elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201809
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZOB.ARTCC, OH
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 145 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class E ZOB
ATC / advisory: Center ZOB
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Workload; Training / Qualification; Confusion; Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Airspace Structure; Procedure
Primary problem: Airspace Structure

Narrative: Aircraft X checked in on frequency off of DTW as a jet level at 11000 feet. The radar controller climbed the aircraft to a higher altitude.  The radar controller and I mistakenly thought we had control to climb on contact with respect to other departures. No separation was lost. I was later told that there are different sectors within DTW airspace which requires coordination prior to climbing. Due to lack of training for the newly implemented Metroplex procedures; I was not aware of this. At the time of this airspace violation; SKY/PAN sectors went red on the monitor. The supervisor was unaware of this and did not offer to split the sectors. He did not become aware of this until another controller came back from break and by this time it was way too busy to split. This resulted in an unusually high workload which could have easily been prevented.




Synopsis: Cleveland Center Controller reported issuing an authorized climb due to lack of training following the Metroplex airspace change.
Date: 202109
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 170/175 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
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: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT; Inflight Event / Encounter Unstabilized Approach
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was the Captain and pilot flying. We were descending via the arrival when we were cleared for the ILS approach. We were descending in VMC conditions. When we were cleared for the approach I set 2;000 feet at a waypoint on the ILS; and selected a vertical direct descent to that fix. As we were descending I realized I was too low for that phase of the descent [and] ATC brought it to our attention. We climbed back up to 3;000 feet and were cleared the visual [approach]. The mistakes I made were misreading and misunderstanding the arrival and approach; and failing to maintain good situational awareness during the descent phase of flight. The aircraft landed safety with no further incident. I should have descended via the arrival and kept the aircraft descending in LNAV and VNAV; instead of descending in green vertical direct.




Synopsis: ERJ-170 Captain reported receiving a low altitude alert from ATC on an ILS approach in visual conditions when he deviated from the charted procedure.
Date: 201605
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: MYF.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: PA-18/19 Super Cub
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class D MYF
ATC / advisory: Tower MYF
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Instructor
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Flight Engineer; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Sea; Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: This encounter is a normal setup and an ongoing problem. The fixed wing pattern for MYF Runway 28L; using AIM criteria; coupled with the standard arrival for helicopters to a landing roughly 200 ft south of that runway; [results in] a conflict point for both when a fixed wing aircraft is on base leg. The tower is not required to separate helicopters from fixed-wing aircraft. Occasionally they will attempt some separation; usually by altering the course of the fixed-wing to avoid the 'flow' of helicopter traffic; but in this particular scenario; the tower simply attempted to alert us - we got the call when on downwind: 'traffic 12 o'clock one-half mile'. This was not what I would call a 'near miss' - we saw him in time to avoid a collision; thanks to the alert from the tower. It is just a situation begging for an accident.The way to fix this is to treat helicopters as if they were fixed wings. Normally the tower will not let us turn base until we have the preceding fixed wing in sight. They should do this for helicopters as well - the potential for a fatal midair is actually higher with a helicopter. Most helicopters are painted black or dark red. These aircraft; when they are lower; are almost impossible to see. This reporter has tried to discuss these issues with helicopter operators. He has been met with sufficient hostility that such discussions are now an impossibility. There has to be a better way to mix helicopters and fixed wings than to simply allow helicopters to go where they want.




Synopsis: PA-18 pilot reported numerous airborne conflicts with helicopters at MYF.
Date: 201408
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Dawn
Aircraft: BAe 125 Series 800
Operator: Fractional
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Air Conditioning and Pressurization Pack
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Fractional
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Situational Awareness; Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Company Policy; Manuals; Procedure
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: I have seen too many could not duplicate/ops check good where the item in question is still inop over the last year. This morning is a blatant example. We had an early morning departure. With the APU running and the bleed on for a couple of minutes I preflighted the aft service bay. Water was literally pouring out of the ACM ducting; pooling on a cover below and eventually flowing out of the airplane. When placing the write up in the log book I noticed a prior write up from two days prior. The write up was for no cabin airflow/unable to cool. It was signed off as could not duplicate. When the drain is clogged and water backs up in the system it freezes and cuts off the airflow. I honestly don't know how it would be possible for the mechanic to miss this. I sent a video of the water pouring out to Maintenance Control; and I have a copy of it in my iPhone.




Synopsis: An HS-125-800 Captain reported an air cycle machine producing a great deal of water which pooled in the aft service bay. When the drain is clogged and freezes over; cabin conditioned airflow is blocked. This anomaly was previously recorded but not repaired.
Date: 201706
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Tower, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Piper Single Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Supervisor / CIC
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; General Police / Security Involved
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: I was working controller in charge when the local controller advised me that Aircraft X had reported losing oil pressure about 5nm west of the airport. The local controller immediately issued the wind and altimeter setting and cleared them to land on the closest runway. I advised local control to ask Aircraft X if they required any assistance. They told local control to standby. Aircraft X's next transmission was that they were landing in a field. I immediately dispatched fire and rescue to the location on the radar display where the data tag was last observed and started contacting all appropriate notifications. FIRECOM (Fire Communications) reported that the aircraft landed gear down no damage and no injuries.It was later found out from the aircraft operator that the aircraft landed at an airport on a grass strip there. Great job to everyone involved.




Synopsis: A Tower Controller in charge reported an aircraft lost oil pressure and landed safely on a grass strip airfield.
Date: 202004
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Company Policy

Narrative: Aircraft was not provisioned with Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) to clean cockpit (the bag with masks; gloves; cleaning wipes). This flight should have been provisioned for the round trip. Not sure where the cleaning provisions went; but clearly thorough provisioning is not working. Fortunately I had a few wipes I had brought from home.




Synopsis: Air carrier First Officer reported no Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) or sanitizing equipment were provided for a round trip flight.
Date: 202111
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Aeronca Champion
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
Aircraft component: Engine
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Time Pressure; Other / Unknown; Human-Machine Interface; Troubleshooting; Workload
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; General Maintenance Action; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: [This was a] VFR flight after maintenance. [In the] post maintenance preflight; no water or contaminates were seen in fuel samples. The engine failed after 1.2 hours of operation. Engaged carb heat; engine returned to cruise RPM. Engine failed again; contacted Tower on (approximately 10 miles away) and requested priority handling. Engine failed again and returned to limited power 2 more times prior to touchdown. Prepared to make an off airport landing on a hay field but turned east and landed into the wind and uphill on a grass strip with farm buildings. Once stopped contact was made with another aircraft on the Tower frequency who relayed that there was no damage or injuries. Tied aircraft down. Aircraft grounded until released by maintenance. Atmospheric conditions were conducive for carb ice development however actual cause of failure has not yet been determined.




Synopsis: Bellanca pilot reported an engine failure during post maintenance flight. After troubleshooting the engine multiple times the engine failed completely. Requested ATC assistance and executed a safe off airport landing with no aircraft damage or injuries.
Date: 201701
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Aircraft: Small Transport; Low Wing; 2 Recip Eng
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Pre-flight
Contributing factors: Chart Or Publication; Weather
Primary problem: Chart Or Publication

Narrative: Yet again the center of the country was hit with a significant weather event that left many airports covered with snow and ice. And yet again many of these smaller airfields had no NOTAMs to indicate the airport was closed or unsafe. Given the absence of a NOTAM the pilot planning a flight has no way to distinguish between an airport that is closed/unsafe and just not reporting against an airport that is open with no adverse conditions. Calling the airport remains the only way to be sure of the conditions; and then only during staffed business hours. Pilots planning or departing on flights outside these hours have no way to know if the destination is safe. An unknowing pilot might plan a flight with fuel reserves based on the expected interpretation that no NOTAMs means the field is open. The pilot could quite likely end up in a fuel starvation event when they find every airport within remaining fuel range of the intended destination is similarly closed from one of these storms.I ended up selecting a larger airport that was reporting conditions. But as I flew over many of the smaller airports I was able to confirm the majority of those airports were closed or had adverse conditions yet the NOTAM system was not reporting any of these facts.




Synopsis: GA pilot reported during last snow and ice event in the Midwest many smaller airports were not listed as closed on the NOTAM list even though flying over many he confirmed they were indeed closed. The pilot reported selecting a larger airport that was reporting conditions.
Date: 202106
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 145 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Air Conditioning and Pressurization Pack
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Attendant; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Diverted; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: When we left ZZZ we had to MEL Pack 1 due to abnormal shutdown. Flight was conducted at FL250 to comply with the MEL. When we leveled off at FL250; Captain and I smelled smoke like wires were burning and saw that smoke a white/gray smoke was coming through the vents. At about that time [the] flight attendant called up and said there was smoke coming from the back of the plane and a loud noise from the pack. Captain and I followed the memory items for smoke/fire/fumes. We then contacted ATC; [requested priority] to descent to the nearest station of ZZZ1. While running the checklist we isolated the problem and the smoke went away. Landed safely in ZZZ1. Flight Attendant did a very good job with handling the situation in the back. The Maintenance met us at the gate and told us that Pack 2 had failed.




Synopsis: EMB-145 First Officer reported smoke and odor operating at FL250 in both the flight deck and passenger cabin with one Air Conditioning Pack already inoperative per MEL. Crew diverted to a nearby airport where maintenance reported the remaining Air Conditioning Pack had also failed.
Date: 201310
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZSE.ARTCC, WA
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Widebody Transport
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZSE
ATC / advisory: Center ZSE
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: PDC Amended clearance read ******NOTICE ROUTE CHANGE****** -SUMMA7 BKE KU90I - . Inserted new routing into FMS but did not check FP in PLAN mode. Did not see that KU90I was west (behind) BKE until sequencing BKE and aircraft began to turn towards TO WYPT in accordance with filed route. Returned aircraft in heading mode to next subsequent waypoint KU27M. ATC shortly after queried if we were heading to KU27M (next point in the clearance after KU90I). I answered that KU90I was behind us and that we were heading to the next filed point; KU27M. We verified with ATC the new routing (direct to KU27M; then as filed). ATC did not ask for further clarification even after questioned if everything was okay.ATC cleared the flight in a manner that was not logical but not easily identified by the aircrew. Avoid requesting high altitude redesign waypoints within 200-250 miles of departure airports.


Second narrative: PDC Amended clearance read SUMMA7 BKE KU90I flight planned route. We failed to realize KU90I was west of BKE until airborne and aircraft attempted to execute filed route IAW clearance and FMS; instead we turned direct to KU27M (next point in the clearance after KU90I) to avoid making the u turn to KU90I and flying 50 NM out of the way. ATC then asked (after BKE) if we were still direct to KU90I. We said no and explained that KU90I was behind us. We verified with ATC the new routing (direct to KU27M; then as filed) with no issues reported by ATC.


Synopsis: Air Carrier flight crew reports receiving an amended PDC stating SUMMA7 BKE KU90I- which would have required a course reversal to accomplish but was not detected until the aircraft made the turn at BKE.
Date: 201212
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: LAN.Airport, MI
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Night
Aircraft: Cessna 210 Centurion / Turbo Centurion 210C; 210D
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Landing
ATC / advisory: Tower LAN
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Flight Data / Clearance Delivery; Local; Ground
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Airport
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: We at the Control Tower here at LAN have continually reported the lack of a runway exit to Taxiway 'C'. This taxiway is abeam and less 500 FT from an intersecting runway. Repeatedly we have aircraft landing Runway 10R and instructed to exit on Taxiway 'C' and they say they can't find or see Taxiway 'C' and nearly turn onto the intersecting runway. We have been told by the airport they have no obligation to put a sign out because of the angle at which the taxiway exits Runway 10R; and they haven't. We have been making this an issue for over 2 years. This is a highly critical active area of the airport due to its location and typical roll out distance for general aviation. I can only assume that it is not a priority for the airport because they have no money and what little they have they refuse to put into something that 'isn't required'. Some sort of attention need to be brought up to this critical runway safety issue and highly potential runway incursion area.




Synopsis: LAN Controller voiced concern regarding the lack of taxiway signage at Taxiway 'Charlie.' The reporter noted that this concern has been elevated to the airport for two years with no action taken.