elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201502
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: PDX.Airport, OR
Flight conditions: Marginal
Weather elements / visibility: Rain; 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Light Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Tower PDX
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Time Pressure
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I filed the MINNE 5 Departure HISKU Transition. When I received the clearance from PDX clearance delivery frequency; I was assigned the Portland 1 Departure; then as filed. This is somewhat common at PDX so I didn't question the issuance of a different SID than filed. Everything was normal until we were cleared for takeoff on Runway 28R. The Tower told us to fly the MINNE 5 Departure and cleared us for takeoff and to not delay since there was an aircraft of short final. My first officer stated that we were issued the Portland 1 Departure and requested a radar vector on the departure; otherwise we would have to reset everything in the flight management system; re-brief the departure; and run additional checklists. The Tower Controller agreed and we began the takeoff roll with a clearance to fly runway heading. Very shortly after departure (about 500 feet AGL) we were recleared as follows: 'cleared direct PEGTY and the remainder of the MINNE 5 Departure. Climb and maintain 7000.' We were able to safely manage the FMS and get everything reset; but we were busy and somewhat distracted. At no point did I feel safety was compromised; but the workload increased significantly. In the future I would like to taxi clear of the runway and get things sorted out before taking flight. I feel the controller was caught off guard and then felt pressure to get us airborne due to the landing aircraft. This was the first flight of the day for our crew and we both had more than 24 hours rest. Fatigue was not a factor. We utilized good crew resource management to handle the event and had a thorough debrief afterward. The event will be documented within our company safety management system for analysis.




Synopsis: Corporate flight crew reported an increased workload on departure when they received a different SID clearance from Tower than what was received from Clearance Delivery.
Date: 202101
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turboprop Eng
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Distraction; Communication Breakdown; Human-Machine Interface; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Human Factors; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Departed ZZZ1 and was given XXY.A departure frequency and after the fact it was XXY.B. I maintained VFR the whole time and was told I may have violated the Class Bravo airspace. Tower was closed at ZZZ1 due to COVID-19. A lot of confusion on the ground and with traffic in the air. I was VFR the whole time and contacted ATC when I landed in ZZZ2. Talked with Controller and explained my situation and filled out this report. No evasive action was taken.




Synopsis: GA pilot reported entering Class B airspace without a clearance.
Date: 201507
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: N90.TRACON, NY
Aircraft: Light Transport; High Wing; 2 Turboprop Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B EWR
Aircraft component: TCAS Equipment
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness; Workload
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Conflict Airborne Conflict; 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 Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: During arrival into Newark while level at 6000 ft and on with New York Approach; we received a TCAS alert 'Traffic!' A target appeared approx. 5 nm ahead at the same altitude. We next got a 'Descend Descend' alert and the VSI indicated approximately a 2000 ft/min descent rate to avoid the conflict (green area). I disconnected the autopilot and immediately initiated an appropriate descent to avoid the conflict. We further received an alert 'Increase rate of descent' and the target was now same altitude within the 4 nm ring on the TCAS. Seconds later we received a 'Clear of conflict' and the target disappeared. At this point we had descended to approximately 5600 ft and initiated a climb to return to our assigned altitude. We advised ATC of our TCAS RA descent. They inquired what traffic we were descending for but at this point the only aircraft near our altitude was 7-8 miles away and clearly not a conflict. Approach seemed to think we were descending for a previously called traffic which we had reported in sight; but we repeatedly told him that we had had the previous traffic and it had long passed behind us and was not a factor. We never saw the actual conflict traffic; it only appeared on the TCAS. I'm not sure if this was a glitch in our TCAS or someone had a faulty Mode C. The flight landed without further incident.




Synopsis: The crew received a TA (traffic alert) followed by an RA (resolution advisory) and took appropriate evasive action. It appears to have been a false target.
Date: 201809
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: DEN.Airport, CO
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Medium Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class E D01
ATC / advisory: TRACON D01
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness; Time Pressure
Anomaly: Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: After takeoff; climbing out of 7000 ft MSL as the non-flying pilot (PNF) I made initial contact with DEN TRACON; DEN advised us of traffic at our 9 o'clock and 8;500 feet. We were in a climbing left turn to DVT VOR climbing at 2500 FPM [Feet Per Minute]. The pilot flying (PF) made no attempt to stop the turn or climb. I said to the PF 'Stop your turn; we are climbing into traffic.' The PF responded to me with 'Don't you yell at me; I'm the Captain and if you have a problem with that you can take it up with [name redacted]' ([Name redacted] being the owner of the operation). I repeat to the PF that we were climbing into traffic and that he needed to stop his turn to avoid conflict with the traffic. Only to have him repeat his warning with other accusation.I believe there was a total breakdown of CRM [Crew Resource Management] as a factor in this event however; the PF did not make any attempt to avoid or locate the other traffic which ATC had advised us was only 1/2 mile away at our 9 o'clock and only 1;500 ft above.




Synopsis: Air taxi First Officer reported a communication breakdown with the Captain while avoiding airborne traffic.
Date: 201707
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: LVK.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 20
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class B SFO
ATC / advisory: TRACON NCT
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Equipment / Tooling
Primary problem: Equipment / Tooling

Narrative: New avionics (Garmin 750) incorrectly showed boundaries of San Francisco Class B. I descended to 6000 foot to be below outer sector floor. By time I double checked (iPad) I was near the 4000 foot floor sector and descending rapidly. I may have been slightly above 4000 feet after entering the 4000 foot floor sector. When ATC advised me of the problem; I was already in a rapid descent.




Synopsis: GA pilot reported a problem with a new avionics platform that seemingly caused an airspace incursion.
Date: 201907
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Caravan 208B
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Test Flight / Demonstration
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Throttle/Power Lever
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: On a maintenance test flight shortly after takeoff; the engine power rolled back to idle. I landed back on the runway and taxied to the ramp. Maintenance was notified.




Synopsis: C208B test pilot reported engine power loss during takeoff; forcing a landing on the same runway.
Date: 202107
Location: MMMX.Airport, FO
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
ATC / advisory: Center MMMX
Aircraft component: Navigation Database
Component problem: Malfunctioning; Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Troubleshooting; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Chart Or Publication; Software and Automation
Primary problem: Chart Or Publication

Narrative: Cleared DARAN1A into MEX; during cruise check of points noted altitude constraint at DARAN was different in the bow than on the chart.  We initially had the DARAN2B loaded.  Chart or database not accurate. NOTAM or new database update required.




Synopsis: Air Carrier Captain reported nav database and chart do not agree.
Date: 201601
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: SFO.Airport, CA
Light: Night
Aircraft: A320
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class E NCT
ATC / advisory: TRACON NCT
Aircraft component: Aero Charts
Component problem: Design
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Workload; Distraction; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation - Altitude Crossing Restriction Not Met; Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Procedure; Chart Or Publication; Human Factors
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: DYAMD TWO ARRIVAL NOTAMed of a change of altitude restriction at ARCHI to 8;000 feet. We missed the change as shown on the paperwork. Paperwork should show NOTAMs in order of importance. Maybe show relevance with BOLD type.




Synopsis: An A320 crew missed the SFO DYAMD TWO Arrival ARCHI NOTAM changing the ARCHI waypoint crossing restriction to 8;000 feet from the published 7;000 feet. Crew descended below SFO Class B.
Date: 201210
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: A320
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Main Gear
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Technician
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Airframe; Maintenance Powerplant
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Maintenance
When detected: Other During Maintenance
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Equipment / Tooling
Primary problem: Equipment / Tooling

Narrative: Employee Mechanic Y and I were conducting maintenance on the right-hand main landing gear of an A320 aircraft while the main landing gear was mounted on the Omni-arm. We were articulating the landing gear to a near horizontal position to facilitate seal replacement. While rotating it to a horizontal position the Omni-Arm suddenly released from its rotating position and suddenly dropped without command 10'-12' inches. Employees Mechanic Y; Z and Supervisor observed this mishap event.




Synopsis: A Line Mechanic reports about an A320 right Main Landing Gear (MLG) suddenly releasing and dropping 10' to 12' inches; uncommanded; from an Omni Arm landing gear support equipment. They were rotating the MLG to a horizontal position using the Omni Arm device to facilitate seal replacement.
Date: 201408
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZZ.ARTCC, FO
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Rain; Turbulence
Aircraft: B777-200
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Climb
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZZ
Aircraft component: Airspeed Indicator
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation - Speed All Types; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Aircraft Equipment Problem Dissipated; Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors; Weather
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: During climbout experienced loss of reliable airspeed; loss of vertical guidance; loss of autothrottles; loss of autopilot while in heavy turbulence and at times extreme rain. Climbing through approximately FL240; after transiting an area of heavy rain lost vertical guidance bar of flight director. Shortly after that airspeed degraded rapidly. Disconnected autopilot and initiated a slight descent to recover airspeed. During straight and level flight experienced momentary airframe buffet. Relief Pilot supplied us with normal power setting and an attitude for an unreliable airspeed. First Officer got ground speed read outs from Center. I attempted reengaging the autopilot with no success. We obtained a block altitude from Center. Declared an emergency and decided to divert due to airframe buffet concerns. Some minutes after exiting rain conditions; systems gradually returned to normal. Executed a normal approach and landing. Aircraft had been loaded during heavy rain. During the last portion of loading; secondary ground power cycled on and off rapidly before dropping off. Experienced timing out of several systems immediately after; before they eventually came back. Loss of multiple systems. Dry loading.




Synopsis: B777 Captain experiences loss of reliable airspeed; loss of vertical guidance; loss of autothrottles and loss of autopilot while in heavy turbulence and at times extreme rain. Possible overspeed occurs and the crew elects to divert to a suitable airport. A few minutes after exiting the rain all systems gradually return to normal.
Date: 201204
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Weather elements / visibility: Haze / Smoke
Aircraft: DA40 Diamond Star
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Second aircraft: Cessna Twin Piston Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Supervisor / CIC; Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was working the D-Side; and unplugged for a short duration of time to tend to some administrative duties. Prior to me leaving; both the R-Side and I identified a couple of VFR targets which were likely to penetrate the sector southbound over the lake; and were potential traffic for the primary sector traffic flow; inbound Class B arrivals from the northeast. After completing these duties; I plugged back in on the D-Side. As I was reassuming the position; the R-Side Controller was issuing a traffic advisory to a DA40; as one of these VFR targets had begun a slow descent; and had leveled at 080 MSL; southbound. The DA40 was level at 080 MSL; northbound; and it was clear the targets were likely to merge. The R-Side; a long time professional continued to issue this traffic on multiple occasions; as the DA40 reported haze and had yet to get the VFR traffic in sight. The R-Side called an adjacent facility (Approach) to gain control; as the DA40 had yet to penetrate our airspace.  The R-Side then assigned the DA40 a block altitude of 080B090 MSL. I personally thought the DA40 would climb to eliminate the conflict; as the R-Side continued to issue the traffic with increasing urgency. The DA40 did not climb; and the aircraft continued to get closer; opposite direction; at the same indicated altitude. Finally; when the aircraft came to what the R-Side considered unsafe proximity and still closing; the R-Side instructed an emergency climb to the DA40 to 090. As the DA40 reported his climb; he indicated a Twin Cessna passed beneath him. I instructed the R-Side; after a short time; to ask the DA40 how close; laterally; the aircraft came to one another. The DA40 indicated the Twin Cessna passed 'Directly Beneath' him. I feel the R-Side saved a potential mid-air collision; and I am simply writing this report to record this data of a job well done by one of our finest. A recurrence of this event; under current VFR rules; is most likely unavoidable. However; I feel this incident should be recorded and disseminated as a training tool to demonstrate to others that our job; first and foremost; is to separate traffic. Where ambiguity of separation exists; as in this case; take all necessary measures to reestablish a safe situation.




Synopsis: Enroute Controller witnessed a developing conflict event between an IFR and VFR aircraft prompting the RADAR Controller to take positive action to separate the aircraft.
Date: 201705
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: King Air C90 E90
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 119
Mission: Skydiving
Flight phase: Landing
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Gear Lever/Selector
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Single Pilot; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Situational Awareness; Distraction
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Gear Up Landing
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors; Aircraft
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Was landing after flying the second jump-load of the day. Jump run was to 14;500 MSL. There was active sailplane/glider ops taking place at the same time. Tow plane was landing and on left base for runway. I was number 2 to land. Due to the moderate right crosswind of 10-15 knots; I elected to use approach flap setting. I failed to extend the landing gear as part of my pre-landing checklist. Landed gear up. The aircraft had the landing gear warning breaker pulled; as well as the stall warning. This is common in the skydiving industry when utilizing a Kingair as a jump plane. Due to the climbs that are at Vyse (best rate of climb). Jump runs at 90-95 knots indicated airspeed; with power pulled back to 200 LBS of torque on each engine and a 1000 FPM descent established. Both alarms will incessantly go off while on climb and jump run; distracting the pilot.Fix to the problem. Mandate that all skydiving operations utilizing a Kingair or any retractable gear airplane; conduct all operations with the landing gear down and locked at all times.




Synopsis: King Air pilot reported a gear up landing following a skydiving operation that typically deactivated the landing gear warning to prevent unwanted warnings during jump runs.