elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 202105
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Cruise
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Dispatcher
Reporter qualification: Dispatch Dispatcher
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Weight And Balance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Hazardous Material Violation; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Dispatch
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Equipment Problem Dissipated; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Radioactive materials were incorrectly loaded in position X that should have been loaded [at position] Y or aft.  Ramp called after flight departed to seek after the fact approval.  Advised the team and the Duty Officers of the situation.  It was determined that based on the low exposure rate - TI .8 - that the flight could continue and the crew would be advised on the ground at the destination.  The flight was concluded without incident.The cause was due to the ramp agent missed the warnings he got from his software to not proceed.Ramp should be more aware of the special handling required by DG




Synopsis: Air Carrier Dispatcher reported incorrect loading location of Radioactive Hazmat cargo after aircraft departure.
Date: 202112
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: 3
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: PA-31 Navajo/Chieftan/Mojave/T1040
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Turbine Engine
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Commercial
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Inflight Shutdown; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: The engine started to gain power so I progressively pulled the throttle back and engine started to decrease in power but then it started climbing again. With power back to idle engine was still climbing. I turned engine off once it got to redline. I [requested priority handling] then landed at ZZZ.




Synopsis: PA-31 pilot reported an engine overspeed in flight. Performed engine shutdown and landed.
Date: 202202
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Turbulence; 5
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Helicopter
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class G ZZZ
ATC / advisory: CTAF ZZZ
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Rotorcraft; Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Other / Unknown; Situational Awareness; Time Pressure; Workload; Confusion
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors; Weather
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Approach to airport ZZZ approximately 300 ft. out at 250 ft. AGL. Aircraft started descending at too high rate. Raised collective to mitigate loss of altitude; but aircraft continued down into a field short of the runway. I believe the problem was settling with power due to wind gusts. Did not have enough altitude to correct situation.




Synopsis: Helicopter Pilot reported landing short of the runway in a field. Pilot states the aircraft was in wind gusts and did not have enough altitude to recover.
Date: 201701
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: CMH.Airport, OH
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Icing
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Gulfstream IV / G350 / G450
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Ferry / Re-Positioning
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class E CMH
ATC / advisory: TRACON CMH
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We received our clearance from clearance delivery while on the ramp. Our clearance received was 'cleared to destination; radar vectors; direct; climb and maintain 10000.' and transponder code. I read back the clearance as received and it was again confirmed by clearance delivery as; 'read back correct'. We received our taxi cleanse from ground and taxied to the assigned runway. Holding short; we contacted tower and requested full length. Tower approved our request for full length and issued the takeoff clearance; 'No traffic on final; cleared for back taxi for full length; on departure turn left heading 270; cleared for takeoff'. Takeoff and departure were normal. On assigned departure heading of 270 and climbing through roughly 6000 ft MSL; tower handed us over to departure ATC. I called departure and checked in including 'climbing through 7000 for 10000'. ATC immediately questioned our initial assigned altitude; which I replied 10000. ATC stated that they believed we were assigned an initial altitude of 5000; therefore they believed there was a potential pilot deviation; and gave us a phone number to call ATC once we landed at our destination. The Flying Pilot; and jumpseater heard the clearance from clearance delivery and also confirmed they heard 10000 as the initial altitude. They also confirmed that there was no other altitude assignments heard differing from the 10000 assigned altitude. On the ground; the three of us called the number given by ATC. Immediately upon answering; ATC stated that 'the error was on their end'. There was 'no pilot deviation'. The clearance delivery person was supposed to assign us an initial altitude of 5000; and to expect 10000 within 10 minutes of departure and they instead issued the initial assigned altitude of 10000. It reinforced the practice of both (or in this case all three) pilots listening to the clearance when given to assure the assignment and read back were correct and confirmed by all.


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


Synopsis: G-IV flight crew was chastised for exceeding their cleared altitude by ATC during departure. Upon arrival at their destination ATC advised that the mistake was made by Clearance Delivery.
Date: 202108
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Weather elements / visibility: Haze / Smoke; 3
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Bonanza 35
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class G ZZZ1
ATC / advisory: UNICOM ZZZ
Second aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown
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: Was ready to depart ZZZ an uncontrolled field and heard a Skyhawk make a position report and he said his destination was Fillmore. I did not hear the position so I asked the position and had no answer. I asked at least three more times and no answer. I carefully taxied onto the runway and did not see anybody as I announced my takeoff roll and; no answer. I called the Skyhawk at least four to five more times as I was climbing. The visibility was extremely bad due to the fires. Since my nose was up; I had nearly no forward view. All of a sudden I caught a glimpse of the Skyhawk banking away from me. I never saw him until he was off my left wing at the same altitude. I called him again and no answer. The Skyhawk was white with blue trim. The worst colors in bad visibility. My airplane has bright red trim on all surfaces. I listened as I heard the Skyhawk announce at ZZZ on Downwind; base leg; then another voice came on the announce final. I believe it was a student and instructor and I believe that the instructor had the volume on his radio turned down; probably to talk to the student and forgot it. Had he not seen me; I'm reasonably sure we would have collided.




Synopsis: Pilot reported taking evasive action to avoid a mid air collision with another aircraft not communicating their intentions correctly.
Date: 202010
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: A300
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Inflight Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Weather
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: While flying at FL230; we began experiencing some moderate turbulence. The plane began an uncontrolled descent for 500 feet; and we reported it to ATC who then cleared us to FL220. The aircraft was controllable at FL220; but were still encountering moderate turbulence. We requested lower and were given FL210; and no more moderate turbulence was encountered. Turbulence in the flight levels was the primary causal factor. There was also active MOAs and crossing traffic that required us to stay higher. Upon getting the flight release I used my personal software of Foreflight to realize we were filed through a SIGMET for severe turbulence. We were then filed lower after talking with the Dispatcher. When talking to Center; they said there weren't any severe SIGMETS for our route of flight. I am not sure where the disconnect was; but I would suggest providing Dispatch the tools for greater awareness of flight through severe turbulence; as this was the second time in two days where we were filed through severe turbulence SIGMETS. Also; there were MOAs that we were being vectored over by one sector of Center; and then another sector said they were cold. This could have possibly been coordinated better to allow for lower altitude to stay out of turbulence.




Synopsis: A300 First Officer reported momentary loss of control during a moderate turbulence encounter at FL230.
Date: 201504
Location: SFO.Airport, CA
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class B SFO
ATC / advisory: Tower SFO
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Not provided enough time to prepare to land.After announcements were made for initial approach to SFO Airport; we were waiting for cockpit to gives the 2 chimes to complete final preparations for landing and take our jump seats; as required; never heard from cockpit until First Officer calls to tell me we were at about 2;000 feet; and ask if we were ready? All I had time to say was 'no; we were waiting for the 2 chimes!' At that time we all jumped into action; and within less than 5 minutes the plane landed at SFO with all 4 Flight Attendants (FA)s not in our jump seats; as a result [one] FA fell in the back Galley and injured a knee. When I confronted the First Officer (FO) after landing and deplaning door was opened was that he have to give us FAs any more chimes as he was not advised by [company] to do so; and when the injured FA called the cockpit to advise what happened to her they kept arguing with her that they don't have to do anything because it's not in their check list; then hung up on her. Me and my partner and all 1st class could hear the cockpit yelling that they don't have to explain themselves to FAs; on top of it one of them had the nerve to tell my partner that I had given him permission to land; not true.




Synopsis: An air carrier Flight Attendant reported that the flight crew did not give them a chime signal to take their seats and several were standing during landing. The flight crew reportedly stated the chime procedure was not in their SOP.
Date: 201809
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Champion Citabria Undifferentiated
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
Aircraft component: Tail Wheel
Component problem: Failed
Reporter function: Instructor; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Upon first landing with student; tail wheel leaf spring broke. I was able to lift the tail with aircraft thrust and control the aircraft to taxi off of the runway to a taxiway where the aircraft was towed to the hanger using a tug. The landing was not a hard landing. The aircraft only has around 120 flight hours since new.




Synopsis: Citabria Flight Instructor reported that the tail wheel leaf spring broke during landing.
Date: 201206
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: GA2.Airport, GA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 50
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Cessna 150
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: UNICOM GA2
Second aircraft: Small Aircraft; High Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Engineer; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Airport
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: I had landed my Cessna 150 on Runway 13 at GA2. This is a 2;400 FT grass runway (13-31); that is significantly lower in elevation on both ends than in the center of the runway. I was taxiing on Runway 13 after the landing rollout when I observed a high-wing; tail wheel aircraft with a radial engine (possibly a Monocoupe) begin his/her takeoff roll on Runway 31 and was coming straight toward me. I immediately exited the runway to the left (or northeast). Wingtips were never any closer than 20 FT. I don't believe the conflicting aircraft ever saw me due to his/her restricted forward vision.




Synopsis: C150 pilot reports a near collision after landing on a grass strip; with a high wing tail wheel aircraft taking off in the opposite direction. The reporter clears the runway to the left while the departing aircraft continues to takeoff.
Date: 201605
Aircraft: B777 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Our first duty period duration stretched to XE:44; including an emergency regulatory exemption. Just after arriving to the hotel I was informed our next duty period; after a 21-hour duty break; would also press regulatory limits. The scheduler wanted a commitment that the crew would be able to extend. I informed her that such an assessment must be made at the time and cannot be achieved in advance.The company altered records to show only XA:02 (rather than XE:44) of prior regulatory duty thusly making it appear the crew would be legal for more than 30 minutes of extension for the upcoming duty period.




Synopsis: B777 Captain reported his company allegedly altered duty time records in an attempt to allow the crew to continue under FAR 117.
Date: 201208
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: MDW.Airport, IL
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground MDW
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Fatigue; Situational Awareness; Time Pressure; Workload
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Procedure; Environment - Non Weather Related; Chart Or Publication; Airport
Primary problem: Chart Or Publication

Narrative: From our gate on the North side of the Terminal; we were given a taxi clearance to taxi to Runway 31C via Yankee; Papa; Golf; cross Runway 31R. We taxied via Yankee; entered Papa; and as we prepared to cross Runway 31R; the Controller said we had missed Papa but to continue to cross 31R and taxi via Golf. This was not true as we had entered Papa; as the Commercial Chart page and airport signage showed. The Controller made no further mention and we proceeded with no incident. The Commercial Chart page and airport signage is deceptive; and that taxi clearance is ambiguous and misleading; allowing for two different interpretations of the desired route. Once I had entered Papa; I was naturally looking to cross Runway 31R and continue via Golf; which is what I did. If one looks at the 10-9; the 'P' for Papa taxiway is placed on Papa Taxiway; but so close to the continuation of Yankee across Runway 31R that it isn't obvious that Papa ALSO continues another 100 FT and crosses Runway 31R. I would suggest redraw the Commercial Chart page and airport signage so that the 'P' for Papa Taxiway does not appear adjacent to where Taxiway Yankee veers right across 31R. I was so task-saturated by the events and requirements of the leg and previous leg (late; lack of crewmember; delay due to maintenance issue; weather; unexpected runway closure and circle to land to 13C (never done it before) on arrival; a difficult/pushy crewmember; lack of performance for only runway being used for departure; flight plan autoload not working; Dispatch not agreeing with performance assessment but later agreeing that the active 13C was inadequate; conferring with clearance to get the runway we needed (31C) without undue delay (originally 30 minutes but modified to no delay); station agent saying we had 3 minutes to push; and others; that I purposefully tried to super-focus so as to not miss anything. I think I succeeded; but I think a combination of fatigue and a misleading clearance and Commercial Chart page; made it appear as if I had not complied with the taxi clearance.




Synopsis: The MDW Commercial Airport Diagram and taxiway signage at the Taxiway P/Y Intersection are confusing and ambiguous. The charted P and Y should be placed further apart and the taxiway intersection signage positioned more accurately.
Date: 202101
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: No Aircraft
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Training / Qualification; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Other Person
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Company Policy; Human Factors
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: Since the COVID-19 Pandemic has started; I have yet to see ANY person in a management position or management support position wear a mask in the flight operations crew lounge.  As a result; what I've observed from other line pilots is people walk in the lounge; and drop their masks immediately.  That's not universal; but it is or was very prevalent.  For months; I've simply avoided going in the lounge.  On my last trip; I needed to enter again.  Nothing's changed.  Clearly; from (name)'s message dated X; as well as (name)'s message the same date; I believe the company's clear expectation is we are all supposed to wear masks in any company location.  As supposed experts at managing risk; there is a problem.  Leadership by example is lacking.  Very disappointing.




Synopsis: Air carrier pilot reported people not wearing a mask while inside the flight operations crew lounge.