elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201604
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: GOO.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 50
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Super King Air 200
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Initial Approach
ATC / advisory: CTAF GOO
Aircraft component: Electronic Flt Bag (EFB)
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Exited Penetrated Airspace
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: While flying a training flight in VFR conditions with an Instructor/Safety pilot we discussed flying the GPS 07 approach into the Grass Valley airport. We elected to fly it with vectors from the Instructor as I had not flown much IFR or simulated IFR with the avionics equipment we had on board. The aircraft was equipped with a Garmin 750 GPS and a Garmin 530. I also had my IPAD up with the approach plate for the approach. I have the upgraded subscription (Pro) that shows the actual position of the aircraft on the approach plate. We are both familiar with the local area and airspace from a VFR standpoint and regularly deal with ATC for transitioning through Beale's airspace/TFR; however neither of us had flown this GPS approach before and didn't realize that MRGOO; the IAF is actually within Beale's class C airspace and subsequently in the TFR. Doing the approach ourselves rather than getting with ATC; NorCal or Beale; put us into the TFR on both the approach and the holding after the missed approach. Contributing was that the Instructor had the 530 display up to show the intersections; the IPAD approach plate does not show the Class C and the auto zoom function of the Garmin 750 zoomed us in to where we could not recognize the boundary of the Class C airspace. We discovered the problem when we switched the 530 over to the map page and could clearly see the airspace depiction. We certainly had plenty of technology to use; but needed to understand the limitations that comes with and be aware at all times of what airspace we are in or headed too.




Synopsis: A King Air pilot training with an instructor reported an airspace violation due to the loss of situational awareness while using several sources of navigational equipment.
Date: 202001
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: HEF.Airport, VA
Weather elements / visibility: Windshear; Turbulence; Rain; Icing
Aircraft: Cessna Citation Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class D HEF
ATC / advisory: TRACON PCT
Aircraft component: GPS & Other Satellite Navigation
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence; Inflight Event / Encounter Unstabilized Approach
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Weather
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: During he RNAV approach I lost GPS reception; that resulted in a autopilot disconnect or the disconnect was a result of the moderate to severe turbulence at the same time. As result I deviated from the approach course and altitudes. Potomac [Approach] saw this and issued vectors; so I could try the approach again.




Synopsis: Citation pilot reported a loss of GPS signal and autopilot disconnect while experiencing turbulence on approach.
Date: 201810
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: PSP.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Dawn
Aircraft: Medium Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Fractional
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class A SCT
ATC / advisory: TRACON SCT
Reporter organization: Fractional
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Confusion; Communication Breakdown
Second reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Altitude Crossing Restriction Not Met; Deviation - Altitude Undershoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: [On departure] we were not issued an arrival into PSP. In flight we were given a reroute to go direct to GLRNO and the SIZLR3 into PSP. At a later communication with ATC we were told to cross GLRNO at 24;000 feet. We started our descent. We were handed off to SoCal who then changed our clearance to 'descend via the SIZLR3.' I armed VNAV and the path captured. On the chart; GLRNO is noted at or above 24;000 feet [and we] crossed above 24;000 feet. SoCal queried us 'would we make the restriction at SIZLR?' which has [charted crossing] altitudes [between] 23;000 feet and 20;000 feet. At that point I realized there was confusion in our clearance. The PIC asked SoCal what was his understanding of our clearance. [The response was] 'To descend via.' It was my interpretation that when given a descend via; unless told to cross the fix at 24;000 feet; you are cleared [via charted restrictions]. I am not sure if it was a poor hand off from controllers or we misinterpreted directions. But from now on I will ask.


Second narrative: [Report narrative contained no additional information]


Synopsis: Medium transport aircraft flight crew reported miscommunication between them and ATC regarding a 'descend via' clearance resulted in a missed crossing altitude.
Date: 201902
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Flight conditions: Mixed
Weather elements / visibility: Turbulence; Rain; Icing; Fog; 0
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Training / Qualification; Situational Awareness; Time Pressure
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Diverted
Contributing factors: Procedure; Aircraft; Airspace Structure; Human Factors; Weather
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: Weather deteriorated while visiting in ZZZ; airport went IFR; [but] VMC conditions still existed. We had to file to get out. The freezing levels were at 7;000 feet. I filled for 6;000 feet. When we received the clearance; I accepted as long as we could stay low and cancel over the desert. ZZZ [Approach] would not allow this stating that we knew the conditions. We were assigned the climb up to 11;000 feet.; my intentions were to cancel over [the] desert and continue VFR.I requested lower due to the OAT and was denied the request. I then asked to divert for [a] VOR. [Controller] gave me vectors and my mag compass was off by 15 degrees. ZZZ [Approach] then [advised for me] and gave me no gyro back to my new choice. The icing started to melt off around 4;000 feet and I was able to land VFR and wait out the clouds.




Synopsis: GA pilot reported taking off in a C172 into known icing.  Ice built rapidly and forced a diversion to the nearest airport.
Date: 201509
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZNY.ARTCC, NY
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Light Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class A ZNY
ATC / advisory: Center ZNY
Second aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Confusion; Human-Machine Interface; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Air Traffic Control Separated Traffic
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors; Airspace Structure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Aircraft X flashing to me climbing to 37;000 feet; so I called Sector X to see if they were working Aircraft X and they said no I said who is working him they said they have 'no idea'; I think Sector Y so then I call Sector Y to stop him but they say there not working them; then Sector X calls me and I proceed to stop Aircraft X at 31;000 feet for traffic. Sector Z calls me and apreq a flight that is climbing better than Aircraft X to keep him climbing to get over the top off him so I say approved. In the meantime Aircraft Y is climbing right in the face of Aircraft X at the same rate of climb; FL268; FL271; FL274; FL276; and so on now Aircraft X comes on my frequency climbing to FL310 so I proceed to turn him 30 degrees to the left who is in the face of Aircraft Y at the same altitude. The 30 degree turn avoided a near midair collision!Sector Z controller should have taken control of situation IN HIS OWN AIRSPACE!!!




Synopsis: Three different ARTCC sectors working three aircraft in confliction with each other. Very confusing scenario due to the different sectors taking point out coordination with different intentions to resolving the traffic conflictions instead of one controller working the aircraft with one plan for separation.
Date: 201810
Location: KZAK.ARTCC, HI
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
ATC / advisory: Center KZAK
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Diverted
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Captain flying; First Officer monitoring. At 39;000 FT with autopilot A coupled; we felt (can be described as) a kick. It was enough that we both took notice. It happened a second and then a third time. We then elected to kick off the autopilot and feel what was happening. We both agreed that something was not right and that the aircraft controls were doing something that was not normal for our phase of flight. We made adjustments to the rudder trim while getting the QRH out. Rudder trim seemed to be having an unusual effect; meaning a little trim was pushing and pulling the aileron trim pointer on the control wheel in large movements (not the usual amount). At this time we felt there [was] something wrong with our control system and elected to return to GUM; as we were heading into an ETOPS flight with no suitable airports in the area. We [notified Flight Service] on HF; as we were unsure of the actual problem so we unable to predict whether it would get worse or not. Once on a direct track to Guam we notified Dispatch; Maintenance; and went through [emergency checklist] with flight attendants. We landed in GUM without incident.




Synopsis: Air Carrier flight crew diverted to Guam due to flight control malfunction.
Date: 201510
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Dispatcher
Reporter qualification: Dispatch Dispatcher
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Dispatch
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: The following ACARS received from flight I dispatched:FOB 048000/ ADDING FUEL TO 54.0Then dispatch sends the following:SO THATS IT ...NO REASON AT ALL? EVEN THOUGH RATIONALE IS REQUIRED?No further communications from the crew to fight dispatch and zero compliance with FOM policies.  Then; even more amazing; the Duty Officer approaches me and informs me that the Captain of this flight called him up to express his displeasure and was very upset; and questioned why dispatch would need to know the rationale for the fuel add. He relayed that this Captain questioned why he would need to inform dispatch on the rationale of adding the fuel -- despite the fact that it is company policy; and not a choice.  It is unacceptable that the crew would not at all involve dispatch in this; and go directly to the Duty Officer. Operational control is; by regulation; between the dispatcher and captain only. It is also unacceptable that the captain would advertently violate company policy.Why would not the Duty Officer get dispatch involved with this call?I would like to request that the phone conversation between this captain and the duty officer be reviewed.  Despite multiple reports on these very same events; they continue with regularity.  The logic of submitting all of these reports has to be questioned; as these non-compliance events continue.




Synopsis: Air Cargo Captain routinely adds extra fuel for his flights and does not inform Dispatch of the rational; even though it is required by the FOM.
Date: 201307
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Rain
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Trailing Edge Flap
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: After completing the After Takeoff Checklist the crew noticed an asymmetrical flap indication. It appeared the malfunction was within tolerance. Crew kept the airspeed at minimum maneuvering speed; completed the After Takeoff Checklist; and then called Maintenance Control. After discussing the problem; Maintenance advised that it probably was an indication problem and not an asymmetrical flap condition. Both rudder and aileron trim indications were normal. Captain enlisted the help of a deadheading pilot to look at the flaps and report back. The deadheading pilot advised the Captain that the flaps looked symmetrical but that the flaps did not look completely fared with the wing. The Captain thought this could be a rigging issue and not an asymmetrical flap issue however was not confident a safe landing could be made at the departure airport. The plane was tankering an extra 10;000 pounds of fuel. The weather there was VFR; 37 degrees Celsius; and forecast for gusty wind conditions. Given the current and forecast weather conditions and the advice from Maintenance Control; the Captain elected to continue to destination. The crew elected to cruise at a lower altitude and slower speed due to the abnormality. After crossing the first fix Maintenance Control sent a message to the crew indicating the flaps were locked out due to the abnormality. The Captain called Maintenance Control again. Maintenance advised that the flaps were probably locked out but there was no way of knowing for sure until the flaps were selected to 1. The Captain determined to continue to destination as this was as safe or safer than landing short. The Duty Manager advised the Captain that air traffic control was notified. Upon arriving at the approach environment; the flaps were selected to 1. The flaps did not move. The Captain declared an emergency. The crew executed the Flaps-Trailing Edge Flaps Asymmetry checklist followed by the Flaps-Trailing Edge Flaps Up Landing checklist. The landing was uneventful.




Synopsis: B737 Captain reports noticing shortly after takeoff an asymmetrical flap indication.  Maintenance is contacted and with strong gusty winds at the departure airport and extra fuel onboard; it is decided to continue to destination at lower altitude and airspeed. The trailing edge flaps cannot be moved during approach and a trailing edge flaps up landing ensues.
Date: 202108
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Dash 8-400
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
Aircraft component: Aileron Trim System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness; Troubleshooting; Workload
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: While boarding for Aircraft X  in ZZZ; a beverage was accidentally spilled onto the trim control panel. It was cleaned up immediately; however the aileron trim seemed to short out and go to full left wing down position. After maintenance was contacted; the mechanics came out and did a thorough cleaning and inspection of the affected area. They completed operational checks and deemed it airworthy. During the flight to ZZZ1; there were no issues noted. After takeoff; some right wing down aileron was applied without issue. On approach into ZZZ1; left wing down aileron was applied to bring the trim to the neutral position. This caused the trim to start to go towards the full left wing down position. Pressing the right wing down button halted this issue and the landing was completed without further issue. We noticed there was condensation in the rudder and aileron trim indicators at the time of the issue.  Use the utmost care and attention when consuming food or drink in the cockpit and always place lid on any beverage that is not being consumed; regardless of the brevity of the break in consumption.




Synopsis: An Air Carrier Captain reported they spilled a beverage into the trim control panel prior to departure which caused the trim indicators to malfunction while on final approach to their destination. Maintenance signed the aircraft off as airworthy prior to the departure.
Date: 202009
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise; Taxi
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; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Passenger Misconduct
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: Taxi; Pre-flight; In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Passengers blatantly refused to wear masks. Masks must be worn at all times; even while sleeping in flight. The only time the masks can be removed is while actively eating or drinking. This was the most non-compliant flight to date. There were passengers only covering their mouth and not their nose. There were many passengers who didn't have a mask on at all. When we would ask them to put a mask on they would roll their eyes; pretend to put it on and take it off as soon as we walked away. We all have families to go home to. This is not acceptable. Every other airline firmly enforces the mask policy.Enforce the mask wearing policy strictly for all passengers and all airline crew; including mechanics; flight attendants; grounds ops personnel and pilots.




Synopsis: Flight Attendant reported several passengers did not complying with face mask policy during flight.
Date: 201404
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Regional Jet 200 ER/LR (CRJ200)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Distraction; Other / Unknown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: [This is] a continuing example of an oblivious pettifogger who deliberately interrupted the flight during sterile cockpit because they were not performing their regulatory required job duties. Dispatch continued to disrupt the flight after being notified of sterile cockpit. The crew was in the process of maneuvering the aircraft in a congested area with other aircraft in motion confined in an area with numerous physical hazards. During this operation the Dispatcher sent an ACARS; whose 90 db alert interrupted operations and blocked radio communications; asking about why the ATC clearance had not been picked up. (The ATC clearance had been obtained some time prior to engine start; and demonstrates that the Dispatcher was not following the flight.) The crew responded informing her that we were in 'Sterile Cockpit'. While Number 1 for departure; with a flight inbound on short final for the departure runway; we received yet another ACARS Alert from Dispatch asking for an estimated departure time. This intrusion degraded the safety of the flight at a critical juncture! The action by the Dispatcher of repeatedly breaking sterile cockpit placed the flight in a degraded safety profile which has become the precursor to events and upsets which take place with alarming regularity: runway incursions; aircraft incidents resulting in substantial monetary damage; clearance deviations; and worse. This situation is a conspicuous example of the Dispatcher's lack of situational awareness of where individual flights are and in what phase of flight they are operating.




Synopsis: CRJ200 Captain laments being distracted by ACARS messages from his Dispatcher during taxi and preparation for takeoff. The ACARS message alert produces a very loud chime in the cockpit.