elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201509
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZBPE.ARTCC, FO
Weather elements / visibility: Thunderstorm
Aircraft: Widebody; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
ATC / advisory: Center ZBPE
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Relief Pilot
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance; Flight Crew Diverted
Contributing factors: Weather
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: While flying at FL280 on A596 approaching KM a cell approx 25nm wide crossed the airway.  Tops of cell were well above our altitude.  Asked ATC to deviate around cell to the west. Was denied clearance and told to remain on airway. Asked if we could deviate to the east around the weather. Again denied and told to remain on the airway. Declared Mayday and deviated off the airway 8nm to the west. Was told by ATC we were entering military airspace. My thoughts were; that is not my problem; that is yours. My problem is avoiding going through thunderstorms.


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


Synopsis: Air carrier flight crew approaching ZBAA; the crew reported that they had to use emergency authority in order to deviate around a large thunderstorm.
Date: 202110
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: EDU.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 99
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class G EDU
ATC / advisory: CTAF EDU
Second aircraft: Small Aircraft
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: While on upwind in the pattern for Runway 17 at EDU; a faster airplane reported 4 miles inbound from the south. I assumed he would make a standard 45 entry and join behind us in the pattern; so I continued onto the crosswind; reported my position; and then turned onto the downwind. I was surprised when the other pilot reported that he too was on downwind; so I reported my position (on downwind abeam the 17 numbers) and began my descent. The other pilot did not clarify his position; and at that moment I saw an advisory on my ADS-B device that he was directly below me by 200 feet; evidently having already started his descent. I immediately arrested my descent; added power; and climbed back to TPA while bailing out of the pattern to the east of the field. I felt this was the safest direction to fly; in order to fly clear of the pattern; rather than to risk getting even closer to the other aircraft should he also choose to take evasive action. After reaching pattern altitude; I maneuvered over the university campus east of the field; at a TPA of 900 feet MSL; to re-enter the pattern on a left 45-degree entry while staying within 2 miles of the airport. It was then I realized that I was 100 feet below the minimum altitude required for VFR flight over a congested area. Even though I was within 2 miles of the airport; I now realize that I should have climbed to 1;000 feet AGL until entering the 45-degree leg to the downwind. I think this occurred due to getting saturated with what appeared to me like a very hazardous situation with a faster-moving aircraft who didn't make adequate radio calls; suddenly catching up with me in the pattern. In the future; I will anticipate that pilots may not make accurate calls with respect to their range and to seek clarification in cases like these.




Synopsis: GA pilot reported an NMAC while on the downwind at non-towered EDU requiring evasive action.  The pilot of the other aircraft had reportedly not been communicating properly; which contributed to the event.
Date: 201906
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B787 Dreamliner Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZZ
Second aircraft: A380
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Procedure
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: On Track E; FL360; SLOP R1 at approximately 31 West; we encountered moderate to severe CAT [Clear Air Turbulence]. Captain immediately seated flight attendants. Encounter lasted approximately 1 minute. During that time; First Officer attempted communication with Gander on HF8864 with a very garbled response. Left that frequency and transmitted on 123.45 that we were encountering moderate to severe CAT. Another aircraft stated that we had an A380 on the track ahead of us. Using ADS-B we determined [the A380] was 22 miles ahead at FL370; SLOP R2. Winds were directly right to left at 25 knots. We determined wake turbulence was likely the cause and increased our offset to R2. Air became smooth and Captain had flight attendants check in. Flight attendants reported no flight attendants or passenger injuries. Winds gradually began shifting to a direct tailwind and we again encountered moderate to severe wake turbulence. Captain immediately seated flight attendants. Because the wake was to our left and continuing towards us we increased our offset to SLOP R3. Again; First Officer attempted contact with Gander without success. Shortly thereafter we received a SELCAL and Gander asked if we were operating normally. We stated that we were SLOP R3 and he responded that ATC had seen that and that it had been 'flagged'. Captain had flight attendants check in. Again; no injuries. Winds continued to shift to a left quartering tailwind and we again encountered moderate to severe wake turbulence. Again; Captain directed flight attendants to be seated. We immediately requested [the A380] to SLOP R2 which he did. Shortly thereafter; [the A380] climbed to FL380. Captain had flight attendants check in. Again; no injuries. At this point; contrails were readily visible and we returned to R1. No further encounters.




Synopsis: B787 F/O reported deviating from their assigned trans-Atlantic track when they encountered wake turbulence from an A380 22 miles ahead of them. Reporter stated they were having communication difficulties with ATC.
Date: 201810
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: B737-700
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
Aircraft component: Laptop Computer (performance; planning; etc.)
Component problem: Design
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: Distraction; Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate; Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: On night of (date) we were assigned to Aircraft X which was equipped with a permanent EFB (Electronic Flight Bag) mount located in the center of the clipboard on the side; number 2 window. I attached the EFB in the vertical position to maximize chart size displayed on the EFB. This resulted in the EFB being located in a more forward and lower position from my usual mounting location; on the lower rear portion of the side window. As we began our taxi out I noticed my left forearm was directly under and pressed against the lower edge of the EFB. Turning to the left was slightly awkward but manageable as I had to push the nose wheel down. The major hindrance occurred during right turns. This requires a lifting and pushing motion on the nose steering wheel. In the only position available; the left forearm is pressed upward into the bottom of the EFB. Any lifting motion is impeded by the bottom edge of the EFB. Only after repositioning the left arm in a much less natural position and to the right of the normal position; is there adequate room to fully manipulate the nose steering wheel. This issue reoccurred during landing rollout. Soon after landing; when reaching speeds where rudder pedal effectiveness is reduced; the Captain will remove his left hand from yoke and place it on the nose wheel.This typically happens when decelerating through 50 to 60 knots. The left forearm is in its natural potion; directly below the EFB. Any right hand turns requiring a lifting motion will be hindered by the EFB. The chances of understeer; caused by the pilot's inability to turn right; without hindrance; is great; especially during a high speed right hand turnoff. This is exactly what happened during our rollout and right hand turn. My ability to move the nose steering wheel was much hindered and only after repositioning was I able to turn the wheel to the right. This design was not thoroughly vetted and needs to be removed.




Synopsis: B737 Captain reported the location of the EFB with mount in center of clipboard inhibits movement of tiller; especially during right turns.
Date: 201705
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: RV-9
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: UNICOM ZZZ
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Ground Event / Encounter Object; Ground Excursion Runway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was in the passenger seat with a student pilot. I had flown with the owner of this plane for some 20+ hours. He had asked me to accompany him to [another airport] for a phase check toward his pilot license. On takeoff he applied power too fast and forces pulled the aircraft violently off to the left. I wasn't expecting this as I had my legs and feet crossed keeping them out of the way of the rudder pedals. I called for more right rudder while trying to retard the throttle. We over corrected and ran off the runway to the right hitting a taxi sign doing substantial damage to the aircraft. The right elevator hinge pin; which hangs down; hit the top of the sign flipping it up and off its post making contact with the right horizontal stabilizer. Lucky no one got hurt or damage to other aircraft.




Synopsis: RV-9 pilot reported the student pilot lost control during takeoff roll that resulted in a runway excursion and contact with a taxiway sign.
Date: 201601
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: PA-28 Cherokee/Archer/Dakota/Pillan/Warrior
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Landing
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Trainee; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Gear Up Landing
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: After returning from the dual night cross country my instructor told me to do several touch and go landings at ZZZ. After the first landing my instructor reached over and raised the landing gear. During the next landing the airplane landed gear up as the landing gear was not lowered during that approach. The landing gear handle was up and the automatic landing gear extension bypass lever was also found to be engaged in the up position. While I did not bypass the automatic extension feature; I failed to extend the gear and verify three green lights. My instructor also failed to verify the lights.




Synopsis: PA-28R pilot reported landing gear up during a training flight with an instructor.
Date: 202108
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: MHT.Airport, NH
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class E A90
ATC / advisory: TRACON A90
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Speed All Types; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Procedure; Weather
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: We had spoken with Dispatch two hours before the flight about the days weather. We agreed on a new route that would work for all parties and operation needs. The route was filed and clearance gave the route to us. In the departure climbout we got a reroute back into the weather; we looked at it and told them unable. ATC said the almighty TMU needed it. We cited our safety concern and they give us a route that was on the border line of legal; we then had no more options with the weather at hand. TMU had plenty of time to be aware of the route; and gave us the clearance. Why should we even flight plan if we are going to get thrown all these curve balls with no recourse in the air. This is a definite safety concern. TMU is too far overreaching.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported filing reroute to avoid weather; but TMU issued a reroute resulting in an unsafe flight into weather.
Date: 201402
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: OAK.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: Mixed
Weather elements / visibility: Rain; 9
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class C OAK
ATC / advisory: TRACON NCT
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Situational Awareness
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 Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Weather; Procedure; Human Factors; Chart Or Publication
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was expecting the ILS 28R circle to land Runway 10L approach at OAK. During the vectoring process I neglected to get the complete OAK ATIS. The part I did catch was scattered clouds at 900 and a broken layer at 2;500. I continued to anticipate the ILS 28R. I don't recall being asked my approach preference. The Controller cleared me for a VOR approach which I didn't fully grasp and readback cleared to the ILS 28R. This readback was not corrected. I was handed off to OAK Tower who then gave me a terrain alert. At this time I had visual contact with the surface and recognized the surroundings and made a visual approach. I erred in this flight by not maintaining SA; not getting the full ATIS; and allowing my anticipation to exclude the actual instruction given. This was an experience I will not repeat. In future I will make sure to get a complete report of terminal recorded information. In all communications with ATC I will be completely attentive to instructions given rather than anticipation of instructions/clearances. Also; I will be asking for clarification unless I clearly understand the instruction/clearance and not be hesitant about confirming my situational awareness.




Synopsis: An IFR C-172 pilot lost situational awareness and failed to understand and execute his approach clearance; ultimately becoming disoriented and receiving a low altitude alert from ATC at which point he gained visual contact with the airport and landed safely.
Date: 201908
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: McDonnell Douglas Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Parked
ATC / advisory: Ramp ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Dispatcher
Reporter qualification: Dispatch Dispatcher
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Dispatch
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure; Company Policy
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: First Cargo uplift request came in at [time]. Ramp agent called to ask for my approval. I asked if that was the final payload and was told yes. I asked to please wait a moment and I would approve the payload uplift. (I had to run the flight plan with the new payload before I approved it) I hung up the phone and ran the numbers. Then approved the first payload uplift. (Approved at [time +5 minutes].) Second Cargo uplift was sent to me at [time + 5 minutes] then an override cargo uplift message appeared at [time +6 minutes]. I ran then numbers for the newer payload and sent burns to the crew. I did not approve the new payload however; my employee number was used to override the cargo uplift request. I called Ramp to question why they overrode the payload request with my employee number when I gave no such authorization. The Ramp Agent told me that this was what she was instructed to do by her manager. I told her that was wrong; and I had only approved the first payload and that she had overridden the second payload request. At this point Ramp Agent's manager got on the phone and argued with me about the override which I had not approved. Resulting in the Manager hanging up the phone on me. Ultimately the flight was fine and well within all weight limitations with the last payload uplift. Ramp Manager telling his employee to override a payload request using my employee number without permission  Not permitting ramp agents to have over ride ability's for anything that could impact the safety of a flight.




Synopsis: Dispatcher reported a load problem and then also a problem with another employee using reporters employee number to override the cargo request.
Date: 201305
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: N90.TRACON, NY
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: B757 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class B EWR
ATC / advisory: TRACON N90
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Time Pressure; Distraction; Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict NMAC; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Automation Aircraft RA; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Environment - Non Weather Related; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Received a TCAS RA while being vectored at 6;000 FT with NY Approach Control approximately near the SAX VOR. Approach issued a target for us at 12 O'clock. We saw him on TCAS and were right under us. We did not see him visually. ATC gave us a descent to 5;000 FT. We asked for a turn away from the traffic and were given a clearance. As we started descending; the aircraft appeared to be climbing. At about 5;600 FT we got a TCAS climb RA. We complied and climbed. We advised ATC that we were climbing in response to a TCAS RA and were cleared to climb to our original altitude of 6;000 FT. Although we are not certain; we may have come within 400 FT of the other aircraft.


Second narrative: On downwind for landing; was given clearance to descend from 6;000 FT to 5;000 FT. During the descent; VFR traffic at our 11 O'clock position set off a traffic alert. We were approaching 5;500 FT and the traffic was about 500 FT below us. We stopped the descent and asked for a turn away from traffic since ATC did not have communication with the traffic. As we turned away; the TCAS gave us a climb command to avoid the traffic. We climbed back up to 6;000 FT and the TCAS RA stopped.


Synopsis: B757 flight crew took evasive action from an unseen TCAS RA target at 5;600 FT near SAX VOR descending for a EWR approach.