elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201301
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: B777-200
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Aircraft component: Cargo Compartment Fire/Overheat Warning
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Other / Unknown
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Airframe; Maintenance Powerplant
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Situational Awareness; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural MEL / CDL; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Other Person
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: [Station Maintenance personnel] requested to defer a faulty aft cargo compartment smoke detector (zone 1) using [per the appropriate MEL]. I authorized the deferral which has cargo loading restrictions for the aft compartment in zone 1 and 2. After the aircraft departed I received a call from load planning asking where zone 1 and 2 in the aft compartment was located. I provided the information from the MEL which stated that zone 1 and 2 in the aft pit extend from the aft wall of the cargo compartment to Station 1664 and requires the zones to remain empty.




Synopsis: A Maintenance Controller was concerned because after he authorized a deferral on a B777 that would restrict cargo from a portion of the cargo compartment; and the aircraft was already in-flight; station personnel called to ascertain the area that should have remained empty.
Date: 201204
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: HCF.Tower, HI
Aircraft: Caravan 208B
Flight plan: VFR
Flight phase: Final Approach
Second aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Supervisor / CIC
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical
Detector: Automation Air Traffic Control; Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: C172 holding in position on Runway 4L.  C208 cleared to land on Runway 4L. ASDE-X ALARM advised; 'Runway 4L occupied; Go Around'.  C208 advised to; 'change their runway to Runway 4R; cleared to land'. There was a previous go around that had occurred a few minutes prior. The Controller may have not used a pad to  write down the incoming aircraft as a reminder. Controller could improve his/her scan.




Synopsis: Tower Supervisor witnessed an ASDE-X alarm when traffic was cleared to land on an occupied runway forcing a landing runway change; the reporter indicated the Local Controller should have scanned the runway before issuing a clearance.
Date: 201509
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: TTA.Airport, NC
Aircraft: PA-46 Malibu/Malibu Mirage/Malibu Matrix
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class E TTA
ATC / advisory: CTAF TTA
Second aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Other Person
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was entering the traffic pattern at my home airport and another aircraft asked if I ever saw him. I apologized and stated that I had not. He reported it as a near miss to the FSDO. I was entering the pattern from the side opposite the downwind as I was trained and as many other pilots I have polled do. Cross midfield at 500 above pattern altitude to enter the downwind.




Synopsis: PA-46 pilot reported another aircraft indicated they had experienced a near miss in the pattern at TTA that the reporter was unaware of.
Date: 201201
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Other Documentation
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown; Confusion
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Incorrect / Not Installed / Unavailable Part; Aircraft; Chart Or Publication; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: At gate and was advised by Maintenance of brake change in progress. Mechanic advised flight crew very clearly about not using hydraulics. However; I really feel that for their safety a placard should have been placed in cockpit over Hydraulics Panel to ensure we didn't activate any pumps. I'm not picking on guys--they were very conscientious; but I am afraid for their safety and something that may inadvertently cause some harm.




Synopsis: A pilot describes why Maintenance should have placarded the overhead Hydraulic's Panel for their own safety; while performing a brake change at their terminal gate.
Date: 201703
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: BUR.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Transport
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E SCT
ATC / advisory: TRACON SCT
Second aircraft: Skylane 182/RG Turbo Skylane/RG
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Between 'DARTS' intersection and the VNY VOR; while cruising at 8;000 feet I was issued traffic; 6 miles level at 7;500 feet located at my 11 o'clock position. I also overheard the controller; conversing along the same line with the aircraft in question; a Cessna Skylane; proceeding northbound. Neither one of us had the other in sight at the time. A few minutes later the pilot of the Skylane advised the controller that he had me in sight. The controller acknowledged the transmission; and then asked me if I had the traffic in sight. I replied 'negative'. The controller then advised me that the traffic was at my 11 o'clock and 1 mile.At that point I spotted the aircraft which was blending very well with the buildings in the background as it seems to be making a turn to the east. I then stated that I had the traffic in sight. The controller told the Skylane to continue climbing and to maintain VFR. He also advised me that the traffic would continue to climb VFR; which it did coming within 300 feet according to 'Traffic Advisory System' on board. That is when I said to the controller 'That was not good!' I was not given an answer.Though the 'Traffic Advisory System' had detected the aircraft at a certain point; but shortly after the traffic vanished from the screens until I made visual contact with it. The controller issued clearance for the aircraft to continue climbing VFR while too close to my path of flight. I made a comment to ATC that it was not a good situation. ATC should have kept the aircraft at the same altitude until I cross its path; or given me a heading change to the south and an increase in altitude.




Synopsis: Air taxi pilot reported that a VFR aircraft which had them in sight flew too close to them.
Date: 201302
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Aileron Control System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Human factors: Time Pressure
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: After being cleared for a visual approach; with aircraft at 2;000 feet and 6 DME; intercepting final approach; autopilot was disconnected at which time the ailerons were found to be extremely stiff. Because of the proximity to landing and the aircraft being configured for same; I determined that there was no time to waste declaring an emergency and that using the time to have a crew plan was the best option.  We were also concerned that the unknown cause might grow worse. Landing was made with no incident; Maintenance was notified and debriefed.


Second narrative: Descent into ZZZ and being cleared for visual approach; Captain disengaged autopilot as we joined approximately 6 mile straight in final. Captain conveyed to me that the ailerons seemed 'stiff.' The aircraft was under complete control and there were no abnormal system indications i.e. Hydraulics or Flight Control System faults. Because of short distance to airfield; time constraints; and aircraft configuration Captain decided not to declare an emergency. The aircraft was controllable. Normal landing.

Second callback: The Reporter stated that he recently looked in the maintenance system for the stiffness's cause. The last maintenance item found relative to this was the aileron trim actuator rod end bearing was found failed and replaced.

Synopsis: B737 flight crew reports stiff ailerons when the autopilot is disengaged at 2;000 feet during approach. The approach is continued to a normal landing and maintenance is notified.
Date: 201406
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: I90.TRACON, TX
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
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 B IAH
ATC / advisory: TRACON I90
Aircraft component: Aero Charts
Component problem: Design
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Confusion; Distraction; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Chart Or Publication; Procedure
Primary problem: Chart Or Publication

Narrative: I departed IAH airport via the BNDT1 departure.  Before I took off I reviewed the SID verbally with my First Officer while I checked the FMS to make sure we had all restrictions listed. It shows SCAMM Intersection AT OR ABOVE 5;000 FT on the SID and my FMS showed the same thing. When we arrived at SCAMM at 5;000 FT we were questioned about the altitude.We were informed we should have leveled at 4;000 FT.  When we looked again we finally noticed the 4;000 FT restriction in normal lettering in the routing box under the initial departure headings and altitudes depending on your departing runway.  The pictorial display of the SID shows 5;000 FT in bold and is boxed.  It is listed again in the box for our assigned runway for departure; which was 15L. I saw this number in my FMS; since it is an RNAV departure. Since I saw this number basically 3 times that it what I defaulted to for my altitude. Next time we will both look at the SID separately as well as the FMS; then review our findings in the future.




Synopsis: After departing on the IAH BNDT1 RNAV; a corporate Captain climbed to 5;000 FT because the chart design listed 5;000 FT in bold distracting from the ROUTING verbiage; 'MAINTAIN 4;000;' with its minimized font and distance location.
Date: 201209
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Regional Jet 700 ER/LR (CRJ700)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Taxi
Aircraft component: Rudder Control System
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Lead Technician
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Powerplant; Maintenance Airframe
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Gate
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Logbook Entry; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I performed the panel close out task on a block check on [a CRJ-700] aircraft. I had done a general visual inspection of the aft equipment bay and I did not notice any foreign objects. I closed and secured the aft equipment bay door. Soon after; the aircraft was dispatched to the gate for a departure. Approximately 2 hours later I was notified by Maintenance Control that the aircraft returned to the gate reporting that the rudder was jammed. Several minutes later I was notified that the flight line located a rig pin installed in the rudder quadrant. I believe that if the panel close out was placed with the task that it was opened for on a block check; this could have led me to focus on why the panel was opened. With the panel close out placed on the last page of the block check; it does not indicate what maintenance task is associated with the panels.




Synopsis: Following maintenance work on a CRJ-700 that required a rig pin to be placed in the rudder system; a Maintenance Technician was given the job card to verify the aft equipment bay was clear of any foreign objects. After a general visual inspection of the area; the technician closed the compartment; unaware that the rig pin was installed.
Date: 201904
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: SLC.Tower, UT
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class B SLC
ATC / advisory: Tower SLC
Second aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Local
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was working Local Center and was told to pick up Local West as well because that Controller had a physiological matter that needed immediate attention. I departed Aircraft X off Runway 16R heading 295. I departed Aircraft Y behind them heading 295 as well. I observed Aircraft X start their turn and switched them to Departure. It then appeared Aircraft X stopped their turn heading southwest directly at a mountain. I called Departure but Controller was not there yet; so I reached out to Aircraft X who was still with me. I did my best to get them to climb and turn away from the rapidly rising MVA's and am not sure if he cleared them or not. I also stopped the turn and climb of Aircraft Y so they didn't cut each other off west of the airport. I ran Aircraft Y right along the higher MVA line and then climbed them again. I believe I got a good read back on the heading for Aircraft X and I do not know why they started to turn then stopped. I did my best to get them turned away from the higher terrain and climbing while missing the traffic that was departing behind them to the northwest as well. Another option for Aircraft Y may have been to keep them going in a southern direction.




Synopsis: SLC Tower Controller reported an aircraft suddenly stopped its climb and turn heading towards higher terrain.
Date: 201901
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZNY.ARTCC, NY
Flight conditions: IMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: A330
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class A ZNY
ATC / advisory: Center ZNY
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Captain
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Center had directed us to descend to 14;000 feet and we were passing 17;000 feet in IMC conditions. Center called out traffic; a Falcon at 12 o'clock; 5 miles; 1;000 feet above. We acknowledged and said we were searching for it; but were in IMC conditions. The target suddenly appeared on TCAS at 5 miles; opposite direction; rapidly closing; 800 feet above. It appeared to be descending; but it was difficult to determine because the TCAS called out a TA; followed almost immediately by a descending RA as we passed 16;700 feet. I disconnected the autopilot and pitched down. It took 1;300-1;400 FPM to stay out of the red. We notified Center we were responding to a RA. The Falcon also notified Center they were responding to a RA. We safely cleared the conflict. Center directed us to continue descent to 14;000 feet and contact the adjacent Center.Before the handoff; Center told us the next sector had assigned the Falcon the same altitude as us. We declared our intent to file an ASAP. More careful coordination between ATC sectors during handoff; especially at an ARTCC boundary.


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


Synopsis: A flight crew reported responding to an RA for an aircraft descending head on to the same altitude they were descending to.
Date: 202103
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Reporter qualification: Flight Attendant Current
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Other / Unknown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Cleaners in ZZZ are not following policy for waiting for all passengers to leave aircraft before they board to clean; and not following crew instructions to remain off the aircraft. Cleaners must wait for all passengers to deplane prior to boarding the aircraft.Cleaners in ZZZ are aggressively pushing their way into the forward galley to remove trash from the carts during the deplaning process. This impedes the flow of deplaning passengers and obstructs the ability of flight attendants to manage the flow of passengers and maintain door and safety compliance. Cleaners are insisting that flight attendants leave the galley area so they can work; they say operations has told them to move the crew to accomplish the cleaning task. Allowing cleaners to pull carts and trash while flight attendants and passengers are deplaning creates safety hazards (bumps; trips; and impacts from trash removal) and does not allow for safe social distancing as per company policy.  Cleaners also leave bags on the floor posing a trip hazard for crew and passengers deplaning; as I was deplaning a cleaner had left a gray cleaning tote below a jump-seat and I tripped over it falling into the bulkhead.




Synopsis: Flight Attendant reported the aircraft cleaners are not adhering to the social distancing policy.
Date: 201510
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: P50.TRACON, AZ
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Light Transport
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B PHX
ATC / advisory: TRACON P50
Second aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Human-Machine Interface; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Airspace Violation All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict
Detector: Automation Aircraft TA; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Procedure; Environment - Non Weather Related; Airspace Structure; Aircraft; Airport
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: We were in the Phoenix Class B airspace; about 1 mile south of DVT 6;000 feet assigned by ATC. We had just gotten a frequency change to the Approach Controller and checked in; when a TCAS TA had gone off; showing traffic below us to our 1 o'clock. I check in that direction and immediately see traffic that we were overtaking; and was not a factor. About 4 seconds later I look more to my 2 to 3 o'clock and find another aircraft under us heading away from us to the right even closer to us (still not a factor). At this point the TCAS gives us another TA; and I look at the 2 aircraft I noticed earlier to make sure they're still in sight. I take a look afterwards to our 3 to 4 o'clock and see another aircraft about 1/4 mile and moving towards us. We immediately banked left away from traffic. The aircraft was close enough that I could read the tail number before we banked away.At 6;000 feet over DVT is where the floor of the Class B airspace begins. This aircraft had to have been at our altitude and in the Class B airspace at that point. Between all 3 aircraft that were within our proximity; ATC only issued one traffic report to us as we received the first TA. We called traffic in sight when I noticed the first aircraft. ATC did not provide any information on any other traffic around us or any resolutions during that time afterwards.After banking away (not deviating from any altitude or heading assignments); we informed ATC of the situation; including that we could read tail numbers to give an indication of proximity.




Synopsis: Air crew in Phoenix Class B took slight evasive action for an aircraft. The pilot observed three different aircraft that he was alerted to by TCAS. TRACON only issued traffic for one of the aircraft; not the one the pilot had to evade.