elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201204
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: N90.TRACON, NY
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: Falcon 2000
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class B EWR; Class D TEB
ATC / advisory: TRACON N90
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Fatigue; Distraction
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Anomaly: 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 Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Departing Runway 01; Teterboro 8 Departure [we] climbed to 2;000 FT MSL; turned right to 040 until 2.3 DME from TEB; overshot turn to heading 280 until 3.5 DME from TEB. Upon discovery took immediate corrective action and turned to heading 280 and continued the Teterboro 8 departure procedure. Once at cruise altitude the error was discussed by crew. Contributing factors were determined to be crew fatigue; not having armed the LNAV function and a becoming distracted due to a radio frequency hand off issue; i.e. no response after three initial calls to Departure Control and choosing to return to TEB Tower frequency. In the future the flight crew will conduct a more thorough departure briefing to include the use of LNAV and VNAV functions to be used during the departure and will aviate; navigate and then communicate with ATC as appropriate.


Second narrative: [Narrative 2 contained no additional information]


Synopsis: Falcon 2000 flight crew reported deviating from the TEB departure track because of fatigue and distractions.
Date: 201408
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Weather elements / visibility: Thunderstorm
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: A319
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
ATC / advisory: Ramp ZZZ
Aircraft component: Parking Brake
Component problem: Design
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Object
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Procedure; Weather
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: While reviewing the logbook during the cockpit setup of a cold/secured airplane; the un-chocked plane moved back on the gate and caught the door on the jet bridge. The aircraft stopped when the door snagged the jet bridge. The brakes appeared to be ON; but the loss of braking memory items were run to verify brakes were working. Yellow Hydraulic pressure was boosted with the electric pump to charge the accumulator. Operations and Maintenance were immediately notified to assist. I'm not a rocket scientist; but I would say that chocking the wheels would be an idea worthy of consideration. Evidently there had been a ramp closure due to lightning being seen in the vicinity; and the previous crew were unable to have chocks installed. Unbeknown to this new crew (that the wheels weren't chocked; or that the ramp was closed) there was no reason to suspect anything was other than normal. The brakes should have held the aircraft without the need for chocks; so I'm still scratching my head as to why this event occurred. Hopefully the experts will be able to determine the reason. In cases such as this; it would be good for the new crew to be made aware of the fact that chocks had not been put in place; as well as the fact that lightning had closed the ramp; so the pilot conducting the preflight would not be put in harms way; and that any potential injuries or damage be prevented from system failure or human error.




Synopsis: An A319 parked un-chocked at the gate because of lightning during the arrival; rolled backward and lodged the door on the jetway after the parking brake pressure depleted.
Date: 201604
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Weather elements / visibility: Windshear
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: HS 125 Series
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground ZZZ
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Vehicle
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Weather
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: After a normal engine start and running the appropriate checklist; FO called Tower for taxi clearance. We were instructed to turn right on Taxiway X and hold short of Runway XX. No FBO Line Service personnel were there to marshal us out of the tight & congested ramp space. I was assisted on the right side by my FO while I kept a vigil on the front & left wing area. The wind at that time was strong with gusts in the 30s from the NW while I taxied Northbound. A myriad of ground equipment was stationed on the left side of the Taxiway Y alley shaking from the wind. Just as I cleared the right side; I looked left and noticed that a large airline-type FBO baggage cart used for de-icing pump storage; that was unsecured and not chocked; loosened from its stand and had wrapped itself around my left wingtip. I immediately stopped and shutdown the aircraft. Our 2 passengers didn't even notice what had happened until I explained the situation to them. There were no injuries to the crew; nor the 2 passengers. After opening the main cabin door; I stepped outside to inspect the wingtip and found damage to the Aft Left Nav light; Recog light; and the Lens Cover. I notified the Chief Pilot of the incident right after it occurred. I instructed my FO to call FBO personnel; which took approximately 10-15 minutes for the first Line Service Tech to arrive on scene. FBO Line Service Manager & Law enforcement; came and took crew & aircraft information for their records. Approximately 1 hour later; our 2 passengers boarded a second Company aircraft and departed. Aircraft was then towed back to the original parking spot; where I finished the required Maintenance paperwork.




Synopsis: Hawker 4000 Captain reported being struck on the left wingtip by a bag cart rolling in the wind as he taxied out of the FBO. The engines were shut down and the aircraft was towed back to the ramp for maintenance.
Date: 201309
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Bonanza 35
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Engineer; Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: Airspace Violation All Types
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I flew a short VFR flight at 2;500 FT MSL (below Class B airspace) from ZZZ to ZZZ1 in Class C airspace with Approach. I checked the weather online and the TFR on the FAA TFR map site. I was cleared to resume normal altitude after an initial 2;000 FT restriction and on course. I headed directly to my destination approximately 30 NM away and was told by Approach to immediately turn to heading 270 because I was entering a TFR. It was apparently a ball game at [university stadium]. I didn't see anything published about this TFR. Are we supposed to memorize when every ballgame starts and where it's being played? I recommend publishing all TFR's and not having pilots call flight service for each flight. With all the capabilities of the internet there really needs to be real time info (not just a Government disclaimer that they are not responsible for current information).




Synopsis: B35 pilot checked FAA TFR map website prior to departure; but entered a TFR over a university stadium with an event in progress.
Date: 202004
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Baron 58/58TC
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Landing
ATC / advisory: CTAF ZZZ
Aircraft component: Landing Gear
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Workload; Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Other landing
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: This was the first flight after annual inspection of the aircraft. Upon takeoff the gear would not retract. The gear indication was unsafe. I noticed that the landing gear motor breaker had popped out. I reset the circuit breaker only to have it pop out again. On the third attempt; the breaker stayed in and the gear retracted. We continued on to take on fuel and to have a longer runway in case we encountered any other problems. I put the gear down early and flew the pattern with the gear down. The gear lights were checked multiple times with all times showing three green lights. After landing and during roll out at approximately 45 kts.; the left main landing gear appeared to collapse followed by the nose gear. As we were sliding toward the left side of the runway; I closed the mixture levers. As soon as we stopped; I turned the master switch off and we quickly exited the aircraft.




Synopsis: Baron pilot reported a gear collapse on landing.
Date: 201604
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZLC.ARTCC, UT
Aircraft: Regional Jet 200 ER/LR (CRJ200)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
Airspace: Class E ZLC
ATC / advisory: Center ZLC
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: Taxi
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Chart Or Publication; Procedure; ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Aircraft X was on the ground at requesting an IFR clearance to; I cleared them as filed. According to a memo aircraft in a non-radar environment must be cleared to a fix depicted on the radar scope or overhead chart. [Fix] is not on the chart and I was too busy to amend the clearance.This memo handcuffs our ability to control traffic in a non-radar environment. All of our airports except two are outside of radar coverage. This rule is less safe; less expeditious; and less orderly. They are taking rules from various parts of the Federal Aviation Administration Handbook (FAAH) 7110.65 and inventing new ones.




Synopsis: ZLC ARTCC Controller reported their facility has implemented rules in addition to the Federal Aviation Administration Handbook (FAAH) 7110.65 regarding issuing IFR clearances to departing aircraft.
Date: 201409
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: STS.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class D STS
ATC / advisory: Center ZOA
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed As Precaution
Contributing factors: Chart Or Publication; Human Factors; Procedure; Airport
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: My flight was going to be from LLR to ZZZ; but LLR had no fuel available and I decided to stop at STS to take on fuel for the remainder of the flight. I had never landed at STS; which is identified on the chart as 'Charles M. Schultz--Sonoma County.' I was on VFR flight following and the controller repeatedly asked me if I was; '...going to Santa Rosa?' to which I replied negative; I am going to Sonoma. About five miles from the field; the controller finally asked; 'Are you intending to land at that field right in front of you?' and told me that was Santa Rosa. I was very confused but landed without incident. I feel that if the airport is called Santa Rosa it should be called that on the chart. This could be a safety issue for a newbie like me who doesn't know the secret name of the field! I'm aware that airports often are referred to by the name of the nearby city but I think this is a case where it is easy to fool the uninitiated. I'm not sure if I broke any rules but I certainly regret the error.




Synopsis: The private pilot of a Siai-Marchetti enroute to STS with flight following was confused when the Controller asked if he was intending to land at Santa Rosa when his charts identified his destination as 'CHARLES M SCHULTZ-SONOMA COUNTY (STS).'
Date: 201810
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: OBBS.Airport, FO
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Confusion
Anomaly: Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Chart Or Publication
Primary problem: Chart Or Publication

Narrative: Approaching JALYD IAF from the east we were switched to Tower as the aircraft was maneuvering to intercept the IAF and the 12 DME arc. We were then directed to fly the 10 DME arc and report FAF inbound. The aircraft was already in a turn away from the IAF which is 10 DME to intercept the 12 DME arc. The Pilot Flying (PF) switched to heading select to turn back to intercept the 10 DME arc by using the SIA VOR/ 10 DME on the fix page. The controller told us that we were trying to follow the 12 DME arc and we responded that we were correcting back to intercept. We continued on heading select following 10 DME arc and landed uneventfully. I later talked to the Tower and told them our database and Jeppesen all had the 12 DME arc. He had said the area past 10 DME was a special operating area (I forget the terminology.) I apologized and told him I would communicate these issues and procedures to the company. Our Jeppesen and databases need to somehow be updated to reflect this base's procedures and possibly update the station guide and company pages. We really weren't given enough notice to make this happen when we were already at the IAF intercepting the arc from an awkward angle the aircraft was trying to intercept.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported track heading deviation during approach to OBBS airport due to the Jeppesen database not reflecting specific airport procedures.
Date: 201905
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Night
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb; Cruise; Parked; Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Dispatcher
Reporter qualification: Dispatch Dispatcher
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Dispatch
When detected: In-flight; Taxi
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: At XA:45L I was given this flight in turnover from another dispatcher at the end of his shift. I noticed this fight had turned red on plot as it had blocked out at XZ:57L. Upon turnover; at XA:50L; I zoomed into ZZZ airport via ASDE-X in time to see this aircraft leave the taxiway leading up to the runway; and pull off to the side. At XA:53L I attempted contact with the crew via ACARS to inquire as to what the issue was. After no response; at XA:57L; I sent the 60 minute ACARS template message. Upon not receiving any response; I walked over to MX Control to ask if they were talking to this crew. They stated they had just cut an MEL for the TAT 1 sensor. *NOTE: There was NO MX BLOCK on this aircraft. At XB:00L I sent another message to the crew via ACARS to amend the release to add MEL X. At XB:06L I sent another ACARS message to the crew to let them know it looked like we were good to go and that I observed them getting back into the taxi line. I also asked for confirmation of receiving the amendment and that I needed some sort of communication as it had been over an hour off the gate. Aircraft took off at XB:12L (1 hour 15 minutes after block out)At XB:32L Once aircraft was well out of sterile cockpit; I sent another ACARS message saying 'Good evening guys.' trying to establish some sort of communication with them. At XB:36L Crew finally responded via ACARS to let me know they had their hands full with weather; trying to get out; and a reroute. At XB:45L Crew admitted it was their mistake and that there were several distractions. Crews need to be reminded that MX calls go through dispatch first so we are kept in the loop. MX control needs to utilize ['Out of Service'] MX blocks in [the system] as a means of communicating to others that they are working on the aircraft or with the crew to defer/reset. Crews also need to know that addition of MEL's is required to keep the release legal. A situation with several distractions and missed procedures from several involved departments can result in catastrophe (Flight crew; MX control; dispatch).




Synopsis: Dispatcher reported being completely out of the loop during a lengthy flight delay.
Date: 201204
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZZ.Airport, FO
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Q400
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Initial Approach
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZZ
Aircraft component: Gear Extend/Retract Mechanism
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Troubleshooting; Distraction
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: On a heading for visual to the runway we were lit up with a green laser in the cockpit. I notified ATC and they notified their superiors.Later; after the First Officer called for gear down the nose gear did not extend; but the doors opened and the main gear extended. We performed a go around and notified ATC. I did not declare an emergency. ATC gave us vectors while we climbed back up to 3;000 MSL and ran the checklist. We performed the alternate gear extension procedure successfully and returned to land. I made a quick announcement to the passengers and flight attendants explaining the reason for the go-around. We were re-cleared and landed normally on Runway 32. I then notified dispatch and ramp that we needed maintenance and I wrote it up in the logbook. I also called Maintenance Control and explained what happened.




Synopsis: After being lit up by a green laser and reporting it to ATC the flight crew of a Q-400 was unable to lower the nose gear. They performed a go around; extended the nose gear using the alternate gear extension procedure and landed without incident.
Date: 201303
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Aircraft: Fighting Falcon F16
Operator: Military
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Other / Unknown; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Airspace Violation All Types; 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: Human Factors

Narrative: [Two F16s] were off [to ZZZ] and scheduled to enter the MOA that is in Sector XX airspace. The flight was en route and we were steady with traffic working the middle to eastern side of the sector. [The F16s] were coming from northwest and the Sector YY Controller did not display or coordinate the transition through our airspace. The XX seasoned R-Controller pulled up the limited data block in our airspace and said; 'You know Sector XX; me; is open here!' The YY Controller known for using airspace by 'look and go' said; 'I looked over there and saw you didn't have anything.' The safety culture of younger controllers is such that they think look and go as a limited data block is okay. This is an area that more direct management and awareness needs to be made that it is NEVER acceptable to use anyone's airspace with coordination. The surprise alone is not worth the skipped heart beat that we encounter when a limited is discovered in our airspace.




Synopsis: Enroute Controller described an airspace incursion event when an adjacent Controller failed to follow proper procedure claiming he/she observed no traffic and entered the airspace; the reporter questioning the younger Controller's safety culture.