elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201410
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: IAH.Airport, TX
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B757 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class B IAH
ATC / advisory: TRACON I90
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Human-Machine Interface
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Altitude Crossing Restriction Not Met; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Descending into IAH on the MSCOT arrival we were given three runway assignments; the last being RWY 27. When we entered RWY 27 into the FMC; the altitude dropped out at BYSUN intersection. We caught the omission; but crossed the fix approx 400 FT high.


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


Synopsis: B757 flight crew reported crossing BYSUN high after runway assignment was changed three times on arrival to IAH.
Date: 201904
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Other / Unknown
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Hazardous Material Violation; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Other Person
When detected: Routine Inspection
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Gate; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: This was a Ramp Directed Loading flight. The ramp finalized the loading with two Hazmat items 1 and 2 on board and not secured with any bags. These items were separated one in pit 1 and one in pit 6. I invalidated the flight and contacted Dispatch to notify the crew and advise them they needed to return to the gate. [I] also contacted operations and advised them about the Hazmat and that the flight needed to return to secure both items with the required minimum 15 bags. The flight returned to the gate and the ramp loaded 15 bags in pits 1 and pit 6 to secure the Hazmat.




Synopsis: Load Control Agent directed taxiing aircraft to return to gate due to incorrect Hazmat load configuration.
Date: 201808
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Widebody Transport
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Fuel Tank
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Troubleshooting; Situational Awareness; Time Pressure
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Inflight Event / Encounter Fuel Issue
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: While at cruise FL360 received a 'tank 3 pumps off' alert. Consulted QRH which stated that the alert could be considered normal if fuel was less than 10;500 pounds in tanks 1 or 3 because of tip fuel transfer balancing. Crew then received alert 'TNK 3 tip trapped'; followed by a 'Tank 3 QTY low' alert. Tank 3 fuel quantity showed 7;000 lbs. Consulted QRH which said that tip fuel (5800 lbs.) was trapped and unusable. This put us in a possible emergency fuel state. Our destination was 160 miles away and closest suitable was ZZZ which was 50 miles away. [Operations Control] and [Maintenance Control] were consulted and decision was made to divert to ZZZ. [ATC was notified about] the low fuel situation. An uneventful approach and landing was accomplished. Landed with 14;000 on fuel gauges and estimated 8;500 with the trapped fuel deducted.The Number 3 tip tank that contains roughly 5;800 lbs of fuel did not drain into main tank as it normally should. Thus becoming fuel that is unusable. There is no crew action or QRH procedure for crew to perform to correct this. Usually caused by a stuck float/valve switch in tank.


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


Synopsis: Air carrier flight crew reported a fuel system tank anomaly causing fuel to become trapped and unusable and necessitating an immediate diversion.
Date: 201705
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: FTG.Airport, CO
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Helicopter
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class D FTG
ATC / advisory: Tower FTG
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: Captain; Check Pilot; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Anomaly: Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: My first IFR departure from the Front Range airport. FTG was doing IFR departures from Runway 8. As noted in the ATIS. I called tower and requested air taxi to the A6 taxiway for a mid-field departure. I directed [the Pilot Flying (PF)] to land the aircraft on the A6 taxiway into the wind which was strong out of the East. Which is why I wanted the midfield departure as I wanted to avoid a downwind air taxi to the approach end of Runway 8. My mind set was a runway departure. But the tower was expecting a departure from the taxiway as most all of our aircraft depart in that manner. When we were cleared for takeoff I directed PF to turn towards the runway as he was beginning a departure from over the grass between the runway and the taxiway. He did a clearing pedal turn (good for him) towards the runway and I looked over my left shoulder to see a Cessna directly overhead on a departure from the runway. I announced stop over the intercom and we did. We then heard the tower calling traffic to the departing Cessna that a helicopter was departing the Alpha taxiway. Then we both realized that our take off clearance was from the taxiway not the runway. We are not sure if we crossed the hold line but that is a possibility. The rest of the flight was uneventful.We both should have listened more intently to the tower communications and not assume the clearance was for the runway. Also during our briefing we discussed that if ever one of us is confused about anything that pilot should let the other pilot know about it. We were both confused. Had we admitted that earlier the potential runway incursion might not have happened.One last thing. We both were very intent on clearing before entering the runway. PF did the clearing turn and I looked. There for we shall continue to do those things we learned in flight school.


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


Synopsis: Helicopter flight crew reported a takeoff from a taxiway that may have drifted towards the runway being used by a fixed wing aircraft.
Date: 202008
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Crossing Restriction Not Met; Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was 500 feet high at ZZZZZ on the ZZZZZ1 RNAV SID from ZZZ. My flying skills and scan have degraded because I haven't flown for 6 months prior to this trip because of COVID-19.




Synopsis: Air carrier First Officer reported altitude deviation on a departure and cited lack of flying as a contributing factor.
Date: 201504
Aircraft: A321
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Passenger Electronic Device
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Passenger's POC (Portable Oxygen Concentrator) low/neg battery level required the use of 2 POBs for duration of flight. Under this circumstance; could exception be made to charge POC battery using onboard 120V outlet?




Synopsis: A Flight Attendant used the aircraft's 120VAC system to charge a passenger's two Portable Oxygen Concentrator batteries inflight. She was uncertain about her company's electrical use policy.
Date: 201907
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Pitot-Static System
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
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Rejected Takeoff; General Work Refused; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Release Refused / Aircraft Not Accepted
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: RTO (Rejected Takeoff) around 88 knots due to IAS disagree on both Captains and FO (First Officer) side. FO airspeed lagged about 15 knots and Capt's AS (Airspeed) began accelerating rapidly. Unable to determine correct V1; Vr and V2 speeds accurately. Vendor maintenance with coordination from ZZZ Maintenance indicated all tests and visual inspections of pitot and static ports were clear and tests indicated no fault. I refused the aircraft to be signed off for flying by Maintenance. [Maintenance Control] sent a team of mechanics and discovered with in depth inspection debris and ash in pitot static system and defective ADM (Air Data Module.)




Synopsis: B737 Captain reported rejected takeoff due to airspeed anomalies.
Date: 201511
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: B737-700
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
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
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation - Speed All Types; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Weather
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: While at cruise altitude FL400; aircraft encountered severe turbulence. This caused the aircraft to momentarily exceed our Mach Max Operating speed along with aircraft flight path deviations. The aircraft then encountered a rapid decay in indicated airspeed while still encountering severe turbulence. We [advised ATC] and exercised Captain's emergency authority and began a descent to regain critical airspeed and give the aircraft a larger margin of safety in which to operate. We descended 4000 feet in order to regain our loss of airspeed; once the aircraft was no longer in severe turbulence and completely controllable; we coordinated a new cruise altitude with Air Traffic Control and cancelled our emergency status.We had our weather radar operating with a tilt below our flight path. Our radar indicated no weather on our flight path or within 50 miles of our flight track. Access to our internet weather program would have possibly given us a clearer picture of weather that was not being depicted on our aircraft weather radar.


Second narrative: In retrospect; the moon was not present so shadows of cumulus clouds were hard to make out. We inadvertently flew right over the top of a very small but forming cumulus. The radar did not pick it up; if we had the tilt lower it may have given us a heads up. Having used an auto tilt is of course safer; but we could have made more frequent sweeps of the tilt.


Synopsis: B737-700 flight crew reported encountering severe turbulence at FL400.
Date: 202012
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Reporter qualification: Flight Attendant Current
Human factors: Confusion; Communication Breakdown; Distraction; Troubleshooting; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Illness / Injury; No Specific Anomaly Occurred Unwanted Situation
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: Other all phases
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: While working Aircraft X ZZZ-ZZZ1; I became concerned for the health and well-being of my flying partner.  She displayed numerous symptoms of severe illness including: persistent coughing; sneezing; shortness of breath; weakness; and sweating profusely.  Prior to starting the service; I witnessed [flying partner] remove her tote bag from the galley cart and take several pills.  [Flying partner] then had difficulty pushing and pulling the beverage cart with assistance.  It strained her and seemed very difficult for her to speak with customers; so I had prepared a sign in blue marker that read; 'What do you want to drink?' and listed beverages.  After picking up trash; [flying partner] repeatedly placed her used gloves on top of the galley counter.  Upon descent into ZZZ1; I noticed the orange strap at door 2R was not attached and reminded her to affix it.  At that time; she was coughing and was no longer wearing a mask at all.  I expressed genuine concern for her well-being and was uncomfortable flying with someone who appeared so unwell.




Synopsis: Flight Attendant reported another Flight Attendant was ill during the flight and not able to wear the face mask at all times; especially when coughing.
Date: 201508
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: A321
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Ferry / Re-Positioning
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Gear Extend/Retract Mechanism
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Maintenance ferry flight; no passengers on board. On visual approach at 1;800 feet Pilot Flying called for gear down. Gear failed to extend with accompanying ECAM message L/G GEAR NOT DOWNLOCKED along with RED UNLKD lights illuminated in landing gear position indicators. Coordinated with Tower - we maintained 1;800 feet and flew an extended traffic pattern. Performed non-normal methodology and ECAM action. Unable to extend landing gear after second attempt. Proceeded to L/G GEAR NOT DOWNLOCKED abnormal procedure. Followed procedure and attempted a total of five normal gear extensions with QRH directed wait time between gear cycles. Gear failed to extend normally. Proceeded to L/G Gravity Extension checklist and performed gravity extension. Gear extended with all gear positions indicating down and locked. Requested ARFF. Landing and taxi was normal with no further issues. Requested ARFF follow us to ramp for safety precaution. Discrepancy was entered in [the logbook] and advised maintenance facility of issue. Filed report with Dispatch post flight on the ground.


Second narrative: [Report narrative contained no additional information]


Synopsis: An A321 flight crew reported the normal gear extend system failed to deploy the landing gear; so they used the backup gravity system.
Date: 201504
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: LGA.Airport, NY
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Medium Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground LGA
Second aircraft: MD-88
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Ground Conflict; Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Flight Crew; Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: Taxi
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Airport; Environment - Non Weather Related; Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: When being cleared to taxi to our gate; the ground controller said 'right on Zulu right on alpha taxi into gate at November; give way to the 88.' We interpreted this to mean give way at November. The controller meant give way at Zulu. The controller said; 'I said give way to the 88'. I answered giving way. The pilot of the 88 then said; let them go ahead. The controller agreed and we continued to our gate.The clearance did not seem confusing but unfortunately we misunderstood the instructions. The controller was not clear about where we were to give way. There were several 88s within sight. I will ask the controller where to give way when they give ambiguous instructions.




Synopsis: A pilot taxiing to the gate reported LGA Ground taxi clearance included giving way to a MD-88 at 'N' which he thought happened but the controller meant a different MD-88 at Taxiway 'Z.'
Date: 201204
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: BFI.Airport, WA
Aircraft: Citation V/Ultra/Encore (C560)
Operator: Fractional
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class D BFI
ATC / advisory: TRACON S46
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach; Departure
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Developmental
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict
Detector: Automation Aircraft RA
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: A C560 was departing BFI; checked on the frequency climbing to assigned altitude of 2;100. I advised them to expect a 'step up climb' due to a heavy B767 departing SEA 4 miles in trail. Soon after RADAR identification; the C560 advised that they were responding to a TCAS RA and descending 'back down' to 2;100. When I observed the C560's Mode C; it indicated 2;300 and I issued a traffic call referencing an unidentified VFR target indicating 1;600 at 1 o'clock and 1 mile. On initial contact; I did not observe the VFR traffic as a potential conflict for the C560. The traffic was no longer a factor and the C560 continued on their route and climb without further incident. I am not certain that BFI Tower issued a traffic advisory to the C560 prior to frequency change while both aircraft were still within the lateral limits of BFI's Class D airspace. Better communication between me and the BFI Tower Controller or between BFI Tower and the C560 might have prevented the TCAS RA.




Synopsis: S46 Controller described a TCAS RA event between an IFR BFI departure aircraft and an unknown VFR aircraft operating nearby; the reporter listing less than complete communication between ATC personnel and the VFR aircraft.
Date: 202012
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: DEN.Airport, CO
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B DEN
ATC / advisory: TRACON D01
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Automation Air Traffic Control; Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory
Contributing factors: Chart Or Publication; Human Factors; Airspace Structure
Primary problem: Chart Or Publication

Narrative: We were cleared for the visual approach to Runway 35R at 9;000 feet. The DRUMM approach segment was to 9;000 feet; and we started down to 7;000 feet for FRONZ approach segment. ATC alerted us of a MVA altitude alert. We corrected up to the altitude of 7;500 feet as ATC said that altitude was needed for that segment. We were cleared for the visual and were following the step down altitudes.I contacted one of our managers here at the Company; and they followed up on it for me and there was no documentation noted by ATC of any issues or violations. Company Manager said that we might have touched the Class B airspace limit and that would trigger the same alert per DEN ATC. The rest of the flight was uneventful.


Second narrative: We were at 9;000 feet MSL approximately three miles east of DRUMM on the visual to Runway 35R. We had Runway 35R in sight and were cleared the visual. Abeam DRUMM we started a descent to 7;000 feet MSL. We leveled at 7;000 feet in between DRUMM and the FAF FRONZ. ATC informed us of a low altitude alert and advised the MVA was 7;500 feet. We were approximately 1;200 feet above the terrain and out of caution climbed up to 7;500 feet and intercept glidepath shortly later. No GPWS alerts occurred.


Synopsis: Air carrier flight crew reported receiving altitude alert from ATC on approach to DEN airport.