elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201909
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Gear Extend/Retract Mechanism
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: While climbing out from the ZZZ airport; during the after takeoff checklist the first officer noticed green 'gear down' lights were illuminated along with the red 'gear disagreement' lights. Along with that; we could tell there was a vibration and the gear must still be down. We ran the appropriate checklists; sent a message to dispatch requesting data to support our initial idea that we may have plenty of gas to continue to [our destination] additionally sent a message to [Maintenance Control] to get their input and whether to continue to [our destination] or return to ZZZ. It took a while to hear back from both entities (in fact; we never did hear back from [Maintenance Control]); and; after brainstorming; decided to continue to [our destination] as the safest course of action. Landing with plenty of gas along with great weather and the security of knowing; after multiple attempts; the gear would in fact stay down and locked.




Synopsis: B737 Captain reported being unable to retract landing gear.
Date: 201911
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Medium Transport
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Ramp
Human factors: Workload
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Ground Personnel
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Procedure; Staffing; Human Factors
Primary problem: Staffing

Narrative: This flight landed ZZZ with a planned gate of XX. The gate was available at the time that the aircraft landed. The aircraft received instructions to enter the alley and approached the gate. However; due to manpower issues with ramp service; there were no ramp employees immediately available to marshal the aircraft into Gate XX. This apparently caused a pushback conflict with [another] aircraft on the concourse. Station Operations personnel and Ramp Leadership were working together to find available ramp employees to marshal the aircraft in; when we noticed that contract personnel who were employed to ground handle Company Y; had decided to come over to XX and marshal the aircraft into the gate. Not only did they use improper marshaling signals; they stopped the aircraft very abruptly short of the stop mark.




Synopsis: Air carrier Ramp Personnel reported being short staffed and unable to marshal an aircraft into the gate; resulting in a third-party ramp service improperly marshalling the aircraft in.
Date: 201712
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: PCT.TRACON, VA
Light: Night
Aircraft: Regional Jet 700 ER/LR (CRJ700)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class B DCA
ATC / advisory: TRACON PCT
Second aircraft: EMB ERJ 190/195 ER/LR
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Departure
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Company Policy; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Aircraft Y was departing north from DCA. My aircraft; Aircraft X; was subsequently departing 2.5 miles in trail behind Aircraft Y. I did not receive a strip that indicated Aircraft X was maintaining Visual Separation with Aircraft Y and communications transfer was delayed. I gathered Tower was trying to establish Visual Separation before frequency transfer since they coordinated with me that they had stopped Aircraft X at 2000 ft. Aircraft X was already 3 miles north of DCA in an area where the Minimum Vectoring Altitude is 2100 ft. On initial contact; I climbed Aircraft X to 4000 ft reference Aircraft Y. Aircraft X continued on his flight without further incident. Tower should better understand that 2000 ft is not an appropriate altitude to level off a departure in a north operation because of the 2100 ft Minimum Vectoring Altitude.




Synopsis: PCT TRACON Controller reported receiving an aircraft from Tower at 2000 feet; in an area with a 2100 foot Minimum Vectoring Altitude.
Date: 201304
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: B777-200
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Second aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Local
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I was working Local 1. Departure Runway 4L; I cleared a B737; for take off Runway 4L. I issued 'Runway heading' to protect for possible missed approach Runway 4R. Controller working Runway 4R advised traffic landing Runway 4R was on missed approach. I did not hear his instruction to his missed approach. I advised my departure that traffic on his right side was going around and I needed him to stay on runway heading. I saw the missed approach; a second B737; turning left instead of the usual right turn. I advised the Runway 4R Controller what his traffic was doing. He stated he gave the missed a right turn. I noticed my departure was climbing thru 2;000 FT and the missed approach aircraft was turning into my departure at about 800 FT. I told my departure to expedite his climb to 5;000. I told the other Controller to stop his missed approach at 2;000. He stated he already had. I then stopped my departure at 4;000 because I had a 4;000 FT altitude restriction. I then observed the missed approach turning right and no longer a factor for my departure; I turned my departure back on his usual heading. We have had many problems on this runway set-up throughout my tenure; and it can all be traced to one variable. The standard departure off of Runway 4L turns over the extended center line of Runway 4R (the arrival runway). Until we develop procedures that allow for the departures to remain on runway heading; we will continue to have these incidents. The situation definitely was exacerbated by the second B737 turning left instead of right which is normal operating procedures for this situation. And no doubt; a language barrier issue might have been a contributing factor. We shouldn't ignore the fact that we often use this runway set-up in bad weather. And it remains a possibility in really bad weather that the miss will not want to turn right into convective weather. Then what options do we have to keep the departure and missed approach separated.




Synopsis: Tower Controller described a conflict event when traffic on a missed approach conflicted with departure traffic that turn unexpectedly in the wrong direction; the reporter suggested new missed approach procedures be developed.
Date: 201606
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZLA.ARTCC, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Military Transport
Operator: Military
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZLA
ATC / advisory: Center ZLA
Second aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Contributing factors: Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Aircraft X reported passing very closely to a weather balloon. He stated it passed between his wingtip and his number one engine. I don't know much about weather balloons but it would be helpful to be able to track them so we could warn aircraft of their presence.




Synopsis: ZLA ARTCC Controller reported a military aircraft pilot reported a near miss with a weather balloon.
Date: 201306
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Aircraft: MD-82
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Diverted; General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: At cruise altitude (FL280); near ZZZ1; our plane entered a cloud; requiring us to turn on anti-ice. Within seconds after turning on engine heat; the flight attendants chimed and reported 'an odor' in the cabin. There was also an odor in cockpit. Nothing visible; just a smell. The smell was described as a 'burning electrical' smell.  I decided to declare an emergency and divert to ZZZ. We landed safely. ARFF inspected the aircraft before we taxied to the gate.It is very possible we flew through a smoke cloud that was from the massive forest fires in the region.  If I had been aware of the possibility of that smell entering the aircraft; I could have done something to prevent an unnecessary divert. On the return trip; I made a PA that alerted the passengers and flight attendants that we may get an odor inside the airplane. While flying over the forest fire area; it is very possible to get that smell in the cabin. Armed with this knowledge; I believe there would be far less fear and panic.




Synopsis: In cruise at FL280; MD-82 flight crew detected 'burning electrical' odor after turning on engine heat. Flight attendants reported same odor in the cabin. Crew declared an emergency and diverted to ZZZ where odor was attributed to massive forest fires in the area.
Date: 201512
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: B737-700
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Turbine Engine
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: Captain
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Inflight Event / Encounter Bird / Animal
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Inflight Shutdown; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: On departure we experienced a sudden failure of the number two engine with severe damage. We were climbing through 15;000 feet when; without warning; we experienced a violent shudder and loud noise from the right side of the aircraft. We quickly determined the number two engine had seized by the engine indications; no fire warnings. We ran the QRH for severe damage; [informed] ATC and received vectors back. We then ran the QRH for severe damage while briefing the flight attendants; passengers and notifying Operations. We made an uneventful landing and taxied to our gate. Upon postflight inspection; we did notice some white feathers well inside the engine and suspect it may have been a large bird or two that caused the sudden seizure.


Second narrative: Climbing out of 15;000 feet a very loud noise along with yawing of aircraft occurred. Upon reviewing the engine instruments; it was apparent the number two engine had failed. There was fairly significant vibration associated with the failed engine that ceased as the engine wound down. We immediately asked to level at 15;000 feet; and informed ATC of our desire to return. Once we secured the engine; we asked for vectors back. We continued the checklist and once we got to the point in the checklist that allowed me to talk to the flight attendants; I called back to ensure everything was okay in the back. I informed the flight attendants what had occurred and the plan to return. I then let the passengers know. After informing Operations that we were returning; we started the approach. The approach and landing were uneventful. We had Fire and Rescue standing by and they followed us back to the gate. Once parked at gate; I called Dispatch and asked for a patch to Maintenance Control to inform them both of what had occurred. I then got in touch with Chief Pilot on call.Fire and Rescue informed us that there was possible evidence of bird feathers in the engine.


Synopsis: B737 flight crew experienced a sudden engine failure climbing through 15;000 feet and returned to the departure airport. Post flight inspection revealed possible bird feathers in the engine.
Date: 201710
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Gulfstream G280
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Second aircraft: Mustang (P51)
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Automation Aircraft RA
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We were cleared number 1 for the visual approach RWY 03R and the P-51 was cleared number 2 on the visual and called us insight. While on the base leg of our approach we received a TA to 'monitor vertical speed' for traffic below us identified as the P51. While making our turn from base to final we received an RA to CLIMB. I was sitting right seat and looked back at the 4-5 O'clock position and noticed the P-51 climbing over our tail and immediately instructed the pilot flying not to climb because the traffic was overtaking us from above at a high closure rate and extremely close distance.The Pilot in the other aircraft had a strong lack of acknowledging and following ATC instructions (including airspeed reductions; and position reports) as evident from the ATC live recordings of the event. We reported the RA to the tower controller and landed safely. I have contacted the tower and started a complaint with the supervisor. In our perception of the event; the tower controller offered adequate reports and instructions to both aircraft but the event arose due to the negligence of the other aircraft.




Synopsis: A Gulfstream First Officer reported they received a Traffic Advisory on base leg and a Resolution Advisory during final approach.
Date: 201204
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ATL.Airport, GA
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class B ATL
ATC / advisory: TRACON A80
Second aircraft: B767-200
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach; Departure
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I was working a Parallel Monitor Position. A B737 was the lead aircraft; a B767 the trailing aircraft. The B737 slowed more than expected at the FAF. I instructed the B767 to slow to final approach speed; and he did. Two point five miles was required; and it went down to 2.36 at the time the B737 was over the approach end. The rate of compression had reduced; and I made a conscience decision to allow the B767 to continue the approach. Spacing was sufficient for the Tower; and there was no danger of a go-around due to long roll out of the lead aircraft with current conditions. There was no reduction in safety; and no danger to the users. Local Control 1 had made the Transfer Control Point (TCP) 1 mile; but a few airplanes later went to 3 miles; which would have made the operation legal. I honestly don't know; with the new confusing Quality Control order; if we still have an approach end; or if this is simply a Mandatory Occurrence Report (MOR) now.




Synopsis: A80 Controller described a less than required arrival spacing event but elected not to issue a go around.
Date: 201203
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: B757-200
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: We began our descent and received a Master Warning Caution light with a 'TE FLAP ASYM' EICAS message. We had not changed our configuration prior to the illumination of the lights. There was no rolling moment of the aircraft or any other aircraft control problems. We went through the QRH and felt we needed more time to work our checklists so we asked the Approach Controller if we could hold. We received clearance to hold at 7;000 FT. During the hold; we contacted [Operations and Maintenance] to inform them of our situation and [Maintenance] felt there was nothing we could do airborne to fix the problem. We worked through the checklist ensuring all steps were adhered to; including calculation of our approach speed given flaps were between up and 1 degree. We then declared an emergency with Approach Control; asked for a 10 mile straight and began our approach. Upon switching to Tower; we asked to stop on the runway and wait for the fire trucks to inspect our brakes prior to taxiing. We touched down on target airspeed and rolled to a stop with approximately 5;000 FT remaining. We switched frequencies to match the Fire Captain who informed us that the brakes did not register excessive temperatures. We switched back to Tower and asked to taxi to the ramp.




Synopsis: B757-200 First Officer reported receiving 'TE FLAP ASYM' EICAS during descent. The flight crew entered a hold to work the problem; declared an emergency; and landed at destination with no other issues.
Date: 202004
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZLC.ARTCC, UT
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: TBM 700/TBM 850
Operator: Fractional
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class E ZLC
ATC / advisory: Center ZLC
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Airspace Structure
Primary problem: Airspace Structure

Narrative: Aircraft X was cleared down to 12;000 ft. I was dealing with a VFR aircraft requesting flight following when I noticed Aircraft X was below 11;000 ft. in a 12;000 ft. Minimum Vectoring Area. I queried him about his altitude and he said he was in VFR conditions and forgot to tell me. He then reported destination airport in sight and was cleared for a Visual Approach. He subsequently canceled IFR. Remind pilots not to descend without a clearance.




Synopsis: Center Controller reported an aircraft left its assigned altitude and descended below the Minimum Vectoring Altitude.