elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201511
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZKC.ARTCC, KS
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class A ZKC
ATC / advisory: Center ZKC
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Distraction; Human-Machine Interface; Situational Awareness; Workload
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Airspace Structure; ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Procedure
Primary problem: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings

Narrative: I missed handing off the data block Aircraft X to ZME sector M33.  With several other operations in progress (ILS approach to MWA requesting Visual Approach; vectoring other aircraft for conflict avoidance; etc.) I believe I was distracted from the task at hand (expecting an auto-hand off to the wrong stratum M33 rather than M25 as the feature is set to auto hand-off to only the middle stratum).  After realizing the data block for Aircraft X did not indicate a handoff to ZME (I had already switched Aircraft X to ZME M33); I called to verify with ZME M33 if they indeed had the handoff; to which the reply was affirmative; they did have radar contact and radio communications with Aircraft X.  Either I erred in not appropriately handing off the aircraft; or computer malfunction.  I have not reviewed the instant replay yet; and I'm not certain at this point.Set auto handoff feature  (for STL departures) to auto hand to next sector owning the airspace for either the entered interim altitude; or the indicated final altitude the aircraft is climbing to ( as opposed to the current auto handoff setting for STL departures of only to the middle stratum (M25).




Synopsis: A Controller issued a frequency change to an adjacent sector for an aircraft. The Controller then realized they had not handed off the data block and target of the aircraft.
Date: 201604
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: CSG.Airport, GA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Dawn
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; High Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Special Use R-3002
Aircraft component: GPS & Other Satellite Navigation
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Airspace Violation All Types
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Exited Penetrated Airspace
Contributing factors: Equipment / Tooling; Human Factors
Primary problem: Equipment / Tooling

Narrative: A couple hours into the 5 hour flight it became apparent that; given the winds; I would need a fuel stop. I selected Thomasville Regional Airport; TVI; for assurance that they would have fuel available (There are lots of small country airports that may or may not have had fuel or self-serve). At any rate; I changed my destination to TVI in my Garmin Aera. The new route moved only slightly westward from my original route. I pulled up Foreflight and changed the route and didn't see the close proximity my new route came to the restricted area. I turned off Foreflight to save the battery for my arrival into ZZZ [originally intended destination]. I lost my GPS signal for the Aera for a short time and when it came back up; it revealed that I was somewhat inside the restricted area. By that time; it appeared the most expeditious exit was to just continue straight ahead. The infringement was totally unintentional and somewhat exacerbated by the low light in the cockpit; reviewing with the red flashlight and the untimely temporary loss of GPS signal.




Synopsis: Pilot reported inadvertently entering Restricted Area 3002 after changing his destination and losing GPS signal in his portable GPS.
Date: 201210
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: LAS.Airport, NV
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Caravan 208B
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class B LAS
ATC / advisory: TRACON L30
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Human factors: Confusion; Physiological - Other
Anomaly: Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert
Contributing factors: Procedure; Airspace Structure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: I was inbound to North Las Vegas airport. ATC was Nellis AFB Approach. I was told by Approach Control that I was 'in the Class B now.' I had just been handed off from LAS Approach to Nellis Approach. I thought I was close but not in Class B. I was under the shelf of the Class B; but he said I was just entering the section that goes down to the surface.




Synopsis: While talking to Nellis Approach Control; the pilot of a C208 bound for VGT is informed that he has entered the Class B airspace.
Date: 201503
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: U90.TRACON, AZ
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: Medium Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class C TUS
ATC / advisory: TRACON U90
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We were directed after DINGO to proceed to CALLS for the visual to 11L. Shortly after; I told approach field was in sight; and we were cleared for the visual approach. I was sequencing the approach as the FO preselected altitude of 5500 which should have been adequate for terrain clearance. He was descending at 800 fpm and I was about to suggest that he reduce the descent rate when we got the GPWS warning at approximately 5800 ft. His training kicked in and he immediately disconnected the autopilot and leveled the aircraft. The warning lasted only a couple of seconds and cleared.I have flown to TUS many times and this has never happened. I believe the high descent rate was the underlying cause of this alert. In the future I will make sure the flying pilot is a little more conservative on the descent rate until passage of the terrain to the northwest of the airport.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain experiences a terrain warning during a night visual approach to Runway 11L at TUS. The First Officer was flying and descending at 800 FPM just northwest of LIPTE and descending through 5;800 feet when the warning was annunciated.
Date: 201501
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: A330
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Workload; Physiological - Other; Troubleshooting; Distraction
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Illness / Injury; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Passenger; Person Flight Crew; Person Flight Attendant
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; General Physical Injury / Incapacitation; General Maintenance Action; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: During takeoff and on climb out an odor of unknown origin appeared in the aircraft. While perceptible on the flight deck; the odor was worse in the area of the mid galley. The odor was described as 'electrical' by most of the cabin crew. One flight attended perceived a 'dirty sock' smell. It smelled like jet exhaust on the flight deck. Passengers inquired as to when the smell was going to stop; while varying symptoms appeared in all but two of the Flight Attendants. These included headache; dizziness; and nausea. I selected both packs to high; and we reviewed the smoke and fumes removal procedure in the QRH; but the odor began dissipating. The cabin crew felt that they could continue to our destination. After conferring with the CSD; we deemed it advisable to contact our medical provider for consultation. They were unable to do so from the cabin; so I initiated a SATCOM call to the controlling dispatcher with the CSD present on the flight deck. The consulting physician recommended Tylenol and Oxygen if needed. Four portable Oxygen bottles were used by the cabin crew in flight. On approach the odor returned. One Flight Attendant vomited with others presenting renewed symptoms. I requested paramedics with Approach Control. This resulted in a phone call from me to Tower after gate arrival per request to comply with their reporting procedures. After deplaning; paramedics checked vital signs of affected cabin crew. I completed a Cabin Odor Report and entered the appropriate Logbook entries. During our time on the ground; I consulted with OCC; MOC and onsite Maintenance personnel. The aircraft was eventually given a clean bill of health; and we departed approximately two hours late. A slight odor was reported after takeoff by at least one Flight Attendant. It did not reoccur.




Synopsis: An A330 crew detected a dirty socks odor in flight which dissipated allowing the flight to continue. On approach the odor returned causing some flight attendants to become ill.
Date: 201407
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Other Preflight planning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: No Specific Anomaly Occurred All Types
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: Dispatch flight planned us over Iran and they had us fly over/adjacent to two active MOA's/prohibited areas. We were flight planned to overfly one; surface to FL230 combat area NOTAMed with active gunfire. The flight plan also flew within 100 miles of another active MOA surface to FL820 [UNL]; also for active gunfire. Both MOA's were near the Iranian/Iraqi/Turkish border. The trip ended up canceling for a mechanical; but after doing some research on Iranian overflight I found a NOTAM on the FAA website; stating that near these MOA's Iranian forces have been known to fire at civilian airplanes.  US Flight Operations in Iranian Airspace FDC 7/8072 SPECIAL NOTICE EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY UNTIL FURTHER NOTICE. THIS NOTICE IS TO EMPHASIZE THAT BEFORE OPERATING IN OR ADJACENT TO IRANIAN AIRSPACE ALL U.S. AIRMEN AND OPERATORS SHOULD BE FAMILIAR WITH CURRENT CONDITIONS IN THE MIDDLE EAST. THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE HAS ISSUED A TRAVEL WARNING FOR IRAN ADVISING; IN PART; THAT THE U.S. GOVERNMENT DOES NOT CURRENTLY MAINTAIN DIPLOMATIC OR CONSULAR RELATIONS WITH THE ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF IRAN. ANY U.S. OPERATOR PLANNING A FLIGHT THROUGH IRANIAN AIRSPACE SHOULD PLAN IN ADVANCE AND HAVE ALL CURRENT NOTAM'S AND AERONAUTICAL INFORMATION FOR ANY PLANNED FLIGHT. WIE UNTIL UFN.




Synopsis: Air carrier First Officer reports being dispatched to a Gulf state (Persian) via a route that overflies Iran and close to a current war Zone. The flight is canceled for mechanical reasons prior to any decision being made on whether to fly this route.
Date: 201308
Aircraft: B767-300 and 300 ER
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Aircraft component: Galley Furnishing
Component problem: Design; Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Reporter qualification: Flight Attendant Current
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: In-flight
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Company Policy; Procedure
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: We blocked our flight attendant jumpseats for the entire First Class service--3 hours per official company written procedures.  I had to park two wobbly half carts each at 1L and 1R as well as a heavy liquor cart in front of 1 center left and 1 center right. There are four flight attendants working First Class: 2 aisle attendants that can only attend 1 unsecured cart each; plus galley and purser attendants who are setting up four three tier queen carts at a time and preparing meals. There are no tie downs to secure any of these carts; so three of the five carts are unsecured and unattended for the entire service. None of the half carts and many of the regular carts stay in place when brakes are set. They are easily pulled with one finger even when brakes are set. This is not an anomaly or an INOP cart.  All half carts do this and many regular sized carts on this configuration do this. I believe it is a design flaw.Also; I could not secure both the rear and forward quarter turns at galley location 310 f/r and 311 f/r. If rear quarter turns are secured then the front cart sticks out; so that front quarter turns cannot be secured. I can only choose one so I chose the front to be secured and hoped that nothing happened. This is an unsafe configuration and I worry about crew and/or passengers being hurt by unsecured carts/faulty galley equipment.




Synopsis: A Flight Attendant reported company procedures for First Class meal services result in blocked access and unsecured and heavy carts being potential hazards to passengers and flight attendants in their vicinity.
Date: 201910
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: TEB.Airport, NJ
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Rain
Light: Night
Aircraft: EMB-505 / Phenom 300
Operator: Fractional
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
Airspace: Class B TEB
ATC / advisory: Ground TEB
Reporter organization: Fractional
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Fatigue; Situational Awareness; Time Pressure; Workload
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Ground Incursion Taxiway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Prior to landing Runway 19; briefed expected Taxiway Lima to ramp. After landing as Pilot Flying; I heard taxi Lima hold short Runway 24 and restated clearance. We passed Golf and ATC then said we were supposed to take a Golf high speed off of Runway 24. I never heard it and Pilot Monitoring may or may not have verbalized it after acknowledgment. It was dark and I was over focused on taxiing the jet. No conflict occurred. We received new instruction to continue on Taxiway Lima to Charlie then hold short of Runway 24; then cleared to cross to ramp. After crossing runway; I had to stop the jet to determine which way to turn to go to [FBO]. Both pilots were tired after long day of IMC in heavy rain and crosswinds. ATC didn't hear our call sign on read back and then admonished us to state our flight ID which we did at every radio call.




Synopsis: Phenom First Officer reported miscommunication with Ground Control resulted in a taxiway deviation.
Date: 201606
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B777-200
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Fuel Quantity-Pressure Indication
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Inflight Event / Encounter Fuel Issue
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Enroute to [an international destination] an overweight landing and diversion to [a suitable alternate] became necessary due to a sudden loss of fuel. We had been ahead of flight plan fuel estimates by approximately 700 lbs at previous waypoints and fuel balance and quantity had been checked approximately 5 minutes prior to getting the Fuel Imbalance EICAS warning due to right wing fuel quantity suddenly being approximately 5000 lbs below left tank fuel. The Fuel Imbalance checklist was accomplished and we were now going to be 4900 lbs below flight plan fuel estimate at next waypoint and it appeared we must have developed a fuel leak. Because we still had lots of fuel and were not yet fuel critical I first coordinated with dispatch regarding a divert because of this fuel disparity. The Relief Pilot was awakened early to inspect the wings and engines for evidence of a fuel leak; and we then notified ATC of our intentions and needs. We then requested and received an inspection and escort to the gate by Fire/ARFF after an uneventful overweight landing. The performance of all of my crew; including Flight Attendants was great and I have no suggestions at this time to anyone involved in our handling of this event to have improved our situation. The diversion and landing although busy and task saturated; went smoothly.

Callback: Reporter stated follow up conversation with Maintenance suggested the problem was a fuel quantity indicator error.

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


Synopsis: B777 flight crew reported diverting to an alternate after experiencing an apparent fuel leak.
Date: 202103
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: FNL.Tower, CO
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Other Pattern
Airspace: Class E ZDV
ATC / advisory: Tower FNL
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Troubleshooting; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Human Factors; Weather
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: Departed FNL airport to stay in the pattern during uncontrolled operations of Class Echo Airspace XA:00. Operations for Tower begin at XB:00.Reported Visibility ASOS was 1SM. Actual visibility on ground and in air was 10+ due to having a clear view of the entire mountain range; which is a given for visibility. One landing in the pattern was performed; 10+ miles visibility and clear of clouds. The Tower opened and reported that the ATIS was reporting 3/4 SM VIS; however multiple aircraft in the pattern gave a PIREP of 10+ visibility. Tower refused our PIREP; asked if we wanted to request SVFR; however if the reported visibility was under 1 SM they could not grant this. We still asked for SVFR since visibility was clear and clear of clouds. Upon asking Tower for SVFR; he said no; asked if we had visual with the runway; which of course we did; and cleared us to land number 2 behind another aircraft ahead of us in the pattern. We landed and terminated the flight. I have previously flown VFR into FNL Airport when the fires were lowering visibility. The METAR and ATIS were reporting 1/4 mile visibility making it IFR; however having full visibility in the aircraft; I called Tower before entering their airspace and asked if the reported visibility was correct. They said no; the RVR is not reliable; visibility was greater than 6SM and to proceed inbound for VFR landing.




Synopsis: Pilot reported FNL airport ASOS visibility is often inaccurate and unreliable.
Date: 201912
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: PA-28 Cherokee/Archer/Dakota/Pillan/Warrior
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Landing
ATC / advisory: CTAF ZZZ
Aircraft component: Normal Brake System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Student
Human factors: Training / Qualification; Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Ground Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Ground Excursion Runway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: After landing plane exited runway; not 100% sure what happened exactly; felt like only one side was braking and could not get the plane straightened out before the plane exited the runway.




Synopsis: PA28 student pilot reported brake failure resulted in runway excursion.