elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201901
Aircraft: B737-900
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Ferry / Re-Positioning
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Ramp
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Hazardous Material Violation; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Weight And Balance
Detector: Person Ground Personnel
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I was working and I have knowledge for a flight that was departing. There was a bunch of [parts] on this flight with 1lb of flammable liquid on the flight. There were no customers and no bags. I overheard management tell the ramp lead that they needed to gather 15 bags of ballast to secure the dangerous goods with. From the conversation that I heard over the radio CLP (Central Load Planning) was dealing with the Zone Controller that was passing the info onto the ramp lead.We have seen this before at other station and we need a policy that describe what the ramp should do in the case. The FAA FAR states 15 bags; there are no bags on this flight; so how can we be compliant.




Synopsis: Ramp personnel reported the need of Hazmat procedural update to address FAR loading requirements.
Date: 201305
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 30
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Cessna 210 Centurion / Turbo Centurion 210C; 210D
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Powerplant Lubrication System
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Instrument
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: After repairs had been completed on a failed vacuum pump during a previous flight I departed the repair station in my Cessna 210 and was flying solo to [an out of state] airport. About 10 or so minutes after departure and before opening my VFR flight plan; the engine started to lose manifold pressure. I looked at the oil pressure gauge which was reading zero; then landed without incident at a nearby grass strip.




Synopsis: A C210 pilot suffered the loss of all oil pressure shortly after takeoff on a long cross country. He landed safely at a nearby grass strip airport.
Date: 202007
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737 Next Generation Undifferentiated
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Airport; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: While holding short of Runway XXL on L at ZZZ; I was observing numerous aircraft landing on both runways. There was a Company aircraft holding short of Runway XXR on L; between the runways. Tower had cleared a small general aviation aircraft to land on Runway XXL. As that aircraft approached the threshold of XXL for landing; Tower then cleared the Company aircraft holding short of Runway XXR for takeoff (or maybe it was Line Up And Wait; I do not remember). The Company aircraft then increased power to move forward. Simultaneously; the small aircraft was now crossing the Runway XXL threshold behind the Company aircraft; at about 10 feet AGL; and the jetblast of the Company aircraft caused the small aircraft significant controllability issues; the aircraft appeared to be blown into very steep bank angles and was tossed around; I thought the aircraft was going to flip upside down due to the violence of the motion. The small aircraft appeared to be a high performance experimental type and went around; and I thought the pilot did an outstanding job of saving the aircraft from crashing.ATC should look at their procedures at Runway ZZZ for this scenario. Because large aircraft holding short between Runway XXR and Runway XXL have the back of their engines in close proximity to the Runway XXL threshold; there is a high risk of these jetblast situations causing problems for small aircraft landing on Runway XXL; especially since small aircraft tend to have much lower threshold crossing heights.  I recommend that Tower not clear a large aircraft to move from this position between the runways while a small aircraft is in proximity of the threshold while landing on Runway XXL. Alternatively; ATC could issue a warning on the radio to aircraft landing on Runway XXL to 'use caution for jetblast from moving aircraft' or something to that effect to warn the landing Pilot of the situation; which could then prompt the landing Pilot to adjust his flight path to cross the threshold at a higher altitude and be above any jetblast risk. I also recommend ATC review procedures and look at other airports in the US system where there is a frequent mix of large and small aircraft with runways in close proximity; similar to ZZZ.




Synopsis: B737 Captain reported seeing a light aircraft on short final to ZZZ airport suffer the effects of jet blast from a company aircraft moving into position on a parallel runway.
Date: 201305
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: DEN.Airport, CO
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-700
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Tower DEN
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Routine Inspection
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: The aircraft required CSFF [Cold Soaked Fuel Frost] deicing. I advised Iceman this verbatim; 'We require removal of CSFF. Deice ONLY [that area] on the wings. We are not configured for a full deice procedure. Spray [that area] only.' The truck started on my side and I witnessed the Boom Iceman spraying the entire wing so again I stated over Iceman frequency; 'The frost on the wing only.' His reply was; 'You mean just right there beside the fuselage?' He was clueless despite me being very explicit in my directions. I am sending this in because EVERY TIME I get CSFF deiced; the Ground Crew screws it up. They need to be properly trained on the differences between CSFF removal and a full aircraft deice. Ground Crews are not following Flight Crew's directions. Properly train Ground Ops in CSFF removal procedures. DEN Ground Operations [were] not familiar with CSFF Deice procedures.




Synopsis: B737-700 First Officer reports requesting CSFF removal by the de ice crew to discover that the entire wing is being deiced. The de ice crew is redirected to de ice just the inner wing where the frost is located.
Date: 201201
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Cessna 210 Centurion / Turbo Centurion 210C; 210D
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Other / Unknown; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: A C210 was level at 11;100 FT for the MIA in the area west of his destination. Nearing a point where pilots tend to request lower for approach to the airport; the pilot requested a cruise clearance and I granted it; saying 'cruise 11;100 FT.' Not long after his read back; I recalled that; due to his destination having a published instrument approach; a cruise clearance without some form of crossing restriction was illegal. In retrospect; I feel like I let him talk me in to issuing a cruise clearance before I took all factors in to account. Cruise clearances are increasingly archaic in this era of increasing RNAV approach capability. This was the first opportunity I had to issue one in quite some time; and I applied it incorrectly. Some sort of refresher and official national interpretation of what a cruise clearance is; along with its issuance requirements and consequences would be of use; particularly emphasizing their use on unpublished routes. There was a D-Side trainee next to me with OJTI in progress; and after realizing what I did and discussing it a bit with them; the trainer had the trainee look up cruise clearances in the .65 on ERIDS while proceeding to give; what I interpret to be a bad example; of a cruise clearance off the ground.




Synopsis: Enroute Controller issued a 'cruise' clearance to an IFR aircraft inbound to an airport with an instrument approach procedure; noting his belief that the clearance was improper without the issuance of crossing restrictions.
Date: 201712
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skywagon 185
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class G ZZZ
ATC / advisory: CTAF ZZZ
Aircraft component: Gear Extend/Retract Mechanism
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Cessna 185 on amphibious floats. While taking off from seaplane base; at approximately 30 knots; the right landing gear hydraulic system failed dropping the right wheel(s) into the water pulling the plane hard to the right. I pulled power and applied full backpressure on the yoke when I felt the issue begin. The takeoff was aborted. The plane did not sink or take on water. I was able to taxi the aircraft under its own power out of the lake and back to the seaplane ramp. The electric gear activation no longer worked; but I was able to use the manual landing gear pump to lower both left and right gear fully before driving up the seaplane ramp.No injuries and no obvious damage to the aircraft. No other boats or planes were in the area. I was the only person in the aircraft. I had flown earlier in the day [for] a 40-minute flight; had lunch at FA1; and was planning to return to my departure airport when the failure on takeoff occurred. I had not consumed alcohol and I am not taking any medication. I attempted to contact several mechanics to see if the issue could be repaired; but there were no mechanics available. The aircraft will be parked on the  plane/boat ramp until sometime after; when I can get a mechanic to look at it and determine the cause of the failure. However; during the previous week while the aircraft was hangered; the aircraft was covered with dirt and debris from an asphalt-cutting project that occurred 10-20 feet directly in front of an open hangar where the aircraft was parked. I will have to wait for a mechanic to determine the cause; but it could be that dust or debris from the asphalt cutting contaminated the landing gear hydraulics either causing or contributing to the failure.




Synopsis: C185 pilot floatplane reported while on waterway takeoff; the right wheel dropped; due to hydraulic system failure.
Date: 202109
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B737 MAX Series Undifferentiated
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Integrated Audio System
Component problem: Design
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Distraction
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: The Runway Awareness and Advisory System (RAAS) on the 737 MAX is a great Situational Awareness tool. However; I experienced what appears to be a design flaw in its triggers for approaching crossing runways.During takeoff on ZZZ Runway XX; Runway XXR crosses Runway XX about 700-800 feet from the threshold. Following FOM Guidance setting the thrust for takeoff; RAAS alerted us with 'Approaching Runway XXR' during a critical time in the takeoff roll. Coordination between the Pilot Flying and Pilot Monitoring for setting takeoff thrust is absolutely critical and the distraction of an unnecessary warning compromises safety. The trigger for that particular warning to be silenced is 40 knots ground speed or greater. The thrust lever angle/setting or thrust mode in TOGA should also cancel the warning.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported a possible design flaw on the 737 MAX Runway Awareness & Advisory System (RAAS) regarding runway crossing warning during takeoff.
Date: 201711
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
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
Aircraft component: APU
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural MEL / CDL
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Procedure; Company Policy
Primary problem: Company Policy

Narrative: Blocked in gate with left engine running due to deferred APU [with the] beacon still on. Had to wait (not long) for loading bridge to be positioned at door 1L before external power cord could be extended and connected to shutdown running engine. Ramp opened cargo doors to begin unloading with engine still running and beacon on. After shutdown and checklists; I went down to the ramp to discuss my concerns about opening the door before engine shutdown with the ramp crew. Ramp Lead told me they were allowed 3 minutes from block in to start scanning bags coming off the plane. Safety and schedule are in major conflict here. Further; the decision to continue this plane along its routing with the INOP APU raises the possibility of damage or injury along the way.




Synopsis: B737 Captain reported ramp personnel opened the cargo door with the left engine still running.
Date: 201212
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: A300
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
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: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Other Takeoff roll
Result: Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control; Flight Crew Rejected Takeoff
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Weather; Airport
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Entering the runway for takeoff lost directional control when TOGA selected. Immediately terminated the takeoff. Ran all appropriate checklists. Did not note anything wrong with aircraft. Decided to attempt second takeoff (fuel and brake temps fine). When turning onto runway the second time the wheels started skidding due to rubber build up and moisture. This time ensured wheels were aligned perfectly with centerline; moved forward a little further; ran power manually to 40% to ensure engines came up to speed symmetrically and flew uneventful takeoff. Make note of rubber reversion and other factors that may affect an intersection takeoff. Ensure proper alignment before running up the power.


Second narrative: Aircraft heading came left of centerline when takeoff power was initially applied. Control inputs were made to correct but heading did not respond as expected. Takeoff was immediately rejected at a low speed. Crew asked to taxi off departure runway at the next intersection. Aircraft systems and controls were checked and were operating normally. Checklists were completed and another takeoff was attempted since it appeared there was deicing fluid and rubber reversion in the takeoff area.


Synopsis: A300 flight crew reports momentary loss of control when thrust is increased for takeoff with the aircraft still turning to line up with rubber and deice fluid making the runway slippery.  The takeoff is rejected at low speed and the second attempt is successful.
Date: 201312
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: CLE.Airport, OH
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 145 ER/LR
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Tower CLE
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Local
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was working Local and Ground Control combined. I took a call via landline from the city stating that the runway braking was good; surfaces treated and taxiways/aprons braking action was poor to good. When I was relieved to go on break I told the relieving Controller that the braking action was good. Making reference to the runways but simply forgetting to mention the taxiways. When I went on break the conditions at the field had not diminished and aircraft/vehicles were moving on the surface area without delay. When I returned from break; I learned that two aircraft had safely landed but got stuck on the taxiways due to ice. I was not involved in controlling these planes but feel that had I given the report of braking poor/good maybe; though unlikely; there would have been a different outcome. Recommendation; the Field Condition Reports should still be sent to us via fax so that this information is at hand at all times. So that even if it is omitted from a briefing the information is still readily available.




Synopsis: Tower Controller acknowledged a failure to accurately brief a relieving Controller regarding braking actions on the ramp/taxiway that may have contributed to several taxiing aircraft getting stuck.
Date: 202111
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: SNA.Airport, CA
Aircraft: Large Transport
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class C SNA
ATC / advisory: Tower SNA
Second aircraft: Small Aircraft; High Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Instructor; Local
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; 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
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I was training on the LC-2; Local 2; position. At this time traffic was moderate with 3 aircraft in the pattern mixed with inbounds and departures. Aircraft Y called up and was assigned an EL Toro Departure; an eastbound departure with an initial heading of 080. My trainee cleared Aircraft Y for takeoff and then proceeded to do other things that needed his attention; such as obtaining visual separation with aircraft on final for the parallel runway; sequencing aircraft for the pattern; as well as issuing wake turbulence and jet blast cautionary for aircraft landing Runway 20L.When Aircraft Y started takeoff roll; Aircraft X was cleared for takeoff on Runway 20R. On the upwind; Aircraft Y drifted slightly right of course into the flightpath of Aircraft X taking off. Both my trainee and I failed to notice this as our attention was diverted to other duties. When the CIC mentioned that Aircraft Y was drifting right of course; I immediately over-keyed my trainee to attempt to rectify the situation but Aircraft X had veered right to avoid Aircraft Y. Aircraft Y failed to offset 15 degrees to the left upon takeoff; which is required per the AFD; Airport Facility Directory. I understand that I failed to notice the drift that occurred on the upwind and the failure of Aircraft Y to offset left of course 15 degrees upon departure. One of the things that I would recommend is that there be signage; such as at intersection Kilo departure on Runway 20L - this is the standard point of departure for most aircraft for Runway 20L - that reminds aircraft to offset left of course 15 degrees upon departure.




Synopsis: SNA Tower Instructor reported that an aircraft did not offset 15 degrees on takeoff as required per the AFD and came close to a commercial airliner also departing; on a parallel runway.