elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201204
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B767-300 and 300 ER
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Human factors: Troubleshooting; Training / Qualification; Distraction; Communication Breakdown
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Weight And Balance
Detector: Person Flight Crew; Person Ground Personnel
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Chart Or Publication; Company Policy; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: As soon as I initiated the rotation for takeoff I had to immediately check my rotation because the nose wheel popped off of the ground. The airplane seemed very tail heavy. I then continued to rotate; but at a slight slower rate to 7.5 degrees to avoid striking the tail. I commented to the Captain that I felt the trim was wrong. The climb profile was executed normally. 24 minutes after takeoff; received a new weight manifest that showed the new ZFW of 263.7 vs. 259.2; and increase of 4;500 LBS. The new takeoff trim setting was 2.8 vs. 3.0. New TOG 317.8 vs. 313.3. Reported discrepancy to our Dispatcher.


Second narrative: [Narrative #2 had no additional information]


Synopsis: A B767 First Officer noted that on takeoff the nose wheel popped off the ground indicating a load problem and a short time later the crew received a revised weight and balance reflecting the correct numbers.
Date: 201701
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: 0.25
Light: Night
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Main Gear
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: We were on the approach when we lowered the gear handle. The left main gear showed a red light and the other two (right main and nose) were green. This indicated to us that the left main gear was not down and locked. The Captain called for a go-around and we did. We climbed up to a safe altitude and attempted to bring down the gear two more times but continued to only get two green lights. We started to run the checklist needed in the QRH but realized we had to make a decision on where to land because the weather [at our destination] was above and below mins constantly. We made the choice to divert to our alternate because the weather there was above one mile visibility and the longest runway was 12;000 ft. As we got closer to [the alternate]; we continued to run the required QRH checklist and ended up using the Manual Gear Extension Lever to lower the left main gear. After doing this; we had our three green lights needed for us to land safely. Upon landing; the gear held the weight of the aircraft and we taxied to the gate safely.


Second narrative: Having one of our Pilots in the back of our aircraft; we asked him to double check through the gear viewer in the Passenger cabin to confirm the left main wheel down and locked. It was confirmed and we landed uneventfully.


Synopsis: B737 flight crew reported no green light on the Left Main Gear on initial extension. Aircraft diverted due to weather and runway length and landed uneventfully after manual gear extension.
Date: 201702
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: A321
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Landing
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Ground Strike - Aircraft
Detector: Person Ground Personnel
When detected: Other Subsequent to landing
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Flight departed runway with a normal rotation and takeoff. The enroute phase of flight was normal. The Captain flew a normal and stabilized visual approach to [the] runway. The aircraft bounced on landing and landed with what I thought was without incident. I did not feel or hear anything abnormal. I subsequently learned that the aircraft experienced a tail strike.


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


Synopsis: The flight crew of an Airbus A321 reported they had a tail strike after landing.
Date: 201907
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: No Aircraft
Operator: Air Carrier
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Parts / Stores Personnel
Human factors: Time Pressure; Workload
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Hazardous Material Violation; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Ground Personnel; Person Maintenance
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Shipping reliever for lunch accidentally shipped Hazmat part to ORD. Paperwork was in error; was busy trying to pick AOGs (Aircraft on ground) and hotshots; realized it was has a Hazmat part tried to stop it from being taken but driver had already taken part away. Picked part and was no Hazmat material sticker on it only an ESDS (Electrostatic Discharge Sensitive).I failed to open box to check part. Assumed part was non-hazardous due to no labeling; nothing flagged when the ship was done.More help during lunch and making sure outside of the box containing Hazmat part is properly marked.




Synopsis: Commercial Airline Stores Personnel reported accidentally shipping Hazmat item with incorrect documentation and no required Hazmat label.
Date: 201512
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Fog; 3
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: SR22
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Autopilot
Component problem: Malfunctioning; Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Inflight Event / Encounter Unstabilized Approach; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Automation Aircraft Terrain Warning; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: I was on final approach and had an autopilot malfunction. I crossed my IAF at the required altitude and then after reducing my air speed (to be able to engage 50% flaps); before the FAF; I noticed the plane was going into a rapid descent. I tried to reprogram the auto pilot but decided to disengage the auto pilot and hand fly the approach and landed without incident. As a corrective measure I will monitor the actions of the auto pilot more closely. I noted that the terrain warning system was activated; I am not sure if it was; but there was a warning activated based on the altitude that was preselected.




Synopsis: SR22 pilot reported an autopilot malfunction that led to a rapid descent prior to disengaging the autopilot and hand flying the aircraft.
Date: 202006
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: UUWV.ARTCC, FO
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Cruise
ATC / advisory: Center UUWV
Aircraft component: GPS & Other Satellite Navigation
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Aircraft; ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Suspected GPS jamming Aircraft X Moscow; UUWV FIR at LAMAG along G724at XA:14Z. FL340 ADS-B OUT L from XA:14Z through remainder of flight/blocked inXC:55Z; also ADS-B OUT R intermittent from XA:16Z through XA:24Z selected transponder R /selected ref nav data; Rad Nav Inhibit off. Unknown [cause]. Possible jamming?




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported possible GPS jamming with both L/R ADS-B malfunctioning or inoperative.
Date: 202008
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked; Cruise; Takeoff / Launch
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant In Charge
Reporter qualification: Flight Attendant Current
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Passenger Misconduct
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I had a Deadheading (DH) pilot and Non-Revenue (NR) Pilot boarding at different times ID's on and refusing to wear masks. I asked both if they could please use their masks; both refused saying they were actively drinking!I addressed the NR Pilot's X type wrap he had primarily around his shoulder; when I asked him to place it on [he] refused. I shared the requirements that went into effect. He said it does [meet the requirements]. Plus it looked like it was a weave similar to what we used to wear as kids to cover our mouths and neck in the Midwest winters. Not a tight weave at all. I looked up the policy. It didn't say much about weave; so I went and apologized to him; only to have my head bit off more.This walking; talking while holding a cup of coffee is not actively drinking. The only ACTIVE action is their germs being spread over the area and on us. Also showing passengers how to circumvent the procedure.DH Pilot only had mask on for takeoff; but did not cover his nose. When I did my walk through I asked to have it please place over his mouth. He slumped down in his seat I was unable to see if complied with keeping his nose covered. The NR did not use mask until we were taxing into ZZZ.Both kept using their drink and very very slowly eating as an excuse not to comply. NR Pilot after landing PA and I did my walkthrough had his bag pulled out from under his seat and had his iPad placed on top and was watching his program; mask off. I asked my B to handle it I didn't think my asking him to comply was the proper thing to do. She did; he moved his bag. B relayed to me later he said he was mad that everyone gives him a hassle about his wrap.I did all I was able to do. Tools are not in place to handle these situations.




Synopsis: Flight attendant reported a deadheading pilot and a non-revenue pilot refused to follow face mask policy.
Date: 202101
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: TRK.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Medium Transport
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class D TRK
ATC / advisory: Tower TRK
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Automation Aircraft Terrain Warning; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Chart Or Publication; Human Factors; Procedure; Airport
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Sink rate EGPWS below 1;000 feet / spoilers used below 1;000. TRK Tower cleared us for the visual Runway 29.  Due to the strict noise abatement procedures and high terrain; the maneuver had to be performed within a shorter radius of the Runway 29.  PF and PM briefed the possible sink rate and usage of the spoilers due to the possible increase of descend rate.  The aircraft was stabilized by 300 feet; on speed.Cause - The peculiarity of the airport location.Suggestion - Request Runway 11; or waiver from the noise abatement community for less strict noise procedures.




Synopsis: Corporate pilot reported experiencing a sink rate EGPWS event while on the Runway 29 visual approach to TRK airport. Reporter cited high terrain and 'strict' noise abatement procedures contributed to the event.
Date: 201204
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-700
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer
Second reporter function: Captain
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural MEL / CDL; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Weather
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: MEL 35-4-02 requires flight below FL250 with two unusable POBs [Portable Oxygen Bottle]. Heavy weather and icing at filed FL240 dictated a climb above the weather for safety of flight. Captain exercised emergency authority and elected to climb out of the poor weather conditions. Note: During climb to get out of poor weather conditions; excessive engine vibration was noted on #2 engine and the Engine Vibration Checklist had to be accomplished; suspected ice on the fan blades. Approximately 12 minutes of flight was conducted in the clear at FL340. Once passed heavy precipitation conditions; a descent back down to FL240 was made. Remainder of flight was uneventful and accomplished below FL250 per MEL 35-4-02.


Second narrative: We were cruising at FL240 due to an MEL restriction that restricted us to FL250 due to two POBs used on the previous flight for a medical emergency. We encountered a wide line of weather and experienced moderate rime icing. We elected to climb to FL330 since ATC advised this altitude was above the weather. We stayed at FL330 above the weather until clear of the line and then descended back to FL240 as soon as possible.


Synopsis: B737 flight crew reports being dispatched with an MEL requiring flight at FL250 and below. Enroute heavy weather and icing conditions are encountered and the crew elects to climb to FL340 until clear of the weather 12 minutes later.
Date: 201409
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: BOI.Airport, ID
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 2 Eng; Retractable Gear
Flight plan: VFR
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class C BOI
ATC / advisory: TRACON BOI
Second aircraft: Small Aircraft; High Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach; Instructor
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Air Traffic Control Separated Traffic
Contributing factors: Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I was instructing on ARS/ARN combined.  Aircraft X departed and requested vectors for ILS (VFR).  Developmental assigned heading; 5000; and maintain VFR to Aircraft X.  Aircraft Y departed on a similar route as Aircraft X.  Prior to communication change to our frequency; Developmental called local control and requested them to assign Aircraft Y 4500ft.  When Aircraft Y did report on frequency he reported 'at 4500.'  Developmental issued traffic to both aircraft.  Aircraft Y reported Aircraft X in sight.  Aircraft X was still looking for Aircraft Y.  Shortly after Aircraft X was issued a turn for the ILS; he reported a NMAC with Aircraft Y.  After reviewing the tapes;local control issued 'at or above 4500' to Aircraft Y.  Aircraft X altitude did indicate as low as 4800 after targets merged.Reissuing 4500 to Aircraft Y seems a bit redundant but possibly could have changed the outcome.  Reissuing traffic to Aircraft X because he didn't have him in sight might have changed the outcome.  Reissuing 5000 to Aircraft X after seeing his altitude change might have changed the outcome.




Synopsis: BOI TRACON Controller reports of two aircraft that were in conflict although both were VFR.
Date: 201302
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Falcon 2000
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Ferry / Re-Positioning
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Autoflight System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Clearance; Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control; Flight Crew FLC Overrode Automation; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: While cruising at FL430; with the autopilot engaged on the left side; the aircraft began an abrupt climb. I saw a CCO (Cursor Control Device) failure on the EICAS message screen and looked at my altimeter which read 29.72 and was climbing thru 42;200 FT. I disengaged the autopilot and looked at the co-pilot's altimeter which now read 43;700 FT. ATC inquired what our altitude was as I started a descent back down to FL430 on the co-pilot altimeter. I engaged the autopilot on the right side and switched the CCO to the right side. We told ATC what happened and confirmed we were at FL430.




Synopsis: Falcon 2000 EASY aircraft began an abrupt climb from assigned altitude. Autoflight system malfunction was cited as contributor to the event.
Date: 202008
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
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
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Passenger Misconduct
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Company Policy; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: A passenger traveling with a pet refused to wear her mask and customer service had to come to the aircraft to remove her from the flight. She began to scream and yell that she had to go home and she paid for the ticket. This occurred after myself and the Gate Agent informed her of our mask policy. She then started to rant how the virus is a political hoax and that she doesn't wear a mask. When customer service tried to get her to come off the plane; she started to scream that she will wear the mask and the passengers around her started to yell with her to give her the mask. We gave her the mask and she put it on.Gate Agents need to ensure the passengers have on their proper masks before they come down to the aircraft. Also; it would help if the CA would make an announcement about the mask policy; and the possible return to the gate for not wearing the mask.




Synopsis: Flight Attendant reported that a passenger refused to wear a face mask. When customer service came on board the passenger agreed to wear the face mask.
Date: 201703
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: HND.Tower, NV
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; High Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class D HND
ATC / advisory: Tower HND
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: During the clearance instructions prior to takeoff; the controller cleared a right turn to the east upon takeoff. I was taking off from runway 35L and there was another plane on a 10 mile final for runway 35R. During climb-out; I started my turn to the east as cleared by tower. I started this turn while still over the runway 35L. This turn was made so that I could stay  clear of the Las Vegas Class B airspace to the north of KHND. Prior to completing the turn to the east the tower controller communicated that it 'wasn't smart' to turn over an active runway (referring to runway 35R). The controller's clearance instructions were contradictory to communication on climb-out.  I recommend that instead of clearing departing traffic to make a right turn in this situation; that the clearance instructions should clearly state to fly runway heading until approved for the right turn to the east. Additionally the controller should not be communicating to a pilot of an aircraft while the plane is in a critical part of flight (turning on departure and climb-out).




Synopsis: General aviation pilot reported being cleared for takeoff from the left runway with a right turn on course. The turn was initiated at low altitude and the reporter was chastised by the Tower.