elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201511
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: DWH.Airport, TX
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: Small Transport
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: CTAF DWH
Second aircraft: Small Aircraft
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Captain; Single Pilot; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Ground Strike - Aircraft
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: While taxiing into the ramp located on taxiway 'p' my aircraft's right wing struck another single engine aircraft. It was unmanned and parked. While taxiing into the ramp area a lineman was indicating with electric wands the area I was to park in. I could not see the aircraft parked to south of my intended parking space due to lighting conditions and determined that area would be the safest approach to the parking spot. While making the turn to the left; referencing the lineman and performing a 180 degree turn to park; my aircraft's right wing struck the [other aircraft]. I believe that more adequate lighting on the ramp area and additional guidance while parking could have prevented this.




Synopsis: General aviation aircraft taxiing into ramp area at night struck a parked aircraft. Ramp lighting listed as a factor.
Date: 201204
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: DFW.Airport, TX
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 145 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class B DFW
ATC / advisory: TRACON D10
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach; Departure
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings
Primary problem: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings

Narrative: We were running Triple Simultaneous ILS Approaches to DFW. One of my aircraft got a stuck mic. I tried several times to see if any of the other aircraft could hear me but was unsuccessful. I had several aircraft leave my airspace because I was unable to communicate with them and turn them. I made the necessary point-outs. Every facility I've ever been to had access to emergency frequencies at all positions. Not here for some reason. They have ONE position with 121.5 available and it is on the other side of the TRACON from where I was working. Had it been available or within a reasonable distance; there would have been much less of a disruption from one aircraft tying up my frequency. We also have ancient (seriously) interfaces instead of ETVS or something similar. It really is embarrassing and it has already been identified as a safety risk but I don't know if/when they are going to replace our current system.




Synopsis: D10 Controller described a 'stuck mike' event during triple simultaneous ILS approach procedures into DFW. The controller voiced concern regarding the lack of Guard Frequency availability and other outdated facility communications gear.
Date: 202102
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: INK.VORTAC, TX
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Utility / Infrastructure
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZFW
Second aircraft: Small UAS (At or above 0.55 lbs and less than 55 lbs)
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Workload; Distraction
Anomaly: Airspace Violation All Types; Conflict NMAC; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Unauthorized Flight Operations (UAS); Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: While flying a routine weekly route I came across a very small unmanned drone. I flew past him at very close proximity. When I first noticed it; I thought it was a distant airplane and then thought maybe it was a glider. But in a matter of about 2 seconds I realized it was a drone; much slower than me in which I had to deviate to avoid. This drone was flying at my altitude of approximately 600-700 feet AGL. When I first saw the drone it was near my 1 o'clock position and within 3-4 seconds it flew in front of me and towards my 10 o'clock position. I was surprised the drone would fly at an altitude near 600 feet AGL. I'm glad they paint them glossy white; it did help it to stand out.




Synopsis: C182 pilot reported that while flying at low altitudes between 500-1;000 feet AGL came within 200 feet of a small UAS.
Date: 201310
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: MDT.TRACON, PA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Bonanza 33
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
ATC / advisory: TRACON MDT
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Distraction
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: I received an IFR clearance from PHL data. The routing portion of that clearance was given as; 'PTW; MXE; then as filed.' For the routing portion; I read back; 'PTW; MXE; then as filed....'Once airborne and out of PHL airspace; I was told by Harrisburg Approach to go direct to ESL. I questioned the routing as ESL was not on the routing I filed. Discussing with that with the controller; I realized the routing that was in the system was nowhere near what I had filed. Somewhere the system had changed my routing and no FRC [Full Route Clearance] was ever issued.Additionally; various electronic feedback loops had told me my expected routing was what I filed. I received various e-mails and text messages to the affect of my initial routing.There is a danger when this happens and I think my IFR SOP now has to include a read back of my expected routing to the controller when they say; 'As filed.' It's not ideal and it's a waste of time; but if we can't depend on the system to give timely results with respect to routing there is a danger of a traffic conflict. In this case; weather was largely VMC and the controllers were advising of traffic conflicts as they should; but it's certainly not a desired outcome of filing IFR.




Synopsis: A BE33 pilot departing IFR; cleared as filed but; when ATC cleared him direct to a fix that was not on his filed route he discovered the route he had filed was not the route by which he was cleared.
Date: 201210
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: TUS.Airport, AZ
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Dawn
Aircraft: Airbus Industrie Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class C TUS
ATC / advisory: Tower TUS
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: While on a left downwind; TUS Approach cleared us for the visual approach to Runway 11L. While approaching POCIB from the north at 4;600 feet; TUS Tower advised us of a low altitude alert and asked us to check our altitude.  We were VMC; clear of terrain visually; and did not receive any GPWS alerts. We reported the runway in sight and continued the approach and landing uneventfully.




Synopsis: A widebody First Officer reported ATC advised them of a low altitude alert on left downwind at TUS. No GPWS; terrain in sight; so approach was continued to a normal landing.
Date: 201206
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Stearman
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Landing
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Ground Strike - Aircraft; Ground Excursion Runway; Inflight Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Other Landing roll
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: During rollout after a good landing and slowed almost to taxi speed the airplane started to swerve to the left from runway centerline.  I failed to make adequate and prompt enough correction with rudder/tailwheel steering input and went off runway at a 90 degree angle in a three-point attitude at an estimated groundspeed of 30 mph. The winds were light and variable.  The right lower wingtip momentarily contacted the grass surface just off the runway.  I continued around in a left turn at taxi speed and returned to runway surface and taxied in.  There was some damage to lower right wing.




Synopsis: A Stearman Pilot momentarily lost directional control on rollout following a normal landing and performed a ground loop; exiting and returning to the runway interrupted by brief ground contact with the lower right wingtip.
Date: 202001
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Gulfstream IV / G350 / G450
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Pressurization System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Physiological - Other
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Illness / Injury
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Flying an IFR flight plan from ZZZ to ZZZ1; I was PIC; pilot flying. Dual crew; flying the XXX departure VIA radar vectors. In contact with center we were 'stepped up' to flight level 260. Once reaching 260; the 'cab press' (cabin pressure) CAWS illuminated. I gave controls to the SIC while I donned my O2 mask and took controls back and requested a descent and turn back to ZZZ mean while the SIC could read from the Emergency Checklist. Once I determined that the cabin pressure was maintaining pressure correctly according to the pressure gauge; I determined that an emergency descent was not imminent; but had the SIC and passengers don O2 masks while we completed a precautionary descent. We were not able to get to an acceptable lower altitude below 15k feet for O2 requirements for terrain on an IFR flight plan; so I requested VFR and continued my descent. The CAB PRESS CAWS went away between 18 and 16k feet. Once getting to an acceptable altitude; we removed and instructed passengers to remove O2 while we contacted ZZZ Approach; did a pop up IFR Flight plan into ZZZ and landed safely. Somewhere between 14 and 10k feet our pressure spiked and hurt the passengers and SICs ear drums. Again upon landing in ZZZ; we did a normal landing with full reverse input where the pressure again spiked. Multiple passengers complained about their ears upon landing and the SIC went to urgent care for complaining about pain in her ears; a 'liquid feeling' in her ears; and later determining that she had blood in her ear canals.Although; I did not feel that this situation did not require declaring an emergency; this plane has been written up MELed for both of these issues multiple times in the past and 'OPS CHECKED GOOD'.




Synopsis: Gulfstream IV Captain reported multiple malfunctions of the pressurization system; which caused physical discomfort to passengers and crew and resulted in return to the departure airport.
Date: 202103
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: SCT.TRACON, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 5
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Initial Approach
ATC / advisory: TRACON SCT
Second aircraft: UAV: Unpiloted Aerial Vehicle
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Airspace Violation All Types; Conflict NMAC; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: Near midair collision with a personal 'drone' remotely piloted aerial vehicle; roughly 18' square in size. Occurred on the SCBBY2 arrival; TAKOE TSN for RWY 26R; at 6;000 feet MSL; 3.5nm East of KALEA Intersection. FO (First Officer) was pilot flying and picked up tally off the nose inside .5 nm; low-hi; rapidly moving from right to left. Jumpseater also gained visual situational awareness at the left cockpit window #2. Both FO and Jumpseater estimate the drone passed less than 50 feet in elevation from the left wing and certainly within the lateral wingspan distance of the aircraft; which confirmed the visual ID of a drone vs. a bird. Captain was pilot monitoring and did not see the drone but reported location; altitude; time; and general description to SoCal Approach moments after the incident with the information FO passed to him. We continued the approach to land without incident.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported an NMAC with a UAV in SCT airspace.
Date: 201406
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: MD-82
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Turbine Engine
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Training / Qualification
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Rejected Takeoff
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Procedure
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: I was the pilot flying. We performed a max power takeoff due to a slight tail wind component. After a power check at 1.4 EPR that was normal; autothrottle was selected and power increased to 2.04 EPR. At the 80 KT airspeed check; I glanced at the engine instruments and saw the left EPR was a bit low and the right a bit high; I modulated the throttles very slightly to match; N1's and N2's were normal and matched left/right. At about 110 KTS; with my fingers on the reversers; I glanced at the EPR's again because I felt a throttle split under my arm. They were still at about 2.04 EPR; but the split was about 1 knob. The throttle split caused me to re-check the N1's; N2's and EGT's.  The right N1 had decreased to about 4-5% less than the left. With the speed at about 115 KTS I scanned EPR's again; then the N1's again. The N1 on the right engine had now dropped to about 9-10% less than the left: estimated at 88% left and 78% right; left EGT was about 575 and the right about 550. Both EPR's remained at 2.04. I initiated a rejected take off at 120 KTS and the First Officer advised Tower.  I taxied clear of the runway and briefed the flight attendants and passengers.


Second narrative: [Narrative contains no additional information].


Synopsis: MD-82 Captain rejected takeoff at 120 KTS due to 10% less N1 and 25 degrees lower EGT on right engine than left engine. EPR's were matched at 2.04. Successful reject with no issues other than required brake cooling.
Date: 202201
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Dispatcher
Reporter qualification: Dispatch Dispatcher
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Dispatch
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Failed to put alternate on for 5G NOTAM.Worked up all ZZZ flights no alternate; no NOTAM and got complacent with ZZZ1 weather no alternate required. Put additional fuel on for winds/ATC but did not put alternate. Added ZZZ2 while enroute.Put alternate on all locations with 5g NOTAM regardless of weather.




Synopsis: Dispatcher reported forgetting to add alternate to 5G related airports.
Date: 201910
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: A320
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked; Cruise
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant In Charge
Reporter qualification: Flight Attendant Current
Human factors: Physiological - Other
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Passenger; Person Flight Attendant
When detected: Pre-flight; In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: I felt peer pressure from Captain to board aircraft even though we relayed several times the symptoms and concerns. He also failed to have management and Inflight meet the aircraft as I requested so we could have our experience documented - he said he would contact them but did not. The Inflight Supervisor that we later met with told us that they were not notified of a flight that requested them meet the flight. He also returned to the aircraft and 'scolded' the flight attendants for calling after landing - even though the call was to report a safety issue the cabin odor returned. Passengers and crew complained of returned odor. The manager in ZZZ that tried to cover up the odor with air freshener put every crew member and passengers in a very unsafe situation. The fume event that occurred was not taken seriously by Captain or ZZZ manager. Suggestions: Support your crews! Fume events are real! Other-station-operation-issues: Manager in ZZZ entered aircraft that I reported as a possible fume event and she sprayed a 'LOT' of air freshener to cover cabin odor in question.




Synopsis: A320 Flight Attendant reported notifying Captain of cabin odor and physiological symptoms concerns that were not addressed.
Date: 201212
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZHU.ARTCC, TX
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: B737-500
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZHU
ATC / advisory: Center ZHU
Aircraft component: FMS/FMC
Component problem: Design
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Human-Machine Interface; Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: First Officer
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation - Altitude Crossing Restriction Not Met; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Flight Crew; 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: Aircraft; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: It was a quick leg; and I had loaded the approach in to the FMC at the gate but forgot the crossing restriction at COACH. Enroute; Center gave us COACH at 11;000 FT and by the time I put it in the FMC; we were 9;000 FT high. As it became apparent we would not make it; (tailwind also); we asked Center for relief. He took a long time getting back to us; said we were 'lucky this time;' and handed us off to Houston Approach. I asked Approach for a verbal verification of relief of the altitude restriction at COACH; which he gave; and Center had not given. We proceeded to the airport and landed uneventfully.I should have loaded the crossing restriction in the FMC on the ground at DAL. Don't do this arrival too often and should have known that.


Second narrative: We had an expect crossing note on the approach plate that we missed and by the time ATC issued the restriction; we were high.We asked for relief from ATC and it was unclear whether or not we received it.


Synopsis: A B737-500 flight crew was unable to comply with an ATC directed crossing restriction. The restriction was noted as an 'expect to cross at...' fix on the arrival plate.