elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201906
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Military Trainer
Operator: Military
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Cruise; Initial Climb
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Automation Air Traffic Control; Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Aircraft X had been in the radar pattern at ZZZ. He questioned his climb out while on approach (as it was amended on his last approach and wasn't reiterated on this approach). After listening to the tape he was given heading 260 and 4;000 feet by the Local Controller and read it back correctly. Upon checking in with the Departure Controller; he said he was at 3;000 feet with request. The Departure Controller took his next request and turned him on downwind. After listening to the tape; Aircraft X questioned whether he should be at 3;000 or 4;000 feet; but was stepped on. I heard the low altitude alert go off; saw Aircraft X at 3;100 feet inside the antennae area- where the Minimum Vectoring Area is 3;500 feet. I instructed the Controller to climb Aircraft X immediately; he did and Aircraft X climbed.We discussed earlier opening up final sector. If we had; all of our controllers would have been on position. We also discussed giving the final to Radar East; but it would only have put all/most of the traffic on the other scope. In the future; I would insist that more of the military aircraft do approaches at an air force base in our airspace; not most of them at ZZZ. One was sent there; but I would send more. This would divide the workload better.




Synopsis: TRACON Controller reported a military training flight was assigned 4;000 feet; but stopped their climb at 3;000 feet and flew below the Minimum Vectoring Altitude.
Date: 201702
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: Widebody; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Dispatcher
Reporter qualification: Dispatch Dispatcher
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Weight And Balance
Detector: Person Dispatch
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Flight plan block fuel is 150;000 LBS. On their own accord; and without any authorization; ZZZ fueling overfuels the flight to 154;000 LBS. ZZZ fueling citing issues such as 'the fuel pumps were not turned off in time'; or 'the Fueler was in the cockpit at the time of fueling and by the time they went back to the fueling station outside; the aircraft was overfueled.' ZZZ fueling has consistently overfueled flights; to the point where it is routine and most actually laugh at this recurrence. ZZZ fueling must be held accountable and the overfueling has to stop and be put in check. I would like to ask that a one-week period of MEM outbound flights be looked at and see how many flights were marked 'overfueled'. Action has to be taken on these ZZZ overfuel events. Accountability and recourse are required if these events are to be halted. The amount of money wasted on these events is staggering.




Synopsis: Air carrier Dispatcher reported the aircraft was over fueled without crew or Dispatch authorization.
Date: 201502
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: LAX.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: Marginal
Light: Night
Aircraft: Light Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class B LAX
ATC / advisory: Tower LAX
Second aircraft: Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Distraction; Confusion
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Unstabilized Approach
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Contributing factors: Airport; Human Factors
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: We were being vectored for a visual approach to runway 25L. We were on on a left base. I called for flaps 8 and 20. We were told;'Follow aircraft Y ahead; cleared visual 25L.' As I lined up on final using the localizer; I noticed that the aircraft we were following appeared to be off course. I couldn't see the runway; but I could see the aircraft ahead and had the localizer dialed in. At this point the captain and I start a discussion about why the aircraft ahead and the localizer weren't matched up. We were switched to tower.  At this point the runways were barely coming in to view and we could see clearly that the aircraft we were following was lined up for 25R. Tower confirmed this when they told us traffic we were following was landing 25R; additional traffic aircraft Z taking off 25L; Cleared to land 25L. As we continue I see aircraft Z taking the runway. As we continue the gear horn goes off and I realize I hadn't configured past flaps 20. I immediately call for gear down before landing checks. Slow the aircraft and call for flaps 30 and 45. I was always in positive control of the aircraft and landing safely was assured in my mind. However by the time I was fully configured and stable; I was around 600/700 feet AGL. I was aware of company policy that at this point I should go around; however the preceding aircraft Z gave me pause. I made the decision at that moment that going around into the aircraft Z wake would have put the aircraft into a bad situation; and was confident I could make a safe landing; so I continued the landing without incident.




Synopsis: An air crew flying an approach to LAX was instructed to follow 'aircraft Y ahead'. They were confused until they realized that aircraft Y was for a different runway. The confusion and distraction caused them to configure late; but they concluded that the safest course of action would be to land rather than go-around.
Date: 201701
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: SFO.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Rain
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class B SFO
ATC / advisory: TRACON NCT
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: ILS / LOC 19L for SFO; Jepp page 11-1. The NorCal approach controllers use ROGGE as a reference on the approach to ILS 19L.  ROGGE does not load as a fix for the ILS in the CDU.  ROGGE is used as a reference for stepping down on the LOC for 19L.  The [Maltese] cross is at SHAKE and is the fix that is loaded into the CDU.  SHAKE is 8.4 NM from the end of the runway; ROGGE 5.5 NM.  NorCal uses ROGGE as the final approach fix and request us to keep a specific speed till then. Talking to the approach controller via telephone the ROGGE fix has always been used as a reference fix for the ILS 19L.  Even though we knew how to identify ROGGE we were not expecting to reference this fix and created a last minute distraction during a critical phase of flight.  Adding fixes inside the final approach fix is not a standard procedure that we practice. For consistency and standardization it might be in the best interest to include ROGGE as a fix that loads when selecting the ILS 19L.




Synopsis: B737 NG Captain reported NorCal Approach uses ROGGE as a fix in their clearance for SFO Runway 19L approaches but ROGGE is not in the FMC database.
Date: 201507
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: PA-24 Comanche
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Descent; Landing
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Engine
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Inflight Event / Encounter Fuel Issue
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: While on descent the aircraft partially lost power. As part of the trouble shooting I turned on the fuel pump and swapped fuel tanks; this seemed to restore power.  I requested an expedited landing as a precaution and stated that something went wrong and that I had partially lost power and needed to land. Approach seemed to interpret this as an emergency [and] they vectored me visually toward the field and handed me off to the tower.  Tower treated it as an emergency.  I landed safely without incident.I believe the power loss was due to fuel starvation; yet I am not completely sure.  Visual inspection of the fuel tanks revealed that the right tank still had more than VFR reserves in it upon landing. The left tank also still had fuel in it. Subsequent tests of the engine revealed no apparent issues.




Synopsis: PA24 pilot reported he suffered a partial power loss; possibly because of a fuel issue; and requested an expedited landing.
Date: 201902
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: Marginal
Weather elements / visibility: Thunderstorm
Aircraft: A319
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Landing Gear
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Distraction; Communication Breakdown; Workload; Time Pressure
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Security
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Upon climbout out of ZZZ; we received a L/G SHOCK ABSORBER ECAM upon landing gear retraction. A number of other ECAM messages followed; along with the loss of autopilot; autothrottles; and LNAV capabilities. As the flying pilot; I flew the SID with raw data; took over the radios; and the Captain ran the ECAM procedures while communicating with the Company; passengers; and ran the [emergency items] with the flight attendants.Due to the longer runways and greater support network in ZZZ1 than ZZZ; we elected to divert to ZZZ1. [ATC was advised] and I proceeded into ZZZ1 via vectors to XXL on raw data. The weather in the region was marginal VFR with thunderstorms. The flight landed uneventfully; and we proceeded to the gate under our own power.Upon arrival at the gate; we were notified that a deportee passenger was onboard the aircraft. Our [passenger roster] did not reflect this security issue. Clearly; there was a breakdown in the [roster] as we did not know this passenger was onboard the aircraft.


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


Synopsis: A319 flight crew reported learning of an unknown deportee onboard after an inflight mechanical issue and diversion.
Date: 201606
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: TMB.Airport, FL
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Tower TMB
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Trainee
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown
Second reporter function: Instructor; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We were on Ground frequency at taxiway D and 9L doing the run up. I finished the before takeoff checklist and advised Ground of completion of [same]. At this time ground cleared us to switch and monitor the Tower frequency. I complied with clearance and I switched the frequency from ground to North Tower. I started taxiing all the way to the hold short line. We were number one at 9L for departure. When we arrived at hold short line I switched the controls to my instructor. Tower was already giving clearance for takeoff. We assumed it was for us since we were holding short number one. We then [read] back the clearance. Since there was no response from tower we thought that the clearance was for us. [We] then started moving and right after crossing the hold short line we heard on the radio from an aircraft on final saying 'Aircraft on the runway; going around'. My Instructor stopped immediately the aircraft right after hearing an aircraft on the radio. After that; Tower came back on the frequency saying 'thank you' and then 'stop.' Tower told us to turn around and wait behind the hold short line for departure.


Second narrative: After listening to the audio recording it shows that our clearance response was blocked by another aircraft; and because of it tower did not hear our response. At the time we were giving the clearance back on our radio; we did not hear any interference in the transmission. Since we were first for departure and there was no indication of negative clearance we then started to cross hold short line.


Synopsis: C172 instructor and student pilot reported an aircraft went around when they taxied onto the runway in error.
Date: 201601
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Cessna 400
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Aircraft component: Engine
Component problem: Failed; Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: When in-range right engine started running rough and after landing both left and right engines shut off when turning off the runway.




Synopsis: The C400 First Officer reported that an engine ran rough in flight and then both engines shut off after landing.
Date: 201912
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B737 Next Generation Undifferentiated
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
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: Physiological - Other
Anomaly: Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Illness / Injury
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General Physical Injury / Incapacitation
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: On the way to the airport; the FO stated he just started to have a little stomach issue but nothing serious. When we arrived at the airport he used the restroom and met me at the airplane. We performed our duties. Once airborne and 30 minutes enroute; he needed to use the restroom. He did throw up in a bag while in the cockpit. But he said he felt a little better afterwards. Halfway to [destination] he started to get the chills and put on his jacket. We discussed if we should divert or continue on. We elected to continue to destination. Restroom was used two more times. Each time feeling slightly better for the moment. We discussed having him sit in the [cabin] versus sitting in [cockpit] and having a FA take his role. We elected to keep everyone in their assigned duties. We landed without incident. Once we were taxiing to [the] gate; we notified Operations to send EMS over to the gate. All passengers disembarked the airplane as normal. Once everyone was off the airplane; the medical personnel showed up to give him assistance. Ultimately he was taken to the ER under the EMS care.




Synopsis: B737NG Captain reported that the F/O experienced stomach illness enroute to destination.
Date: 201411
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: BWG.Airport, KY
Weather elements / visibility: Cloudy; 10
Aircraft: Pitts Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Ferry / Re-Positioning
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class E BWG
ATC / advisory: CTAF BWG
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Weather; Human Factors; Aircraft
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was flying VFR to Atlanta GA. During a fuel stop in Indiana I checked my foreflight app for ceilings and visibility to determine my stopping point due to weather. I selected Russellville. When approaching that area light showers had reduced visibility so I diverted to bowling green. Due to the poor forward visibility of my aircraft and 600' ceiling; I was not comfortable with looking down to tune radio to CTAF. During roll out on runway 21 a business jet flew over; obviously had to go missed approach. The pilot of the other aircraft was obviously not happy. We discussed the incident and decisions that should have been made to prevent it.




Synopsis: Pitts pilot reports a weather divert to BWG and landing without announcing on the CTAF. Pilot neglects to make announcement due fear of looking down to tune at low altitude and the poor forward visibility of his aircraft. During roll out; a business jet is observed going around overhead.
Date: 201811
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Jet/Long Ranger/206
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class E ZZZ; Class G ZZZ
ATC / advisory: CTAF ZZZ
Aircraft component: Engine
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Time Pressure; Workload
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: While performing a Functional Check Flight to validate performance of the GPS with the use of the Night Scanner landing light and verify Autorotation RPM Speed; the engine failed during the execution of the Autorotation RPM Speed Check. No prior maintenance was performed on the power plant or flight control system.Upon entry into the autorotation and confirmation that systems were normal; the throttle was reduced to the idle position for the check. The caution/warning system alerted me to the engine out condition and I confirmed the condition with the N1 and Turbine Outlet Temperature gauges. An autorotation landing was performed to Runway XX at ZZZ with no damage to aircraft or facilities.




Synopsis: Bell Long Ranger helicopter pilot reported an engine failure while conducting a practice autorotation maneuver.
Date: 201308
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Dash 8-100
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
Aircraft component: Exterior Pax/Crew Door
Component problem: Design
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty); Flight Attendant In Charge
Human factors: Distraction
Anomaly: Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Attendant; Person Passenger
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: When the young college age man was leaving the aircraft; he was looking down at his iPhone and he did not see the low clearance of the airstair doorway. He also looked very out of it from sleeping during the flight. He bumped his head pretty good and kind of fell backwards a bit from the impact.  He did not sustain any injury and he left the aircraft. Low clearance of the airstair door caused the issue; as well as his being distracted and tired.




Synopsis: DHC8-100 Flight Attendant describes another passenger head collision with the top of the door frame while deplaning.