elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201910
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: BRD.Airport, MN
Flight conditions: IMC
Light: Dawn
Aircraft: Small Transport
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class E BRD
ATC / advisory: CTAF BRD
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Human factors: Workload; Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Time Pressure
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Airport
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: Checked NOTAM for BRD preflight. I got local weather and requested to approach RNAV Runway 34 into KBRD. Was cleared for RNAV Runway 34 following another airplane on the same approach and Runway. Was switched CTAF. Made call 11 miles south inbound to land Runway 34. Clicked pilot operated lights on. After passing the FAF heard BRD airport Maintenance contact [FBO] on and tell them they shut down Runway 34/16 and turned the lights off. Informed them I was short final IMC Runway 34 and I needed the lights on. They asked me if I could circle Runway 23 and land. I informed them probably not. After departing IMC at about 700 feet AGL I determined I could safely circle to land Runway 23. I made radio calls as such. After landing I was thanked by the operations crew. When I went in to order fuel at [FBO] the desk clerk stated she noticed the airport had just put the NOTAM on and wondered why they didn't check flight aware or make a radio call prior to shutting the runway down. I checked NOTAMs and saw the runway NOTAM.Airports should be more aware of who is coming IFR and work to accommodate and or communicate before shutting runways down for routine Maintenance. Further; there should be a buffer time between NOTAM placing and effectively shutting down if there isn't already one.




Synopsis: Small Transport pilot reported the poor issuing of a NOTAMed runway closing for Maintenance.
Date: 201412
Aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Operator: Air Carrier
Flight phase: Other General Ramp
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Vehicle Driver; Ramp
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Other / Unknown; Ground Event / Encounter Vehicle
Detector: Person Ground Personnel
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged
Contributing factors: Equipment / Tooling; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was attempting to chock aircraft according to procedures; had chocks and cones on golf cart. After setting the brakes on the cart I took a pair of chocks from the cart and was heading towards the back wheels; then the cones fell on the gas pedal and the golf went racing towards the aircraft; I attempted to stop the cart but it was coming too fast and had to step out of the way and the cart hit the wing of the aircraft.




Synopsis: Ramp person reports traffic cones aboard a golf cart he drove to the aircraft; falling on the gas pedal after he has left the cart to install chocks. The cart collides with the wing.
Date: 202105
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Hydraulic System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural MEL / CDL; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew; Person Maintenance
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Arrived at aircraft. I reviewed the Aircraft Maintenance Logbook (AML) to verify what I had already reviewed on my IPAD. The aircraft had three MEL's: Auto-brakes inoperative; Auto speed brakes inoperative; and External power inoperative. I then found an open write up for the Anti-skid system; and called maintenance to address the issue. (This was the first flight of the day; aircraft was in ZZZ all the previous night).Maintenance arrived; and I showed them the open write-up and gave them the logbook. I then discovered that the B system hydraulic was at 69% with RF displayed. I again called maintenance to address this issue. The technician showed up and filled the system to 88%. I told the technician that I did not put the discrepancy in the AML; and if he wanted me to; I would get the AML from the other maintenance technicians and make an appropriate entry. He said; it's okay. We then pressed on with the other issues. I never made a HYD B low" entry into the AML. Upon landing ZZZ1 and accomplishing our post flight duties; I again noticed that hydraulic system B was at 69% with the RF displayed. I made an AML entry and called Maintenance Control regarding the issue. I then left the aircraft and debriefed the oncoming Captain on all of the above issues. I later called the oncoming Captain and was told that during trouble shooting in ZZZ1; a hydraulic leak was discovered in one of the wings.With the many MEL's and the newly discovered maintenance issues; I failed to make an AML entry regarding the low system B hydraulic quantity prior to having it serviced. I also allowed it to be serviced without an AML entry.Suggestions: Maintenance could clear MEL's on overnights and service low fluid quantities. They could also investigate low fluid quantities that are out of the ordinary."




Synopsis: B737-800 Pilot reported failing to make proper AML entries for hydraulic system maintenance event.
Date: 201605
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: SLC.Airport, UT
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Widebody; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B SLC
ATC / advisory: TRACON S56
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Abeam the field for a left downwind to runway 34L at 8;000 feet; approach queried if we had the field in sight. We reported we did and were cleared for the visual approach to runway 34L. (Sequence was number 1).  We were west of the 34L LOC course at 8;000 between DUNLP (8;000) and FLLAG (6;100).  We made a left turn to intercept the ILS 34L on a 45 degree intercept and commenced a descent to 6;100 feet to arrive just outside of FLLAG on the ILS. We were VMC and clear of all terrain. Passing 6;600 feet and .5 miles from intercept of LOC; SLC approach gave us a 'Low Altitude Alert; below Minimum Safe Vectoring Altitude'. We leveled off and replied we were on the visual; clear of terrain; and intercepting the LOC. Intercepted ILS 34L just outside of FLLAG at 6;200 feet. Landed uneventfully. Submitting report for information. Do not feel any violation or safety concern occurred. We do appreciate the controller looking out for us. Heads up on his part; however in this case it was DAY VMC and we were well within parameters for visual approach maneuvering. Again; though; we appreciate the information from ATC. [Suggest] a refusal visual approaches? Not always feasible; but will certainly play a larger role in my decision matrix from now on.




Synopsis: Air carrier First Officer reported ATC issued a low altitude alert to them on a visual approach to SLC.
Date: 201704
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: BVU.Airport, NV
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E L30
ATC / advisory: CTAF BVU
Second aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Instructor
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Confusion; Distraction; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Airspace Structure

Narrative: While flying back with a student we were transitioning from the Lake Mead area which is 20 miles east of LAS and just north of BVU down to the solar panel farm just south of BVU to cross over back to HND. While headed towards the BVU airport CTAF was tuned in to check for traffic and possible skydiving in action. On the trip north there had been skydiving in progress but this time no one had made any reports when we asked for advisory. Though we could see and hear helicopter traffic on the ground and low levels no one else fixed wing had reported. As we got about 2-3 miles to the north I could see what looked like a possible aircraft at the same altitude headed in an unknown direction but could not make a positive ID on them due to the size. It looked too small to be an airplane and was hard to keep an eye on. At that point I diverted to the right slightly to be safe. As we were headed SW to pass about a mile NW of the airport the target continued to get closer and we had yet to hear them report; I continued to turn right to remain clear. During this time I wanted to climb back up to get ready to cross the ridge but if so would not have been able to see as well due to the increased pitch so I was stuck at 4000 and since the 172 is a high wing plane I did not want to descend due to the loss of traffic visibility and having no idea of the other aircraft's intentions. At this point I noticed the other Aircraft; hang glider or drone was only coming closer. I immediately made a descending left hand turn hoping that there would not be a collision. From our point of view it looked as if we came within 50 feet of each other. The closest I have ever come to anything so far with flying. I could not believe on a completely clear day with great weather that I would have a close of a call as this. I hope that the implementation of ADSB becomes mandatory as soon as possible. At least so one of the pilots has the ability to detect the other traffic. If neither of us would have seen each other today it could have ended up much worse.




Synopsis: C172 instructor pilot reported having to take evasive action to avoid an object near BVU. He described the object as either another aircraft; a hang glider; or a drone.
Date: 201702
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZOA.ARTCC, CA
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class A ZOA
ATC / advisory: Center ZOA
Second aircraft: Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Time Pressure; Workload; Communication Breakdown; Distraction; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; 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; Air Traffic Control Separated Traffic; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I was working Sector 29 by myself at a level of traffic that I wouldn't need a D-side. A call comes in blocking an aircraft checking on. There is an aircraft on the SUTTR arrival into SMF level at FL190 but descending via; far as I know. I was not talking to the second aircraft. Aircraft X attempted to check on when I was coordinating he leveled at FL190. He then checks on again telling me he sees traffic at his altitude and needs to climb. Norcal approach shipped the aircraft late or he attempted to check on multiple times while being stepped on or not heard due to coordination. Would having a D side made the situation better yes of course did I need one; I would say not. Aircraft X finally checks on I immediately climb and turn the aircraft seeing it will be really close to or less than 3 miles. The turn and the immediate climb saved the loss of separation; the aircraft reported out of FL200 before he hit the 3 mile ring. Norcal approach should maybe have asked for higher in this situation or descended the SUTTR arrival in the event the aircraft couldn't check on; which is what ended up happening. After watching the falcon no loss was seen; and when I was working the plane reported out of FL200 outside of the 3 mile ring. Norcal should or could've asked for higher. The pilot was definitely not happy about be so close to the other plane and climbed and reported out of FL200 very rapidly. Should those airplanes on the SUTTR level at FL190 when departures are climbing out and possibly losing communication at FL190 probably not.




Synopsis: ZOA Center Controller reported an unsafe situation when an aircraft was switched over from NCT TRACON and the pilot took it upon himself to climb to avoid traffic at the same altitude.
Date: 201908
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: M98.TRACON, MN
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Airspace: Class B MSP
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness; Troubleshooting; Time Pressure
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: Human Factors; Company Policy; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: MSP/M98/ZMP OS (Operations Supervisor); OM (Operations Manager) and TMU (Traffic Management Unit) personnel made the decision to be on a 12/17 configuration after the weather briefing (light surface winds and winds aloft were out of the northwest from 20-28kt). Right at the beginning of the arrival bank; the TMU personnel said we were going to switch to 30/17 (wind 210/10) and that the Tower was done departing Runway 12's and would only be straight out off of Runway 17 with departure traffic. At the time there was a TMU; OM and 2 OS in the room with only one feeder position open and 2 finals. Someone came in to give me a break as I had been at another position for an hour prior to splitting approach and I suggested that another feeder be open or an [Assist] for coordination with the runway change as we had way too many aircraft in our airspace at the time with 4 gates full of traffic inbound. ZMP was calling on the line from every gate as we were unable to take hand offs due to the number of aircraft already in our airspace and the complexity that this created for the entire room. TMU and/or the OS/OM had not coordinated with ZMP to slow the traffic down or spin aircraft due to the runway change. The Tower departed a [carrier] on 12L straight out into the 30's ACDA (Advanced Continuous Descent Approach) after we were told over 10 minutes prior that there were no more 12's departures. At that point; the north Approach Controller asked for the departures to be stopped but none of the management personnel or TMU did anything so I called up and stopped all departures to alleviate some of the complexity that was escalating without help from management or TMU. The situation that was unnecessarily created by the TMU/OS/OM making the decisions and therefore created a safety event/concern for the Controllers; especially those at M98 and ZMP.The SOP/LOA regarding runway changes needs to be followed and the TMU/OS/OM personnel need to make better decisions in regards to choosing runways and the timing of runway changes if it is not imminent. These same individuals need to be held accountable and if they are going to put everyone in this position; they also need to assist with the coordination and communication instead of putting it all on the controllers.




Synopsis: M98 TRACON Controller reported Management creating a configuration change that unnecessarily increased Approach and Center's workload.
Date: 201209
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: HOU.Airport, TX
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-700
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B HOU
ATC / advisory: Tower HOU
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC; Inflight Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Downwind to Runway 4 at HOU on the ROKIT Arrival via the Runway 4 transition; the First Officer (pilot not flying) says; 'Parachutist at 12 o'clock.' I disconnected the autopilot and turned right. Two more parachutists appeared deploying their chutes and passed extremely close to our airplane. We informed ATC and they had no idea there was jumping in that area. Obviously; we need to be aware of parachute jumping close to our arrival area.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reports a NMAC with parachutists while on the downwind segment of the ROKIT 1 arrival to Runway 4 at HOU. Evasive action is taken and the incident is reported to ATC.
Date: 201502
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Fatigue; Workload
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We began our trip with a normal morning flight.  Our report time was XC00 and I was able to get a full night sleep at home prior to going to work.  Upon arriving in ZZZ; we were supposed to then rest at some point during the 13 hours we were in the hotel before departing again that night for a redeye segment that left at what would be XA:00am on our body clocks (Eastern Time).  It was simply not possible to get adequate rest given my inability to just fall asleep at any time during a day.  I was able to get about 2 hours of sleep prior to this ANF segment.Upon reporting for duty; the captain and I agreed that we were OK to fly what was a relatively short segment to ZZZ1.  When we arrived at ZZZ1; we were both exhausted.  I was able to fall asleep for about 2 hours upon reaching my hotel room that morning; which ended up being approx XG00-XI00 eastern time.  I was unable to force myself to sleep any further that day prior to our report time that evening.About half way from ZZZ1 toZZZ2 I realized that I was nodding off; making mistakes on ATC communications; and was generally unable to function at an appropriate level due to fatigue resulting from the unworkable rest periods leading up to this segment.  My situation degraded further as the flight continued and we entered the descent approach phase; which was approx XT00 eastern time.  I made multiple mistakes communicating with ATC.  I had a very difficult time remaining alert at even a basic level.  Complicating the situation was the fact that it was night time; we were landing in ZZZ2 where there are special procedures; short runways; prohibited areas and it was quite windy.




Synopsis: A B-737 First Officer was unable to adjust to the demands of his schedule which required him to sleep during the day before departing for flights during the night. He reported fatigue resulting from the unworkable rest periods making mistakes on ATC communications. He was also nodding off.
Date: 201208
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: RDM.Airport, OR
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Haze / Smoke
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: M-20 B/C Ranger
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class D RDM
ATC / advisory: Tower RDM
Aircraft component: Reciprocating Engine Assembly
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: [Shortly after takeoff] engine started running rough; landed at RDM. [I was] unable to contact RDM. [I] landed safely with out any problems. Engine cleared out; carbon.




Synopsis: Mooney pilot reports a rough running engine shortly after takeoff and elects to land at RDM but is unable to contact the Tower prior to landing.