elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201408
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZLC.ARTCC, UT
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZLC
ATC / advisory: Center ZLC
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings

Narrative: VFR aircraft was given Flight Following below radar and radio coverage.  Previous controller did not deny it in the sector.  When I took over the plane was supposed to be delaying around the SMN airport.  No altitude information was given.  The radio and radar coverage in the area is very poor.  For my duration on the sector we never saw the plane on radar or were able to talk to it.  This creates a very dangerous situation as the pilot thinks we are providing him with traffic calls and other radar services; when this is not the case.  Also if we cannot talk to the plane; or see it how are we going to ensure the plane will safely transition our airspace.    Do not give Flight Following to aircraft below radar minimums.  Also get further information on the aircraft in a situation like this.  It will aid in our traffic calls and or broadcasts to other airplanes in the area.  With the 'Rash' of VFR awareness of late; I'm confused as how such a simple concept gets missed at our local level.  I would like to see additional training or guidance to help promote a safer handling of these aircraft.  Or even more radar and radio sites.  This would also help the issue.




Synopsis: ZLC Controller reports of a previous Controller allowing Flight Following of an aircraft that is below radar and radio coverage.
Date: 202104
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: No Aircraft
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Ramp
Human factors: Distraction
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Ground Personnel
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Company Policy; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: I am a Lead Ramp Serviceman and I get bounced around the airport gate to gate and most of the time different ramp employees on my flights. The expectation is that when I get my gate box it is clean. Wireless headsets have been disinfected. Problem is; that's great when I work my first trip. Now I get sent to another work area; with new crew; there is a sense of time pressure now since I need to get to the other side of the airport to do a departure. By the time I get there it is already past the time to start loading the aircraft so I need to plan the flight; verify any cargo or freight at the gate along with bags; and make sure whoever is assigned to that flight is there. I'm now even further behind the 8 ball. Now it comes to load and the entire time I am running around ensuring a safe operation on the gate. Now comes departure time and the pressure is so immense that the Supervisor comes out to the gate and stands there watching you for no apparent reason. I feel like I have no time to sanitize my headsets; so the new crew I have puts on these headsets without having them cleaned. I feel as if I will be spoken to if I take any more time out to sanitize each headset that I am given. This creates an exposure not only for myself; but for anyone wearing these headsets. I have had guys refuse to wear headsets because they are not sanitized properly and; in their mind; and the wipes that are provided; they think; are not enough. Few people the wipes are OK but for most; they don't trust that it will effectively sanitize the headsets. We've lost a lot of good people here in ZZZ and everyone is on edge with this pandemic. After being moved around a lot I tend to use up all of my wipes. So; what do I do then? I barely have time to each lunch at times.




Synopsis: Lead Ramp Serviceman reported lack of equipment sanitation due to on-time departure pressure and working with different personnel throughout the airport.
Date: 201208
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Weather elements / visibility: Thunderstorm
Aircraft: No Aircraft
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Dispatcher
Reporter qualification: Dispatch Dispatcher
Human factors: Workload
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Dispatch
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Staffing; Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Staffing

Narrative: On Saturday afternoons; Sectors 43/59 continuously have 22-23 flights in the air for the first 4-5 hours. This includes South America; Caribbean; Mexico; all highly susceptible to thunderstorms; and multiple hubs; and Canada. Before 1500L this requires 2 desks. This is not a complaint of working too hard; but a serious concern with maintaining operational control.




Synopsis: Dispatcher reported a serious concern regarding 'maintaining an operational control' during certain time periods based upon workload.
Date: 201506
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZZ.ARTCC, FO
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Widebody Transport
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Cruise
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZZ
Aircraft component: Cockpit Window
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Distraction; Confusion
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; Flight Crew Diverted
Contributing factors: Manuals; Company Policy; Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: In cruise flight at FL370; heard a loud pop and observed Captain's windscreen shatter.  Pressurization remained good.  No arcing observed before or after. I referenced closest airfields; requested [expedited] descent and divert to ZZZZ.  ATC cleared us to descend to FL200 IAW QRH procedure for cracked window.  I passed the pilot flying duties to my first officer due to very limited forward visibility on my side.  Uneventful divert to ZZZZ.




Synopsis: Air carrier flight crew diverted after the Captain's windscreen shattered in cruise flight. In accordance with company policy and QRH procedure; they landed at the nearest suitable airfield.
Date: 201510
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: A319
Operator: Air Carrier
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Pushback was normal; Engine 1 started for planned single engine taxi. After engine start; I incorrectly directed 'Set Flaps 1 After Start Checklist'. This error was not caught by the Pilot Monitoring (PM). Ground Frequency was very busy; with three other aircraft entering taxiway from different ramps and two towed aircraft. I called for the Before Takeoff Checklist down to the line. Checklist was interrupted by clearance to transition to parallel taxiway to pass two planes and follow third to runway. At this point; I directed the First Officer (FO) to start Number 2 engine.  We were on taxiway E passing the two preceding aircraft; the plane we were to follow was transitioning to E on D. The plane behind our lead plane disregarded his hold short clearance of Taxiway C; and also began transitioning to E on D. This caused a reduced separation with our plane; and I applied significant braking to avoid merging with that offending aircraft. We attempted to clarify takeoff sequence and fault; but frequency congestion prevented contact. We elected to switch to tower as previously directed; continue our preparation; and deal with takeoff sequence if or when it came up. During the completion of the Before Takeoff Check; distracted by the preceding event; I responded incorrectly to the Flaps call...1 final; 1+F indicated. Again the error was not caught by the PM. Takeoff was uneventful; I remembered the planned flap setting as I called for flaps up and the After Takeoff Checklist.




Synopsis: A319 Captain reported taking off with incorrect flap setting.
Date: 202104
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: SLN.Airport, KS
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class C SLN
ATC / advisory: Tower SLN
Second aircraft: Helicopter
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Instructor; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Multiengine; Other Remote Pilot
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict NMAC
Detector: Automation Aircraft Terrain Warning; Automation Aircraft TA
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was instructing while my student was performing a touch and go on Runway 36 at SLN when a Helicopter turned over the runway head on with me and passed roughly 200 feet above my aircraft during our initial climbout. SLN Tower had advised the Helicopter that there were three aircraft on Runway 36; which the Helicopter pilot acknowledged. However; SLN Tower did not call out the Helicopter traffic to my aircraft or the other aircraft in the pattern for Runway 36. The traffic alert popped up on my GPS; at which point I instructed my student to take evasive action by leveling off over the runway and staying below the Helicopter until it was behind us.




Synopsis: GA Flight Instructor reported an NMAC during climbout while practicing touch and goes at SLN airport. Reporter stated the conflicting aircraft was never pointed out by ATC requiring a level-off evasive maneuver from the student.
Date: 201910
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 170/175 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Turbine Engine Thrust Reverser
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Inflight Shutdown
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Engine 2 Reverser deployed during climb. We [requested priority handling] and called for the appropriate checklist. The engine shut down and attempted an auto relight while we were executing the checklist. We decided to shut it down following the checklist procedures. After completing the checklist we decided the safest course of action was to continue to our destination; and were able to land without further incident. Crew performed admirably.


Second narrative: During climb out; at FL240; ENG 2 REV DEPLOYED EICAS message displayed. Ran associated checklist [and requested priority handling]. Engine 2 shut down and attempted to auto-relight while we were running the checklist. Continued checklist and we decided to shut down engine 2 according to checklist. We elected to continue to ZZZ as we felt it was the safest option. Continued single engine approach to landing from there with no further incident. Single engine approach and landing was uneventful.


Synopsis: EMB-175 flight crew reported experiencing an engine thrust reverser deployment inflight.
Date: 201508
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: MDW.Airport, IL
Weather elements / visibility: Turbulence; Thunderstorm; Rain; 7
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Light Transport
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class C MDW
ATC / advisory: Tower MDW
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Distraction; Confusion; Communication Breakdown; Workload
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation - Speed All Types; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Flight Crew; 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: Runway 4R departure from MDW.Tower Controller reiterated takeoff clearance 'left turn 180; climb/maintain 3;000 feet.'After takeoff controller reiterated left turn 180; I commenced a left turn at 400 feet AGL to heading 180; my copilot read back left turn 080.At this point the controller started screaming nonstop 'Negative; I said left turn 180; I say again 180 degrees' and continued his tirade for several seconds.I immediately started scanning looking for an anomaly; checking my heading mode; navigation source; malfunction etc. From the alarm in the controller's voice I was sure we were either going to have a midair or some other disastrous outcome. My attention was diverted and I inadvertently exceeded altitude of 3;000 feet and was accelerating past 250 knots.I immediately reduced power and began a descent back to 3;000 feet; engaged the autopilot and we frequency changed without further incident.I feel that this was a factor in my altitude/airspeed excursions. Contributing factors were my copilot's readback mistake on assigned heading and my diverted attention from what I thought was a dire developing situation.I should have obeyed the basic tenant of 'fly the airplane'. Easier said than done in this situation.




Synopsis: Just after takeoff from MDW; the pilot was distracted by a miscommunication which resulted in an altitude and airspeed exceedance.
Date: 202003
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Large Transport
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict Airborne Conflict
Detector: Automation Aircraft RA
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: About 7 miles prior to ZZZZZ Intersection on the RNAV arrival while level at 11;000 feet and slowing to 220 knots we were issued a traffic callout by Approach. They said we had company traffic at our 10 o'clock climbing out of 7;000 feet for 10;000 feet. We reported him in sight. We got one 'Traffic' TA on TCAS; followed shortly by a 'Climb' RA. My FO (First Officer) immediately disconnected the autopilot and initiated the climb. Passing through approximately 11;400 feet the TCAS reported clear of conflict. I advised ATC of the RA and our climb. (I don't believe that loss of separation occurred).  Once clear; ATC gave us descent clearance; and a frequency change.[This] was early enough in the Coronavirus days that we were still getting used to flying nearly empty airplanes. Open climb with 20 passengers in an empty Large Transport could well give a 4;000 FPM rate of climb approaching 10;000 feet. I myself have been using Vertical Speed in the last 2;000 prior to level off at 10;000 feet to avoid excessive rates of climb. Apparently; the pilot of the other aircraft did not use the same technique. TCAS had no idea he was still planning on leveling at 10;000 feet; and issued us an RA.I've been briefing my FO's on using Vertical Speed to alleviate excessive closure rates. I think that other pilots must be figuring it out and doing the same. I think it was self correcting as I haven't heard of others having the same experience as we did.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported receiving a TCAS RA related to an abnormally high climb rate associated with very lightly loaded aircraft because of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Date: 202004
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: RNO.Airport, NV
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Landing; Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Other Person; Person Flight Attendant
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Fumes in Cabin and after arrival and door was opened the smell of rotten eggs was smelled from the aircraft and up the jetbridge.




Synopsis: B737 Flight Attendant reported a 'rotten eggs' smell at parking after gate arrival.
Date: 201703
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: EWR.Airport, NJ
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: A320
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class B NYC
ATC / advisory: Tower EWR
Second aircraft: B757 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Conflict Airborne Conflict; Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: On approach; we [were] spaced close behind a B757. At approximately 200 feet AGL; we started to encounter some wake. Elected to go-around because the approach had become unstable.




Synopsis: A320 pilot reported executing a go-around on final to EWR when they encountered wake turbulence in trail of a B757.
Date: 201510
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: LIT.TRACON, AR
Aircraft: Medium Transport
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class C LIT
ATC / advisory: TRACON LIT
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Supervisor / CIC; Approach
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Confusion; Distraction; Human-Machine Interface; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Human Factors
Primary problem: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings

Narrative: I was working all radar positions combined and was also the Controller In Charge (CIC) in the Tracon. I cleared an aircraft for the ILS approach and after starting their turn to final; the aircraft informed me that they were not picking up the localizer. I glanced right and saw on the indicator board that the localizer was selected and informed the aircraft. At this point the aircraft was through final and told me they were correcting back to the IAF. While this was happening I called Local Control and asked the status of the localizer. Local Control advised me that the localizer (possibly glideslope as well; I don't recall) was red and he had not noticed because someone had rubberbanded the toggle switch to disable the aural alarm. This is grossly unacceptable and created an unsafe situation. Fortunately I had no other traffic in the area and vectored the aircraft around to the ILS and they landed without incident. Local Control did call me back at some point and advised that after resetting it; the localizer was in the green; but I did not have an aircraft test it before I was relieved.At the time; I was CIC in charge of the Tracon and entire facility. I did notify the controller who relieved me as she was the actual watch supervisor on the facility log and this occurred on her watch.Perhaps retraining on how to deal with one of the localizers not working properly and being in constant or periodic alarm.




Synopsis: TRACON Controller vectored an aircraft to an ILS Approach. The aircraft advised the Controller they were not receiving the localizer and flew through the final approach course. The TRACON Controller's monitor equipment indicated the ILS was selected. The Tower Controller informed the TRACON Controller that the localizer had gone out; but someone had inhibited the aural alarm from sounding by wrapping rubber bands around a toggle switch. The Tower Controller reset the localizer and the aircraft completed its next approach.
Date: 201808
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Reporter qualification: Flight Attendant Current
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Illness / Injury; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: General Physical Injury / Incapacitation
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Aircraft
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Exposed to carbon monoxide poisoning on aircraft. Aft galley and back of the aircraft. Injury report filled out and treated at hospital ER. On board aircraft to preflight equipment and get galley ready for flight. Within minutes started feeling a pounding headache; and burning in my eyes; numbness and tingling in my fingers. I was on board the aircraft about 35 minutes. Exposed in the back galley about 20 to 25 minutes. The other 3 flight attendants also were feeling the symptoms but to lesser degrees and were not exposed as much as I was. Captain came on board; told the gate agent to hold up boarding until he determined what was going on. He could not smell anything in the back. I told him my symptoms and he asked me if I was feeling ready and safe to go? I told him I was not and wanted off the aircraft. My supervisors came down and we all got off the aircraft. I was starting to feel heavy and a little disoriented. I was assessed by medical on the jetway and transported to hospital where my blood test confirmed later that afternoon that I had levels of carbon monoxide in my system.




Synopsis: Flight Attendant reported illness due to carbon monoxide inhalation while preparing the galley for flight.