elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 202110
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: SRQ.Airport, FL
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft
Operating under: Part 91
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground SRQ; Tower SRQ
Second aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Automation Air Traffic Control; Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: Taxi
Result: Air Traffic Control Separated Traffic
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: After a normal landing on Runway 14 at Sarasota/Bradenton Intl Airport (SRQ) the Tower Controller instructed me to turn left at Taxiway Delta and contact Ground Controller. The Ground Controller told me to turn right on taxiway Charlie cross taxiway Delta and hold short Runway 4/22. When I stopped at the hold short line I accidentally rolled part way over the hold short line; causing the Tower Controller to instruct an aircraft landing on Runway 4 to go around. I understood all instructions; and I believe the problem was my concern about my position in relation to busy Taxiway Delta that I miss judged where the hold short line was. I would have been better off to pay more attention to the hold short line and disregard Taxiway Delta.




Synopsis: Small Aircraft Pilot reported they failed to hold short of an active runway.
Date: 201909
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Aircraft component: Fan Reverser
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Technician
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Airframe; Maintenance Powerplant
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; Flight Crew Diverted; General Maintenance Action; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Procedure; Manuals
Primary problem: Manuals

Narrative: I worked an inbound reverser log item on aircraft XXXX log page XXXXXXX. I pulled [aircraft maintenance manual] 78-XX-XX-XXX-XXX-XXX and [aircraft maintenance manual] 78-XX-XY-XXY-XXX-XXX.  Went out to aircraft and performed Engine Accessory Unit reset and then went to flight deck and cycled engine 1 reverser 4 cycles. Determined reverser was good and had no faults; signed off item. My maintenance manuals never had me go out to engine 1 to open fan cowls so fan cowls were never opened.




Synopsis: Maintenance Technician reported that aircraft maintenance manuals did not have a step to open fan cowls while working on thrust reversers.
Date: 201809
Aircraft: No Aircraft
Operator: Air Carrier
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Ramp
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Vehicle
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Equipment / Tooling; Human Factors
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: Yesterday a motor vehicle accident occurred between a catering van and a ramp agent driving a tug pulling a cart. I was driving as the team leader was coming towards my direction. As he was coming forward he didn't realize the van was coming out already. Once he realized he then tried to avoid the collision but in that instance the cart on the bag of the tug swerved back in. When the cart came back in that's when it collided with the van. Immediately as I see this take place I notified [a supervisor] over the radio and told him that an accident had just taken place. When he came over to my gate he asked (3) questions! Did I see what happened? What had taken place? Who was at fault? I then gave him the run down as to what had taken place. I went back to uploading and pushing out my flight. After [pushback] a Supervisor was still at the gate and I asked him if he had wanted my statement in which he then told me that it was stated that there were no witnesses to this incident. He then took me to the office to write out my statement.




Synopsis: Ramp Agent reported an accident between a catering van and a tug pulling a cart.
Date: 201704
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Decathlon 8KCAB
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Ferry / Re-Positioning
Flight phase: Taxi
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Distraction
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Ground Strike - Aircraft
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Winds were calm and conditions were clear. I was taxiing to the runway at about 5 mph and 1;000 RPM; and applied brakes approaching the movement area hold short line for a 10 minute ferry flight. The hold line is just forward of a bump in the ramp corresponding to track for a fence that used to be located there. The tail unexpectedly came up to the point that a propeller strike occurred. Following the propeller strike; the tail immediately came back down. The only point of impact was the propeller blades and no other damage is noted to the aircraft. There were absolutely no injuries or collateral property damage. This occurred shortly after leaving my desk handling urgent; unrelated matters. I completed all relevant preflight actions; but did not take a moment to slow down and allow my brain to switch gears. In the moments leading up to the propeller strike I believe my brain was processing/filing/deleting my tasks and actions of the previous two hours and was not focused on taxiing. I was surprised by the approaching movement area boundary; and applied the brakes aggressively; which as it turns out was excessive. Possibly related is that the different aircraft that I had flown most recently the day prior required maximum effort braking for a moderate deceleration response.




Synopsis: Decathlon pilot reported a propeller strike after aggressive application of brakes while taxiing.
Date: 201606
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: B757 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Electrical Distribution Busbar
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Troubleshooting; Distraction
Second reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: While at cruise altitude (FL380) midway through flight; R IRS DC FAIL EICAS displayed along with DC FAIL light for approximately 10-20 seconds then extinguished. QRH checklist completed and we decided to continue to [our destination]. Around the same time; we began hearing a clicking sound coming from the area right of the First Officer's seat near the right Circuit Breaker (CB) panel; printer and AC power outlet. All CBs checked in and clicking stopped for a while. Approximately 10 to 15 minutes later; the clicking sound returned. This stopped after a few minutes and at this point we were near our top of descent. Shortly thereafter; we lost the Captain's displays; FMC and the top EICAS display; as well as losing all autopilots and auto throttles. EICAS messages were plentiful...upwards of 30. Captain asked for lower altitude below RVSM airspace and asked for clearance direct to [destination] while breaking out the QRH. First Officer flew the airplane. Captain determined that the L AC BUS OFF EICAS message was the source of our problems. He then ran the QRH checklist for L AC BUS OFF. L AC BUS would not reset. Captain selected Right Instrument Source Select Panel to receive displays and managed flight from right FMS. We initially were on vectors to intercept ILS; but due to Flap indicator being inoperative; we chose to back up flap operation with ALTN flaps. Requested delay vectors to configure properly and discuss flap indications. We decided to use flaps 20 for approach and use [a different runway] for longer landing rollout. In addition; received EQPT OVHT message and Captain ran appropriate checklist. Approach and landing conducted uneventfully. Maintenance debriefed and AML entry input by Captain. Duty officer called and debriefed by Captain.


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


Synopsis: B757 flight crew reported experiencing an electrical issue resulting in several system rendered inoperative or degraded. Flight landed normally.
Date: 201301
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZSE.ARTCC, WA
Aircraft: No Aircraft
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Pilot departed SLE and gave me a tops report. I assume Tower must have asked the pilot to report the tops since he did so right after check on. I filled out a PIREP form and sent it off. The PIREP came out but was wrong. It showed OVC013 TOP013. I had the Supervisor go back down to the TMU with the correction. Another corrected report came out shortly afterward. I called SLE Tower to make sure they had received the PIREP but they said they had not received it on the FDIO Printer. I called TMU and asked if they could send the PIREP to SLE and they said that they could not send it. I told them they most certainly can and that I wanted them to send it to SLE Tower. The individual argued with me that he could not send the PIREP to the Tower and needed an address to send to it.  I said I didn't know right off hand and I would have to research it. He asked for an address again and again. Then he asked if the address was SLET. I mentioned that might work but that I wasn't sure and would have to do some research to find out for sure. However; my main concern is that the individual was not even aware that he needed to or even could send it to the Tower! How many PIREPs have we assumed were sent to the Tower which were not really sent? We never know unless we call the Tower to verify it. I would electronically forward the PIREPS to the Tower if I could but I do not have the tools to do so. TMU has the tools; but refuses to do so either because of improper training or a willful choice not do so. Have a software string written to allow automated forwarding of PIREPS to the Towers. Provide training to TMU personnel and stress the importance of sending PIREP information to all concerned facilities including Towers. In this case; the PIREP clearly impacted their operations and was within their area of jurisdiction. I had put SLE for the weather reporting station and SLE for the location. I don't know what else I can do except remind them to send it to the Tower each time I send a PIREP.




Synopsis: ZSE Controller voiced concern regarding the TMU's apparent lack of awareness regarding sending PIREPS to Towers in the area; noting some training in this area is needed.
Date: 201908
Location: BOS.Airport, MA
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground BOS
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Airport
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: Ramp told us to stop at Spot 7; we did. Ground eventually gave us taxi instructions. We went out single engine and couldn't get moving from Spot 7 due to a very large low spot/indention/hole right at Spot 7. Ground even asked us if we were stuck in the hole; so they are well aware of it. I had to start the second engine to get out of the hole; even applying an abnormal amount of power to get out of it with both engines running. You need to do several things; first put a note on the airport pages that says DO NOT SET. Secondly the airport needs to fix this. Thirdly; in the meantime prior to it being fixed; preferably with concrete not asphalt again; is to instruct ramp to have aircraft hold at either Spot 8 or Spot 6 to avoid this hole.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported parking ramp deterioration at BOS airport caused taxi issues requiring high breakaway thrust to be used.
Date: 201503
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: F11.TRACON, FL
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Medium Large Transport
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class B MCO
ATC / advisory: TRACON F11
Second aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict
Detector: Automation Aircraft RA; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Chart Or Publication; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Everything was normal; we were at 5;000 ft between CORLL and DIGGR. ATC told us to climb to 6;000 for traffic. The First Officer (FO) started the climb. I looked at the TCAS; saw a yellow dot target in front of us 200 feet high. I quickly looked outside and saw the traffic above us. Before I could even tell the FO not to climb the TCAS gave us an RA; 'Descend' at about 1;000 ft per minute. I then told ATC that we have an RA and we are descending. ATC gave us a descent to 4;000 and a turn to 250. I watched the light twin engine plane fly above us from right to left. My suggestion is that we stop using the CORLL 1 Arrival. This arrival is getting very dangerous. We are getting traffic alerts all of the time. We need to be grouped with the MCO arrivals using the BUGGZ 2 Arrival.




Synopsis: Air Carrier Captain arriving SFB via the CORLL1 arrival experienced a TCAS RA which he attributes to using this arrival. He believes that MCO arrivals would be more suitable for his aircraft and away from VFR traffic.
Date: 201904
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: A319
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Arrived at aircraft to find inbound Captain and local maintenance putting a ladder up to the number one engine. There was an MEL deferral for a 'feather gap seal' which had 'departed the airplane' on a previous flight.The 'fix' that ZZZ Maintenance had completed was to tape over where the panel had come off; adhering tape to angle iron on the pylon and the translating sleeve for the thrust reverser. This was completely ineffective as when the airplane went into reverse; the tape was ripped off.When I got up on the ladder to inspect the new fix; further investigation showed that not only was there a missing feather gap seal; but also the angle iron attached to the engine pylon was cracked for a significant distance; over 12 inches in my estimation.During multiple conversations with [Maintenance Control]; Local Contract Maintenance as well as in consultation with my First Officer; it became clear that there was a miscommunication and lack of comprehension and understanding as to which aircraft components were actually cracked/ missing as well as to the severity of the cracked angle iron. (Initial maintenance release document showed a '3 inch crack 12 inches aft of leading edge of angle iron.)In conversation with [Maintenance Control]; I expressed my concerns as to accurate identification of the problems and the proposed fix and was eventually forced to refuse the aircraft. Hearing this; the [Maintenance Control] 'hung up on me.' I contacted Dispatch and got phone patch with [Maintenance Control] and did official refusal of the aircraft [and] also entered 'unable to operate' code into ACARS.At my request; [Flight Operations Manager] became involved; multiple conversations ensued ; additional pictures were exchanged; [Engineering Authorization] was referenced and a 'fix' using 'high-speed tape' was effected that I believed address the situation at least from a legal standpoint. Although I had little confidence the tape resolution would hold; I did believe the airplane was airworthy at this point and we flew the aircraft to ZZZ1.




Synopsis: A319 Captain reported they initially refused aircraft based on unairworthy repair of aircraft.
Date: 201810
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: SR20
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class G ZZZ
ATC / advisory: CTAF ZZZ
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Instructor; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Ground Personnel
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport
Contributing factors: Airport; Procedure; Human Factors; Chart Or Publication
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I received a weather briefing for a local training flight with a student. Winds were gusting 25 knots at home airport and decided to listen to AWOS at ZZZ to see if winds were better. They were only gusting 17 so I decided to take my student there to practice short and soft field landings. Never was it in my mind to check the NOTAMS for the field. We entered left traffic for runway 28 and landed. We departed again on runway 10; as it was a 90 degree crosswind for either runway; and we did another landing. At this time another aircraft was taxiing for takeoff so we exited the runway at the end of 10 and taxied back to the beginning of 10 to allow the other aircraft to depart. We held short of runway to allow my student to reconfigure the aircraft for takeoff and made a traffic call that we would be departing runway 10. Before we started moving; the airport manager came over the CTAF frequency and told us that the runway was closed for fresh tarring till [XX:00]; he said it was NOTAM'd closed and that there were runway closure X's in the grass. He said we could depart. At this time; I looked down at the beginning of the runway and saw the X's; which were hard to see as they were in the grass and made of orange construction netting. I apologized for the confusion and we departed. Had I not been so focused on the better winds at ZZZ and teaching my student landings; I would have thought to check the NOTAMS for the airport and would have discovered its closure or at least seen the Xs for the runway.




Synopsis: GA flight instructor reported performing multiple take offs and landings without realizing the runway was closed.
Date: 202011
Aircraft: No Aircraft
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Other / Unknown
Human factors: Other / Unknown; Troubleshooting; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Other Person
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Software and Automation; Procedure; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: It was determined that pilot's FAA Medical was updated on 202011 with special Issuance / Expiration date and it was defaulted to the 6-month expiration date in Pilot Records.Due to the high volumes of FAA Medical coming in for the past few months and FAA Medical extensions; this one fell through the cracks.Because of the pandemic last year; pilots were granted FAA medical extensions on their 'Expiration Time'; and that may have caused the confusion and to slip by.We are very careful when processing FAA Medicals including other work that we process; and fully intend to process our work as accurately as possible.




Synopsis: Air Carrier Administration Office employee reported a pilot's FAA Medical Certificate was erroneously marked as expired during the COVID-19 extension period.