elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 202104
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Wind
Aircraft: DC-10 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Landing; Takeoff / Launch
Aircraft component: Cargo Restraint/Tie Down
Component problem: Improperly Operated
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: Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Hazardous Material Violation; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Other / Unknown; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Equipment Problem Dissipated; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Normal takeoff; after rotation a loud thump was heard throughout the airframe. Same thump was heard on descent and during landing rollout.  Post flight inspection revealed Hazmat pallet was not secured in locks and was free to slide between 1L and 2L.  Possible aircraft damage and 9G net damage. The cause was the lack of loading personnel/DG (dangerous goods) personnel not ensuring pallet was locked into position. FO (First Officer) is brand new and did not inspect the locks. Reporter recommends more training of load crew/DG personnel to check all locks are engaged. DG person was in a hurry and short handed. Train FO's to inspect locks as well during DG inspection.




Synopsis: MD10 Captain reported a loud thump on takeoff and landing. Post flight inspection revealed Hazmat pallet was not secured for air transport.
Date: 202111
Aircraft: B737-800
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
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Hazardous Material Violation; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Ground Personnel
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: During offloading of the mail there were MANY sacks that contained Lithium Ion batteries with Hazmat labels on them.A co-worker brought this to my attention. ZZZ load planning and ramp crew loaded when they should have stopped it from being loaded.Load control was notified then employee came to me so I could send a report.USPS needs to be stopped from sending these packages with [Lithium Ion] Hazmat in them. Needed to be stopped at the source.




Synopsis: Ground employee reported many Lithium Ion parcels with Dangerous Goods labels during off loading cargo at destination. Lithium Ion battery parcels are limited to transport on cargo aircraft only.
Date: 201202
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZOA.ARTCC, CA
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 129
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZOA
ATC / advisory: Center ZOA
Second aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Automation Air Traffic Control; Person Air Traffic Control
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings
Primary problem: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings

Narrative: While working Oceanic Sector 3 I cleared Air Carrier Y for arrival KWA Island Airport. After arrival; I received arrival report from KWA Base Operations. Opened appropriate window; hit modify and entered arrival time. FPEA was opened for Air Carrier X. ATOPS automatically deleted Flight Plan for Air Carrier X. I was distracted by flashing orange conflict and other operations. I did not perceive disappearance of Air Carrier X Data Block. Approximately five minutes later saw Air Carrier Y Data Block still on scope. [I] re-entered arrival message using same process. This time Air Carrier Y disappeared from scope as expected. Air Carrier X was Data Linked aircraft. Normal expectation is that Air Carrier X would have to be logged off Data Link prior to ATOP allowing controller to delete flight plan information. Recommend that arrival airport should be a necessary entry into FPEA window to report arrival for aircraft. System should do a logic check on arrival airport. Data Link aircraft should not be deleted out of ATOP until logged off Data Link.




Synopsis: ZOA Controller described an apparent false conflict alarm when an Airline Data Block failed to drop off the operational display after the aircraft had landed; the reporter listing Data Link/ATOP anomalies as causal factors.
Date: 201704
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: EUG.TRACON, OR
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Medium Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class D EUG
ATC / advisory: Center ZSE; TRACON EUG; Tower EUG
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach; Departure
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Troubleshooting; Human-Machine Interface; Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings
Primary problem: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings

Narrative: MFR Tower requested release for Aircraft X via the rundown list. I released Aircraft X watched the target tag up; then handed the tag off to center. I was waiting to hear the pilot's initial call when Tower called on the shout line and advised that Aircraft X could not get ahold of me on my frequency. I was on the main transmitter and receiver; so I switched to the standby transmitter and receiver and advised the tower to have Aircraft X try again. I heard nothing on the frequency; so I called back to tower to have them turn Aircraft X on course and switch them to Center.Shortly after that Center called; advising that they had Aircraft X and requested control. I gave Center control. Then Tower called advising they weren't able to get a hold of Aircraft X. I advised them that the pilot had switched to Center; and tower and I coordinated a few frequency checks; all of which failed. The tower could not hear me; and I could not hear them. I called tech ops into the TRACON. The Tech Ops person reset something; and we managed to get the standby transmitter and receiver back. Then; Tech Ops informed me that this was a known issue; and the contractor in charge of this knows that a switch between our facility and the equipment at the transmitter/Receiver site sometimes fails; and we lose our communication ability in that area. I was shocked. We can lose our frequencies at any time; and not even know it? What if this had happened when vectoring multiple aircraft for an instrument approach? The Minimum Vectoring Altitudes in that area are extremely variable; if we lose communication with an aircraft it would be extremely dangerous. We have an emergency override socket for our headsets; but I don't know if that is on the same circuit that fails or not.Have the contractor fix the issue; and penalize them until it's fixed. Since this is a systemic and known issue; there is no excuse for this to still be so unreliable. This is a serious safety issue!




Synopsis: EUG TRACON Controller reported that after being unable to communicate with an aircraft; was advised that the transmitter/receiver site routinely fails and it is a known problem; but nothing has been done to fix it.
Date: 201708
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: SCT.TRACON, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 2 Eng; Retractable Gear
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E SCT
ATC / advisory: TRACON SCT
Second aircraft: King Air C90 E90
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Captain; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Confusion; Distraction; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Automation Aircraft RA
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Was on a routine personal maintenance flight along coast in Class E VFR space and requested VFR advisories while at 4;500 ft. Was flying northbound along coast when SoCal approach handed us off to next controller who promptly alerted us to traffic at our 10 o'clock and 5;000 ft a King Air. I saw traffic at 10 o'clock and probably 4;000 feet (below us) but not above us and told him as such. He said; yes that's a Bonanza but that there was a King Air at 5;000 ft. SoCal requested we drop down to 4;200 ft to provide additional separation which we did. We continued northbound for several more minutes but were quickly bearing down on R-2503 A&D (restricted airspace for Camp Pendleton). Knowing we were going to arrive in that airspace fairly shortly I was expecting SoCal to turn us right or left to deviate from that area (he was very busy and I didn't want to interrupt him knowing he'd request a turn shortly). When he didn't request it I made a 180 degree turn to avoid the restricted area (and did avoid it) and as I was about 90-degrees into the turn I saw the King Air at about my 2 o'clock and about 500 ft above and called 'King Air insight' for visual separation. I noticed that during the turn I had come up in altitude from 4;200 to 4;350 ft. The King Air responded after me saying; 'We have the Cessna insight also and we got a TCAS RA notice.' I didn't have TCAS on board so I received no RA notice. I do receive conflict alerts from a traffic advisory system but did not get a conflict alert. The SoCal ATC operator then responded to me: 'Stop your climb' (which I already had and was returning to 4;200 ft) and further said; 'King Air has you in sight AND he got an RA. Thanks for that!' Both the King Air and ourselves had each other 'in sight' and visually separated at all times during the turning maneuver.




Synopsis: A twin engine pilot; reported an airborne traffic conflict while maneuvering to avoid a restricted area. While maneuvering; the pilot deviated from his assigned altitude; resulting in a resolution advisory (RA) in the other aircraft.
Date: 201403
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZOB.ARTCC, OH
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: Regional Jet 900 (CRJ900)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class A ZOB
ATC / advisory: Center ZOB
Aircraft component: ACARS
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Distraction; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew FLC Overrode Automation
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: During the initial climb of the flight we experience 9 events of strong radio interference due to ACARS transmissions/crosstalk. These events caused both discomfort due to the very loud volume of the interfering transmissions and difficulty in understanding ATC communication.  We followed the temporary procedure issued recently by the company and switched the COMM 3 radio from 'DATA' to 'VOICE' disabling ACARS communications. Above FL180 we reactivated ACARS communications and there was right away 2 more events of interference. During the last eight weeks many crews have been experiencing frequent events of radio interference due to ACARS transmissions/crosstalk. These interference events should be a safety concern. They caused in more than one occasion to miss/misunderstand critical ATC communications and instructions during the departure phase of the flight. Last week the company has finally made available a temporary mitigation procedure but did not notify the pilot group about it. Some of the airplanes in our fleet do not have the COMM 3 VOICE/DATA button which allow to disable the ACARS system as recommended by the temporary procedure.Root cause: Something changed since December 2013. The interference could be caused by changes in the ACARS communication software; protocols; procedures; equipment. Usually after Weight off Wheel both the FMS and the EICAS show an 'ACARS NO COMM' message; shortly after that a very loud burst of digital communication is heard into the pilot headsets. In the worst cases the interfering signal is repeated multiple times during the first few minutes after takeoff. There should be an investigation of these events. Only last week; 8 weeks after the beginning of the interference problems the airline has finally provided pilots with a mitigation procedure for the interference problems. The procedure is not applicable on some of the airplanes in our fleet because they do not have a COMM 3 VOICE/DATA button which allows to disable ACARS system communications. It is also true that they never notified the pilots about the issue nor of the availability of the mitigation procedure.




Synopsis: CRJ900 First Officer reports strong VHF radio interference when the ACARS transmits data on VHF 3 after takeoff. Switching VHF3 to voice will stop the data transmission but not all aircraft have this switch.
Date: 202007
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Flap Control (Trailing & Leading Edge)
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Workload
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: I was Check Airman in the right seat performing duties of a Captain. Aircraft X; ZZZ to ZZZ1. During configuring for landing at ZZZ when selecting flaps 5 the flaps indicated flaps 1. We went around and did the QRH procedure for Trailing Edge Flaps Disagree. I communicated with Dispatch; Flight Attendants; Company operations in ZZZ1; and made a PA to the Passengers about our situation. Weight and Balance data showed good data to land on Runway XX at ZZZ1 and Brake Cooling was good to park at the gate. We discussed advising ATC and did request priority handling with ATC. We were cleared to land and landed with no issues. After clearing the runway we had the emergency crews check the aircraft and where told that everything looked good. Taxied to the gate and had no further issues. Logbook entry was made. Dispatched was notified. Maintenance was notified.


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


Synopsis: Air Carrier Pilot Crew reported a Trailing Edge Flap Disagree on approach.
Date: 201601
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: SCT.TRACON, CA
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class E SCT
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Automation Aircraft RA; Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Descending into PSP on the SBONO 1 Arrival with the RNAV Vis to 31L we got an Resolution Advisory (RA) just out of CEKMA. We followed the commands to climb which the VSI showed about 1;500 FPM. In the climb we got another command to monitor the VSI which shortly later said conflict over. At this time First Officer (FO) noticed the traffic on our scope at about 8'clock and 400 feet below. We told approach which sounded overloaded and I continued on path with no further conflict. After landing we advised tower.We never saw the traffic.I believe approach was late on their call to us; don't know the reason.


Second narrative: I'm thinking that the RNAV visual to 31L probably shouldn't have a waypoint so close to an uncontrolled airport.


Synopsis: Flight crew reported an NMAC while on a visual approach after they received a traffic call from ATC as well as an Resolution Advisory; related to an aircraft that took off from Bermuda Dunes.
Date: 201710
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ACT.TRACON, TX
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 2 Eng; Retractable Gear
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class E ACT
ATC / advisory: TRACON ACT
Second aircraft: Light Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach; Departure
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Airspace Violation All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Company Policy

Narrative: Aircraft X came off of an IFR approach climbing out runway heading climbing to 3000 feet. I issued him his new IFR clearance to eastbound; issued him his new code; and turned him on course. Then I went to the printer to pull and disseminate strips. While disseminating the strips to the high radar position I heard the conflict alert going off. When I returned to my scope I saw Aircraft Y in close proximity to Aircraft X. At this time I had no idea who the Aircraft Y was or where he came from. Before I could issue a safety alert to Aircraft X the track on Aircraft Y was already observed turning away from Aircraft X.In the scramble to establish separation between the two aircraft and to ascertain who Aircraft Y was and where he came from he was not properly radar identified. Although his identity was established he was never told 'radar contact'. No recommendations at this point.




Synopsis: ACT TRACON Controller reported leaving their position to attend to the flight strip printer and heard the conflict alert sound at his position. When they returned; they observed one of their aircraft in close proximity to an unidentified target.
Date: 202201
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Aircraft: A321
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Climb; Climb
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Turbine Engine
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: I was the pilot monitoring and the FO (First Officer) was the Pilot Flying. We were climbing out of 12000 ft. when we heard a loud bang and yawing of the aircraft We got an ECAM alert #1 Engine Stall. We completed the ECAM procedures and as soon as we brought the #1 Thrust Lever to idle; the compressor stalls stopped. We advised ATC that we needed to return to ZZZ.It was just as if we were in training. The FO and I followed our training procedures and everything seemed to flow smoothly. Great CRM between the two of us and ATC did a great job!Nothing we could have done could have prevented this event.




Synopsis: A321 Captain reported returning to departure airport after experiencing a #1 engine compressor stall.
Date: 201605
Location: PIT.Airport, PA
Aircraft: No Aircraft
ATC / advisory: Ramp PIT
Reporter function: Ramp
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Distraction; Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Other / Unknown; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Ground Personnel
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Airport; Equipment / Tooling; Human Factors
Primary problem: Equipment / Tooling

Narrative: Ramp control air to ground radio was replaced [with] digital due to upcoming FAA mandate. The system is flawed and has [a] wait respond time that's so long that other aircraft are calling to the controller before he or she can give instruction to original call. This is not only confusing to the ramp controller but to all aircraft on the ramp at the [busiest] time. It's just a recipe for an accident. The answer [from] the radio installer to the controller is its new [tech] you'll just have to get used to it???  Also the clarity could be a lot better. The ground to ground is just garbled and muffled to the point that you cannot understand the person that's calling you or you to them. We got the same answer from the radio tech.




Synopsis: A PIT Ramp Agent reported the new digital Ramp Control radio transmissions were garbled; muffled and unintelligible which caused confusion and is a potential safety issue for personnel and aircraft.
Date: 202112
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: No Aircraft
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
ATC / advisory: Ramp ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Ramp
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Hazardous Material Violation; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR
Detector: Person Ground Personnel
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was just made aware; while working in ZZZ on assignment; that I was moving material that was shrunk wrapped and unmarked pallets. And the material was transported to ZZZ1 apparently containing Hazmat material.




Synopsis: Air Carrier Ground Personnel reported being notified of a Hazmat violation regarding a cargo pallet shipment that was incorrectly labeled.