elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201508
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: LNA.Airport, FL
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Robinson R44
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E LNA
ATC / advisory: CTAF LNA
Second aircraft: PA-28 Cherokee/Archer/Dakota/Pillan/Warrior
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Instructor; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: At LNA helicopters perform right traffic for all runways; while fixed wing traffic performs left traffic for all runways. After turning into a 1000 ft downwind and reporting position I observed a fixed wing aircraft passing close below us and just barely behind our track. I alerted my student to the traffic and we amended our path to the right in order to maximize clearance. It is unfortunately not uncommon for aircraft to enter left crosswind legs 'from the right' at LNA and I am keenly aware of the danger this poses. This aircraft however was not performing any standard pattern entry. I instructed my student to extend our downwind and amend the plan to perform a straight in autorotation instead of the 180 degree autorotation we had originally intended. As is my habit when I fail to hear any radio calls from an aircraft in the pattern I performed a comm check; to which another helicopter on field at the time confirmed we were loud and clear. We continued to observe the airplane enter a low left downwind; turn left sharply and land on runway 9. We performed a straight in autorotation to runway 9 after his clearance. After observing another full pattern without radio calls; my student and I were in a position to depart after the airplane. I made the radio call for departure for my student; specifically mentioning that we had the airplane in sight; identifying him by callsign. After our departure we observed the airplane turn to the west and depart the area.It is my opinion that the presence of heavy flight training traffic; and the right pattern for helicopters should be marked on sectional charts; and re-added to AWOS broadcasts in addition to their current presence in Airport Facility Directories. These types of problems arise not with traffic that is based at LNA; as the flight schools gather for meetings and discuss these topics regularly; rather they are most frequently involving transient aircraft that are completely unfamiliar with the airport and its typical operations.




Synopsis: R44 Instructor Pilot reported an NMAC with a light aircraft in the pattern at LNA airport.
Date: 201901
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: B757 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Indicating and Warning - Fuel System
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Procedure; MEL
Primary problem: MEL

Narrative: Originally; the MEL was designed to take a broken but flyable plane from a non-maintenance facility to a hub where it could be repaired. Now it is used to push broken planes all over the world for weeks until there is a perfect time to repair them. This was never the intent of MEL. Today we were dispatched a plane with no [fuel quantity] totalizer capability. Therefore the only way to know if there is a fuel leak is to look overhead (no forward EICAS gauges on 757 fleet); then add the two tanks together for a total fuel. This must be done continuously and is unrealistic on this plane. The FMC only calculates the fuel based on what is 'supposed' to be on board based upon fuel burn and original total fuel entered by the crew. There is no warning for a fuel leak.  If the crew forgets to look up overhead and add the two gauges together; then compare with expected fuel; they will never know there is a leak until it is dire. Why accept an MEL which sets pilots up for failure? It was never the spirit of MEL.




Synopsis: B757 Captain reported concerns about accepting an aircraft with the fuel quantity totalizer deferred inoperative; because there is no easy way to identify a fuel leak in that scenario.
Date: 201906
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: PA-18/19 Super Cub
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
ATC / advisory: CTAF ZZZ
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Troubleshooting; Distraction
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Equipment Problem Dissipated; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors; Chart Or Publication; Airspace Structure
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Following departure from the airport; I felt the airplane climb at an excessive angle. Further investigation revealed that the electric trim was in full 'nose up' position; and upon resolving the problem; my altitude was 2;500 feet. At that location; the floor of the Class C Airspace was 2;200 feet. I was in the Class C airspace (300 feet above the floor of the airspace) for 3 minutes and immediately proceeded to descend to a correct altitude. Based on in-cockpit ADS-B information; there were no other aircraft in the vicinity. I was the only pilot flying this particular aircraft on this day; and this problem was; at least partially; caused by a poor pre-flight inspection and not checking the trim position prior to takeoff.




Synopsis: GA pilot reported a Class C airspace incursion.
Date: 201901
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ONT.Airport, CA
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class C ONT
ATC / advisory: Tower ONT
Second aircraft: Light Transport
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Trainee; Local
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Developmental
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Distraction
Second reporter function: Instructor; Local
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Ground Conflict; Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was training on the Local Control position at the time of the event. I had approved a pointout with Aircraft Y 8NM NE of ONT in-bound to POC on the ILS approach. I received release for Aircraft X while Aircraft Y was 5 NE (260 KIAS) of ONT and cleared Aircraft X for takeoff. The Aircraft X pilot did not take the runway as quickly as I anticipated and I attempted to get a vector for Aircraft X approved from SCT. SCT advised they were 'Unable' to issue the vector. After quickly scanning to see Aircraft X's departure status; I noticed the aircraft had barely begun to move forward and cancelled their takeoff clearance. Due to the added stress of the government shutdown; and not knowing how I am going to keep myself and my family fed and housed; I may not have fully evaluated all of my options; and may have reacted to the situation more slowly or logically if I wasn't worried about when I would receive my next paycheck.Allow ONT Tower to utilize DVA's [Diverse Vector Areas] without SCT approval while still in ATCT controlled airspace.


Second narrative: Aircraft Y automated IFR pointout 10 miles east ONT Aircraft X [given] a takeoff clearance. Aircraft X took an excessive amount of time I prompt the developmental to call for a heading and it was denied by overlaying facility. Developmental canceled take off clearance; Aircraft did not pass twy V less than 300 feet of departure roll. Looking out no traffic in line or crossing line 15 miles out of requested heading. Earlier the developmental was expressing concern over paying bills with the shutdown and loss of pay. I believe that this is the main reason it happened. The only reason I can see the vector was not approved would be the shutdown. There was no traffic evident.I don't know how to prevent the effects of not getting paid for months; maybe years; will have on the work force.


Synopsis: Ontario Tower Controllers reported an unsafe situation between a departure and an arrival due to distractions.
Date: 201811
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Icing
Aircraft: Regional Jet 900 (CRJ900)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Engine Control
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: Training / Qualification; Workload
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Unstabilized Approach; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Attendant; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors; Weather
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: During approach into ZZZ we encountered icing and had to use Wing and Cowl AI systems. FADEC kept the power up with engines at idle. I forgot to account for this; first approach this season with Wing AI and FADEC. I had a difficult time slowing down to configure the aircraft. I opted to level off to configure. This caused us to be high on the approach so increased descent and had autopilot off. We became task saturated with configuring and checklists and I ended up well below the glide path. At this point we were out of the clouds. Since I could the runway and obstacles; I immediately started a correction to the glide path. At the same time we received a call from tower or approach advising us we were low which we responded that we were correcting. Once reestablished we continued the approach uneventfully. PF (Pilot Flying) visually detected and received a call from ATC. Forgot that FADEC keeps a higher power at idle with Wing AI on which caused task saturation when trying to configure. Corrected position on the glide path and continued the approach. Remind crews about FADEC power with Wing AI on especially with winter here.




Synopsis: CRJ900 Captain reported while using wing and cowl anti ice; FADEC kept power up making it difficult to slow and configure; resulting in excursions above and below the glideslope.
Date: 202102
Local time of day: 0601-1200
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: Workload; Troubleshooting; Time Pressure; Communication Breakdown; Fatigue; Physiological - Other
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: When we arrived and the door was opened we started to deplane the aircraft; a full flight; just as the first three first class passengers were deplaning ; the cleaning crew started to enter asking if they could board to clean first class to start. The first class wasn't even deplaned. Only three people had deplaned while others were trying to get their bag down and deplane. I said no not at this point; which in turn the first cleaner gave me serious attitude. The Gate Agent came down; no mask on; with an attitude about us not letting the cleaners enter to clean. They had 12 people to clean; usually they have a shortage of cleaners. But we hadn't even had first class passengers cleared and they started coming on. I asked not yet; let the passengers deplane and this flight is a full flight. This is becoming a serious issue at times and passengers getting upset they can't deplane and usually the cleaners keep cleaning and not moving in so they can deplane. Understand at this time with COVID the importance of cleaning but passengers complain at me about cleaners not clearing so the could deplane. It's stressful enough with all we are dealing with no food drinks and upset passengers about what they can't have. Our passengers were moving quick and not stalling getting off.  When they were off we couldn't get our bags and personal items together.  The flight deck wasn't able to exit. I understand there is time a limit and all but this rushing is going to seriously cause problems with safety of crew and passengers.  I was wrong possibly and maybe for which i will follow these memo's I forgot about from now on. Just trying to give our paying passengers a pleasant and safe flight including safe deplaning.




Synopsis: Flight Attendant reported there was no social distancing by the aircraft cleaners during deplaning and also stated the Gate Agent was not wearing a face mask.
Date: 201601
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZSE.ARTCC, WA
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Medium Large Transport
Operator: Military
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZSE
ATC / advisory: Center ZSE
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Training / Qualification; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Manuals; Human Factors
Primary problem: Airspace Structure

Narrative: Aircraft X had transitioned from a Special Activity Airspace to VFR flight following to a requested IFR clearance. Pilot advised he was seeking VFR conditions. I issued an IFR clearance via the airway and a descent clearance. Pilot read back clearance after repeat. The MEA on the airway is above the altitude issued in the descent clearance. I issued too low an altitude by mistake. NUW TRACON requested route verification on handoff; which I gave quickly before hanging up. TRACON called Supervisor desk to advise of incorrect MEA issued. Self-familiarize with area MEA/MIA info. Verify if unsure.




Synopsis: ZSE Controller issued an IFR clearance altitude below the Minimum Enroute Altitude for the airway.
Date: 202007
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Reporter qualification: Flight Attendant Current
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Passenger Misconduct
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Passenger was coughing profusely with mouth open. Passenger; was not wearing a mask during flight. This FA told the parents it is mandatory. She was brought a mask from the galley. They were shown that it is mandatory for any child over 2 to wear a mask. The child struggled with the parents and kicked this FA. This FA asked if they had a mask for the child. The dad said they have masks. The child broke one mask given to her. They were given another mask and suggestion made to tie the back so it would fit her better. The child continued to struggle. As trash was collected; it was noted that the father had a little pink mask in his hand. The mother tried to put the mask on but only tried to hold it in front of the child's mouth. It was explained that virus is spread through coughing and the child may be exposing these passengers to a virus. Before sitting for descent; the FA asked if she had it on and the mother said no. The child continued to scream. The parents said that in the previous flight; the FAs allowed them to have child NOT wear a mask.




Synopsis: Flight Attendant reported that a child was not wearing a face mask and was coughing.  Parents attempted to put mask on the child; but were not successful.
Date: 201212
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Dash 8-400
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Altitude Alert
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Distraction; Communication Breakdown; Training / Qualification
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: During descent; we were cleared to descend from FL250 to FL240 and to contact the next Controller on a new frequency. The Captain entered 24;000 FT into the autopilot; pushed the ALT SEL button and initiated the descent. Upon initial check in with the new Controller; I realized that ALT SEL had somehow been deactivated and we were descending through FL233. I immediately notified the Captain and he began to correct the deviation; I then advised ATC of our current altitude and we were then cleared to descend and maintain FL230. No further action was taken. Exercise additional vigilance while initiating 1;000 FT altitude changes; verify ALT SEL activation more often during a 1;000 FT altitude change.


Second narrative: [No additional information from narrative.]


Synopsis: DHC-8-400 crew failed to level at FL240 following a 1;000 FT descent because the ALT SEL mode control button was either not selected or was disengaged.
Date: 201706
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ORD.Airport, IL
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Regional Jet 900 (CRJ900)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class A ZAU
ATC / advisory: Center ZAU
Second aircraft: A330
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: While on the descent into ORD on the WYNDE 8 arrival; we encountered wake turbulence between PAITN and WYNDE fix. While on autopilot the aircraft rolled to the left then to the right. I disconnected the autopilot and assumed manual control. The aircraft rolled again left and then right. I called for 'ignition continuous' then; I asked the Captain 'what we were following?' He questioned ATC; ATC replied 'an Airbus A330.' The Captain told ATC that we encountered wake turbulence. At that time the Captain and I noticed the separation between the Airbus and our aircraft was less than ten miles. ATC then gave us vectors [and] while on that vector we encountered additional wake turbulence. Once we were out of the wake turbulence; the Captain called the flight attendants to ask if [everyone] was okay; and they said no one was injured. The flight attendants did make an announcement regarding this situation after speaking with the Captain. We continued the approach and landed safely with no further issues.




Synopsis: CRJ-900 First Officer reported encountering wake turbulence on descent into ORD in trail of an A330.
Date: 202012
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Tower, US
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Time Pressure; Workload
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Passenger Misconduct
Detector: Person Flight Attendant; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General Police / Security Involved
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: While in cruise flight Flight Attendant (FA) A called the flight deck.  The First Officer answered the call.  He told me the FA had a non-compliant passenger with the mask.  He reported that she was tapping him trying to waken the passenger and he pushed her arm away.  We transferred control and I called her back and asked it everything was OK and to repeat what happened.  We ACARS Dispatch to have a Supervisor at gate.  We were in range when we received the call and elected to continue to ZZZ. The passenger was mask non-compliant.  He was told to cover his nose with the mask.  He was sleeping when mask slid down.  FA woke passenger with a tap; it may have startled him; but he pushed her hand away and swore.I believe the company has to make sure the passengers are aware of the seriousness of non-compliance.




Synopsis: Air Carrier Captain reported a passenger was not complying with face mask policy during flight while sleeping.