elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201409
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Night
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 170/175 ER/LR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Reporter qualification: Flight Attendant Current
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Illness / Injury
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate; In-flight
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Near the end of boarding there was a teenage girl who vomited in the aft galley. We called for hazmat to clean and a ground supervisor to come determine whether we should accept this passenger for transport since she seemed to have 'flu-like' symptoms. The girl who got sick did not speak English. She was traveling with a large international group. One of the members of her group came forward and told us that she does not have a fever; that she is only vomiting because they had to run to make their connection. With this information it was determined that it would be safe to transport her. 20 minutes after take off; she had vomited on the floor in the aft again and continued to vomit in the aft lavatory  sink. Approximately 20 minutes after that; after preparing the cabin for landing; another gentleman of the group (in his mid-twenties) came to the forward lavatory to vomit. The B FA and I decided to break sterile cockpit to let the pilots know that there is a passenger in the lavatory vomiting. The passenger was still in the lavatory for landing and until we parked at the gate. The passenger who vomited during boarding vomited 3 more times between preparing for landing and arriving at the gate. Paramedics were called. The paramedics checked out the two vomiting passengers and were on their way.




Synopsis: Flight Attendant encounters two passengers vomiting on her flights and has the flight crew call paramedics to meet the aircraft. The passengers are examined and released.
Date: 202111
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Aircraft: PA-28 Cherokee/Archer/Dakota/Pillan/Warrior
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Communication Systems
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach
Human factors: Confusion; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors; Procedure; Aircraft; ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings
Primary problem: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings

Narrative: While vectoring Aircraft X to final for the GPS XX at ZZZ; I lost comms with the aircraft due to poor radio coverage. He was on a base headed east and descending to 2;000 ft. When he went NORDO and flew into a 2;700 ft. MVA. I tried reaching him and asked another aircraft for to relay a message to climb with no response and then the pilot came up on another frequency anxiety climbed him immediately. He climbed above the MVA and then was vectored around for another approach.




Synopsis: TRACON Controller reported an aircraft went NORDO and flew into a higher MVA.
Date: 201912
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ORD.Airport, IL
Flight conditions: IMC
Aircraft: B777 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class B ORD
ATC / advisory: Tower ORD
Second aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: Final approach to 28R ORD; CAT III approach was planned and briefed. There was another aircraft on the runway cleared for takeoff but not yet ready. Tower asked them several times if they were ready. They responded '20 seconds; 10 seconds; 5 seconds; ready' and were cleared for takeoff when we were on a 2 mile final. We were then cleared to land with a caution for wake turbulence. We were at 130 kts with flaps 30. Stable.Approaching alert height the runway approach lights were in sight. Around alert height the runway was in sight. Just after the 30 foot call the aircraft began veering to the left of center and 'burbling' was felt; due to the other aircraft's wake we believe. Around the 10 foot call I decided the best course of action was to disconnect the autopilot; announced disconnecting autopilot; then disconnected to prevent further left drift. The runway was in sight with a safe landing possible. I was concerned with our low airspeed and altitude that the tail would contact the runway if a go around was executed. Landed 28R and taxied to gate with no further incident. We fully debriefed as a crew at the gate.




Synopsis: B777 Captain reported encountering jet blast just before landing from an aircraft departing on the same runway.
Date: 201211
Location: DFW.Airport, TX
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: MD-80 Series (DC-9-80) Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground DFW
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Confusion; Workload
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: DFW Ground Control and my airline use coded standard taxi routes for outbound and inbound taxi operations at DFW airport. There are some serious safety issues with this that need to be addressed. 1. Not all the controllers us the standard routes. They are not used with other carriers at DFW and the controllers don't always give us a standard routes; some say 'cleared to 17C via Kilo; Echo; Gulf.' The next day the same route is: 'Cleared to 17C via the inner.' 2. The coded standard routes forces us to be heads down during taxi. This is a runway incursion waiting to happen; and for what? These clearances do absolutely nothing to help the pilots. Their sole benefit is take work away from the Ground Controller and allow them to pass the buck for compliance and legality on to the cockpit. In other words; these clearances shift work and stress from Ground Control and transfer it to the cockpit. I therefore assume the responsibility and do the work that the Ground Controller is getting paid to do. Controlling aircraft on the ground is their job; not mine! I am doing the Ground Controller's job at a time that I am juggling nine balls already. THIS IS UNSAFE ON SO MANY LEVELS AND SHOULD BE STOPPED IMMEDIATLEY. There is no real benefit to these asinine clearances. There is only increased risk to the safe operation of my aircraft. I have therefore refused these clearances since they were begun. I will not accept them.




Synopsis: Air Carrier departing DFW voiced concern regarding the 'Coded Taxi Routes' used for his company; noting inconsistency of use by ATC and cockpit workload as complicating factors.
Date: 201407
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Bonanza 36
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class G ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Cowling/Nacelle Fasteners; Latches
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Captain; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Distraction; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Ground Event / Encounter Gear Up Landing
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Just after refueling and leveling off VFR in cruise flight the engine cowling popped open and began flapping in the slipstream. I had just flown a 2.5 hour flight with no issues and was surprised to see this happen after departure; as the cowling had not been opened since preflight that morning. I slowed the aircraft and looked for a close airport to land and secure the cowling. Directly below me was [a suitable] airport. I began a circle around to land. I set up for final approach and checked mixture rich prop forward and on final flaps full for landing. My concern was that the cowling would tear off before I got on the ground and cause damage to the windshield or worse. Due to my attention to the flapping cowling I neglected to select the gear down and executed a gear up landing. When I did finally hear the gear horn buzzing I mistakenly thought I was hearing the stall horn warning. Although I have flown this aircraft in the past; it had been over three years since I flew it. The day before I took this flight I went up for a 45 minute familiarization flight and executed four take offs and landings in the process. In retrospect I believe I should have gone up with someone who has been flying this aircraft on a regular basis and gone over all the emergency procedures that could be anticipated and not simply a local area flight and normal take offs and landings. It had been a long time since I flew retractable gear aircraft and while I have many thousands of hours in them my recent experience has all been in helicopters with fixed gear. This combined with the distraction of an engine cowling loose in my opinion contributed to my error in not having the gear down upon landing.




Synopsis: BE36 pilot reports the engine cowling coming open in flight and a diversion to a suitable airport. The distraction caused by the flapping cowl results in the landing gear being forgotten and a gear up landing.
Date: 201507
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: PHX.Airport, AZ
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class B PHX
ATC / advisory: TRACON P50
Second aircraft: UAV - Unpiloted Aerial Vehicle
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Captain
Anomaly: Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Object
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Procedure; Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Flying the BRUSR 1 Arrival for Runway 26 into PHX; and a four-pod drone was spotted in front of our aircraft moving right to left. Continue to report high flying drones in the vicinity of all airports and give full detail to ATC of its current location; and description.

Callback: The reporter stated his aircraft was at 9;000 feet. The UAV was west of his aircraft about 1;000 feet below and near SDL.

Second narrative: On the BRUSR 1 Arrival; we saw what looked like a drone about 1;000 feet below us heading northwest bound around the BRIEZ waypoint. The drone appeared to be a chopper- quad. We were surprised to see something like this operating in busy airspace. Previous to this; my First Officer noted what appeared to be a drone to our right; but I did not see it; this would have been a different sighting then the craft we both saw fly underneath us. We reported it immediately to the Controller and he asked us a few questions about its description.


Synopsis: Air Carrier flight crew report a four pod drone in the vicinity of their aircraft while on final for Runway 26 at PHX.
Date: 202107
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Aircraft: B777-200
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Cruise
Aircraft component: GPS & Other Satellite Navigation
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Workload; Situational Awareness; Human-Machine Interface; Distraction; Confusion
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overrode Automation; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Software and Automation; Procedure; ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings
Primary problem: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings

Narrative: Suspected GPS jamming between LOGMU and ROKUB on T561 XA:17Z-XB:03Z. EICAS alert for NAV UNABLE RNP. Followed checklist and used radio/IRS updating during the event. Was able to resume normal GPS ops for remainder of flight. Most likely some crazy militants in the area. Perhaps pay the big bucks and fly over Siberia on this route. Most likely less GPS jamming and probably more efficient for flight planning. Although I appreciate the longer rest opportunities on these double crewed flights.




Synopsis: An air carrier Captain reported GPS jamming.
Date: 201910
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 170/175 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Aircraft component: Monitoring System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant In Charge; Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Reporter qualification: Flight Attendant Current
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; General Maintenance Action; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: A few minutes after the sterile light went off; as we were starting our service; the Captain called and said we had a technical issue and that we had a Yellow Emergency; the MAU 3 failed and that we needed to land as soon as possible - that was approximately 15 minutes after takeoff. Right after that; the Captain made an announcement that we were to go back to ZZZ because of maintenance/technical issue. Being Flight Attendant A; I also briefed FA (Flight Attendant) B and we went through the procedure - had the passengers sit down securely buckled; stowed everything; locked the lavatories; turned the Wi-Fi off and then reviewed the land emergency QRC (Quick Reference Checklist). And we did all that without the passengers noticing how serious the issue was. They thanked us of the way we handled the situation upon deplaning. I would also like to conclude by thanking the pilots the way they handled this event; and the FA B who was incredibly professional. End of report.




Synopsis: EMB-175 Flight Attendant reported that aircraft returned to departure airport due to loss of AV MAU-3 on climbout.
Date: 201712
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: 0.75
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: PA-44 Seminole/Turbo Seminole
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Ferry / Re-Positioning
Flight phase: Final Approach
Aircraft component: ILS/VOR
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: During approach to ZZZ on ILS tower issued a terrain alert. Checking the HSI I noticed no glide slope indication. Added power and pitched up. Glide slope returned immediately from the top. Followed the glide slope to the runway and landed.




Synopsis: Twin Piper pilot reported ATC issued low altitude alert due to continued descent following loss of glideslope information.
Date: 202008
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Reporter qualification: Flight Attendant Current
Human factors: Confusion
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: In-flight
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Temporary; COVID inspired FARs require that only one Flight Attendant (FA) can take their break in the crew facility per break. However; FARs (and company policies as well) state that if the crew facility is occupied at all; the bunk with the phone in it 'must' be occupied as well. Therefore; if FAs are not allowed to occupy more than one bunk per break in order to keep physical distance from other FAs and not re-use any bunks; then we would actually be violating the FAR that requires the phone bunk to be occupied. Therefore; I occupied the phone bunk on this flight for my break in order to fulfill that FAR and safe practice. I left my mask on during my contractual rest break.  There was another FA in the facility as well; in the most forward bunk furthest away from the phone bunk; which is the most aft on the right side.For the second break; another FA occupied the phone bunk (after I had wiped all surfaces I had touched) in order to fulfill that safety requirement--but in violation of the COVID policy not reusing of bunk rule. There was also another FA taking their (second) break in  the facility.I feel it is 'more' unsafe to not comply with the requirement of having a FA in the phone bunk if the rest area is being occupied; therefore I complied with the older (and more logical) FAR. Senior FA who chose to use bunk for their break did not want to use the phone bunk. Also; I feel it is unsafe to only have one FA taking their contractual rest break in the facility per rest break. I have occasionally encountered FAs on rest breaks that have had health issues that needed medical attention. If someone were to suffer a health emergency while alone on a rest break; it could be a long time before another crew member could be alerted. Also; if a fire were to break out in the rest area we would not have enough FAs to both fight the fire and to communicate to the cockpit on the status of such an incident.




Synopsis: Flight Attendant reported safety concerns with having to follow COVID-19 procedures regarding the use of the crew rest area.
Date: 201909
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: BOI.Airport, ID
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Medium Transport
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class C BOI
ATC / advisory: TRACON BOI
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was PF (Pilot Flying) during a visual approach to BOI 28R backed up by the ILS in VMC conditions. We were cleared for the visual and turned base inside ZIXIP. I was descending to catch the glideslope; which was below us. At this time; I called for the Landing Checklist. I became too distracted by items on the Landing Checklist; and allowed the airplane to descend below glideslope and continue descending. The EGPWS [had] an amber terrain caution message; not a red terrain warning message. I leveled the airplane to maintain altitude; and the caution message went away. I then intercepted the glideslope from that altitude. I continued to a landing in BOI without any additional incidents.If I had stayed 'heads up' while descending; I would have easily intercepted the glideslope from above. While responding to the Landing Checklist; I should have stayed heads up; instead of becoming fixated on gear; flaps; etc. I should have allowed the PM (Pilot Monitoring) to focus on those items; which I could have easily verified after intercepting the glideslope and becoming stable. Another option would have been to call for the Landing Checklist after intercepting the glideslope and becoming stable.




Synopsis: Medium Transport First Officer reported receiving an EGPWS warning on approach to BOI airport.
Date: 201201
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Mission: Passenger
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Fatigue
Anomaly: Other fatigue
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Human Factors
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: There should have been a normal rest opportunity prior to operating a red eye flight. Even with normal rest in ZZZ; there was no time to rest prior to departing ZZZ1 to SKBO. Fatigue was an issue. SKBO as a special airport should have the most attentive crews available. I feel a two leg red eye is unsafe. We were awake for almost 20 hours while trying to navigate in the terrain around SKBO.




Synopsis: Air Carrier pilot describes a fatiguing two leg red eye flight from the west coast to SKBO.