elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 202109
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Light Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Second aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Time Pressure; Workload; Confusion; Communication Breakdown
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict NMAC; Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation - Altitude Crossing Restriction Not Met; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Automation Air Traffic Control; Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Talking to ZZZ Center. Was assigned; what we thought; was an altitude of FL370. We read back FL370. ATC specialist actually assigned us FL270; but didn't correct our read back. A few minutes after the altitude assignment; ATC then advised us of crossing traffic at FL280.Upon us passing FL275 MSL; ATC queried if we were level at FL270. We advised ATC that we were climbing to our assigned altitude of FL370.ATC then clarified our clearance of FL270. Autopilot was disconnected and a return to FL270 was commenced as the other aircraft was given a heading assignment to further relieve the conflict.At no point did we receive a TA or RA; nor did the conflicting traffic report either.


Second narrative: [Narrative contained no additional information.]


Synopsis: Air taxi flight crew reported climbing through their assigned altitude. On read-back to ATC the pilots were not corrected that their stated altitude was incorrect. There was no RA.
Date: 201410
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: CLT.Airport, NC
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Regional Jet 200 ER/LR (CRJ200)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
ATC / advisory: TRACON CLT
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: When conducting the IVANE FOUR arrival procedure; Charlotte approach control changed the landing runway assignment multiple times. The pilot monitoring updated the FMS. While in the FMS NAV mode; with the autopilot engaged; the aircraft failed to turn at the AMOBE waypoint. The pilot flying immediately corrected the aircraft from deviating further from course and selected HDG mode to re-join the arrival. The waypoint was overflown by approximately 1/2 mile and the arrival procedure was rejoined. Nothing further occurred. The FMS failed to navigate in NAV mode; while still showing FMS in the flight mode annunciator; due to the numerous runway changes issued by Charlotte approach.




Synopsis: CRJ-200 First Officer reported deviating from cleared course on approach to CLT; citing multiple runway changes and slow FMC processor speed as contributory.
Date: 201910
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Ramp
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Hazardous Material Violation; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Ground Personnel; Person Other Person
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Gate; General Maintenance Action; General Work Refused
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Ramp Lead loaded a piece of freight labeled with 'Dry Ice' without being manifested or marked DG on the Load Plan. Ramp Lead failed to inform CLP (Central Load Planning) or SUPV [Supervisor] of discrepancy and pushed the airplane out of the gate then called CLP for help. This action caused airplane to return to gate to remove freight piece and took over 1:30hr of delay.




Synopsis: B-737 Ramp personnel report aircraft ground return to gate to remove undocumented Dry Ice due to a ground procedural violation.
Date: 201912
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Weather elements / visibility: Fog; 1
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Champion Citabria Undifferentiated
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class G ZZZ
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter VFR In IMC; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution
Contributing factors: Weather; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Weather at time of departure from ZZZ1: Vis 6 Sky condition OVC 011. Weather reported at ZZZ2 at time of departure: Vis 3 Sky condition OVC 007. TAF (Terminal Aerodrome Forecast) reporter from ZZZ3 for time of arrival: Vis 6 SCT 035. Morning before flight; reviewed weather and determined the ceilings would be lifting enough to make safe flight. Departed ZZZ1 and remained in Class G airspace. Flew safely for one hour south by remaining below cloud ceiling and remaining 500 ft. from persons; vehicles; vessels; and structures. Approximately thirty minutes after passing ZZZ; cloud ceiling lowered and fog moved in; reducing visibility to less than 1SM. Decided to make precautionary landing in a plowed soy bean field. Landed safely with no damage to persons; aircraft; structures; or vehicles. Tied down the aircraft for the night and retrieved it three days later. Upon reflection; the safer decision would have been to wait a few days for the weather to pass. Another choice would have been to make a precautionary landing sooner on a runway at an established airport when the weather first began to collapse; instead of continuing flight in hopes it would improve. I believe the flight ended safely due to my comfortability; willingness; and experience with landing in a field as opposed to continuing flight into IMC.




Synopsis: Pilot flying Citabria aircraft made an off airport landing in a field due to deteriorating weather.
Date: 202103
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Night
Aircraft: B737-700
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Time Pressure; Distraction; Communication Breakdown
Second reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Hazardous Material Violation; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Passenger Misconduct
Detector: Person Flight Crew; Person Dispatch
When detected: Routine Inspection; Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: After pushback in ZZZ; Dispatch notified us via ACARS that ZZZ Operations had contacted her and that 'you did not sign her [Dangerous Goods Form]'. However; only the Pilot's copy of the [Dangerous Goods Form] was provided to us by the A Flight Attendant. Prior to pushback; and at the same time the [Dangerous Goods Form] was delivered; we had an intoxicated Passenger removed from the aircraft. Once we reached our cruise altitude; we took pictures of the signed Pilot's copy of the [Dangerous Goods Form] and amended Release and emailed them to the Operations Center and the Dispatcher via the Company provided EFB.First of all; any time HAZMAT/COMAT is transported onboard; a face to face briefing with the Captain should be required. This will build a shared mental model and will allow the Captain the opportunity to efficiently and effectively bring Dispatch into the loop in accordance with the FOM. Personally; any time we carry HAZMAT/COMAT; I will review the FOM as this is not something I do every day; so I can back up the Captain more effectively. Finally; discussing actions to take if unruly Passengers pop up among the whole Crew can help prevent distractions when they do pop up


Second narrative: After pushback; ACARS notification from our Dispatcher stated QUOTE 'You did not sign her NOTAC' ie; describing the Ops Agents copy of the NOTAC.  Apparently the Ops Agent only handed the 'Pilots Copy' of the NOTAC to the A Flight Attendant; and not directly handing it to the Captain.  No 'Ops Copy' was ever provided. Just when this occurred; a Passenger was being removed for behavior of what an intoxicated passenger would exhibit.  Once at cruise; photographs were taken of the 'Pilots Copy' of the NOTAC; and of an amended Release stating in the remarks section. Note: 'Raft on flight; refer to NOTAC' -- with our Dispatchers initials and the time of the amendment; and this was emailed to our Dispatcher and Chief Pilot in the Operations Center.  Confirmation was received on ACARS that Dispatch was in receipt of our email; sent via Company email on the Captains EFB.


Synopsis: B737-700 First Officer reported a communication breakdown between flight crew and Dispatch regarding missing signed NOTOC document.
Date: 201708
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Aircraft: A321
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Aircraft component: Air/Ground Communication
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Illness / Injury
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Procedure; Aircraft; Company Policy; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: About 25 minutes prior to landing we received a call from the Flight Attendant (FA) that [a] passenger was having trouble breathing and was in and out of consciousness. I asked her to get as much information and put it on the form so we could relay that to the physician on call if we needed to. I also asked her to try the phone in the back to get the physician on call on the line. They could not get the phone to work. They recruited some medical personnel from the back of the airplane who assisted in administering oxygen; IV fluids; juice; taking his blood pressure and getting all of his statistics. He was breathing well and his blood pressure varied from 80/30 to 100/80. His heart rate was fluctuating but approximately 50 bpm. His wife had stated that he had had diarrhea earlier in the day. He was dehydrated. His blood sugar was about 99. The medical assistants attached the defibrillator pads to the patient. The defibrillator suggested shocking the patient but they did not shock the patient because he was awake and talking. I sent dispatch a text message through ACARS to contact us with the physician on call. He replied with 'you will have to call me'. We were too busy to do that as we were only 20 minutes to landing by that point with one of us flying the aircraft and the other one communicating with the flight attendants. We talked to air-traffic control about our situation and they gave us emergency handling to the airport all the way to the gate. They did an excellent job. I think additional training may be required in the dispatch area so that they realize that when we are too busy to contact them that they have the tools to contact us and use a three-way patch with the physician on call so that we could give him and receive information.The [seat] phones on the aircraft have never worked when I have needed to use them in an emergency. It wastes valuable time and a valuable Flight Attendants (FA) resource when he/she is trying to get someone on the line. Either replace them with something that does work or remove them.




Synopsis: A321 pilot reported that the seat phones would not work and Dispatch was too busy to patch a physician on call with the flight crew during a medical emergency .
Date: 202011
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Dawn
Aircraft: Small Aircraft
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class G ZZZ
ATC / advisory: UNICOM ZZZ
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Student
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Confusion; Communication Breakdown; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: Early morning at roughly XA:30; Aircraft X flew from the west into ZZZ for pattern work. At the time Aircraft X was the only aircraft that was currently in ZZZ's airspace at the time of the event. Initially Aircraft X made a call to ZZZ Tower asking for pattern work. Since the aircraft was positioned over the mountains the response for ZZZ Tower came in weak. Clarification was requested by pilot flying and stated that the Air Traffic Control Tower was closed. The pilot flying treated the airport as a non-towered airport and switched frequency to XYY.Z. From that point the pilot flying used non-towered airport call outs to announce position. After completing three laps in the pattern an airport operations vehicle flagged down the pilot in command. The pilot in command then preceded to reject the takeoff and continue to the run up area. Airport operations advised the pilot to contact Tower at XXZ.A where the pilot was advised that he could continue pattern work yet had to take a phone number down. Pilot took down phone number and contacted Tower staff after the flight.Due to COVID-19 many ATC facilities are having to temporary close down due to cleaning. ZZZ has also been changing hours of ATC operation in the last ninety days. Pilots from ZZZ1 have also run into the problem of not properly reaching Air Traffic Control due to altered non-posted hours.The pilot in command flying was a student pilot that had recently soloed. When contacted by an airport operations vehicle; [they] only asked for intentions which the pilot responded that he was doing pattern work. At the time it could not be depicted if the airport operations vehicle told on XYY.Z to contact Tower on XXZ.A. In the future [if] airport operations could do this it would help. At the time the pilot thought the airport operations vehicle was attempting to do a FOD patrol of the runway since it was the early morning. The aircraft has been in the past known to have radio issues at random times.The student pilot will go over procedures with Class Delta airports with a flight instructor to mitigate problems in the future.




Synopsis: GA student pilot reported frequency communications issues while flying to an airport whose Tower services were not in use.
Date: 201206
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: OWD.Airport, MA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground OWD
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Confusion; Distraction; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: Taxi
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Airport; Human Factors; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: I taxied over the hold short line at my home airport and had to be reminded by the Tower Controller. Contributing factors: The hold-short lines were moved since I last used that runway. It has been some time; but for some reason my habits don't take me to that runway. The hold short line was moved a large distance from where it used to be. I was 'expecting' to taxi to where I was used to going. I remember thinking: 'Oh neat; they've painted ILS hold lines here; never had 'em before'. Lack of recent experience; ironically; that was the purpose of the flight. I just got back from a family visit to a relative dying at an unexpectedly young age. I think it must be bothering me more than I thought because I've been doing stupid; distracted things like this all week.




Synopsis: A pilot taxied beyond the newly installed OWD Runway 35 hold short line because it was some distance from the runway end and he was not expecting it to be different from its previous location.
Date: 201809
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZID.ARTCC, IN
Aircraft: PA-46 Malibu/Malibu Mirage/Malibu Matrix
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZID
ATC / advisory: Center ZID
Second aircraft: UAV - Unpiloted Aerial Vehicle
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Training / Qualification; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict NMAC; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Aircraft X was level at FL210 and asked me if there was any known drone activity in the area. I responded; 'Negative; why?' His response was; 'We just went right by one. It was big and black'. I asked the pilot if it was the type with 4 rotors to which he responded affirmative. I had an aircraft climbing in that same general area so I reported it to him two times. Upon leaving my sector the climbing aircraft said he never saw it. I immediately reported it to the FLM [Front Line Manager] and he proceeded to do his checklist and paperwork. Approximately 5 min after the incident the FLM had me ask the pilot if he could tell what direction the UAV was traveling and if he considered it to be a near miss. The pilot said it appeared to be hovering in one spot and that he came within approximately 50 feet of it; and he definitely considered it a near miss. I looked the situation up in the 7110.65 later and discover that advisories are supposed to be broadcast every 4 min after the last report; similar to a laser event. We have not had proper training on UAV activity so I was unaware of this requirement. [Recommend] proper training on unauthorized UAV activity.




Synopsis: Indianapolis Center Controller reported an NMAC between a Piper and a drone; and also failure on Controller's report to broadcast for 15 minutes afterward.
Date: 201409
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Weather elements / visibility: Fog; 0.5
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Weather
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Initial Dispatch Release and weather forecast did not require a takeoff alternate. During pushback; fog began to move in and there was a runway change; and during taxi the ATIS changed; visibility was 1/2 mile. The First Officer accomplished the takeoff data and we discussed the change. Holding short of the ILS critical area; we re-briefed the departure and takeoff data. We discussed visibility requirements and because I am a new Captain with close to 300 hours; we discussed the legality of low visibilities. We were cleared on to hold and the visibility was then reported as RVR 800. The First Officer asked if I was legal and I replied yes. During our discussion about my legalities and reviewing runway change and departure; we overlooked the fact that a takeoff alternate would now be required. We did not expect the rapid weather change. Once the weather got bad; I should have sent a message to Dispatch and coordinated with them. They would have then reminded me of the need for an alternate.


Second narrative: We then discussed HUD takeoff requirement and determined it was not required. Takeoff was uneventful. After departure; the Captain realized we actually needed a takeoff alternate due to the reduced visibility below CAT 1 mins.


Synopsis: B737-800 flight crew experiences a rapid change in visibility to below Cat I minimums during taxi out for takeoff. The requirements for the low visibility takeoff are discussed but the crew forgets to request a takeoff alternate from Dispatch.
Date: 201808
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Cruise
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Instructor; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Commercial
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Equipment / Tooling
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: While conducting slow flight at 2;500 feet with the carb heat on; the engine began to run very rough suddenly. The crew cycled the magnetos; adjusted the mixture; adjusted the throttle; and cycled the carb heat off then back to the on position. Nothing that the crew did improved the vibration. Given the recent history of the aircraft; the decision was made to immediately return and the PIC contacted ATC; announced his intention and was provided instruction to return to ZZZ. The crew remained at their current altitude at normal cruise power with carb heat on until landing was assured and made an uneventful landing on Runway XXL.




Synopsis: C172 pilot reported rough running engine and returning to destination airport.