elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 202106
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class G ZZZ
Second aircraft: UAV: Unpiloted Aerial Vehicle
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Confusion; Distraction
Anomaly: Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Unauthorized Flight Operations (UAS); Inflight Event / Encounter Aircraft
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Airport; Human Factors
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Aircraft was in the traffic pattern at ZZZ; downwind leg turning to base; approximate altitude 3;000ft MSL; 90 MPH. Approximately .25 mile from the approach end of RUNWAY. A small impact was heard and felt by the pilot. There was nothing observed by the pilot; no evasive action taken. There were no control issues with the aircraft; initial thoughts were that a bird strike had occurred. After parking in the hangar; the aircraft was inspected. Damage from impact with a solid object was found on the underside of the right wing; outboard wing panel and wing tip. There were scratches on the paint and a slight crease in a wing skin. There was no structural damage and the aircraft is airworthy. The damage was consistent with a hard object with a width of at least 18 inches; and suggested that the impact was with a drone. Within the traffic pattern and at pattern elevation of an airport is not an appropriate area for drone operation.

Callback: Callback completed and pilot was able to confirm impact was most likely from a quad style type drone due to damage and scratches to aircraft.



Synopsis: General aviation pilot struck a UAS while on approach. After landing and during inspection of the aircraft the pilot found damage to the wing of the aircraft.
Date: 201809
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Powerplant Fuel Control Unit
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Technician
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance
Detector: Person Maintenance
When detected: Routine Inspection
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors; Incorrect / Not Installed / Unavailable Part
Primary problem: Incorrect / Not Installed / Unavailable Part

Narrative: [We] were assigned to Aircraft X to troubleshoot a fuel leak out of #1 Engine. We noticed a fuel leak coming out of Fuel Pressure Relief Valve on the Main Fuel/ Oil Heat Exchanger. We created a non-routine on ELB [electronic log book] to troubleshoot and [someone else] transferred [the] ELB write-up to a paper write-up with work sheet.We removed the Servo Fuel Heater per AMM and removed the Main Fuel/Oil heat exchanger per AMM. We received a new Main Fuel/Oil Heat Exchanger but it was damaged when received; so we turned over to midnight shift.




Synopsis: B737 Maintenance Technician reported the replacement part was damaged.
Date: 201708
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: AVQ.Airport, AZ
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Ferry / Re-Positioning
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class E TUS
ATC / advisory: CTAF AVQ
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Single Pilot; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Exited Penetrated Airspace
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure
Primary problem: Airspace Structure

Narrative: I was repositioning the aircraft to AVQ. Approximately 30 miles from Marana I started monitoring CTAF in my #2 radio. There was a Cirrus on a similar route as me that I was overtaking. I told Center that unless Tucson Approach had taken my handoff I would cancel IFR so that I could coordinate spacing to Marana with the VFR Cirrus. Center advised me that there was no other traffic observed between me and the Marana airport and frequency change was approved. I slowed down and configured early to keep spacing on final. The aircraft ahead reported over Pinal airpark shortly before I did; I then also reported over Pinal. A voice then came onto CTAF and advised me I had flown through an active military drop zone at Pinal. I apologized and landed normally. I have several concerns about the jump operation at Pinal. 1. I had briefed through DUATS before departure and saw no NOTAM for parachute activity at Pinal. 2. Center did not advise me of any jump activity over Pinal. Center and Approach typically will advise when the jump area over Pinal and other surrounding airports is hot. Absent this; I joined an extended final approach to 12 to allow time to slow and configure for spacing. 3. The aircraft ahead also reported over Pinal. If the jump zone went hot in the less than 3 minutes between CTAF reports with no advisory over Marana CTAF as well as Center and Approach not being aware; a serious conflict could develop. 4. Having a drop zone located on a 10 mile final to the calm wind runway at a busy non-towered airport with large amounts of jet traffic does not seem like a good idea to me.




Synopsis: Corporate jet pilot reported unknowingly flying through a military drop zone at MZJ during final approach to AVQ.
Date: 201305
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZMP.ARTCC, MN
Aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Other / Unknown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Fuel Issue
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I arrived at Polar to relieve a Controller and found out that we were holding aircraft for ORD. After getting the briefing and finding out that ZAU only had two of the three sectors open that they could have open I questioned my Supervisor and TMU Manager about us holding airplanes 300 miles from ORD when ZAU had an unopened sector 200 miles closer to ORD that could be used for holding. We had one aircraft divert to their alternate airport because of fuel. In the past we have asked for assistance from the Command Center with saturated sectors and we were told that; 'Unless you have all your sectors open; you do not need any assistance.' Have ZAU open all their sectors and hold these aircraft closer to their destination so aircraft don't have to divert to their alternates.




Synopsis: ZMP Controller described a holding event for ORD claiming that holding in ZAU's airspace much closer to ORD was more reasonable.
Date: 201909
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: A320
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
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: Troubleshooting; Workload
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Hazardous Material Violation; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Fuel Issue
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: The ground problem began when the Ramp Agent came to the cockpit to tell us he was loading batteries in the rear pit and he had specific procedures to follow to surround these with a certain number of bags. He thought these were lithium batteries but wasn't sure; but he was told these batteries were hazardous material. However; he was sure that these items were not dangerous goods so we departed with his assurance. Once airborne; I began to question my trust in the agent and should have asked more people to be involved in determining the classification of these items.ATC then gave us many more unnecessary threats upon entrance into ZZZ airspace; rerouted [RNAV Arrival ZZZZZ3] which added 15 mins and cost over 1000 lbs. of gas. This put us at 4.9 EFOB. I stated that I could then accept no delays and asked for reason for reroute. Gate deconfliction was given as reason and then we were rerouted back to [RNAV Arrival ZZZZZ3]. Shortly after this we were reissued [RNAV Arrival ZZZZZ2] and a descend via. We followed the STAR plate and set up for [Runway] XXR even though this runway was NOTAM'd closed - bottom parameters at HOOTI 210/6000 . Upon contact with ZZZ approach; we were given Runway XXL assignment with no change in descend via - bottom parameters at ZZZZZ1 210/8000. Then as we continued closer; we were given Runway XY with no change in descend via - bottom parameters at ZZZZZ2 210/4000. The ONLY reason we did not have an altitude violation was due to our VVM and attention to detail. Flight landed and taxied to gate without further incident.




Synopsis: A320 Captain reported receiving unspecified batteries from Ramp Agent who erroneously informed flight crew batteries were not classified as Hazmat. Flight departed without information verification.
Date: 201403
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: PA-28 Cherokee/Archer/Dakota/Pillan/Warrior
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Initial Climb
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: AC Generator/Alternator
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Check Pilot; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: After normal run-up; [we] experienced a total electrical failure. During startup we could tell the battery was low due to slow prop cranking but it fired fast. During run-up everything was normal per the laminated checklist. After takeoff clearance cleared for takeoff fly straight out; as I announced no more usable runway; positive rate; gear up; [the other pilot] selected gear up; whereupon electrical failure occurred. Both pilots verified total avionics failure. [We] verified 80 knots for upwind. At 3;000 feet we began right crosswind to downwind; keeping eyes on Tower. Remaining at 3;000 FT downwind; we began left circles midfield. [We] exchanged controls and verified the emergency checklists for electrical failure and gear down extension. Checking for Tower lights; during the 3rd circle I called Dispatch on cell phone to forward information to Tower on the situation. During the 4th circle we received a green light gun signal for landing. At approximately 100 FT we did a low pass for Tower to verify gear down. During go-around; I called Dispatch to verify and the Dispatcher forwarded the verification for gear down from the Tower. At midfield we received the 2nd green light gun signal. Executing normal approach and landing; I verified checklists out loud and airspeeds upon short final. The landing was uneventful. After clearing the runway using no brakes we received a green light gun signal and taxied straight into the ramp where maintenance personnel signaled to continue taxiing to the ramp.




Synopsis: Two pilots in a PA28 Arrow experienced a complete electrical failure after takeoff. They performed the appropriate checklist and circled the field anticipating tower light gun signals. One pilot used his mobile phone to relay information on their issues and requested landing gear position confirmation. They then received a light gun signal and landed normally. They reported to suspect that the new alternator had seized.
Date: 201810
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ramp ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Ground Personnel
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Airport; Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: We were pulling into gate XX at ZZZ. Had engines at idle the entire time. The accu-park system was on and giving us proper guidance. With about 40 feet remaining on the sign; I noticed out of the corner of my eye a marshaller standing off to the left giving me the stop sign. We stopped with about 35 feet showing left on the parking system. We were getting conflicting information from the marshaller and the parking system. The marshaller was giving us the shutdown engine sign; which we did while querying ramp/ops if they had any information. After the marshaller plugged in; he said we would have hit a catering truck which was off to the right. The safety zone was clear when we were making the turn in and the FO (First Officer) said we were clear as we were nearing the gate. There was an aircraft at [the adjacent gate] with a catering truck at door 2; which could have moved giving the marshaller concern. I have 2 safety concerns about this evolution. One; if there was a truck in the safety zone; the system should have given us a STOP signal. The second; I barely noticed the marshaller giving us the stop signal; as he was off to the left and I was concentrating on the parking system. If in fact there was a chance of hitting anything; he should have been much more visible about getting our attention or been able to turn off the parking system. After we towed the rest of the way to the gate; I talked with him on the interphone and stated these concerns. He stated the shutoff for the parking was on the other side of the jetbridge; and he understood my concerns.




Synopsis: B737 Captain reported a ramp employee gave the stop signal while taxiing into the gate using the accu-park because a truck had pulled into the safety zone.
Date: 202112
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Aircraft: A319
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Pressurization System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport
Contributing factors: Aircraft; MEL
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Climbing through FL200 felt a pressure bump. We heard a 'flapping' sound and immediately had the EWD (Engine Warning Display) display the Pressure page and it was showing the cabin climbing at 4100 fpm+. That cleared itself and we both agreed to stop our climb at FL220. Selected the Pressure page and it showed the cabin still climbing at 500-600 fpm and the cabin altitude at around 4;500 feet. We watched it continue to climb and decided that there was a malfunction in the system but had no ECAM warning associated with it at that time. We decided the best course of action was to descend immediately and return to ZZZ. The First Officer was the Pilot Flying and he took control of the plane and the radios while I called the company (ZZZ Ops & Maintenance Control as well as the Dispatcher). I then notified the #1 F/A that we were returning to ZZZ and we had had a pressurization malfunction but to expect a normal flight back to the airport. The First Officer received a clearance to descend and a turn back to ZZZ. We prepared for a normal approach to [Runway] XXR and landed without further incident. Our landing weight was approximately 127;000 lbs well under our max landing weight. Cause - Simple mechanical malfunction. But a contributing factor might be that the aircraft had the left Pack on MEL.Suggestions - Again; this was just a mechanical failure that we had to deal with...you know FIX!


Second narrative: Climbing out of FL210 I noticed the cabin pressure was rising at a rate not typical to the aircraft. I (Pilot Flying) leveled off at FL220 to assess the situation. We determined there was a pressurization problem and the cabin altitude was continuing to rise. We advised ATC; requested a descent; and returned to ZZZ without further incident. The Captain and I worked well together using SOPs to determine the issue and make the right decision about how to safely get the airplane on the ground.


Synopsis: A319 flight crew reported a pressurization system malfunction in climb. Returned to departure airport and landed uneventfully.
Date: 202201
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: MD-11
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Gear Lever/Selector
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: After takeoff landing gear handle would not move to the up position. Ran the 'Gear handle will not move to the up position' checklist which has you push the handle release button and move the handle to the up position. The main landing gear retracted but the nose gear remained down. This led to the 'Gear primary or secondary light(s) illuminate with gear handle up' checklist which has you lower the gear and maintain speed. Gear lowered and was verified down and locked. Requested priority handling with ZZZ Approach and requested vectors. Then ran the 'Ground sensor failure' checklist as ground shift had not occurred. Received vectors to ILS [Runway] XXC; ran normal checklists and made an uneventful landing. Did not dump fuel or request equipment however Fire/Rescue was standing by. On landing rollout the nose gear seemed to settle or compress to a low position with an unusual vibration. Stopped on runway and had Fire/Rescue inspect the nose gear; they reported that the nose gear appeared normal. Cleared the runway and taxied to parking uneventfully.




Synopsis: MD-11 Captain reported landing gear handle would not move to the up position after takeoff. The flight crew performed an air turn back and precautionary landing.
Date: 201502
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Dispatcher
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Weight And Balance
Contributing factors: Chart Or Publication
Primary problem: Chart Or Publication

Narrative: Aircraft departed NTD with incorrect ZFW numbers from CLP. Error appears to have come from between  &quot;Ride along&quot; and communication to CLP. Aircraft was 19;700lbs heavier than what CLP was told by ride along; and thus Crew were given incorrect numbers prior to take off.  This is not the first time that actual weights are not correct at departure.  System is severely flawed.




Synopsis: A Dispatcher reported an aircraft departed NTD with incorrect ZFW numbers from CLP.  The aircraft was 19;700 lbs. heavier than what CLP was told by 'ride along.'  The air crew were given incorrect numbers prior to takeoff.
Date: 201212
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-300
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Trailing Edge Flap
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: On approach as flaps 5 were selected; the flap gauge did not move past the 1 position with a slight asymmetry. A go-around was initiated and the flap lever was set to position 1. The QRH was referenced and a flaps 1 approach was accomplished as per the 'Flaps; Trailing Edge: Asymmetrical' with the flap lever in the 1 detent. The landing data was recalculated and stopping margin and brake cooling were not a factor. Approach and landing were uneventful. I felt a bit rushed to accomplish the checklist and get the aircraft on the ground. Fuel was 5.7 when the go-around was initiated. ATC was keeping us busy with frequency and altitude changes. There was enough fuel to take more time to analyze the situation.




Synopsis: B737-300 Captain reported asymmetrical trailing edge flaps on approach. Go-around was executed; procedures run; and a normal landing ensued.