elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201503
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: RSW.Airport, FL
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Flight plan: VFR
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class C RSW
ATC / advisory: TRACON RSW
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Landing Without Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: While working radar approach I pointed Aircraft X out to RSW tower so Aircraft X can descend into FMY airport.  Aircraft X reported FMY airport insight.  I cleared him for the visual approach into FMY.  He cancelled his IFR and told him that the RSW tower is watching him fly through to his destination.  I accomplished other approach duties such as strip management and Class C service.  RSW tower called me and told me that the Aircraft X just landed on RSW runway 24 without clearance.Aside from asking the pilot if he's 'sure you have the correct airport insight' I'm not sure what else could be done.




Synopsis: A Fort Myers (RSW) Approach Controller reports of an aircraft going to land at one airport; but instead lands at another airport. This happens under the Approach Controller's jurisdiction.
Date: 201909
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Light: Dawn
Aircraft: B737-700
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Escape Slide
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Technician
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Airframe; Maintenance Powerplant
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate; Pre-flight
Result: General Maintenance Action; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Procedure; Manuals; Human Factors
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I installed [Company 1] emergency evacuation slides on aircraft in the service aft and service forward position. I was notified on my drive home by the dayshift supervisor that the inflight crew found the gurt bars were the wrong length and would not attach. Not being familiar with the [Company 1] slides; I did not know the gurt bars are a different length and position specific. I assumed they could be installed in every position just as the [Company 2] slides/gurt bars can be. I relied on my lead to print MPD25 after I turned in my parts tags and paperwork. I did not realize the [Company 1] have an A or and F in the serial number that notates what position they should be installed in; as there is no documentation of this. I should have checked MPD25 myself before installing the slides. I believe my 'norm' of installing [Company 2] slides that fit in every position and relying on my lead to print MPD25 contributed to my error. In the future I will check MPD25 before installing all parts and I'm truly sorry for this event causing a delay for our passengers.




Synopsis: Technician reported installing emergency evacuation slides in the wrong doors.
Date: 201508
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZZ.ARTCC, FO
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: B767 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Human factors: Troubleshooting; Workload; Physiological - Other
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Hazardous Material Violation; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Illness / Injury
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; General Physical Injury / Incapacitation
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Environment - Non Weather Related; Procedure
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: We received a call from Business Class galley Flight Attendants (FAs) reporting that she was feeling light headed and dizzy. 10 minutes later all 3 FAs in the Business Class galley called to report light headedness; difficulty breathing; and slight headache. Recirc fans were turned off to increase fresh air to cabin. Only those 3 fwd FAs were affected; the 3 working in Coach were not. Symptoms went away within a few minutes. Approximately 10 minutes after that a 4th FA who had come fwd to assist in the Business class section called to report that he too now had a headache. Contact made with Dispatch; [medical services]; and [maintenance] at this point. While conversing with Dispatch we received another call from fwd galley to report all 4 of them now had all previous symptoms return. Decision to descend and divert was made at that point. Made immediate descent to FL240 to further lower cabin altitude and original plan was [a] diversion. After level at FL240 for 10 minutes Purser called to inform us that all symptoms had gone away. I also had them use portable O2 starting just prior to descent. At that point decision was made in conjunction with Dispatch to continue to ZZZ. Upon arrival we were met by emergency medical personnel who checked all crew members vitals. At no point during the time that the FAs were showing symptoms did either of us in the cockpit feel any of the same symptoms. I had the relief pilot check them and several passengers to see if they were ok. Problem seemed to be located in the fwd galley only. We did have a shipment in the fwd cargo compartment which contained 44 lbs of dry ice which the emergency crews were notified about. After arrival police also met the aircraft and wanted statements from all of us. I refused for us and recommended the same to the FAs.




Synopsis: A B767 returned to the departure airport after the business class flight attendants became light headed. Coach flight attendants were unaffected. Forty four pounds of dry ice were in the forward cargo hold.
Date: 201808
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: Ramp
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Hazardous Material Violation; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Ground Personnel
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: On the [load plan] item 1 only showed the mail as 'live animals-other' and it weighed 893 lbs. Also; on the [load plan] was a 16 lb dog and a quickpack of dry ice. I needed to plan the item 1 mail and the dog in the forward pits and the dry ice in the aft pit. Not knowing what type of animals were in the item 1 mail; I was unable to calculate the air space for the 16 lb dog. I explained this to the [Loading Supervisor] and she had the Ramp Lead call me. The Ramp Lead advised me item 1 mail was fish. Also; item 4 was listed as 'tropical fish.' With that information; the air space was okay.




Synopsis: Ramp load agent reported HAZMAT cargo incorrectly assigned to live animal cargo compartment.
Date: 201510
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B757-200
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Turbine Engine
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 Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Shortly after reaching cruise altitude the right engine displayed indication of high vibration. We followed the checklist procedure; which resulted in operating the engine at a reduced power setting to keep the vibration within limits. We [advised] Center and got clearance to return to ZZZ. We landed uneventfully; however the aircraft was overweight. We then taxied to the gate and entered the engine problem and overweight landing in the maintenance logbook.I think the event was well handled by all - the pilots; flight attendants; ATC; dispatch; airport personnel; and maintenance.




Synopsis: B757-200 Captain reported returning to departure airport after noting high vibration on the right engine.
Date: 201711
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 50
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: RV-3
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: CTAF ZZZ
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Ground Excursion Runway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Other takeoff roll
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Weather
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Lost control of aircraft on takeoff run and ran off the runway. Damage to landing gear. Runway in use had quartering tail wind.




Synopsis: RV3 pilot reported loss of control on takeoff roll resulting in a runway excursion and damage to the landing gear.
Date: 201301
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Aircraft: PA-44 Seminole/Turbo Seminole
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: A PA44 reported [the airport] in sight; and was given a visual approach clearance into [the airport]. I observed the PA44 descend through 008; and then climb back to 017. The PA44 checked back on and stated that [the airport] was NOTAMed closed. We agreed that neither of us had been made aware of this closure. The PA44 stated that he was in communication with someone at [the airport] on UNICOM frequency; he was declaring an emergency; and would be landing [the airport]. I reported all this information to the FLM. Make sure that appropriate coordination is accomplished when airports are NOTAMed closed.




Synopsis: Enroute Controller issued a Visual Approach clearance to a non-towered airport only to discover that the airport had been NOTAMed closed.
Date: 201605
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Passenger Misconduct
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Equipment / Tooling; Aircraft
Primary problem: Equipment / Tooling

Narrative: We had a Passenger issue in the back of the aircraft; and requested direct to ZZZ. We were given priority handling from ATC. We only had one FMC that had ACARS capability. While I was trying to communicate with our Company via ACARS; my FO; who was flying the aircraft; was unable to get the weather for our arrival; due to a single ACARS setup.I think it could be a continual safety issue; with only a single ACARS setup; in our aircraft when you are in a time sensitive situation; and severely limited to needed information for the safety of the flight. Only one of us could use ACARS at a time.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported about the limits of single FMC/ACARS operations.
Date: 201808
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZLC.ARTCC, UT
Aircraft: DA40 Diamond Star
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
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; Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Aircraft X was cleared via V4 BYI direct TWF. We descended aircraft to 100 and shipped as per LOA. TWF called and asked if the aircraft was over DRYAD or MALTT or something for the ILS. We said no; that they were on V4 to BYI. They said okay and asked for control. We gave them control. Later; we saw the aircraft was westbound into high MEA. We called and asked what they were doing and thought the controller said they were going to DRYAD and we informed them they were entering high MEA. They asked what altitude they needed and we said 120 (the MEA was 113). They gave us some explanation of what their strip showed (direct MEDEA or something). We again said they were on V4 and our strip showed that. The controller climbed to 120 and gave direct DRYAD. The plane did enter the 113 MEA when they were at 100.It seemed like the TWF Controller didn't have the complete flight plan on their strip. I don't know why that is and what the controller gave the aircraft or was thinking. They should have had the routing.




Synopsis: Salt Lake Center Controller reported an aircraft was allowed to operate below the Minimum En-route Altitude.
Date: 201902
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: TGI.Airport, VA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Dawn
Aircraft: Helicopter
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Flight phase: Taxi
Airspace: Class G TGI
ATC / advisory: UNICOM TGI
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Rotorcraft; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Commercial
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Chart Or Publication; Airport
Primary problem: Chart Or Publication

Narrative: After landing Runway 2; aircraft air taxed to the departure end of the runway (approach end for Runway 20). After touchdown; First Officer observed that a barge with an estimated 50' crane had been positioned 800' from the approach end and 200' to the right of center line of Runway 20. It was observed that a small orange flag was affixed to the top of the crane. There was no observation of a light. Later in the day; the Duty Officer spoke with the point of contact on Tangier Island and was informed that a light was on the top of the crane and that the crane would be in place for an extended period of time. The First Officer contacted FSS to report the hazard to flight in an attempt to get a NOTAM published. Pilot provided the lat/long and pilots observed estimated height. After multiple conversations and phone calls; the NOTAM was not published. the reason provided was that the crane owner was required to call the FAA and provide identification information for the crane and accurate information regarding the lighting; position; etc. Pilot implemented a conference call with FSS and [company] system command to assist in verification of the hazard. Pilot was unsuccessful in meeting the administrative requirements to have the NOTAM published. The result of the administrative requirements was that no NOTAM was issued; or has been issued at the time of this report. The hazard still exists. The location is such that it presents a serious safety hazard to landing aircraft.




Synopsis: Helicopter pilot reported sighting a 50-foot crane to right of centerline of the approach to runway 20 at Tangier Island airport.
Date: 201709
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: SCT.TRACON, CA
Flight conditions: Mixed
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Lancair Legacy
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class E SCT
ATC / advisory: TRACON SCT
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Situational Awareness; Workload
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Chart Or Publication; Airspace Structure; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Company Policy

Narrative: SoCal approach is using outdated arrival procedures that are only obscurely published; failing to take advantage of modern equipment and databases; and thereby imposing unnecessary workload (and therefore hazard) on arriving aircrew. Furthermore; they are unable or unwilling to tell a pilot as little as 10 minutes before joining an instrument approach which approach will be used. Conversations with other pilots and personal experience from 10 years prior indicate that this is standard procedure for SoCal and has been brought to their attention previously.The arrival procedures in question turn out to be Tower Enroute Control clearances; which are verbally dictated to the aircrew and sometimes changed midway through the arrival (although a STAR exists). The report also documents SoCal's clearance for a 110-degree turn onto final contrary to guidance in FAAH 7110.65 and without any prior warning to the pilot resulting in a serious overshoot of the final approach course.

Callback: Reporter explained details of the event.



Synopsis: Lancair pilot reported receiving an IFR clearance via VORs and airways when they were prepared to fly the published STAR. They were issued a VOR Approach which required a steep turn to the IAF which the pilot felt was in violation of ATC procedures.
Date: 201506
Location: BHB.Airport, ME
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Sail Plane
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class E BHB
ATC / advisory: CTAF BHB
Second aircraft: Small Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turboprop Eng
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Glider
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Over the numbers at approximately 250 feet; I noticed a [air taxi turbo prop] come out from under my nose. I then extended my touchdown point beyond the [other aircraft] to avoid wake turbulence. Our speeds were providing separation. Completed landing; exited at midpoint; and tried a radio call to the [aircraft]; no response. Called CTAF for a radio check for my radio...was working fine. Contributing Factors:1. Straight-in approach does not work safely at uncontrolled airports and is not approved.2. No radio contact with CTAF? Wrong frequency or whatever..Flying a pattern at an uncontrolled airport will allow all other Aircraft to see that someone is coming in Silent/off frequency or just not talking.




Synopsis: The pilot of a sailplane experienced a near-mid-air-collision with an air taxi's turbo prop aircraft while operating at a non-towered airport.
Date: 201902
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Widebody; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter function: Other / Unknown
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Hazardous Material Violation
Detector: Person Ground Personnel
When detected: Routine Inspection
Result: General Maintenance Action; General Work Refused
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Dangerous goods (RMD) on pallet PMC was not indicated on the loading instruction; pallet had a DG label on it. Load Control notified; they could not find out what the DG was. Due lack of info pallet was offloaded. As pallet was already loaded other cargo had to be offloaded then affected pallet offloaded and aircraft reloaded Nine minute delay due to this.




Synopsis: Airline Safety Personnel reported the removal of Hazmat shipment due to insufficient required Dangerous Goods documentation upon loading.
Date: 201712
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: LAX.Airport, CA
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: A321
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class E SCT
ATC / advisory: TRACON SCT
Second aircraft: UAV - Unpiloted Aerial Vehicle
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Distraction
Second reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Human Factors; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Departing LAX; DOTSS 2 departure assigned 5000 ft. We were give several turns and then direct PEVEE climbing to 9000 ft then 12000 ft then issued 'climb via SID' then FL230. While in the turn to PEVEE the preceding aircraft reported sighting a drone at 13000 ft. We wanted to clarify the climb via instruction and get a vector left to avoid the area of the drone sighting. Once the Captain was able to finally ask for clarification the controller issued a climb to FL230 and stated 'you're not going to make that climb restriction here's the number to call for a pilot deviation.' We were still at 12000 ft and approximately 17 NM from the 15000 ft or above restriction at DOTSS when he made that pronouncement. We ended up crossing DOTSS at approximately 17000 ft.After speaking with a supervisor at the SoCal ATC faculty; it seems the controller was a bit task saturated with the drone in the area and coordinating with other aircraft. He also stated there was no violation.


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


Synopsis: A321 flight crew reported being distracted by reports of a drone on departure from LAX.