.




Synopsis: B737-800 Captain described an altitude deviation involving an uncommanded climb while capturing the Runway 28C localizer at ORD with the glideslope centered. Reporter stated he has seen this anomaly in the past.
Date: 201706
Aircraft: B777 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Distraction
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: The intent of this [report] is to begin a review into the FAA Air Safety Inspector (ASI) line check program. Over the past several years I have observed an increase in the overreaching and unreasonable number of line enroute checks. An ASI can have many different specialties. All of which entitles the inspector to a jump seat that requires an enroute line check of the flight crew. Theses line checks are the veil that allows ASI non-aviators to get a free ride to their work or personal transport. I have been graded by a Flight Attendant (cabin inspector); radio technician; airframe tech; engine mechanic and even a fraud inspector who said that the line check was tremendous entertainment for him getting to the work destination. Receiving an enroute line check by people not qualified as pilots; let alone B777 ETOPS; overwater; Class 11 ops; is at the very least unprofessional. It does not matter how nice an individual is it's their very presence hovering over you that causes distraction and becomes a threat. Imagine a 7-hour line check by an airframe mechanic or cabin inspector followed by another 7-hour check the next day. All of these enroute check rides are for one reason. Free transportation for the FAA ASI to and from work sites or personal travel. All of which are paid for by the flight crew in the form of having to submit to an enroute line check with non-pilot ASI specialists. No one ever hears about this because the FAA is granted a jump seat without question and there is no disruption to the operation. Part 121 Air Carrier inspectors are more than welcome. However; they are far and few between. The rest are after a free ride. And the flight crews are the ones that have to submit to this distraction and onboard threat peering over our shoulders. This abuse of power must stop. The FAA as a government agency should buy a ticket for the ASI to their destination and stop using [my company] as their personal jet to and from work or their personal travel.




Synopsis: B777 Captain reported that line inspectors are using the FAA/Air Safety Inspector line check programs for their own personal transportation.
Date: 201308
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: BRW.Airport, AK
Aircraft: B737-400
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Aircraft component: Flap Control (Trailing & Leading Edge)
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Distraction; Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: Other Takeoff roll
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Our flight was about 30 minutes behind schedule and was departing an uncontrolled airport with a 7;000 foot runway. The weather was low overcast with a light direct crosswind. The First Officer was flying. We did not receive the clearance until after engine start. A new ATIS was published and obtained after start. We taxied to the west end of the airport then learned the new ATIS and FSS now suggested a runway change. I elected to enter the runway and back taxi to the opposite end of the runway. The takeoff brief and flight attendant alert were accomplished during the back taxi but the takeoff flap setting was missed in the taxi check and the flaps were set to up not five. During takeoff the First Officer set the power to about 49% pushed TOGA and the aircraft accelerated rapidly. The takeoff warning horn sounded and the Captain instinctively placed the flap lever to the 5 position and unintentionally hesitated the abort. The airspeed increased rapidly through 100 KTS and the flaps moved to the takeoff position. The flaps were nearing the takeoff position and the airspeed was increasing rapidly. The Captain made the decision to fly based on airspeed; flap position; and runway remaining. The flaps reached takeoff position well below rotation speed. A normal takeoff was accomplished followed by a normal flight.The Checklist was not accomplished correctly which caused the takeoff flap setting to be missed. The procedures were not followed correctly when the Captain hesitated on the abort.




Synopsis: Distracted by runway changes due to winds the flight crew of a B737-400 failed to select the planned flap setting prior to initiating the takeoff roll. When the takeoff warning horn sounded the Captain elected to select five degrees during the continued roll. The flaps reached the desired setting prior to rotation.
Date: 201908
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: A321
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Horizontal Stabilizer Trim
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew FLC Overrode Automation; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: I was the Pilot Flying and after liftoff; the control wheel felt heavy. I tried to trim out the forces; but it did not work. I asked the First Officer to try his trim switches but they did not work either. I then engaged the auto pilot to see if that would trim the aircraft. That did not work. I then had the First Officer run the Stabilizer Trim Failure Checklist. The aircraft could be trimmed manually. I then had the First Officer fly the airplane. We then [advised ATC]. I notified the Dispatcher; flight attendants and passengers. Rest of flight and landing was uneventful.




Synopsis: Captain reported that the stabilizer trim system did not work after liftoff; aircraft manually trimmed and landed uneventfully.
Date: 201408
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: JFK.Airport, NY
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: None
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Tower JFK
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Other / Unknown
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Airframe; Maintenance Powerplant
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: Other Under Tow
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I was instructed to move under tow Aircraft X from November to Hangar 3S.  A super tug was connected to Aircraft X to move the aircraft.  It was not a taxi.  When holding short of Victor on Alpha; I was instructed by ATC Ground 121.90 to go left Uniform hold short Runway 13L.  The tug has a slow top speed.  On the way to Uniform; ATC instructs Aircraft X to Cross Runway 13L; 'Aircraft X without delay cross Runway 13L traffic 4 miles final.'  I was on Uniform approaching Uniform-Alpha when the directions were said.  I took this as a new set of instructions and proceeded to the next available taxiway to cross Runway 13L.  We moved the aircraft across Uniform-Alpha then Left Charlie-Bravo to Charlie. ATC said the whole 'taxi' was unacceptable and to call the ATC Tower.  I called the Tower and then explained the situation.  About 3 hours later the Port Authority Airport spoke to me and issued me a BOR for a runway incursion and pulled my Port ID.  The ATC Controller needs to specify what taxiway to cross the runway.  When ATC called and advised to cross Runway 13L without delay; it sounded like a whole new set of instructions and the ATC assumed I was already at Uniform.  This was not the case and I was nowhere near Uniform.  The aircraft was under tow with a slow tug and I would've never made it to Uniform and then cross 13L with traffic 4 miles final.




Synopsis: JFK tow driver describes a situation where he is using a slow tug to move an aircraft across a runway.  JFK Controller tells tug driver a new instruction; driver crosses runway and then later is issued a 'ticket' and his ID is pulled.
Date: 201307
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Aircraft: B757-200
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Aircraft component: Galley Furnishing
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Illness / Injury
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: In-flight
Result: General Physical Injury / Incapacitation
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: I attempted to lift up the cover to compartment 1-2 in the forward galley. The hinges to the cover were not attached to the aircraft; but rather propped up and in and the door was braced shut by only the 2 locking pins on the bottom of the door. By disengaging the locking pins the door released forward and the tracking mechanism on top created an angled fold-out that hit my forehead and I subsequently caught the door with my hands. I placed the door on the floor of the galley and called to the flight deck to inform them.




Synopsis: B757-200 Flight Attendant reported being struck on the head by a galley compartment door that was not attached properly.
Date: 201506
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Reporter qualification: Flight Attendant Current
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Passenger Misconduct
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Diverted; General Police / Security Involved
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: About an hour and a half after takeoff Flight Attendant came forward to tell us (purser and myself) that a passenger was smoking in the aft bathroom. Purser went back to speak to passenger. Sometime after their conversation he walked towards aft bathroom and I was a few rows behind him. He turned around and said to me 'I am going to smoke in the bathroom again.' He smelled [of] alcohol and appeared slightly drunk. He was not slurring but he had a strange look in his eyes. I told him smoking was prohibited on the aircraft. He waved his butane lighter and opened pack of cigarettes at me and said 'I don't care I'm going to smoke.' Purser grabbed the lighter and cigs out of his hand and went forward. He then told me 'I don't care I have more.' [Purser] was in constant communication with the Captain and handled the situation very professionally. Surrounding passengers said this man was pushing and shoving other passengers in the jetway during boarding. We were keeping an eye on his behavior and he was doing some perverted thing with his tongue. Sticking it out of his mouth and snaking it disgustingly. At some point later purser went to passenger to explain the seriousness of his smoking and he shoved her hard twice. She came and told me this upfront. She called Captain with this information. Then Captain advised crew we were diverting and getting passenger off plane. Unfortunately this passenger presented clear danger to passengers and crew with his defiance of no smoking rule; shoving the purser twice; and not willing to follow any instruction from the crew.




Synopsis: Flight Attendant reported diverting to remove an unruly passenger.
Date: 202105
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class A ZZZ; Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Distraction; Workload; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Altitude Crossing Restriction Not Met; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Procedure; Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: I was working Position X. Position Y was feeding me the arrivals. I was not talking to Aircraft X. He was getting close to ZZZZZ the fix prior to approach. I think Position Y was having a hard time because ZZZ1 sector was busy and not shipping all the aircraft. I pointed to the Aircraft X and told Position Y to give Aircraft X FL190 because I was not talking to that aircraft and he had needed to start down. Consequently; I was not talking to the aircraft in time to get him down. And working without a D-side to make the call; I handed the aircraft off high to ZZZ2 Approach. He should have crossed the boundary at 120 but he was more like 170 crossing. They took the hand off and I switched the aircraft. My recommendation is more D-sides. I know there is COVID and we seem to work with fewer controllers and not have the numbers in the control room as usual. And everyone needs a break. We try to have a good work break balance. Talking to the aircraft in a timely manner would help also. As controllers to do our best in switching aircraft in a timely manner. Maybe a better; faster way to get in touch with the pilot. I think I went through company; the last controller; guard frequency; the supervisor. I think it was another company airline that got a hold of him; or that could have been another instance. Yesterday was busy with weather and the situations are all blurring together. And a D-side could have helped to make the call. I kept my eyes on the other air traffic situations to keep them flowing smoothly as well. Thank God approach took that hand off. The sector would have been 10 times more difficult if I had to spin that aircraft to get him to 120 by ZZZZZ and concentrate on the other issues by myself.




Synopsis: Center Controller reported not being able to talk to an aircraft and the prior sector was having difficulties which left the aircraft high at a crossing restriction.
Date: 202012
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Aircraft: PA-28 Cherokee/Archer/Dakota/Pillan/Warrior
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: CTAF ZZZ
Aircraft component: Landing Gear
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Student
Human factors: Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Ground Strike - Aircraft; Inflight Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged
Contributing factors: Weather; Human Factors
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: I had just landed the Piper PA 28 140 cruiser I have been approved to be flying solo by my CFI I just returned from training maneuvers like a tracking VOR's; slow flight; stalls etc. Then I came in for a landing and then after landing I decided to do a touch and go as I did I had a 90 degree crosswind that was coming at 5 knots which was well within my CFI's logbook approval for me. However after I had given it full throttle for the touch and go there was a gust of wind which lifted my left wing slightly. As I put left rudder in my foot inadvertently hit the break and caused my plane to pull to the left off of the runway at which time my nose gear collapsed which caused the incident with my airplane.




Synopsis: Student pilot report loss of aircraft control during landing possibly due to wind gust.
Date: 201906
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: PAE.Airport, WA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class D PAE
ATC / advisory: TRACON S46
Second aircraft: Helicopter
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Procedure; Company Policy; Aircraft; Airspace Structure
Primary problem: Airspace Structure

Narrative: I was vectoring Aircraft X to the IAF for the RNAV 34L approach into PAE and there was [Aircraft Y] below him about 700 feet. I stopped Aircraft X at 2;500 feet and cleared him for the approach. Aircraft X didn't want to descend until Aircraft Y was clear. I reached out to PAE Tower to see if they were in communications with aircraft and luckily they were and were able to move aircraft east of Final. This situation routinely happens and places aircraft in an unsafe altitude and either having to be vectored around or we have to take other evasive actions. We need a more controlled airspace around PAE. With the increase in air carrier operations PAE needs a Class C or the Class B for SEA needs to be lowered to encompass around PAE's Class D.




Synopsis: S46 TRACON Controller reported an airborne conflict between an air carrier IFR aircraft on the RNAV 34L Approach to PAE airport and a VFR helicopter.
Date: 201408
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: S12.Airport, OR
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class G S12
ATC / advisory: CTAF S12
Second aircraft: Small Aircraft; High Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Other / Unknown
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Procedure; Environment - Non Weather Related; Airport
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: I was in the process of aircraft shopping. I arranged for a test flight with the owner once I'd inspected the aircraft on the ramp. We agreed that he would fly; while I would monitor engine instrumentation/performance. We planned a few trips around the pattern. We taxied to Runway 34 and did run ups in preparation for departure. I asked for several additional items above and beyond the standard mag/carb heat checks. During that time; two other aircraft were talking on the CTAF which is shared with several area airports.  The PIC made the appropriate CTAF departure call and lined up on 34. We began our departure; and upon rotation; we heard a call 'XXXXX; uhh; vacating Runway 16?' We passed nearly directly overhead of the aircraft which had been preparing to depart 16; missing by about 30 feet vertically. The PIC banked to the right after a few seconds. The PIC and I were shaken; and we confirmed with one another that neither of us had heard any previous calls from the aircraft. The sun angle was such that it was difficult to see to from the 34 end of the runway to the 16 end. Additionally; both the PIC and I were distracted by the sales process and the long run-up checks. There had been traffic on both 16 and 34 earlier in the day when I had flown in. I had elected to use 34 when I landed about two hours prior. Wind conditions were calm. 34 is the preferred calm wind runway at S12.




Synopsis: A passenger/pilot reported passing 30 feet overhead an aircraft which entered S12 Runway 16 without CTAF communications during his takeoff from Runway 34 into an interfering sun.