elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201309
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Gate Agent / CSR
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Vehicle
Detector: Person Gate Agent / CSR
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Equipment / Tooling
Primary problem: Equipment / Tooling

Narrative: This jet bridge will not stop right away it continues to move even if you are not touching the controller. The jet bridge operator hit the aircraft with the jetbridge causing damage to the door of the aircraft.

Callback: The reporter stated that she did not personally see the event occur but knows that jet bridge had been a problem in the past with CRJ and ERJ type aircraft. Pictures were take of the aircraft door damage. A previous jet bridge related event at a different gate was complex and related to a combination of rain; the jet bridge canopy and the jet bridge extension used to couple with regional jet type aircraft. In that event the canopy did not completely cover the jet bridge extension between the jet bridge and regional jet. Because it was raining; a passenger slipped after she encountered a slight hump at the extension's center and fell into the aircraft hitting her head on the Flight Attendant jumpseat. The passenger was not seriously injured; but the reporter highlighted that the jet bridge extension solution to boarding smaller aircraft has pitfalls associated with their use.



Synopsis: A jet bridge hit a regional jet aircraft causing door damage when it did not stop after operator inputs ceased.
Date: 201604
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZDC.ARTCC, VA
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Large Transport
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class A ZDC
ATC / advisory: Center ZDC
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Time Pressure; Communication Breakdown; Workload; Distraction; Confusion; Troubleshooting
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Altitude Crossing Restriction Not Met; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: We were flying to IAD via the GIBBZ2 arrival. Tail wind was 160 kts which we made sure was in the descent planning page. Washington Center held us at altitude past the top of descent due to crossing traffic. When clear of the conflict they told us to descend via the GIBBZ2 arrival. I stated that we were unable to make the altitude restrictions on the arrival as we were already 5;000 feet above path. The controller then told us to go direct KILMR and comply with the restrictions and contact Washington on 133.2.  The captain flew the plane using idle thrust and speed brake and programmed in direct KILMR. I changed frequency and checked in with Washington Center and said we had a request; as it was obvious we were still unable to make any restrictions. The controller told us to stand by. I made repeated attempts to get a reasonable clearance from ATC but was ignored. Finally I broke in and stated that the clearance was impossible and we needed a new clearance and I requested a phone number to center. The controller told me they had a lot going on and he would get back to me. They never issued any altitude relief in spite of our repeated statements that we could not comply. We crossed every restriction over 5;000 feet high. Finally they told us to contact approach control.  When I checked in with approach I simply told them we were descending to 6;000 feet (bottom altitude of the STAR). He told us to descend to 5;000 and we continued to a normal approach and landing. I have serious concerns about Washington Centers total disregard of our concerns and failure to resolve the clearance issues.




Synopsis: Pilot reports of being left high and advising ATC that they could not make the assigned restrictions. ATC never advised the crew on what to do. Aircraft crossed every restriction high. Pilot was concerned about the center and their disregard for the flights clearance issues.
Date: 201708
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Weather elements / visibility: Cloudy
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: A321
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Emergency Exit
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Passenger
Anomaly: No Specific Anomaly Occurred All Types
Detector: Person Passenger
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Aircraft; Chart Or Publication
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: The flight attendant asked my wife to demonstrate how to open the emergency exit door. I have [much time] with this airline; and have never heard such a request. Still; we were anxious to comply; so we studied the door and safety instructions in the seat pocket. The instructions on the door are quite confusing. The instructions in the seat pocket are so tiny that it is impossible to discern the proper sequence for opening the door. We were unable to figure out how to open the door for several minutes.




Synopsis: A321 passenger reported the instructions on the door Emergency Exit Door and instruction card quite confusing; taking several minutes to determine the proper steps.
Date: 201703
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZDC.ARTCC, VA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Regional Jet 700 ER/LR (CRJ700)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class A ZDC
ATC / advisory: Center ZDC
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Clearance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: [The flight] was on arrival CAVLR Three landing north into Washington Dulles. We were given [descent clearance] for the CAVLR three arrival. As I was the non-flying pilot getting the landing information; inputting the FMS; briefing the passengers; as well as monitoring the radio. While doing all of this I overheard my first officer [being] given the instruction to [descend] via the CAVLR three. I finished putting in the information into the FMS. As I looked up to and the landing speed I noticed my first officer was 3000 feet below the assigned altitude of 22;000 at the initial fix of the star. I immediately took action to regain the original altitude of 22;000 feet. At this point we were too close to the fix to regain the altitude. We continued with the descent into Dulles. No conflict happened. Finished flight as normal and nothing was ever said. I inquired to my First Officer why he did that; what made him descend; and his response was he was looking at the FMS while I was inputting information and misread it. This was completely and utterly unintentional. The contributing factor to this is that new hires at this airline are coming from flying Cessna aircraft to a 70;000 lb jet. Zero mid-size aircraft experience; such as turboprops and similar aircraft. I also may have been doing a bit too much. I could have not been monitoring the radio and alleviate workload a bit. Airlines choices of pilots to hire new in the pipeline is diminishing; and as a result; experience is affected. Corrective action is to eliminate these descend via clearances. When you have one pilot who is responsible for being off radios; while one is inexperienced requiring precision; this will happen again.




Synopsis: The Captain of a Bombardier CRJ-700 reported that the First Officer was flying and was 3000 ft lower than assigned altitude.
Date: 202201
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Reporter qualification: Flight Attendant Current
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Passenger Misconduct; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Passenger Electronic Device
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Gate
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: Boarded flight and Captain prior to door closure said they were having issues because of 5G networking; asked all passengers to turn their phones to airplane mode and WI Fi. We pushed back from gate; more PA from Captain made with same issue FA (Flight Attendant) walked through cabin to ask passengers to turn their phones to airplane mode; but had no way of enforcing this and from my seat I saw 2 passengers scrolling through their facebook accounts and  watching facebook videos. Captain final came on PA and said we would have to return to the gate and deplane and have Maintenance take a look at aircraft systems; which is what we did we were told that we did not have contracted Maintenance at ZZZ for this aircraft and we took approximately 2 1/2 delay before we were on our way again. Wanted this event to be brought forward and I believe we will see more issues concerning the 5G and passengers putting their phones on Airplane mode.




Synopsis: Flight Attendant reported possible 5G interference with the aircraft and passengers not setting phones into aircraft mode as instructed.
Date: 201703
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Large Transport
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Check Pilot; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Training / Qualification; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Excursion Runway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Rejected Takeoff; General Evacuated
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was the Captain; Check Airman (Non flying Pilot) in right seat. Did OE training with another Type Rated Captain that was the flying Pilot.During takeoff after V1; the flying pilot removed his hands from throttles and waited for me to call VR and at that time he started to rotate by pulling back on yoke and shortly thereafter he decided to ABORT the Take Off. I never heard him announce 'ABORT' and during the abort we ran out of runway and airplane came to a stop approximately 1000 feet past the end of the runway. Evacuation was announced and all Passengers and Crew evacuated the airplane.Weather conditions were VMC; Gusty Winds; Visibility 10+ Miles; Clear Skies. We never received a Windshear warning during Take Off Roll and airspeed did not fluctuate before or after V1.




Synopsis: A Line Check Airman reported the flying pilot executed a rejected take off at rotation for no apparent reason resulting in stopping in the overrun and prompting an evacuation.
Date: 201505
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Caravan Undifferentiated
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Ice/Rain Protection System
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Physiological - Other
Anomaly: Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Equipment Problem Dissipated; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: During a routine flight with a flight time of approximately 50 minutes at an altitude of 4500 MSL; an OAT around +10C. TKS system on HIGH; inertial separator in bypass; heat on with the selector turned to the 9 o'clock position; the overhead vents opened; and side vents closed. I prepped aircraft for a normal winter's flight by doing a preflight test of the TKS system. All TKS panels were saturated with TKS fluid and all systems operated normally. After engine start and during taxi to the takeoff runway I turned the TKS system on high; and pulled the inertial separator to bypass. I maintained the system on high and inertial separator in bypass for entire flight. About 20 minutes into the flight I noticed a strange taste and a very faint odor of TKS fumes. About 5 minutes later I noticed the beginnings of a slight headache. I put my oxygen mask on for the remainder of the flight. After the flight I walked around got some fresh air and a drink of water and the headache was gone.On the return leg I turned the TKS on to the NORM selection for about the first 15 minutes of the flight then turned the system onto HIGH. Inertial separator in bypass; Heat on at 9 o-clock position and overhead vents open. On the return leg I did not notice any fumes or get a headache.The difference between the 2 legs was on the initial departure I started the system on HIGH on the ground during taxi; and on the second departure I started with NORM and ran on NORM for about 15 minutes. Another difference was the direction of flight. From initially I was flying into the sun and I'm sure the flight deck was much warmer.




Synopsis: After takeoff with the TKS system set to high; a C208 pilot detects fumes and develops a headache. Oxygen is used for the reminder of the 50 minute flight. On the return leg the TKS system is set to normal for the first 15 minutes then high and no odor is detected nor does a headache develop.
Date: 201307
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Aircraft: Citation V/Ultra/Encore (C560)
Operator: Fractional
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Workload
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: A Citation V departed ZZZ on a RNAV arrival to the destination. As he was climbing; he told me that he was unable RVAV DPs and STARs and could not fly the assigned arrival. This was the second time in twenty minutes I had pilots tell me in the air that they were cleared on a route they could not fly. I said; 'this is really something that should be handled on the ground;' and proceeded to fix the route. He relayed that he informed the Tower he could not accept RNAV arrival. They're response was something like; 'We are a little busy and we do not have a route for you; they will fix it in the air.' The Tower launched him on a route he knew he could not fly and told him to get a new route from the Center in the air. This is unacceptable. Recommendation; inform the Tower that 'fixing it in the air' is not a viable option.




Synopsis: Enroute Controller voiced frustration with a local Tower who knowingly issued RNAV procedures to an aircraft that was not equipped to fly RNAV procedures.
Date: 201710
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: BJC.Tower, CO
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Citationjet (C525/C526) - CJ I / II / III / IV
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class D BJC
ATC / advisory: Tower BJC
Second aircraft: Amateur/Home Built/Experimental
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Flight Data / Clearance Delivery; Ground
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew; Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Chart Or Publication; Airspace Structure; Procedure; Company Policy
Primary problem: Airspace Structure

Narrative: Aircraft X was inbound on a Visual Approach with two VFR targets on 1200 codes northbound near east of Class D airspace. As Aircraft X checked on; I heard the Local Controller issuing traffic and I believe Aircraft X reported traffic in sight. One target was north of the final and no longer a factor; however there was also a second target (Aircraft Y) near the final; also northbound around 7300 ft.Aircraft X asked what the intentions of the traffic above him were; and the tower controller responded that intentions were unknown because the aircraft (Aircraft Y) had not established communications and appeared to be transitioning east of the Class D airspace. Aircraft X responded 'not good'. Aircraft Y established communications after that. The transitioning aircraft reported that he was aware of the traffic on final as he transitioned in the VFR corridor; and the Tower Controller suggested to the transitioning aircraft in the future he may want to communicate with ATC due to the volume of traffic in the area. Aircraft Y acknowledged he would in the future. A MOR (Mandatory Occurrence Report) was also filed as a 'public inquiry' due to the concern expressed by Aircraft X about proximity of the other traffic. This is one more event highlighting concern about the design of this airspace corridor; where VFR aircraft operate without communication with ATC. In situations like these; such aircraft skirting controlled airspace can create conflicts with aircraft transitioning from Approach over to the Tower frequency. In fact; in the event of an inoperative transponder; we might not even know such transitioning aircraft were even there! Many of these conflicts could be mitigated and managed better if aircraft operating so close to Class B and Class D airspace would communicate with ATC; or if controlled airspace was redesigned to ensure aircraft could not operate in this area or at those higher altitudes without first establishing communication with ATC.




Synopsis: BJC Tower Controller reported that an aircraft on visual approach was concerned that an aircraft in a VFR corridor was too close.
Date: 202112
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Time Pressure; Workload; Other / Unknown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; 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 Became Reoriented; Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Deviated slightly from river caused Caution Terrain aural on river visual; corrected and landed.Over corrected for cross wind on the approach.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported receiving a GPWS ' Terrain Warning'. The Captain was aware of over correcting for a cross wind on approach.
Date: 201602
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: LAX.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Gulfstream II (G1159)
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B LAX
ATC / advisory: TRACON SCT
Second aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter; Inflight Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: This experience occurred on the SADDE6 arrival into LAX. After crossing the SMO VOR at 7000 ft MSL we were given a vector of 070 degrees. Very light winds out of the east about 7kts at the time. At the time of the incident; as the pilot not flying; I was heads down making final adjustments to Nav radios and FMS inputs. During this time; the Captain called for my attention to check Hydraulic pressures (his initial reaction was that we had a floating spoiler). By the time I looked up and over at him he had full control wheel deflection; left and right; with no aircraft response. Only after using asymmetric thrust with full control wheel deflection was he able to raise the wing back to level flight and regain control. Immediately following the control issue we queried SoCal Approach as to the traffic we were following into LAX. We were advised that there was a 737 in front of us (don't remember his distance); and also a A380 that was on 5 mile final.After much discussion between ourselves and neither one of us having ever experienced a wake encounter of that magnitude; our best professional opinion was that it was the wake of the A380 that we flew through that morning.




Synopsis: G1159A First Officer reported encountering very strong wake vortices on approach to LAX in trail of a B737 and A380.