elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201712
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Aircraft: Balloon
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Landing
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Human factors: Other / Unknown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Weather; Human Factors
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Low flight over homes. Brushed roof of home. Good landing in the street. Was not in Class B airspace and I had contacted the tower and advised we were flying over 5 miles from the airport. Other balloons were in the area.




Synopsis: A balloon pilot reported landing in the street after brushing a house.
Date: 201811
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: B737-700
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant In Charge; Other / Unknown
Human factors: Time Pressure; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Security; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Weight And Balance
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Contributing factors: Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Ops agent had given me the count as 47+1 and was ready to close the door. I asked him to wait so that the C Flight Attendant (FA) could finish briefing the exit row. Something either I (the A) or the C said alerted one of the passengers in the exit row; and she asked us if she was on the correct flight to ZZZ. We informed her that no; we were going to ZZZ1. That is when she grabbed her things and deplaned. I asked him what the new count was and he said; 'Now it should be correct.' My thing is; there's no way to cross check the passengers count; and if that 'extra person' had been a terrorist; we could have been in serious trouble. We had no way of knowing that an extra person was on there; and if she hadn't been in the exit row; she might not have known herself.




Synopsis: B737-700 Flight Attendant reported a security issue with inaccurate passenger count procedure.
Date: 202107
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B767-200
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
Aircraft component: Exterior Pax/Crew Door
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: We departed ZZZ turned northwest and was climbing out of approximately 14;000 ft. for 16;000 when we received an EICAS MESSAGE L FWD ENTRY DOOR. Also entry doors light was illuminated on the overhead panel. We seemed to be pressurizing normal but it seemed slightly louder than normal.  At this time we where level at 16;000 ft. so I informed ATC that we would like to stay at 16;000 while we look at a pressurization issue. I read the QRH and it advised that if pressurizing normal that we could continue but if not we need to raise cabin altitude to 9500 ft. and land. At this point it seemed we where pressurizing but I didn't want to climb higher without being certain so I got out of my seat and went to the back of the plane to look at the door. I immediately could see the handle was about 1/4 open; lock was released; some daylight under the door and could hear whistling noise of air escaping. I returned to me seat and informed ATC that we wanted to descend to 10;000 ft. I then called and received a phone patch to flight control. I told them we have an entry door unlatched and need to land. I asked if they wanted me to return to ZZZ; ZZZ1 or ZZZ2 since they where all about the same distance. We then informed ATC that we wanted to return to ZZZ. We finished the remainder of the checklists and returned without incident.




Synopsis: 767 Captain reported aircraft failed to pressurize correctly and discovered a Service door was not closed; resulting in an air turn back and precautionary landing.
Date: 201704
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: N90.TRACON, NY
Aircraft: Medium Transport; High Wing; 2 Turboprop Eng
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class E N90
ATC / advisory: TRACON N90
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Procedure; Airspace Structure; Chart Or Publication; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Aircraft X checked in descending to 7000 feet with restriction to cross arrival fix at 7000 feet. I didn't need the aircraft to cross the fix at 7000 feet so I intend to give the aircraft a descent to 6000 feet without restrictions. The Minimum vectoring Altitude (MVA) is 5700 feet; the next MVA is step down is 4000 feet. I should have cleared the aircraft to descend to 6000 feet. I cleared the aircraft to descend to 4000 feet and the aircraft read back 4000 feet. I did not realize that I said 4000 feet when I meant 6000 feet. I notice aircraft is descending below 6000 feet. The aircraft was at 5600 feet and almost leaving the 5700 foot MVA area. I stopped  aircraft at 5000 feet and  the pilot complied. I did not climb the aircraft as the aircraft was leaving a MVA area and higher terrain was behind aircraft.I'm not sure how to prevent this. I have descended aircraft in this area to the correct altitude hundreds of time. I was not busy or distracted. The aircraft was the only one on frequency and had my attention. The wrong words came out and I did not catch it.




Synopsis: A Tracon Controller reported inadvertently descending an aircraft below the Minimum Vectoring Altitude.
Date: 201512
Aircraft: B737-800
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural MEL / CDL; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Fuel Issue
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Chart Or Publication; Aircraft; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Dispatched [with] MEL 49-XXX APU CONTINUOUS OPS ETOPS. 5+27 flight time. Fuel burn was 31.8 with 2.3 burn to alternate. MEL added 438 lbs for APU burn... That seem low to you? No extra fuel provided. Weather at destination 3/4 mile in rain and fog. Alternate weather good. Filed for FL350 and assigned FL330 for first 2.5hrs of flight. Got airborne with required fuel of 40.0. [Flight plan] estimated landing with 7.9. At altitude FMC totalizer estimated landing with 8.0. However; we all know that once center fuel pumps off; that estimate will drop 1000 lbs or more. That caused me concern. Called dispatch on SATCOM and discussed; specifically MEL fuel burn being way too low. She said the computer plugs that number in automatically. (Flight plan waypoint burns were initially +400 and eventually down to +200 and then even over CP.) Agreed that we'd keep an eye on it. (she agreed with estimated landing fuel of 7.9). Uncomfortable; I later called back to talk to ETOPS Maintenance control. Asked him what fuel burn for APU at altitude was. He had no idea...So center fuel finally gone and we watch FMC totalizer for landing march down to 6.7 as I had predicted. Weather now .5 mile. Called dispatch on SATCOM again and agreed to plan of one approach and immediate divert to alternate. Flew SA CAT I to mins and broke out at DA- landed with 6.7 fuel.Discussion: MEL fuel seems ridiculously low- about 1300 lbs low so; it would seem. Also; the known totalizer anomaly when center pumps on is a set up and should be corrected. Not an issue when you're +1200 on your flight plan waypoint burns until pumps turned off; but when you start out only +400; I knew something was amiss. Dispatch and pilot blindly following automated MEL fuel add of 438lbs for continuous APU ops for 5 hrs.




Synopsis: B737-800 Captain reported being dispatched on an ETOPS flight with an inoperative generator and the APU operated continuously for the five and a half hour flight. Four hundred thirty eight pounds of fuel are provided for the APU burn and the aircraft lands at destination with 1;200 pounds less fuel than planned.
Date: 201507
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 135 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Workload
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Weight And Balance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: While loading the plane there were many issues with station operations; they seemed very short staffed; also the gate agent working the flight told our FA that people pick up overtime but refuse to do any work during their overtime shift. I did my preflight walk around (inspection) right after the plane pulled into the gate for a crew change. As I was near the cargo area they were still unloading the bags from the arrival. If I can; during my walk around I try to take a quick look to see what is getting loaded; [paying attention to] anything different than your standard bag or box. However; since I did the walk around as soon as the plane arrived; they were still unloading the bags. Nothing was ever [given for] the plane [on] our departing flight. The flight went smoothly; but during my post flight inspection I noticed 5 tires coming out of the cargo compartment; I went back up to the flight deck and pulled the cargo (bag sheet) from the garbage to double check if we were ever told about these tires; which [we were not.] I went and talked to the ground crew unloading the tires and questioned them on how they would tell a crew about tires; and they showed be on the bag sheet how it was done. I went and asked them if there was a way to tell how heavy each tire is. They pointed out to me that the tires are labeled as 100 LBS each; so therefore we flew with 500 extra pounds of cargo we were never aware of.Our weights and CG numbers [could have been off] because of the extra unknown weight.Learning from this event we can try to ask the ground crew when they hand us our bag sheet is there is any cargo that is not your standard bag or box. Also these tires were being sent from one maintenance facility to another maintenance facility; therefore maybe the company can set up some sort of way for maintenance control to have dispatch put a note in our release paperwork about the company maintenance cargo they are going to have us carry.




Synopsis: EMB-135LR FO reported noticing five 100 pound tires being offloaded after arrival that were not on the load manifest.
Date: 201405
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: FMH.Tower, MA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Night
Aircraft: Small Aircraft
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class D FMH
ATC / advisory: Tower FMH
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: No Specific Anomaly Occurred All Types
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Airport
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: While night flying in VMC conditions I determined; no runway approach end identifier lights are available on any runway at this facility.  The runway ends are lighted to indicate the (red) departure end of each runway; but the normal green threshold identification lights are installed with a black lens on the reverse side.  The only indication of runway lighting is the beginning of side white lights indicating the side of runway; but no threshold indication is available.  It would be easy to 'land short' of the runway in at least 2 of the 4 runways as there are no other approach lights to them (Runways 5 & 14).




Synopsis: Small aircraft pilot reports that the runways at FMH do not have REIL's and the beginning of the runway is difficult to judge.
Date: 201502
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: FTY.Airport, GA
Flight conditions: Mixed
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: UAV - Unpiloted Aerial Vehicle
Airspace: Class B ATL; Class D FTY
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot; Trainee
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Airspace Violation All Types
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Other After the event
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Purchased a DJI Inspire 1 UAV. My previous experience with Radio Control systems was with cars in 1985. Eager to test fly the UAV; I flew it at my parents' home; not realizing that FTY was actually less than five miles from their home. During the flight the highest I flew the UAV was about 76 feet for less than one minute. Other than that; total flight time was 15 minutes at an altitude ranging from .5 to 13 feet. At no time did I fly higher than tree level or enter Class B Airspace. At no time did the flight interfere with private or commercial air traffic. At no time was there a traffic conflict.[In the future I will] conduct an airport recon and distance check prior to UAV flight.




Synopsis: An ATP rated pilot purchased a small UAV and inadvertently flew it within five miles of an airport but never at an altitude above 76 feet and; thus; did not consider the operation to have been a hazard to manned aircraft.
Date: 201710
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Falcon 900
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
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: Corporate
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Human factors: Troubleshooting
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Diverted
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: We were on a flight cruising at FL410 when we noticed some things with pressurization weren't adding up. Climbing up to 410 and still in 30's; we noticed air in gaspers were very weak which grew concern between the other pilot and myself. After discussing the problem; we decided to request a lower altitude in the 30's in case we did lose pressurization; we could have more time to react especially with passengers on board. Both of us pulled our oxygen masks out and had them in our lap; and we watched the automatic pressure controller start to make some changes in differential pressure dropping slowly and cabin altitude slowly climbing. At this time; the cabin warning came on the annunciator panel and followed the cabin warning checklist. The automatic pressure controller started to change with triple indicators; and we both decided to [request priority handling] especially for our passenger's sake. ATC helped us descend our altitude and get us diverted to [nearby] airport safely.As we got lower; the cabin warning went off and we were at a low enough altitude to remove our oxygen masks. [Company maintenance] diagnosed the situation; and it turned out the flex tube that connects to forward part of water separator became disconnected which kept the bleed air from going to the cabin and pressurizing the airplane.


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


Synopsis: Flight crew Falcon 900 reported a failure of cabin pressurization and commenced an emergency descent and diverted to a nearby airport.
Date: 201702
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZMA.ARTCC, FL
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Light Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Fractional
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Ferry / Re-Positioning
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class E ZMA
ATC / advisory: Center ZMA
Reporter organization: Fractional
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings
Primary problem: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings

Narrative: Miami center cleared us to 7000 ft approximately 50 miles from MYAM then to 3000 ft. We were told to contact Nassau approach on 121.0. We could not get in contact with them so we tried to switch back to Miami approximately 25 miles from MYAM and we could hear Miami center but they could not hear us. They tried to relay messages thru another aircraft in the area but communications were not clear. We were never given clearance instructions in the event of a missed approach before we lost communications with Miami. We were not able to communicate with Nassau approach or Nassau radio at 3000 ft. We never saw the field at 3000 ft when we overflew the field. We heard another aircraft departing from MYAM and we showed him on our TCAS. We proceeded to climb in a holding pattern VFR to 7500 to avoid the departing traffic that was on the TCAS; so that we could establish communications with Miami and tell them we were diverting to our alternate. When we got in radio contact with Miami they asked us who gave us a clearance to climb. I replied that we were climbing VFR for traffic and to establish communications. Miami asked what our intentions were and I told them we were diverting to MYGF. Miami then told me to maintain 8000 and proceed to GRREG intersection and then MYGF. We were handed off to Nassau approach and we then landed at MYGF.Our feasibility notes on our brief tell us that there is no radar below 7000 and communications are intermittent below 7000 and if communications are lost contact Nassau approach on 121.0 to cancel IFR or handle the diversion if unable to land visually. We could not get in contact with Nassau approach on 121.0 at 3000 ft.We were told that Miami could not give us missed approach instructions. We would get them from Nassau approach. When we were given the frequency change we could not contact Nassau approach and when we switched back to Miami we could not talk to Miami either.




Synopsis: Light Transport flight crew reported experiencing communication issues with Miami Center and Nassau Approach. Flight crew elected to divert due to departing traffic from the original destination and the inability of the ZMA Controller to give them a missed approach clearance.
Date: 201511
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: A319
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Other takeoff roll
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Gate; Flight Crew Rejected Takeoff
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: On takeoff roll received ECAM message of 'thrust lever not set' accompanied by master caution. I as pilot flying performed low speed reject at 75 KTS. Cleared runway. Brake temps never exceeded 275 degrees. Suspect takeoff data upload issue due to runway change on taxi out. Discussed situation with Dispatch and Maintenance. I decided to return to gate to top off fuel and have FO do walk around and talk to local maintenance. Reject was below 80 KTS so no Aircraft Maintenance Log (AML) entry or official maintenance inspection required. After fueling; takeoff and flight were uneventful.


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


Synopsis: A319 flight crew reported rejecting the takeoff when they suspected takeoff data was invalid following a runway change during taxi out.