elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201901
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Night
Aircraft: B737-700
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Time Pressure; Workload
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Hazardous Material Violation; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Attendant; Person Flight Crew
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: The A Flight Attendant informed me that a Passenger was boarding with an assist device that looked like a hover board with a handle attached. She was concerned that the device was prohibited. The passenger said that our operations handle it by sometimes allowing it in the cabin; and sometimes letting it go below. This time it was tagged for the cargo bin. Operations in ZZZ seemed confident that this was the right thing to do; according to the A. (I never spoke with Ops about this; nor did I talk to the passenger.) The A was very concerned that this device had a lithium battery. I did ask the First Officer (F/O) to look up this HAZMAT information in our manuals to see if we had any guidance regarding this device. We found the information that lithium batteries must remain in the cabin. But we did not know if this device had that as a power source. I also observed the ramp fumbling with the large handle on the device as they passed in front of the nose on their way to the cargo bin. They seemed unfamiliar with this type of device. My main focus during this time was determining if we needed to deice due to Cold Soak fuel frost (CSFF). It turns out that we did; the fuel uploaded did not melt the frost; and the ambient temperature was below the limits for the presence of the CSFF on the upper wing surface. The F/O and I were both consulting the manual on this. We then had to communicate with Operations our need to deice; and find out where and how this was going to happen at ZZZ. This was our main focus in getting ready for this flight. After we landed; the A informed us that the device (according to her internet research) did indeed have lithium batteries. I am concerned that a device that should have been in the cabin or not on the aircraft at all was carried in the cargo bin. I need to remember my ultimate responsibility for the safety of the flight and be willing to take a delay in order to make sure that we don't carry anything in the cargo bin that is unsafe. It would be nice to have easy access to all the information that we need to evaluate the safety of items that passengers bring onboard.




Synopsis: B737 Captain reported passenger no easy access information to determine procedures for Lithium powered devices.
Date: 201201
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Weather elements / visibility: 20
Aircraft: M-20 B/C Ranger
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: UNICOM ZZZ
Aircraft component: Elevator Control Column
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Engineer
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Other / Unknown; Ground Event / Encounter Ground Strike - Aircraft
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Shortly after lift off I retracted the manual gear handle to the locked position between the forward seats. I felt resistance as the gear handle touched the floor and looked down to see that the passenger seat belt was blocking the lock position. I pushed the handle down and at same time inadvertently pushed the stick forward with my left hand causing the propeller to strike the runway. I pulled back the power; extended the gear and landed on the remaining runway. Amateur mistake from an experienced; high time pilot; as I forgot the primary rule: 'Fly the airplane first; deal with problems later'.




Synopsis: An M20C pilot; distracted by difficulty retracting the manual landing gear; suffered a prop strike while attempting to correct the blockage to the exclusion of monitoring the aircraft's flight path. He was able to extend the landing gear and land straight ahead on the remaining runway.
Date: 201907
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: BTR.Airport, LA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
ATC / advisory: Ground BTR
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Fuel Issue
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: BTR Clearance Delivery cleared the flight as filed LFT.LINKK1; FL220. Call for release; no delays expected. After push back at about XA30Z; received a release time of XB02Z. Took off at XB00Z. At approximately XB02Z on frequency 126.35 Houston ATC re-cleared the flight via Present Position AEX.GESNR1. From the then current course; that's a 90 degree course change to the right; and an additional 10-15 minute of flying time; completely using the SCF/TNK fuel. According to Houston ARTCC the modified route and clearance was out and available all morning; and thus should have been available to BTR ATC. BTR failed to re-clear the flight with the proper routing. This failure denied the crew the opportunity to increase the fuel load to the appropriate level. This is an unacceptable risk forced upon the crew and passengers by BTR ATC. Improve communication between ATC stations so the flight crew has the best information available for the safe conduct of flight operations.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported receiving a routing change after takeoff which differed from Pre-departure clearance routing; resulting in fuel reserve burn.
Date: 201707
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: SZT.Airport, ID
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class G SZT
ATC / advisory: CTAF SZT
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Rotorcraft; Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness; Confusion
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Flying into SZT saw NOTAM and ASOS saying a crane was off the north end of RWY 02 and 90 ft off centerline. Didn't pay too much attention; but on final; flying the PAPI lights; I had to go-around the top of the crane; which protruded some 60 ft into the PAPI glidepath. I took a photo looking north on RWY 02 and the crane was dead center in the runway centerline. The solution was to turn off the PAPI lights so it did not guide aircraft into the crane; which moved east and west during the day; but often within the runway width and extending into the PAPI glidepath. Seems that simple solution would have been to find some other way to do work on a bridge north of SZT; but FAA decided OK; which baffles me from a safety standpoint. Call 208-263-3074 and listen to the current ASOS; which is better; but what if a transient pilot doesn't listen; or pay attention. Same risk on takeoff with low-performance aircraft hitting the crane.




Synopsis: Turbojet pilot reported executing a go-around on the SZT Runway 02 final because a crane protruded into the runway's visual descent path. The crane is mobile and NOTAMed; but a danger to transient pilots and others.
Date: 201705
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZDC.ARTCC, VA
Aircraft: B737-900
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class E ZDC
ATC / advisory: Center ZDC
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Distraction; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Sector 19 went into a hold for LGA airport. Before I issued holding instructions to Aircraft X; I issued an amended altitude clearance: 'Aircraft X; amend altitude; descend via the KORRY3 arrival; except cross BRAND at and maintain one-one; eleven thousand.' Aircraft X read back; 'Roger; descending via the KORRY except cross BRAND at eleven.' I continued issuing a few other clearances then gave Aircraft X holding instructions at RBV. He read them back correctly. After that exchange I said in a separate transmission 'Aircraft X; I just want to reiterate; cross BRAND at and maintain one-one; eleven thousand; I'll have traffic holding directly beneath you in the pattern.' Aircraft X read back; 'yes; BRAND at eleven.' A few minutes later Aircraft X checked in the hold at RBV: 'Aircraft X; established in the hold at ten thousand.' I rogered the airplane; but it took a minute to realize what he said; and my D-side also told me that I now had two airplanes in the same holding pattern at the same altitude. I asked Aircraft X to verify his altitude; 'Aircraft X; verify level at one-one thousand?' and Aircraft X said 'negative; we are level at ten thousand; you told us to descend via the KORRY except cross BRAND or HOLEY at eleven thousand.' I climbed Aircraft X immediately to eleven thousand. No separation was lost; nor was there a TCAS RA.I think it was a misunderstanding or a misinterpretation on the pilots part of what I had expected the aircraft to do.




Synopsis: ZDC Controller reported that an aircraft was issued one altitude; but descended below that altitude in a holding pattern.
Date: 202001
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Tower, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
Aircraft component: Autothrottle/Speed Control
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Confusion; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Deviation - Speed All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: ZZZ Tower told us to go-around due to the aircraft landing in front of us not clearing the runway. On go-around I inadvertently pressed the autothrottle disconnect switch instead of the go-around switch. As I rotated and began the go-around litany; my First Officer stated 'Airspeed.' I had not added enough power during clean-up and our airspeed got below Vref.I am new to the 737; just reaching the 100-hour consolidation period last week. It has taken me over 3 1/2 months to accumulate the 100 hours. I am very junior on the aircraft so I am on reserve and have not flown very often. I transitioned from the MD80 which I have flown for over 11 years straight. On the go-around; I was having trouble locating the go-around switch on the throttles because my old habit pattern kicked in and I was searching for the switch where it used to be on the MD80. I then mistakenly pressed the auto throttle disconnect switch and initially did not added enough power for the go-around.I have to mentally practice the go-around procedure; including all of the physical movements I would be making during the go-around so that my hand can reflexively find the go-around switch instead of reverting to old 'muscle memory'.




Synopsis: B737 Captain reported that unfamiliarity with a new aircraft caused them to inadvertently disconnect the autothrottle during a go-around.
Date: 201508
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZOA.ARTCC, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Gulfstream V / G500 / G550
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class A ZOA
ATC / advisory: Center ZOA
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Cleared 'Descend Via RAZRR2 Arrival; 30L Transition' in KSJC. We were in level flight on LNAV; autopilot engaged. I selected VNAV to descend via the arrival as the descent path was ahead of the aircraft. This is a normal procedure in the G-550. For some reason yet discovered; the plane went into a max performance descent; VFLCH. I corrected the premature descent using vertical speed; staying on autopilot. We lost a little over 2;000 feet during the incident/recovery. I climbed the plane back up to previous altitude; but sequenced the next waypoint with lower altitude restrictions and just complied with that. I actually never made it back up to FL240 as it was no longer a valid part of the arrival.Gulfstream is looking into this and hopefully we can understand why this happened.




Synopsis: G-V Captain reported excursion from cleared altitude when the aircraft went into an uncommanded max descent.
Date: 202103
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Tower, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: PA-31P Navajo P
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class B ZZZ; Class E ZZZ1
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: GPS & Other Satellite Navigation
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Captain; Single Pilot; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Clearance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: GPS system went into Dead Reckoning mode; but we did not notice right away.  After about 5 minutes; it found the aircraft position again and updated; showing the aircraft track about a mile further west than it had displayed before.  We were traveling north just outside of the ZZZ Class Bravo.  We do not believe we penetrated the edge of the airspace at any time; but once the GPS came back online and updated; we were substantially closer than we had been believed based on the previous; ambiguous; nav data.




Synopsis: PA-31 Single Pilot Captain reported a navigation error due to temporary loss of GPS data.
Date: 201210
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: SAN.Airport, CA
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower SAN
Second aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: ATC in San Diego were pushing hard on both our arrival flight and our departure flight. On the arrival flight; we were told to maintain 170 to the FAF and we were already close to the preceding aircraft such that we had to fly high on the glide path to avoid wake turbulence; and they cleared an aircraft on the runway before our arrival that just barely got airborne before we landed. On departure we were cleared for departure just after a B737 and just in front of a landing aircraft. We were much heavier and required more ground roll than the preceding aircraft and we ended up hitting their wake turbulence on departure. I realize that traffic is tight in SAN; however both of these incidents were too close for me. It would be better to build in a little more buffer between flights and not push so hard on all of us. This practice is an accident waiting to happen.




Synopsis: A B737-800 Captain expressed concern over aircraft spacing in SAN after experiencing wake turbulence on both arrival and departure.
Date: 201205
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: GEU.Airport, AZ
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Light Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class E LUF
ATC / advisory: TRACON LUF
Second aircraft: Small Aircraft; High Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Distraction; Human-Machine Interface; Time Pressure
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Automation Aircraft RA; Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Environment - Non Weather Related; Airspace Structure; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: [I] departed GEU off Runway 01; contacted Luke AFB Departure as directed. Crew was given vector 300 degree heading/climb to 5;000 FT. LUF called out traffic 11 o'clock southeast bound. Picked up target aircraft on TCAS and monitored path. Continued climb on 300 degree heading toward target aircraft. Crew commented on altitude and position of target aircraft. [I] did not have visual contact. As a result crew reacted to TCAS RA alert and picked up target aircraft visually. Pilot flying performed an abrupt nose down maneuver per the RA alert and observed target aircraft in abrupt nose up left turn maneuver. Before TCAS alert; TCAS reporting greater than 300 FT at time of maneuver aircraft separation was approximately greater than 100 FT vertical and greater than 1/8 mile horizontal. Crew reported RA rapid descent. Pilot flying leveled when cleared from conflict. Crew reported resuming climb; after incident crew questioned ATC on vector toward target aircraft and through altitude. A new Controller reported on frequency and cleared us on course. Contacted Luke AFB ATC and spoke with Controller. Was given explanation of the VFR traffic and that they were not in contact with that aircraft. In addition it was indicated that the event was being investigated further. Due vigilance is always important by both ATC and pilots. This type of event is dangerous. If in doubt; questions should always be asked.




Synopsis: A corporate jet which departed GEU Northwest bound took last second evasive action during a near miss with ATC reported but unseen TCAS traffic at about 3;000 FT.
Date: 201506
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: HIO.Airport, OR
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class E P80
ATC / advisory: TRACON P80
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: During departure from HIO on the BERNI2 RNAV DEPARTURE we passed very near to a glider to the forward/right of us in a descending left turn. We were in a climbing left turn ascending through approximately 5;000 feet. Our separation from the glider was approximately 300-400 feet horizontally. [FO] was the pilot flying and was properly flying the flight director. The incident happened in close proximity to HETAT intersection. I made a radio report to ATC and was told they had not observed any targets in our vicinity. The event happened so quickly there was no time for an evasive maneuver and we were already turning away from the other aircraft.Weather at the time and at our position was scattered clouds with bases around 7;000 feet and unrestricted visibility. Neither of us know what type of glider it was. As stated above a radio report was made to PDX TRACON and I was given a number to call and followed up with more detail in a phone conversation.Extend Class D or C airspace to include RNAV departure corridor. Require gliders to have mode aircraft transponders when operating in proximity to busy airports.




Synopsis: A Captain reported an NMAC with a glider on departure from HIO airport. ATC reported no targets in the vicinity.