elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 202102
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Ramp
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Human-Machine Interface
Second reporter function: Ramp
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Hazardous Material Violation; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Weight And Balance; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Ground Personnel
When detected: Pre-flight; Routine Inspection
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Ramp cargo ground personnel work as a Lead in one of my outbounds Aircraft X going to ZZZ1 leaving ZZZ at XA:37. I run into the same problem as before; missing 1155 pounds of cargo and like I explain in my last report our Cargo Facility they; most of the time; bring the Hazmat or Cargo carts at the last minute. The problem is that as a Lead we have to set up the scanners prior we Load our planes otherwise we can't do anything. That being said we are not allowed to load the aircraft if we don't pit our bags; cargo or even the mail. And yesterday like any other day I did what I usually do; pit all my stuff. In this case I only saw and put on the plane 11 bags and 2 small boxes. One was a quick pack and the other one a box with Human Tissue between both items it was no more than 20 lbs.


Second narrative: ZZZ gate control manager notified of an error after takeoff for discovering cargo at 1155lbs was not loaded on the aircraft. The gate manager stated cargo manager (name) notified of cargo DSTG [Departure Staging Guide] item 2 remained planeside in their warehouse. This revision generated a significant weight change of 1;155lbs representing 0.82% adjustment from the original takeoff weight. Percent MAC adjusted from 14.3 to 15.8 / +1.5.


Synopsis: Air Carrier Lead Ground personnel and load crew reported recurring issue of late planeside arrival of Hazmat cargo which results in departure delays; cargo weight and cargo handling errors.
Date: 201209
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: MHT.Airport, NH
Aircraft: S-70/UH-60 Blackhawk/Seahawk/Pavehawk/Knighthawk
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class C MHT
ATC / advisory: Tower MHT
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: An H60 helicopter was IFR doing an ILS approach to Runway 35 with a missed approach of 090 and 30. He departed VFR and was turned westbound by MHT. The Tower called and informed me he was VFR and not requesting advisories. When I advised the Tower; you do know that a Class C requirement is that I provide RADAR service to all departures until exiting the Class C? The Tower advised yes; but he doesn't want advisories. MHT Tower needs to learn what a Class C is; and what the requirements of a Class C are. Too many controllers in the Tower are just allowing VFR aircraft to depart without Class C services. The Class C was put in place because of the volume of passengers leaving the MHT airport. Failure to comply could possibly cause a mid air collision.




Synopsis: A90 Controller voiced concern regarding the lack Class C requirements demonstrated by some controllers at MHT.
Date: 201908
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: MSN.Airport, WI
Aircraft: Citation Excel (C560XL)
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class C MSN
ATC / advisory: TRACON MSN
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach; Supervisor / CIC
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors; Airspace Structure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Aircraft X descending into MSN from the northwest; initially issued 4000 ft. to stay above MVA (Minimum Vectoring Altitude) of 3200 ft.; aircraft still high 25 NM northwest; out of 8000 ft. aircraft issued 3000 ft.; anticipating would NOT be below 3200 ft. while still over that MVA area; however aircraft descended faster than expected and was observed at 3000 ft. at the very southeast portion of the 3200 ft. MVA where transitions to the 2700 ft. MVA. Weather in area better than 5000/5. C56X can perform very differently depending on flight crew and experience; in the future I won't anticipate quite as soon and observe how aircraft is performing initially.




Synopsis: A TRACON  Controller reported aircraft was issued a descent clearance; descended faster than anticipated and flew below the Minimum Vectoring Altitude.
Date: 201504
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: PCT.TRACON, VA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class B IAD; Class E PCT
ATC / advisory: TRACON PCT
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We were near KIKKR on the GIBBZ 2 Arrival and cleared direct MOSBY. We misheard the clearance and proceeded to MOSLE.  Shortly after; the Controller asked if we were still on the arrival and we said yes.  He said no problem that happens here and he meant for us to proceed to MOSBY on the approach to Runway 1R; he then gave us a vector. Either MOSLE or MOSBY needs to be renamed they are too similar in spelling and sound.




Synopsis: B737-800 Captain on the GIBBZ2 arrival to IAD; reports confusing their clearance direct MOSBY as direct MOSLE; and believes they are too similar to be in the same airspace.
Date: 201206
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: BED.Airport, MA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Lancair Evolution
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class D BED
ATC / advisory: Tower BED
Second aircraft: Cessna Single Piston Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Automation Aircraft TA; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: After taking off from Runway 23 on an IFR flight I was cleared to climb on runway heading to 2;000 MSL. While climbing through 750 MSL TCAS called traffic dead ahead about the same time as we spotted a high wing Cessna right ahead. We broke right and narrowly avoided him. We had had no warning from tower about potential conflict. The Controller was very busy with many aircraft in training situations entering and exiting [his airspace]. In talking to the Tower supervisor later it appears the Cessna was on a practice approach and drifted across the end of the runway. I don't think the Tower controller should have allowed practice approaches (to another runway!) during such a busy time. He should have appreciated that they could drift into a conflict and should have warned me of the potential.One additional factor is that the Lancair Evolution is a very high performance airplane and the Controller may have been unfamiliar and not realized how fast we would go once released.




Synopsis: A Lancair pilot departing on a IFR flight plan experienced an NMAC with a Cessna single flying a practice approach to a different runway.
Date: 201908
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: BOS.Airport, MA
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Cessna 402/402C/B379 Businessliner/Utiliner
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B BOS
ATC / advisory: Tower BOS
Second aircraft: A340
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Inflight Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach
Contributing factors: Procedure; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: Coming in on the visual 4L; I was 4 miles behind a heavy Airbus A340 on final for 4R. At 300 feet the airplane rocked and bounced wildly; and the airplane went into a right roll. I was able to recover the roll at what I can only estimate to be about 90 degrees. People were bounced out of their seats; and pinned against the right side of the airplane. I struggled to control the airplane; applying full left aileron and rudder to attempt to correct the roll. Finally I was able to straighten the aircraft. I executed a go around at full power. We came back into land on 4L without incident. I asked the passengers once in the air when we got leveled out; and twice on the ground if anyone needed any assistance. The only passenger that spoke up was a female who had previously had back surgery. She stated her back hurt and that she would need to take her pain medicine now. She also asked for a wheelchair which I already had plane-side for her. Wake turbulence from the heavy Airbus; plus a 15 knot crosswind; blew the wake right into my aircraft; thus causing it to become uncontrollable.

Callback: Reporter stated the big problem at BOS was the tendency for ATC to continue to use Runway 4L even in crosswind conditions that tend to 'trap' the preceding aircraft's wake in the approach path for the following aircraft to encounter. Reporter suggested using Runway 15 could alleviate some of the concerns.



Synopsis: C402 Captain reported his aircraft was rolled into a 90-degree bank from wake turbulence at 300 feet AGL on approach into BOS 4 miles in trail of an A340.
Date: 201410
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Second aircraft: DC-10 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types
Detector: Automation Air Traffic Control; Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Returned To Gate; Flight Crew Rejected Takeoff; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Tower cleared us for Takeoff flying heading 090.  Checked final and runway clear. Recollect stating both verbally.  As the pilot flying; I pushed throttles up.  (Captain) Pilot Not Flying stated thrust was set.  (Captain) Pilot Not Flying stated 80 knots.  I said that checks. 2-3 seconds later Tower stated Flight XXX Abort Takeoff 8R.  Captain immediately brought throttles to idle and RTO activated.  I stated on tower frequency Flight XXX was aborting on 8R.  Tower asked if we need any assistance.  We said we would let them know.  Cleared runway.  Followed Rejected Takeoff checklist in QRH.  Followed Brake Cooling Schedule in QRH.  Referenced Flight Manual Part One.  Arranged with Operations and maintenance to return to the gate for maintenance inspection.  Maintenance inspected aircraft.  No damage.  Returned for uneventful takeoff and flight. Additional Information: Captain nor I perceived the DC-10 cargo aircraft being a conflict even after roll out from rejected takeoff.  No part of the suspect aircraft looked to be near the runway or over any line from our line of sight.  We also estimated the speed to be 100 knots when reject was initiated.


Second narrative: Lightweight aircraft. Around 120;000 lbs. First Officer was pilot flying. Tower cleared us for takeoff. Runway was clear. Called out power set; then 80 knot call. A few seconds later tower called for us to abort. We were at approx 100 knots. I aborted and FO responded that we were aborting. I made PA for passengers to remain seated. We cleared the runway and declined assistance offered by tower. We checked the brake cooling chart . Called ops for a gate and advised maintenance of high speed abort. Ground control gave me number to call tower. Called tower. They said DC-10 wasn't following instructions and the alarm or alert went off on the ground radar system for the aircraft encroaching on the runway. Not sure if it was past a hold line but it did not appear to be over the concrete boundary of the runway. Maintenance performed their check and we Departed approx 1 hr later.


Synopsis: B737-800 flight crew reports being cleared for takeoff by the Tower then; at 100 knots; commanded to abort. The Tower Controller apparently perceived that a DC-10 was about to enter the runway down field.
Date: 201403
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: C90.TRACON, IL
Aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class B ORD
ATC / advisory: TRACON C90
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Supervisor / CIC
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Human-Machine Interface; Troubleshooting
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Air Traffic Control Separated Traffic; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Procedure
Primary problem: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings

Narrative: At approximately XA:00 Local in the middle of a configuration change from West flow to East flow at ORD TSOC personal vacated there position and were unavailable to change the localizers around to the new configuration. At the time we had arrival aircraft in the new arrival descent area preparing to intercept the new runways as the remainder of the West flow aircraft were touching down. This is a very typical situation that maximizes efficiency during a configuration change. When I went over to ask the TSOC personnel to change the localizers there was no one at their position. We are not trained in Air Traffic on how to do this. Another Supervisor went over to the localizer change equipment and attempted to change the localizers. This was done successfully but late. We have no way of knowing if there were Maintenance Personnel working on any equipment at the airfield at the time and whether or not this could have been a safety issue by energizing the equipment they could be touching. After the switch the runway 10C Localizer indicated a slight malfunction. TSOC then came back to their post and said it was just a DME failure. The controller vectoring that runway was notified and the Tower was told to add the equipment outage to the ATIS. TSOC then; without notifying Air Traffic; switched the localizer from 10C back to 28C to try to fix the problem. At the time there was aircraft on runway 10C with traffic on the other 2 East flow runways as well. Clearly this is a huge safety concern.  Either Air Traffic should be trained on how to use the Localizer Equipment and be guaranteed that changing it will never endanger Maintenance Personnel at the airport or TSOC shouldn't leave their post without having it covered by another TSOC personnel.




Synopsis: C90 TRACON Controller states ATC personnel had to change ILS to a different runway configuration because Maintenance personnel could not be found to do so. After the change and a discrepancy was found; Maintenance changed the ILS back to original state to attempt to fix the problem while aircraft were inbound on the ILS.
Date: 201210
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: SFO.Airport, CA
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B SFO
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict
Detector: Automation Aircraft RA; Person Flight Crew
Result: Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors; Airport; Aircraft
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Tip Toe Visual to 28L. Had traffic; A319; called in the descent for 28R. Traffic went below cloud deck so he was not in sight. Controller stepped us down until below the cloud deck. Had traffic in sight. As we came down to capture the glide path from above we caught up with the A319. We were LOC capture on 28L. We were dead abeam with the A319 and he was CLOSE! I do not know if he overshot 28R center line or not. I decided too close for me and as I went for the TOGA; the TCAS RA 'Climb Climb Climb.' We executed a normal go around. Went around for left downwind and made a normal approach and landing on 28R. The passengers on the right side of the aircraft were grateful; as they saw the whole thing quite clearly. Suggestions; SFO operates on the edge of safety with simultaneous double parallel and intersecting runways operations (28L/R for landing and 1R/L for take-off) I am quite surprised that it is authorized to operate TCAS in the TA only mode (note on 10-7 page). Having had friends killed after silencing a safety system; I would never operate in TA only mode. In the future; I will be sure to have longitudinal separation of any parallel traffic. A kudos to the training department on the debrief with the FO; I asked him if I did the go around correctly. He said it was textbook. It all happened so fast; we just did it and I didn't remember. Relaxed and controlled.




Synopsis: SFO Air Carrier landing Runway 28L experienced a TCAS RA with traffic on the parallel runway and executed a go around.
Date: 201810
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: EWR.Airport, NJ
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Bell Helicopter 407
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class B NYC; Class E N90
ATC / advisory: TRACON N90
Second aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: Single Pilot; Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown; Confusion
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Environment - Non Weather Related; Airspace Structure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: I had just finished a left turn in a climb from a westerly heading in front of the Statue of Liberty from 500 feet.In the turn I contacted EWR tower and asked for an alpha tour. Newark clears me in and tells me there are numerous other aircraft in the vicinity so I look around everywhere to see if there are more than what I already have seen which is about 3 other helicopters between statue of Liberty and Governors Island. I also look to the south and above me and I see no additional aircraft which will affect me.As I'm heading northbound just south and slightly west of Governors Island I notice a fixed Wing which looked like a white Cessna 172 above and to the left of me about 50 feet above. I'm climbing through 900 feet-1;000 feet as I see this. I immediately stop climbing and slow down my speed to around 90 KT from a 100 KT and turn slightly right. It looks like he's passing over me and turning to the left either to avoid me or just because he has just decided to make a turn to the left to follow the Hudson left of freedom tower.I'm not speaking to him and I'm busy listening to Newark for other traffic and also looking out for other traffic. The Cessna is probably on river frequency and continues ahead of me and I continue my climb behind the Cessna to 1;500 feet which Newark has cleared me to.

Callback: Reporter stated that no further information was available beyond what is provided in the ASRS report that was submitted.



Synopsis: A helicopter pilot reported an NMAC while giving a New York City tour.
Date: 202103
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 170/175 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ; UNICOM ZZZ
Second aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Time Pressure; Workload; Situational Awareness; Distraction; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Airport; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We made a UNICOM frequency call; then taxied out to Runway X; called ZZZ Center to get clearance to takeoff; then on takeoff roll; a private aircraft calls and says that they are landing on Runway YY; resulting in a sidestep and go-around by the private aircraft. While monitoring UNICOM frequency and ZZZ center; both me and the First Officer missed calls made on the UNICOM frequency about potential traffic in the area due to a short taxi; high workload calling and obtaining departure clearance; running checklists; and making UNICOM frequency calls.In order to prevent this in the future; I could have made a 'traffic report' call on the UNICOM frequency; asking if there was any traffic in the area and what runway they were using. I could have also taxied slower to allow more time to monitor the UNICOM frequency in-between checklists. In the future I will be more diligent and alert to any potential communications on a UNICOM frequency in all phases of flight at an untowered airport.




Synopsis: EMB-175 Captain reported a ground conflict with another aircraft during takeoff roll at a non-towered airport.