elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201505
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZAN.ARTCC, AK
Aircraft: B747 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class A ZAN
ATC / advisory: Center ZAN
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Aircraft; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: The B747 departed ANC; A11 put him on a vector to join Q44. When he should have been joining Q44 I asked if he was joining Q44 he said he was still on a vector to join. I was busy and let him fly a little further to see if he was going to join; when I got back to him it was clear he had gone past the airway; I gave him a vector back toward Q44; by the time the pilot made the turn he hit the airspace boundary of Stony ATCCA airspace; a few minutes later he reported joining Q44; but was observed diverging off the airway south again and required another vector; there was a Military Red Flag mission going on and GPS jamming may have been a factor. Place GPS Jamming info paperwork with times of the affected sectors.




Synopsis: ZAN Controller observes a B747 flight departing ANC on vectors to intercept Q44 miss the airway twice. At the time a military exercise was underway and GPS jamming was occurring.
Date: 201810
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: SUS.Tower, MO
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class D SUS
ATC / advisory: Tower SUS
Second aircraft: Cessna Citation Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Anomaly: Conflict Airborne Conflict
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action

Narrative: Departed 1H0 to the south and contacted Spirit (KSUS) Tower to transit airspace enroute to ZZZ1. Transition was approved south of the airport and KSUS indicated they had positive radar contact of my aircraft. While flying south of KSUS at 2;500 MSL and still on frequency; I heard KSUS Tower say 'Aircraft Y are you with me?' About 30 seconds later KSUS repeated this inquiry with no response again from Aircraft Y. At this point; I looked down at my iPad which was connected to a portable ADS-B receiver and noticed reported traffic 11 o'clock high; descending; and heading in the exact opposite direction of my flight path. I began a small turn to the right and held my altitude at 2;500 MSL. I visually located the traffic maybe 1 NM away and descending toward me. I continued my right turn away from the jet and estimate it passed off my left wing within 1;000 feet. Shortly after Aircraft Y passed me I heard them say 'Aircraft Y is with you Spirit Tower.' KSUS Tower then gave them permission to enter the pattern and said nothing to me or Aircraft Y about the near miss. I did not say anything to KSUS after the incident either. My best guess is that Aircraft Y was on the KSTL Approach frequency and was not handed off quickly enough or did not switch frequencies quickly enough when entering Spirit's airspace. I'm not sure why the controller did not try to contact me for evasive action when Aircraft Y did not respond.




Synopsis: Small Aircraft pilot reported taking evasive action due to airborne conflict with jet traffic.
Date: 201810
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: IMC
Aircraft: A320
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 Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: While operating at FL260 we began to observe a significant increase in engine Number 1 N1 vibration. Specifically; engine Number 1 N1 vibration was indicating approximately 3.3 and rising; while engine Number 2 N1 vibration was indicating approximately 0.2. We were in cruise flight at FL260; in icing conditions; with engine Number 1 [and] Number 2 anti-ice selected ON. The engine Number 1 N1 vibration indication continued to rise steadily to 5.0 and above and we could physically sense abnormal vibration on the left side of the aircraft. As this occurred; we initiated QRH 'Eng - High Vibration'. As we executed 'Eng - High Vibration'; we experienced a decrease in engine Number 1 N1 vibration to an approximate value of 0 when engine Number 1 thrust was reduced to; or near; idle. However; once thrust was increased to cruise; engine Number 1 N1 vibration increased and was eventually sustained at approximately 9.4. In accordance with the continuance of 'Eng - High Vibration'; we increased engine Number 1 thrust to 90% N1. No change in engine Number 1 N1 vibration occurred. The engine Number 1 N1 vibration value continued to be sustained at approximately 9.4. As the aforementioned occurred; we requested and received clearance to climb to FL320; in an effort to exit icing conditions. Once level at FL320; we were; in fact; clear of icing conditions.Upon completing 'Eng - High Vibration' QRH with no reduction in engine Number 1 N1 vibration at cruise thrust setting; we continued flight with engine Number 1 thrust at; or near; idle. We advised Dispatch of our [issue]. At this point; we were in range of [destination] (approximately twenty minutes from landing) and had begun the descent and arrival phase of the flight. We attempted to establish communication with [Maintenance] via Dispatch. However; as we descended; we lost radio communication with Dispatch. I provided a briefing to our Purser Flight Attendant. We continued our approach and arrival. We landed without incident; taxied to gate; and concluded the flight.




Synopsis: A320 Captain reported high vibration in Number 1 engine that led to operating the engine at or near idle for the latter part of the flight.
Date: 201208
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: B737-700
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Galley Furnishing
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Technician
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Powerplant; Maintenance Airframe
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown; Distraction
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Maintenance
When detected: Routine Inspection
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: A butane soldering iron was inadvertently left onboard a B737-700 aircraft following maintenance (Cabin Mod) in ZZZ. The tool was left above the aft cabin ceiling immediately forward of the access panel for the FDR. Distractions from other maintenance being performed in the aft cabin and galley area most likely caused me to eventually close the access panel before a Final Inspection of the area. The tool was discovered missing the following night. The aircraft terminated in ZZZ1 that night. Maintenance Control was contacted; who then directed Contract Maintenance at that station to remove the tool from the aircraft. The tool was found and removed. [Suggest] inventory of tools following maintenance and inspection of all opened areas; access panels; etc. prior to close.




Synopsis: An Aircraft Maintenance Technician reports he inadvertently left a butane soldering iron above the aft cabin ceiling on a B737-700 aircraft during a cabin modification.
Date: 201507
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: DEN.Airport, CO
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked; Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground DEN; Ramp DEN
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Workload
Second reporter function: First Officer
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I am making this report to highlight the potential threat to our operations induced by the frequent runway changes in Denver. Local conditions indicated that Runway 8 would be the likely departure runway; which we planned. ATIS updated to indicate Runway 17R would be used for departure. We changed the programming and re-briefed the departure. When we called ramp for pushback; we were assigned Runway 8. We reprogrammed the route; changed the runway data; re-briefed and accomplished the Departure Checklist. When we called for taxi; Ramp assigned us Runway 17R. We again reprogrammed; changed data; re-briefed and re-ran the Departure Checklist. When we contacted Ground for taxi; we were given Runway 8. We reprogrammed; re-briefed; changed data and re-ran the Departure Checklist. After we started our taxi; Ground changed our runway assignment to Runway 17R. We again reprogrammed; changed data; re-briefed and re-ran the Departure Checklist. Twice we were hustled by Ground. We resisted the time pressure and complied with our procedures. The trouble; as I see it; is that these changes run directly counter to our attempts to preplan our departures; and are a major source of errors. Furthermore; this change and uncertainty is commonplace in our Denver departures.Preventative Measures: Have Denver assign runways on the PDC. This way we can know what to expect and be pre-briefed. Also; re-emphasize with Denver the difficulties in changing runways; and let them know to expect a stop and delay prior to continuing for departure.


Second narrative: [Report Narrative Contained No Additional Information.]


Synopsis: B737 flight crew described the extra workload and opportunities for errors when they received multiple departure runway assignment changes on taxi out at DEN.
Date: 201601
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: GIF.Airport, FL
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Landing; Initial Climb
Airspace: Class E GIF
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown; Confusion
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: Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: While doing closed circuit touch-and-go's at KGIF Winter Haven; FL I was sharing the pattern with a [another aircraft] (Aircraft Y). We were communicating on the CTAF and alternating without conflict or difficulty. As I took off from Runway 29 I saw what appeared to be [the other aircraft (Aircraft Z)] at my 12:00 and less than 500 feet ahead and above. I [was aware] that aircraft X that I was communicating with was turning base to final; so could not understand how he had gotten ahead and directly above me. I called that I had the aircraft in sight directly ahead and above. Aircraft then made a tight right turn away from the left-hand pattern for Runway 29. Aircraft Y that I was communicating with called short final; so there were now two aircraft at KGIF; one not communicating and interfering with the flow of traffic. I turned left and called crosswind; then downwind while communicating with Aircraft X who was taking off and turned crosswind behind me when I was abeam the numbers. I called base and final for a simulated engine-out touch-and-go. When turning base to final Aircraft Z turned directly in front of me; approximately 300 feet below; from a non-standard right-hand pattern. I called a go-around and overflew the aircraft; which was no longer seen when I turned crosswind. I continued to be in communication with Aircraft X; who landed after that circuit. Aircraft Z was flying without radio communication and flying a non-standard pattern in the face of active pattern work by two other aircraft.




Synopsis: A general aviation pilot reported a near-mid-air-collision with an aircraft at a non-towered airport that was not using a radio and was flying a non-standard pattern.
Date: 201408
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Amateur/Home Built/Experimental
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Landing
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Excursion Runway; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Weather
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: On approach to the runway; the Tower cleared me to land and reported winds 160 at 12 knots. I had to crab left into the wind to keep a straight track towards the runway. I touched down and bounced back into the air. I came back down and bounced again. I decided to go around and started to apply throttle. The aircraft departed the runway. I slid to a stop and shut everything down and raised the flaps. Thereafter; I checked my logbook and realized that a tailwheel endorsement obtained about twelve months earlier had not satisfied the flight review requirements of FAR61.56(c) as I had mistakenly believed. This incident occurred more than twenty four calendar months after my last recorded flight review. My limited time in type with crosswinds probably caught me off-guard.




Synopsis: The pilot of a tailwheel aircraft reports a bounced landing with wind at 80 degrees to the runway at 12 knots. On the third touch down the aircraft departs the runway. The reporter notes limited tailwheel experience and a non current BFR.
Date: 201707
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZBW.ARTCC, NH
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Transport
Operator: Fractional
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZBW
ATC / advisory: Center ZBW
Aircraft component: GPS & Other Satellite Navigation
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Fractional
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Diverted
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Aircraft
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: On a flight at FL240 we diverted to ZZZ due to multiple and continuing GPS failures. The GTN GPS first failed without warning; causing the autopilot to enter roll mode and causing the MFD map and Weather functions to fail. This happened just prior to crossing BAF VOR and starting the HYPER7 arrival. The GPS flashed a warning that it had lost all satellites and was in DR mode. We asked BOS Center for an initial heading while we worked on the problem. After about 3 minutes the GPS regained its position. We informed BOS Center that we could continue; they cleared us direct a fix on the HYPER7. After a few minutes the GPS again lost all satellites and the associated failures occurred again. We waited a minute to see if the GPS would regain its position; it did not. Due to restricted airspace around and near IAD and several storms and reported low IFR conditions we decided to divert to ZZZ which we had just passed and was good VFR. We informed BOS Center and we diverted and landed uneventfully at ZZZ.




Synopsis: Fractional aircraft Captain reported an issue with GPS navigation which resulted in significant effect on aircraft navigation capability. Aircraft diverted to an enroute airfield.
Date: 201707
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: B737 Next Generation Undifferentiated
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
ATC / advisory: Ground ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Dispatch; Person Flight Crew
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: We received a severe turbulence PIREP from Company Dispatch five minutes prior to push. We talked to Dispatch and confirmed; 500 ft on departure end during takeoff. 737 in and out of stalls! Shouldn't Dispatch inform the Operations Center about this and shut down the field? Ground Control; and Tower had no knowledge of this PIREP. So a 737 almost crashes at 500 ft and ATC has no knowledge of this? We requested a reroute away from the area and used Runway XXR for takeoff about 20 minutes after the end of the valid time of the PIREP. Other aircraft took off and reported ok rides so we took off and climbed uneventfully. Ground only had PIREP of severe turbulence 40 NM south of the field and was confused about the one we received. So this report is to address the flaws that we saw between Dispatch; the Operations Center; and ATC. Why didn't the Operations Center shut down the field; why didn't anyone know of this PIREP except us? Why didn't our Dispatcher know about the PIREP 40 NM south of the field that Ground knew about? Usually all parties are in sync.




Synopsis: A B737 Captain reported confusion after receiving a PIREP from Dispatch that ATC had no knowledge of.
Date: 201411
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: SNA.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Citation Excel (C560XL)
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class C SNA
ATC / advisory: TRACON SCT
Aircraft component: FMS/FMC
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Confusion
Anomaly: Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Chart Or Publication; Human Factors
Primary problem: Chart Or Publication

Narrative: Before departure from SNA; the MUSEL7 departure was briefed and loaded into the FMS. Based on the pictorial depiction from the current Jeppesen chart 10-3D dated Sep 14; the course appears to follow the LOC BC from runway 20R until 1.0 DME I-SNA; then a 177 degree course to MUSEL; followed by a hard right turn the SLI VOR. This was the procedure that was briefed. Because the turn is so tight (more than 270 degrees to the right); the FMS commanded a right turn before reaching the MUSEL intersection (smart turn). During the right turn ATC issued instructions to fly heading 210. At that point we were turning right past 230 degrees and returned to the left heading 210. The departure then continued uneventfully. ATC did not indicate that the procedure was being flown incorrectly. There was no traffic conflict.Upon review of the departure procedure after safely reaching cruising altitude; I discovered that the text description of the departure route indicates a left turn to 177 degrees after reaching the 1.0 DME I-SNA for VECTORS to the MUSEL intersection. This is different from what is depicted in the picture; which seems to indicate that you are supposed to fly directly to MUSEL and then turn hard right.Suggested resolution: Jeppesen should revise this chart to clarify that the 177 degree heading is not a clearance direct to MUSEL; it is a heading to fly while waiting for vectors; and it is possible that ATC will not turn you to the right until after passing MUSEL.There was no conflict or ATC inquiry. This report is filed to improve the charting of this particular departure procedure.




Synopsis: A track deviation occurred when the flight crew of a C560XL turned right toward SLI as they approached MUSEL; having misinterpreted the plan view depiction of the MUSEL SID off SNA and failing to have briefed the textual description which requires flights to maintain a 177 degree heading for vectors to MUSEL.
Date: 201808
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZKC.ARTCC, KS
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZKC
Second aircraft: Small Aircraft; High Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Traveling on a routine; short hop to JLN. I was on a heading of 200 at 2;500 feet MSL. Another high wing; appeared to be something similar to a C152 or Champ; traveling on a heading of approximately 280 at apparently 2;400 feet MSL; passed just below me while in between the two airspaces of LLU(G) and JLN(D). I sighted the conflicting aircraft; and approximately 1 second later; closest approach occurred. I took reflexive action with a hard pull and sharp rightward bank; just wanting to make sure that if a collision were to occur; the closing speed would be at a minimum and hopefully away from the wings and tail. I continued to observe the other aircraft after passing; and no action was taken on their part; leading to my assumption they never saw me.




Synopsis: C172 pilot reported a NMAC with another light aircraft in the vicinity of WOMBA intersection.