elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201504
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZMP.ARTCC, MN
Flight conditions: Marginal
Weather elements / visibility: +
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Regional Jet 200 ER/LR (CRJ200)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation - Speed All Types; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence; Inflight Event / Encounter Unstabilized Approach
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Weather; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We were anticipating a visual approach with weather reported as a high ceiling and 10 miles visibility. We were in icing conditions so the Pilot Flying (PF) had the flight spoilers out to keep the N2 appropriate to provide icing protection. Leveling off we were working with ATC to get the appropriate procedure if the we were unable to get the visual approach to the airport. Leaving the flight spoilers out combined with gusty winds the stick shaker activated momentarily. PF immediately increased thrust appropriately and the spoilers were retracted. Aircraft state was immediately back in a desirable state and we had the airport in sight. We were a little high and not in a great approach position so we elected to go around for a second visual approach.The root cause of this event was failure to monitor the airspeed. There were many contributing factors we were task saturated as we became uncertain this would be a visual approach. Along with icing conditions and using the spoilers for Increased N2; and gusting winds.This was certainly a chain of events that started with poor planning. The weather reports were leading us to believe a visual approach was appropriate; but perhaps we could have acted sooner to elect an approach reducing task saturation. The gusty winds played a small factor but a little more thrust a few seconds sooner and we would have been well above shaker speed.




Synopsis: CRJ-200 Captain reports descending in icing conditions with spoilers extended and N2 up for warmer bleed air. The spoilers are forgotten during level off and airspeed is allowed to decrease to stick shaker speed which is quickly corrected. This action produces an unstabilized approach and a go-around is initiated.
Date: 201811
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: IMC
Aircraft: B737-800
Flight phase: Taxi
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Vehicle Driver
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Ground Personnel
When detected: Taxi
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Airport; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Supertug was dispatched to retrieve aircraft (737-800) from Terminal. As the tow team started the pushback from [gate]; the tow team was cut off by a U.S. Customs and Border Protection pickup truck. The driver ignored multiple stop signals by move team personnel. The near miss was reported by ground-to-air radio to ramp controllers who showed zero interest in taking action; [they were] even joking about our safety concerns over the radio.




Synopsis: Air carrier tow truck driver reported being cut off by a U.S. Customs vehicle while towing a B737-800.
Date: 201908
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B757 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Time Pressure; Workload
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Hazardous Material Violation; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Other Arrival Cargo Unloading
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: After completion of loading; ZZZ ramp personnel entered flight deck with required paperwork; [Dangerous Goods Form] and weight and balance.  They handed me the two clipboards with the paperwork that needed to be signed.  After signing the [Dangerous Goods Form] and weight and balance; I took a copy of the WEIGHT and BALANCE and gave them both copies of the [Dangerous Goods Form]; presuming one copy would be placed into the Hazmat pouch at entry door.  We departed for ZZZ1 and found that no copies were left onboard the aircraft when we reached ZZZ1.  In retrospect it is ultimately my responsibility to make sure all required paperwork is onboard prior to departure. I didn't catch the fact that ZZZ had taken both [Dangerous Goods Form] copies.


Second narrative: After Weight and Balance was completed in ZZZ the Captain handed the load supervisor the [Dangerous Goods Form] and release. When we landed in ZZZ1 there was no [Dangerous Goods Form] in the folder and it became apparent the load supervisor had kept both copies. We advised ZZZ1 the problem and they immediately called ZZZ. Ultimately we should have supervised her placing it in the folder but we did not.


Synopsis: B757 flight crew reported on arrival at destination that the required Captain's Dangerous Goods Form copy inadvertently left behind at departure airport.
Date: 202201
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: S46.TRACON, WA
Aircraft: B737-900
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B SEA
ATC / advisory: TRACON S46
Second aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation - Speed All Types; Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Procedure; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: Intercepting the ILS 16R from heading 140; level 4;000; cleared for the approach. Speed assigned 170. Flaps 5 selected. At ILS GP and course intercept experienced wake turbulence. Brief stick shaker due to wake turbulence roll. Added power; recovered; stayed on ILS path and advised ATC of the encounter. Turned back on auto pilot/ throttle and shortly confirmed we were good to continue the approach. Landed without incident.Carry more speed above yellow bar; I could have configured to flaps 10.

Callback: Reporter stated wake encounter was stronger than they expected.

Second narrative: Wake turbulence was encountered during an ILS approach to Runway 16R in SEA after receiving approach clearance. Prior to GS intercept and maintaining 4;000 ft. at an issued speed of 170 knots; the aircraft unexpectedly jolted and rolled with varying pitch; momentarily activating the stick shaker due to the wake. Immediate recovery was conducted with a small variation in altitude while tracking the LOC path. After stabilizing the aircraft it was determined that sufficient distance remained to safely continue the approach and landing; which was conducted without incident. ATC was advised of the encounter. Maintaining extreme vigilance of wake turbulence is imperative at all times; even in the absence of an ATC transmitted 'wake turbulence' caution.


Synopsis: B737-900 Flight Crew reported encountering wake turbulence on descent into SEA.
Date: 202002
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: GUTER, KS
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Operating under: Part 91
Airspace: Class E ZKC
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: There is a 1;787 feet [MSL] communications tower at the 57 milepost; west side of Interstate 135 that does not have the top of the tower lighted with an obstruction light of any kind.  This is a recurring hazard.




Synopsis: Pilot reported that there is an unlighted communications tower by an interstate freeway that poses a hazard.
Date: 202012
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: LGA.Airport, NY
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground LGA
Second aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
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; Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We landed on Runway 4 and due to the snow removal operations that were occurring at the time as the front had just cleared the city; with numerous taxiways closed or impassable; we were instructed to exit onto Runway 13/31 and taxi to hold short of Lima. We were then cleared onto Lima; Alpha to the gate; but it turned out that there was on outbound Company coming out of the alley. We then were told to hold short of Bravo on Lima. We did and then I heard Ground give the outbound Company aircraft instructions to taxi Lima; Bravo.  I said to my FO (First Officer) that I didn't think we had room for him to clear us. As he came past Spot X I was concerned. As he started onto Lima I said 'I think this is too tight.' As he started his turn onto Lima I knew it was unsafe and I instructed him three times on Ground frequency to stop. He did. We were staring at his right winglet very close to us. I then coordinated with Company and Ground to get a tug out to us. Because we were inbound; I had the Ground Crew push us back towards Runway 13/31 on Lima to allow [the Company aircraft] to continue his taxi. We then continued to the gate. I have since talked to and debriefed the other Captain to get his view of what occurred and to talk about the safety concerns that I had. No metal was bent; but it would have if we hadn't both realized his close proximity to our aircraft. There were parallax concerns from Ground's view and the other crew's view. Speaking up is critical when things don't look right. The substantial numbers of snow removal trucks and plows along with closed taxiways that were constantly changing made it even more challenging.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported a near collison during taxi in LGA.
Date: 202101
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: CTAF ZZZ
Second aircraft: SR20
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Instructor
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was instructing on a training flight; and departed from ZZZ; while climbing out and making a crosswind departure to the east. The student was flying while I was making radio calls. Upon reaching approximately 2;300 feet MSL; I caught a plane performing a steep left turn bank towards us. I took flight controls from the student and descended around 500 feet approximately 1;000 feet AGL to avoid the other traffic. I made radio calls on CTAF at the local airport and the other aircraft was not on frequency. I proceeded to warn an aircraft behind us on CTAF performing a low approach with a departure to the east as well about an aircraft performing unpredictable maneuvers on the departure end at a low altitude. Once on the ground we were able to review the flight data and track logs of the other aircraft. My assumption is the other aircraft was unaware of their proximity to the airport and performing steep turns. Another contributing factor could have been the difference in altimeter settings between the two local airports and change from departure of approximately .11 in/hg. The maneuvers were being performed outside the local practice area box. Panel mounted ADS-B-In could have assisted with our situational awareness of the aircraft location. We had a portable receiver but did not have an tablet out as we were practicing crosswind landings so we had no traffic advisory until after corrective action. Once corrective action was taken; and tablet was consulted; we still had traffic above and turning towards us from the opposite side. We maintained a low altitude until well clear of the aircraft. Which leads me to believe he was unaware of us and their proximity to other aircraft and airport.




Synopsis: Flight Instructor reported an NMAC occurred nearby the departure airport when another aircraft maneuvered directly into their flight path requiring evasive action. The other aircraft was not on CTAF and appeared to not be aware of their proximity to the airport.
Date: 201705
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: MDW.Airport, IL
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class C MDW
ATC / advisory: TRACON C90
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Distraction; Physiological - Other
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Security; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Illness / Injury; Inflight Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; General Physical Injury / Incapacitation
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We were shined by a green ground based laser multiple times while on visual approach at MDW. The laser went into my left eye causing my eye to water and to see a green spot when I closed my eye. I went to the hospital and was released without any permanent damage.This is the third time I have encountered a laser in flight in the last three months! We need to think asymmetrical to defeat this threat. As a past Air Defense Officer in the Army; I know an aircraft without lights is harder if not impossible to target.  Therefore; I make the sincere suggestion that when any aircraft reports a laser in the area; all the other aircraft should be allowed to turn off all of their lights including their beacon and navigation lights until clear of the threat. Also; when an arrest is made; I would suggest it be publicized so these brazen people that shine lasers at aircraft will be scared of being caught.




Synopsis: Air carrier First Officer reported being stuck in the eye by a laser while on a night visual approach to MDW. He suggested aircraft should turn off their lights in the vicinity of a reported laser event.
Date: 201410
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: PHL.Airport, PA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-700
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class B PHL
ATC / advisory: Tower PHL
Second aircraft: Dash 8 Series Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict
Detector: Automation Aircraft RA; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: This is to highlight a safety concern with our departure from PHL.  We were cleared for takeoff from Runway 9L; our departure instructions were to turn left Heading 081. After lining up on RWY 9L; I transferred aircraft control to the First Officer; the Pilot Flying for this leg.  Although takeoff roll and rotation were normal; during the takeoff roll I heard ATC (Philly Tower) clear another Carrier for takeoff from Runway 8; on departure his instructions were to fly Heading 050.  After our rotation and gear retraction; I noticed a TCAS Traffic Alert on our navigation multifunction display without an aural warning.  As I scanned to my left; I noticed the other Carrier (a Dash-8) about 400 feet below us; very slightly offset to our left.  Passing about 800 AGL we received a TCAS 'Maintain Vertical Speed' aural alert with a commanded climb of about 1500 fpm (our climb rate significantly exceeded this).  The FO called for the normal speed increase passing 1000 feet AGL; but I directed him to continue the climb as the Dash-8 was maintaining an approximately 400 feet vertical separation and approximately 100 feet lateral separation.  After a while the Dash-8 turned left and ceased to be a factor.  I'm surprised this is an accepted procedure with PHL departures. There should be more separation between aircraft departing RWY 9L and RWY 8 in PHL.  At the very least; RWY 9L departures should get a slight right turn (at least 090) and RWY 8 departures should get a left turn to provide lateral separation from the beginning of the departure phase.  Heading 081 after departing 9L actually places the aircraft closer to RWY 8.




Synopsis: B737 Captain believes that the practice by PHL Tower of departing aircraft simultaneously of Runway 9L and 8 is unsafe.
Date: 201812
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class G ZZZ
ATC / advisory: CTAF ZZZ
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Instructor
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: My student and I were on short final for Runway 10 at ZZZ when we each observed an unmanned aircraft operating directly above the airport at what appeared to be pattern altitude or possibly lower. It was difficult to gauge the size of the drone from our perspective but I would say at least 6 feet from wingtip to wingtip. We landed normally--we had been planning to fly the closed traffic pattern for a few circuits at ZZZ but quickly decided after seeing the drone to depart the area for the day; which we did without seeing the drone again. We had been monitoring the CTAF since 15 miles out and had communicated our position and intentions for a straight-in approach several times; starting at 8 miles away. No one else had made radio transmissions at ZZZ the whole time. After landing back at [home airport] and concluding the flight; we spoke on the phone to someone at an FBO listed at ZZZ. He said 'the drone people had been asking (him) earlier that morning if (he) could hear them on the frequency;' and he said he hadn't been able to hear them. Obviously we could not either. He suggested we file [this] report.




Synopsis: C172 Flight Instructor reported an airborne conflict with a UAV in the airport traffic pattern.
Date: 202005
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZZ.Airport, FO
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B747-800 Advanced
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Aircraft component: Trailing Edge Flap
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Diverted; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Procedure
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: While vectoring around weather while approaching ZZZZ; the had a problem with the Flap Monitor System and a Flap Drive Message. The flaps had not been deployed yet. The Captain and other first officer worked the checklist while I maintained control of the aircraft. After working through the checklist we still did not know the status of the flap system or if the problem could be fixed in a timely manner on the ground in ZZZ. The Captain called the company on the SAT Phone while I continued flying the aircraft. At this point; the three of us did not feel confident that we would not get stuck in ZZZZ with an AOG (Aircraft on ground) aircraft. We asked to divert to ZZZZ1 and have the problem fixed there. After some discussion between the Captain and company; the decision was made and we proceeded to ZZZZ1. Repairs took longer than hoped and after about 1 hour we were told to go to the hotel. The only concerning part of this situation was Maintenance control asked the Captain to use ALTERNATE FLAPS. The checklist specifically says not to use ALTERNATE FLAPS. The Captain refused. While in flight; Maintenance Control should not ask the crew to perform a function that is against what is written in the checklist. That particular prohibition is there because 'Asymmetry and uncommanded motion protection are not provided in Alternate Model. Also; since I was flying and dealing with Country ATC I did not hear all discussions between the Captain and company; so for that reason if more info or different info is available I defer to the Captains report.




Synopsis: First Officer reported an uncommanded inflight engine shutdown; causing a diversion and landing.