elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201305
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Mission: Passenger
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Dispatcher
Reporter qualification: Dispatch Dispatcher
Anomaly: Other Dispatcher data error
Detector: Person Dispatch
When detected: Routine Inspection
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Equipment / Tooling
Primary problem: Equipment / Tooling

Narrative: Several times a day the controlling WSI [commercial weather service] forecast gets knocked out of [my display] by the NWS forecast.  UHMA [commercial weather service] forecast was knocked out twice by NWS forecast today.  All weather in our current systems should match and should show the controlling forecast.  I have to call WSI and ask them to re-send the TAF to get it back into [my display].




Synopsis: Dispatcher reports that several times a day the controlling WSI forecast gets knocked out of the Dispatch program by the NWS forecast.
Date: 201308
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZSE.ARTCC, WA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Citation Excel (C560XL)
Operator: Fractional
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class E JAWBN3
ATC / advisory: Center ZSE
Reporter organization: Fractional
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Confusion
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Crossing Restriction Not Met; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Chart Or Publication; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Enroute to BFI; we were instructed to descend via the JAWBN 3 Arrival. We misread the restriction at JAWBN. The chart is misleading. The restriction box calls out landing north or south in reference to SEA. Below that it calls out 'BOEING FIELD/KING COUNTY RWY 13.' We read that as Boeing Field (all runways) or King County Runway 13. The Controller pointed out the deviation and instructed us to cross ALKIA at 12;000 feet. We did so. When we reached BFI we checked the NOS chart and realized our mistake.Change the chart to match the NOS chart which would eliminate the confusion.




Synopsis: A CE-560XL flight crew inbound to BFI on the JAWBN RNAV STAR misread the intent of the crossing restriction at JAWBN. The reporter believes the format of the commercially produced chart restriction 'LANDING BOEING FLD/KING CO RWY 13...Cross at and MAINTAIN 11000' was a contributing factor.
Date: 202001
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: A320
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Hazardous Material Violation
Detector: Person Dispatch; Person Ground Personnel
When detected: Taxi
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew Returned To Gate; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: On taxiout we were informed to return to the gate as the ramp had improperly loaded dangerous goods. We returned to the gate and the goods were loaded into the correct bin.




Synopsis: A320 Captain reported ground return to gate due to loading errors of Hazmat cargo.
Date: 201409
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: OMA.Airport, NE
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Embraer Legacy 450/500
Operator: Fractional
Operating under: Part 135
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Exterior Pax/Crew Door
Reporter organization: Fractional
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Routine Inspection
Result: General Release Refused / Aircraft Not Accepted
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors; Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: On post flight; found damage to airstair door (main cabin door). Contacted maintenance to get disposition of squawk. Maintenance attempted to tell me that the airstair door was a 'panel' and that the EMB505 MEL/NEF provided relief to defer ANY 'panel' in the aircraft; [MEL] 25-00-00. After discussing with my other crew member; we did not agree that this item was a 'panel'; nor did the FAA intend our company to decide any item on the aircraft was panel and a relief was provided to defer maintenance. Picture was provided to maintenance documenting the damage noted by crew on post flight. Maintenance furthermore provided the following in our company maintenance activity log provided to crews: 'Main airstair door upper cowling around snubber area is damaged. 2 areas cracked and damaged (crew refused NEF relief).' We as a crew took this to be pilot pushing; giving the impression to others that our maintenance write-up was not valid. I have seen a pattern of maintenance pushback in the past 6-9 months; where nearly every write-up is disputed and pressure applied to fly the aircraft. Maintenance should not be pushing pilots to fly broken aircraft.




Synopsis: EMB505 Captain discovers damage to the main cabin door on post flight; and makes a logbook entry for maintenance. Maintenance attempts to defer the airstair door as a 'panel;' stating that the EMB505 MEL/NEF provided relief to defer ANY 'panel' in the aircraft. The crew does not agree.
Date: 201905
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: A321
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Company Policy
Primary problem: Company Policy

Narrative: Better guidance for the cabin crews on handling odor/fume events. As a pilot; you are behind a door with an oxygen mask on once the fume event is reported. You can't go back and investigate the nature of the odor/fume. The cabin crews need to be trained to make sure they are giving accurate and reliable information to the pilots.




Synopsis: A321 Captain reported better training required for cabin crew regarding handling and reporting of fume events.
Date: 201207
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: TEB.Airport, NJ
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: King Air C90 E90
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class D TEB
ATC / advisory: TRACON N90
Aircraft component: ILS/VOR
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: PIC (pilot flying) did not fly the proper radial out of TEB. Pilot not flying input the wrong radial for the departure. No conflict -- (guessing 1/2 miles off course) -- PIC corrected error.




Synopsis: King Air pilot reports a track deviation departing TEB due to the wrong radial being set by the pilot not flying.
Date: 201901
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Dawn
Aircraft: Citation X (C750)
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Ferry / Re-Positioning
Flight phase: Landing
ATC / advisory: UNICOM ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Ground Event / Encounter Object; Ground Excursion Runway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: VMC Visual approach into ZZZ. I was Non-flying Pilot. PIC was on stable approach; fully configured on VASI [Visual Approach Slope Indicator] to Runway XX. Landed at ref speed in touchdown zone. Runway bare and dry. OAT -20C. No wind. After touchdown on centerline; aircraft veered hard right. Captain corrected immediately and it veered hard left departing runway at approximately 60 knots. Nose gear contacted a runway sign after departure from paved surface. After stopping; taxied back onto runway and to ramp without further issue. No eye witnesses and no other traffic in the area.




Synopsis: Citation First Officer reported a loss of control on landing resulted in a runway excursion and contact with a runaway sign.
Date: 201807
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: PA-25 Pawnee
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 137
Flight plan: None
Mission: Agriculture
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class G ZZZ
Second aircraft: PA-28 Cherokee/Archer/Dakota/Pillan/Warrior
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Commercial
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: At ZZZ I encountered a runway incursion with another aircraft; a PA-28. I am an agricultural pilot; had just completed a mission; and was returning to ZZZ. My aircraft has no radio; therefore I do most of my traffic spotting visually with no radio for aid. I entered the traffic pattern at a 45 to downwind entry for Runway 07; the active runway that was being used all morning. I had been flying since [early morning]; and had made multiple landings that morning. I saw no traffic except for the PA28 taxiing for departure on the opposing Runway 25. I completed a standard traffic pattern; and landed on Runway 07. As I began applying brakes on my rollout; I saw Aircraft Y begin a departure roll. I quickly began to depart the runway towards the grass to avoid the oncoming traffic. The grass was my first option; as there were no close taxiways to turn onto. I stopped my turn before departing the runway; as I noticed the PA28 aborted its takeoff roll. The PA28 departed the runway at the next taxiway; and I followed behind at a distance. When I touched down for landing; the aircraft was nowhere near Runway 25. The aircraft then taxied down to Runway 07 and departed the airport and traffic pattern. I had the right of way in this situation; and although I did not have any radios; I had a very clear understanding of the situation at hand. I believe the other aircraft could have been too reliant on radios to aid in traffic avoidance; and did not see me; or could have been distracted by some other means. The runway incursion did not result in any harm to either aircraft as far as I am aware.




Synopsis: Agricultural pilot reported a ground conflict while landing as opposite direction traffic rejected take off.
Date: 201411
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: JAC.Airport, WY
Flight conditions: Marginal
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Regional Jet 700 ER/LR (CRJ700)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
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 Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Pre-flight
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Lack of accurate runway surface condition report by ATC resulted in; reduction of contingency fuel by dispatch in order to accommodate load planning. ATC reporting of a wet runway when in fact the runway was dry by FAA definition; resulted in reduction of load carrying capacity to include removal of fuel; passengers; and cargo. Local ATC runway condition reporting is not accurate. Tower distance from the runway makes it impossible for controllers to give an accurate report. Or; airport OPS is not giving the tower; timely or accurate reporting information. Relaying runway conditions in official reports such as in ATIS broadcast; alters Company dispatch load and performance planning for reported runway surface conditions. When official reporting is not accurate; the Company cannot operate efficiently which results in loss of revenue; inconvenience to the traveling public; and a reduction of safety in the form of reduced contingency fuel with marginal weather conditions and gusty winds.The ATIS was report a wet runway at XA45Z; XB45Z; and again at XC45Z; for which the latter two reports I personally observed to be inaccurate; based on FAA definition. ATC facilities are wholly owned and operated by the FAA which administrates regulations that impact flight planning; and which directly impacts flight load planning. The reporting of runway conditions cannot be based on a 'guess or assumption'. They must be reported accurately both for better and for worse by individuals trained to observe and report actual conditions based on standard definitions. Lack of accurate reporting causes a number of problems in that it can unnecessarily restrict operations into short runways such as JAC. However; such inaccuracies could also cause a lack of restriction to the opposite if for example; the runway was icy but being reported as dry. The lack of integrity of the reporting must be corrected; primarily for safety; but also for reduction of loss of revenue and loss of essential air service for the traveling public.




Synopsis: CRJ700 Captain laments inaccurate runway surface condition report by JAC Tower. Tower reports a wet runway when in fact dry; resulting in removal of passengers and cargo.
Date: 201405
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: LEE.Airport, FL
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E F11
ATC / advisory: TRACON F11
Second aircraft: Light Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Check Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown; Confusion
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict NMAC; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: While just outside the LEE airspace departing to the east; flight crew leveled off at 2;500 FT in VFR condition. Standardization applicant was undergoing some basic instrument procedures therefore wearing a limited viewing device. Suddenly a small jet that was later identified by IP having registration; overflew our airplane by only few hundred FT headed in the same direction. IP contacted Orlando ATC to report the near mid-air collision and ATC explained that aircraft was under radar vectors for practice approaches at the Sanford airport and when they realized the alert on radar they immediately instructed the jet to climb. No further explanations were given; flight crew continued with planned lesson.ATC could provide better separation or higher altitudes vectors considering jet aircraft was well outside Orlando Class B airspace in a known congested area of flight training.




Synopsis: An instructor administering a pilot's standardization check at 2;500 FT reported a near miss after a small jet passed overhead while it was under MCO TRACON radar vectors for SFB practice approaches.
Date: 201702
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: PHX.Airport, AZ
Aircraft: A320
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Tower PHX
Second aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Taxiing for takeoff at PHX runway 7L on E taxiway. As we became number one for takeoff we were proceeding past E4 taxiway to turn left on E3 taxiway to hold short for takeoff instructions. As we were crossing over the E3 threshold tower told us to stop to let another aircraft go ahead of us. I figure it was an aircraft behind us because the nose of my aircraft was half way through the E3 taxiway. Then I saw an aircraft on D taxiway making the left turn from D to D1 to E3 right in front of us at a high rate of speed. I told my First Officer (FO) I think he may clip our nose with his wing tip. My FO said his right main wheels were so close to the taxi way lights that he thought he was going to take them out. The wing tip of the aircraft missed us by 5 feet. After they had passed the tower called thanked us for stopping and apologized for the late call for stopping.They should have stopped and said they could not get through because we were blocking the taxiway. Had they hit us it would have damaged the aircraft.




Synopsis: A320 Captain reported another aircraft passed very close to the front of the aircraft while holding at a taxiway intersection.
Date: 201908
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: DIJ.Airport, ID
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class E ZLC
ATC / advisory: Center ZLC
Aircraft component: Fuselage Nose Cone
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Captain; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Inflight Event / Encounter Bird / Animal
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged
Contributing factors: Airport
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: I had canceled my IFR flight plan in the air and was entering the DIJ traffic pattern for runway 22. Upon setting up and while entering the 45 entry for right downwind 22 the aircraft was struck by a medium size bird which appeared 30-50' in front of the aircraft. Impact was obvious due to the sound and debris on the windshield. I continued to enter the pattern normally and landed without further incident. Upon landing; a visual inspection determined the bird had impacted the radome causing serious damage.




Synopsis: Corporate pilot reported a bird strike to the radome while landing at DIJ.
Date: 202105
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: clear; 10
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: Golden Eagle 421
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
Aircraft component: Normal Brake System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Ground Excursion Runway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Other Landing
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: After a normal landing at ZZZ the right brake would not activate. Once rudder authority was lost the aircraft departed the left side of the runway. The nose gear collapsed in the soft dirt and the engines stopped. There were no injuries and we exited the aircraft.




Synopsis: Pilot reported right main brake malfunctioned; causing a runway excursion and aircraft damage.