elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201204
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: IMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: PA-28 Cherokee/Archer/Dakota/Pillan/Warrior
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Electrical Power
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Diverted; General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Aircraft; Weather
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: About 50 minutes after taking off for a single-pilot night IFR flight; my aircraft lost all electrical power. After some unsuccessful attempts to resolve the problem; I attempted to re-energize the transponder to at least briefly squawk an emergency code and to contact ATC via a handheld NavCom device. The success of either action remained unknown. If I would have continued my flight to its original destination in accordance with FAR 91.185 I would have had to fly my aircraft into the busy airspace of a commercial airport not just without communication but also without transponder; anti-collision lights; and landing lights. My aircraft would have been invisible to any TCAS of any larger aircraft operating in that airspace while ATC would have seen the flight as a passive target with unknown altitude.Furthermore I had only handheld devices with limited battery life left available for navigation; so I decided to treat the situation not just as a loss of communication but as an emergency.I made another attempt to contact ATC using the handheld NavCom; declaring an emergency and stating my situation and intentions. I received no readable response from ATC or otherwise. Upon reaching VFR conditions; I landed without further issues at a nearby non-towered airport thus deviating from my clearance.




Synopsis: A PA28 pilot on a night IFR flight suffered the loss of all electrical and; thus; communications and navigation capability. Rather than proceeding to his destination using lost comm procedures he opted to take emergency measures and diverted to a VFR airport for a safe landing.
Date: 201909
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: VRB.Tower, FL
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class D VRB
ATC / advisory: Tower VRB
Second aircraft: Other
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict NMAC; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was departing Runway 12R; and while I was aware the runway is a right pattern; I was fairly certain that Tower told me to continue on course. After I took off; at about 800 ft.; I began my turn to the northwest to my destination. There was another plane departing Runway 12L [that] passed very close underneath me on the left side of my plane. At about the same time I saw the other plane; the Tower Controller asked if I could see the traffic. I told him I could; and that it should be no factor. There was no contact; and I continued to my destination without further incident.




Synopsis: C172 pilot reported that an ATC error resulted in a NMAC.
Date: 201405
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: N90.TRACON, NY
Aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class B JFK
ATC / advisory: TRACON N90
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Time Pressure; Workload; Communication Breakdown; Confusion
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Separated Traffic
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Procedure
Primary problem: Airspace Structure

Narrative: JFK [and] LGA were both landing ILS 13; and coordinating to change approaches to both land ILS 22. Because of the close proximity of these airports; these are not easy runway changes; and require a lot of coordination between the two sectors. I heard the LGA Supervisor; give the Belmont airspace to JFK. This allowed JFK to start landing ILS 22. Unfortunately; LGA still had 5 aircraft being vectored for ILS 13 approach. JFK cannot land ILS 22 in the Belmont airspace when LGA is landing ILS 13. The ILS 13 go-around procedure is runway heading climb to 2;000 feet; which goes right into the Belmont airspace. I advised my Supervisor of his mistake and told him to keep the airspace until the last LGA 13 arrival had landed. He responded 'don't worry about it'. I was then instructed to relieve the Final Controller; and I personally had to clear the last of the LGA arrivals to Runway 13 with absolutely no protection for a go-around. LGA was in IFR conditions; and windshear had been an issue all day; the likelihood of a go-around was very high. A supervisor having such disregard for aircraft safety is absolutely frightening. I recommend everyone be briefed on all conditional airspace in our facility; and be reminded why airspace delegation is so critical. We are lucky none of the LGA arrivals went around; I'm afraid of what may happen next time someone is so negligent.




Synopsis: N90 Controller describes airport configuration change that he feels is unsafe.
Date: 201710
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Night
Aircraft: B737-700
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Automation Aircraft Terrain Warning
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: From the Arrival; we requested and were cleared the visual 19R with a right base a beam [a Tower]. The First Officer (FO) turned to a dogleg a little earlier than usual which brought us closer to the [Tower] than normal. We received an 'OBSTACLE; PULL UP' alert; which he immediately complied with by rolling wings level; pulling the nose up and adding power. The alert stopped quickly after that and we saw that we were still in a position to safely resume the approach. We landed with no further incident.On the right base to visual 19R; we should square the turn to final to maintain separation from the Tower. As the Pilot Monitoring; I should have noticed the situation developing and directed a correction. I don't see a need to change the procedure; we could have prevented the situation by complying fully with the existing procedure.


Second narrative: We were cleared for the 19R visual and briefed this event. I had not done this visual in a while; and did not maintain 3;500 FT long enough and did not fly a long enough final. When abeam the [Tower] I realized I was closer and lower than 'normal' and received; what I initially thought was a bank angle indication. I started to roll out as the Captain mentioned to follow the Guidance (GPWS). I started to push up the power and follow the commands. I was now in level flight and the GPWS guidance stopped. I was able to intercept the final and land uneventfully.I drew a 3.0 arc; but I did not stay outside of it nor did I stay at 3;500 FT long enough. I needed to be higher and wider around the [Tower]. We should have went around and landed on 26L.


Synopsis: B737-700 flight crew reported that they got an 'OBSTACLE; PULL UP' alert when they turned base early.
Date: 201402
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Weather elements / visibility: Snow
Aircraft: B737-700
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Turbine Engine
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Ground Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control
Contributing factors: Airport; Human Factors; Weather
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: The Captain taxied on [taxiway] at the direction of Ground Control. We were on centerline and the right main hit an unseen snow drift causing the aircraft to slide right and stop. The engine shut down on its own; shut down by snow ingestion.




Synopsis: B737 First Officer reports hitting an unseen snow drift during taxi out causing the aircraft to slide right and the right engine to shut down due to snow ingestion.
Date: 201712
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Turbulence
Light: Night
Aircraft: ATR 72
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Second aircraft: B767 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: [I] was following a B767 to land at ZZZ on Runway XXL. I was PF. ATC notified us of wake turbulence and issued vectors and speed reduction. B767 was clear of the runway and taxiing back when we were on approach. At 200 AGL [we] began to feel the wake turbulence of the 767. At 100 AGL the aircraft began to roll to the right [and] I applied full left aileron to counteract the roll and the aircraft continued to roll right. I executed a go around [and] continued around to another approach to XXL.We had appropriate wake turbulence clearance; but an aloft tailwind condition lead to the drift and continuation of wake turbulence; [it] was a good decision to go around and try another approach. No other deviations were observed.




Synopsis: ATR-72 Captain reported executing a go-around after encountering wake turbulence at 200 AGL on approach in trail of a B767.
Date: 201906
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: N90.TRACON, NY
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Climb
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: During our climbout of New York airspace; we were given altitudes and vectors instead of a departure procedure. Eventually we were given direct to a fix. The Controller told us 'direct to COATE.' I (PNF) responded 'direct to COPES;' line-selected it on the CDU; confirmed with the PF; and executed the command. Proceeding to COPES would result in a left turn of about 45 degrees. Direct to COPES may have resulted in no turn at all due to the vectors. A couple minutes later a different Controller took over and said we were supposed to be flying to COATE; and to turn now to 315 degrees. We took the vector and assured him we were direct to COPES (still not noticing the difference in the fix names he was pronouncing). In the meantime the PF and I were discussing what the confusion could have been; and realized it was a confusion between COATE and COPES; so when the Controller again gave us direct to COATE a minute later; I responded 'direct to COATE Charlie-Oscar-Papa-Echo-Sierra.' The Controller didn't seem to think it was that bad of an error; but we thought it prudent to file this report. The rest of the flight was uneventful. We needed to listen more carefully.




Synopsis: First Officer reported a track deviation during departure from JFK airport.
Date: 202001
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: SJC.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: IMC
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class C SJC; Class E ZOA
ATC / advisory: TRACON NCT
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Automation Aircraft Terrain Warning
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: After being vectored off the SILCN 4 arrival into San Jose; we were given direct to the fix GGUGL and instructed to descend via the SILCN 4 for Runway 12R. The next Controller cleared us to descend to 5;100 feet and shortly after reaching that altitude; we responded to a EGPWS warning 'Terrain Terrain Pull Up' The first officer told ATC that we were responding to a terrain warning and after we'd climbed about 1;500 feet; we were out of the clouds and could see we were above any possible obstacles. Out of an abundance of caution and because it took awhile to put the aircraft back into a more normal posture; we climbed to 10;000 feet before getting on vectors for the approach. After landing; I talked about the event with the TRACON supervisor.Task saturation was definitely a factor in why this happened. Halfway into our arrival the San Jose Airport switched from landing west to east and the controllers were consequently scrambling. The First Officer and I were unusually busy since we had to keep setting up for different approaches. First we were told to expect the RNAV (GPS) to Runway 30L; then the RNAV (GPS) to Runway 12R; then the ILS to 12R. All these changes took place within about 10 minutes. Perhaps because the controllers were so busy with turning the airport around and the FO and I [were] so busy with setting things up; no one caught the unsafe altitude.If our aircraft had the updated EGPWS system we would have seen the high terrain coming on our nav displays and avoided the entire situation.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported a CFTT event during approach to SJC airport. The crew immediately climbed to avoid the terrain and ATC re-vectored them for landing.
Date: 201310
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Weather elements / visibility: Fog; Rain; 10
Aircraft: Cessna 180 Skywagon
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Result: Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure; Weather
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: On initial call up before taxi requests was made to ground controller for special VFR out of the zone through ZZZ airspace which was VFR at the time and then continue South Bound out of the zone. I was told to make my request when ready for take off; making me believe that the request was being processed. When I was ready to depart; I was told to make a completely different departure transition. I had no time to study the weather or anything else. On departure it became very clear that I could not [fly] this route and had to make immediate course corrections to remain VFR. At this point I asked to return to field and was told to circle in areas that were not possible to circle because of obstructions and low clouds and was informed that it would take 5 minutes before I could return to the field. Luckily the weather improved to the south where I could depart the area. [I wish that ATC would have] advised a pilot if their request is not possible and [suggest] options before the end of the runway ready for take off. On my part it would have been easier and safer to have filed for IFR on top.




Synopsis: The pilot of a C180 made a departure request upon contact with ATC for taxi; but was advised to make the request when ready for takeoff. The pilot did not make the request again; thinking that it was being processed. Instead he was given a departure route that he was unable to fly due to weather.
Date: 201901
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: FLL.Airport, FL
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Night
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 1 Eng; Retractable Gear
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Ferry / Re-Positioning
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Tower FLL
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: The ILS Approach system was being used for approaches to the runway 10L at FLL; so I held short of Runway 10L at the ILS HOLD line.  Ground asked me to contact tower and I called ready for takeoff at Runway 10L.  There was an aircraft landing at the time; and tower said to me to Taxi up to the runway and hold short.  He did NOT say taxi up [to] the hold short line; so I moved up past the HOLD SHORT line; but a good 75 feet from the runway edge and Held there.  [At my home] airport we get told all the time to taxi up to the runway and hold short; and they mean exactly that.  You can check the tapes; but he clearly said taxi up to the runway and hold short.




Synopsis: Single engine pilot reported that a miscommunication with ATC led to a runway incursion.
Date: 201810
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Electrical Power
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Instructor
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: A student and I were conducting flight training and after approximately an hour and a half of flying; we headed back towards ZZZ. We contacted [Approach] and established radar contact with the assigned squawk code. We had our instructions to enter via VFR approach reporting points from the south east of the field and proceed to runway XXL. Before being passed on to ZZZ Tower; we had a complete loss of all communication equipment and the vast majority of our electrical equipment. At that point; we squawked 7600 and began to flash our landing light and rock our wings. Tower recognized the situation that we were in and proceeded to issue light signals to us with a steady green light telling us that we were cleared to land. After taxiing off the runway; a flashing green light signaled us that we were able to continue taxiing. Prior to continuing the taxi; I called Tower on my phone and we were given instructions on how to proceed with our taxi back to the ramp. The folks in the tower were extremely helpful and polite which lead to the uneventful landing.




Synopsis: C172  flight instructor reported an electrical failure resulted in NORDO condition.
Date: 201403
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: MHK.Airport, KS
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: PA-28 Cherokee/Archer/Dakota/Pillan/Warrior
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class D MHK
ATC / advisory: Tower MHK
Second aircraft: Cessna Aircraft Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors; Airport
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: After listening to the Tower frequency for approximately 20 SM with no observed traffic; I contacted MHK approximately 12 miles out on a heading of 207 degrees toward midfield. As I approached the field in a decent; I was instructed to report midfield on a right downwind for 03. From my position I turned to approximately 130 degrees to position for a right downwind for Runway 03. I was north of MHK and would cross the runway approximately 5 miles off the east end of 21-03. While scanning toward the field; checking for any traffic and scanning ahead of me I observed a Cessna coming head-on. I diverted to the left and after I started my diversion the approaching plane diverted to his left. The planes passed approximately 100 FT apart. After being contacted by KC Center operations; I was informed that the Cessna was talking to Center and I was talking to MHK Tower. There was no communication on the Tower frequency from the Cessna. I was not aware of his presence in the area. I believe that if the Cessna was in communications with the local airport that I would have known that he was there and the tower would have advised me of the traffic. I think that if I had been using Center for flight following; they would have made me aware of the traffic. If the Cessna was with the Center; he should have been notified that I was in the vicinity.




Synopsis: PA28 pilot arriving MHK reports a NMAC with a Cessna departing the area. The Tower made no notification to either pilot.