elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201207
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ATL.Airport, GA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Thunderstorm
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 170/175 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Tower ATL
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Ground Incursion Taxiway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: When we exited the runway onto Taxiway Lima going east bound. Ground Control instructions were to give way to an MD88 and hold short of Ramp X. We gave way for the MD88 continued down Lima and held short of Ramp X. While holding short of Ramp X a 757 crossed our path into the ramp; at this point we were not aware of any other traffic nor saw any other aircraft. At that point we called Ramp told them we were holding short of Ramp X for the gate. Ramp Control came back and told us to taxi in left side to the gate. We then entered the ramp and taxied down towards gate. As we were waiting to get parked we sat there approximately 10 minutes when Ramp Control wanted us to call Ground. When we called Ground we were informed that she did not want us to contact ramp and taxi in; she wanted us to wait so she could get another aircraft in before us. She also instructed us that we are not to make that turn until she says so. It is common in other airports as you hold short of a ramp it is expected to call ramp on your own. If the controller would have added in her instruction to hold short of Ramp X and stay with her or hold short of Taxiway Sierra there would have not been any doubt as to not switch frequency and contact Ramp.


Second narrative: [Narrative #2 contained no additional information.]


Synopsis: Air Carrier taxiing to gate at ATL experienced confusion regarding frequency assignments involving Ground Control and Ramp Control.
Date: 201409
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: IMC
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
Aircraft component: Air Conditioning and Pressurization Pack
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Equipment Problem Dissipated; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: While cruising at 27000 feet in icing conditions; both packs failed shortly after tail deicing was selected.  A descent to a lower altitude was initiated.  The packs resumed normal operations at about 16000 feet.  We had at this time exited icing conditions.  All deicing systems were engaged prior to the event and had been operating for about 20 - 25 minutes when failures occurred.  Engines were operating at normal power for flight at 27000 feet and 280 knots.  Cabin reached an altitude of 7000 - 7500; before pressurization was restored.  No abnormal deicing annunciators lights were observed until after pack failure.  I believe the pressurization flow annunciator was the only abnormal light on; as it should have been on.  Remainder of the flight was normal with packs on and anti-icing turned off.




Synopsis: MD-82 pilot experiences a dual pack failure at FL270 shortly after tail deicing was selected. A descent to a lower altitude is initiated and the packs return to normal operation passing 16;000 feet.
Date: 202010
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Ground Incursion Taxiway
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: Taxi
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: Aircraft was stopped at intersection X waiting to taxi to [Runway] XR. Last ground instruction was to use Taxiway E; but then was changed to follow company off right by different Controller. FO and I both missed transition to Taxiway F instruction. Controller said 'No big deal;' but it was clearly a pilot error in not understanding and reading back correctly the instructions. Day five of flying led to slight fatigue; coupled with change of ATC instructions leading to failure.


Second narrative: We were approaching ramp number [X] from the gate for departure.  Contacted Ground for taxi clearance.  They instructed us to proceed onto Taxiway Echo westbound to Runway YR; the rest of the transmission was difficult to understand.  We; instead; turned westbound on Taxiway Foxtrot. While I was trying to interpret what the second part of the transmission while I was starting the number one engine; a second Controller informed us of our error.  Lots of time compression and task loading along with part of the Ground Controller's transmission being difficult to understand.  The airport was busy; lots of aircraft simultaneously taxiing in and out with numerous 'stepped on' transmissions.  An additional 'additive condition' was the Ground Controller's transmission.  I believe a contributing factor was mask wearing in the Controller facility.  If this is true; they need to standardize what type of masks they wear and work harder to enunciate their syllables.


Synopsis: Air carrier flight crew reported turning the wrong way on taxiway due to not clearly understanding Controller instructions. FO stated controllers wearing face masks could have contributed to them not clearly understanding the clearance.
Date: 201911
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZLA.ARTCC, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class E ZLA
ATC / advisory: Center ZLA
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Confusion; Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Airport; Manuals
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: When we plugged in Aircraft X was already on approach and another aircraft was orbiting about 7 miles north of BLH waiting for Aircraft X to finish the approach to continue parachute operations. A few minutes later the Supervisor walks over holding the phone and asking us to give Aircraft X a vector because 'Tower wasn't going to take him.' I had heard rumors that there was a Tower operating there; and that there had been an incident the day before where someone; not this facility; had broken off another [carrier aircraft] on approach and issued vectors below the minimum IFR altitude. So; when the Supervisor demanded for us to give a control instruction to [aircraft] I was initially confused as to why. The other aircraft was waiting for the approach to conclude and there was no other observed traffic in the area. I was never briefed that there was a facility operating at BLH; there was no Letter of Agreement; nothing. So; I under duress; and since the Supervisor was standing behind me demanding for me to 'give him something because Tower wasn't taking him' told my trainee to have '[Aircraft X] continue on the radials of the approach climb to and maintain 6;000 feet; upon reaching 6;000 feet direct...and hold as published.' When Aircraft X was holding at the fix after the trainee identified him and gave him a clearance to his next airport; I keyed up and advised the pilot that what had just occurred had been done by an unsanctioned facility and urged the pilot to call the Center and FSDO to file a report. My transmitting the advisory to Aircraft X was done out of concern for [aircraft]'s safety; as well as the safety of anyone else IFR or VFR landing at that airport. Brief the controllers if a new facility is operating in our airspace. Have a Letter of Agreement in place before operations commence.




Synopsis: ZLA Center Controller reported they were told by a Supervisor the Tower would not accept an aircraft on approach. The Controller was not aware of a Control Tower operating at this airport.
Date: 201604
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: A330
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Second aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Relief Pilot; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Second reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Returned To Gate; Flight Crew Rejected Takeoff; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: At approximately 100 KIAS the Tower instructed us to abort our takeoff due to a warning they had received about a conflict a taxiway and the Runway. Takeoff was aborted and after coordinating with the Tower and Fire Rescue we taxied to a taxiway and allowed the brakes to stabilize. After the brake temperatures started decreasing we taxied back to the terminal; refueled and departed. With a heavier aircraft and a wet runway this could have been a very interesting situation.


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


Synopsis: At approximately 100 knots; the A330 Crew was instructed by the Tower to reject the takeoff due to a runway incursion alert.
Date: 201701
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZAB.ARTCC, NM
Aircraft: Fighter
Operator: Military
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZAB
ATC / advisory: Center ZAB
Second aircraft: Fighter
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Distraction; Human-Machine Interface; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Airspace Violation All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Contributing factors: Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Flight of 3/Fighter aircraft checked on to my frequency at level at 170. [The flight] was flying a [coded route] to SELLS MOA. I acknowledged the check in and switched the aircraft to tactical frequency. It is standard operation procedure to acknowledge the check in and immediately switch the aircraft to Tracon.TUS Approach Control attempted to point out [Aircraft A]; C130; to Sector 46 level at 170. I informed the TUS controller that I was no longer talking to [the flight of 3] who was in conflict with [Aircraft A].Both aircraft were at 170 inside TUS approach airspace. The error occurred between 2 aircraft that TUS had the responsibility to separate. The [coded route the flight of 3] was flying does not enter ZAB airspace. It goes from TUS to SELLS MOA. Does ZAB still need to be involved in the process?I would recommend ZAB not even talk to these aircraft. TUS approach should switch them to tactical frequency after they have separated from all of their known aircraft.




Synopsis: Albuquerque Center Controller reported a loss of separation in Tucson Approach airspace.
Date: 201205
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: PMP.Airport, FL
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skylane 182/RG Turbo Skylane/RG
Operator: Government
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class E PMP
ATC / advisory: CTAF PMP
Second aircraft: Small Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Check Pilot; Instructor; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Automation Aircraft TA; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: In day VMC conditions; sky clear; ceiling and visibility unlimited; we established our Cessna on a 12 mile straight-in visual approach from 2;000 FT MSL for landing at PMP. For training value the crew of two activated and followed the advisory course and glide path provided by the G1000 system for the GPS 15 approach with LPV minimums. Crew made multiple callouts on PMP CTAF. PMP Class Delta was not in effect at that early. Tower opens at 0800 local. Passing through 1;000 FT MSL; crew was alerted by TAS that an aircraft was within 2 miles; 200 FT below our altitude. Both crew members searched for the aircraft; assuming it was a light GA aircraft departing the field and not announcing on CTAF.Passing through 900 FT MSL; on the advisory glide path; at 2.9 NM from the field; 2.5 NM from the approach end of Runway 15; crew observed a light jet traveling north; approximately 100 FT BELOW our altitude; and approximately 300 FT to our rear. There was no time to take any evasive action; and the jet was never heard on the CTAF frequency. Crew called FXE Tower (over 6 miles south) and determined a jet matching the description had just departed FXE. It is likely the jet was flying a low level trip to BCT; and rather than check the PMP CTAF frequency; switched directly to BCT which is 6 miles north of our near miss. It was very surprising to see a light jet operating below 1;000 MSL over a populated airport over 6 miles from a point of departure or arrival.




Synopsis: A C182 Instructor reported a light jet flew below them at approximately 800 FT AGL in the vicinity of PMP airport; apparently enroute to another airport.
Date: 201709
Aircraft: B777 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Distraction
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Ground Personnel
When detected: Taxi
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: During pushback the tow bar broke resulting in a 30 minute delay on the taxiway. Tow bar was removed and aircraft inspected. The rest of the flight was uneventful.




Synopsis: B777 First Officer reported the tow bar broke during pushback resulting in a delay until the aircraft could be inspected.
Date: 201410
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: 7B2.Airport, MA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Night
Aircraft: PC-12
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class E 7B2
ATC / advisory: TRACON BDL
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Procedure; Airport; Human Factors
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: I filed an instrument flight plan from 7B2. I picked up my clearance on the ground at 7B2 (Northampton Airport) and was asked which runway I would be using (runway 14); I was told to hold for release. When I was released; I was instructed to turn right to a specified southwesterly heading. There were two problem with this instruction (neither of which occurred to me until after the flight): 1. Traffic pattern at 7B2 for runway 14 is LEFT traffic. Perhaps Bradley clearance could see there were no other aircraft in the vicinity and therefore were comfortable giving me a heading that would be in conflict with the traffic pattern at the airport. Had I not been given that heading; my plan was to fly three left turns (essentially fly to pattern) and then turn on course.2. Much more importantly; the assigned heading took me dangerously close to terrain. Happily; I had half tanks of fuel and only one passenger; and it was a cool evening; so my climb rate was in excess of 1;500 fpm. However; even with that climb rate; I came dangerously close to unlit terrain in the direction I was instructed to fly. While not specifically instructed when to begin the turn; I waited until I climbed above pattern altitude; perhaps an earlier turn or an even more steep climb (or a slower airspeed) would have kept me further from the terrain; but I was not given any instructions other than to turn right to that heading. In the future; I would suggest that Clearance Delivery take into account the traffic pattern at the airport (assuming this wasn't done) and more importantly make the departing pilot aware of terrain and give more specific instructions to avoid the terrain. I note that this will differ for different aircraft (speed and climb rate). Perhaps the safest alternative would be to instruct pilots to fly a turn in the traffic pattern prior to flying to an assigned heading and contacting the departure controller.




Synopsis: PC12 pilot reports receiving an IFR departure clearance from 7B2 departing Runway 14 to turn right after takeoff on a southwesterly heading. The reporter questions the turn direction as being opposite to the VFR pattern and notes that he came dangerously close to terrain before starting his turn above traffic pattern altitude.
Date: 201809
Aircraft: A320
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Oxygen System/Crew
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Routine Inspection
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Company Policy
Primary problem: Company Policy

Narrative: If the jet experienced cockpit smoke and we had to wear the mask we would potentially consume all of the oxygen; best case; 5 minutes before landing. The [manual] states we have 15 minutes of O2 onboard if we dispatch at [minimum] dispatch limits. The [manual] doesn't distinguish the number of crew members; so we could assume 2 @550 psi and 4 @850 psi. Had we dispatched at the [minimum] limit; in a smoke scenario on that route; the outcome would have been unfavorable. So; is [it] our position; given a specific route; [that it is acceptable to] dispatch at the dispatch limits knowing that the quantity will be insufficient to safely land the jet within 15 minutes?




Synopsis: A320 Captain reported that aircraft are being dispatched with less than an adequate amount of crew oxygen.
Date: 201807
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: DEN.Airport, CO
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: A321
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
ATC / advisory: Tower DEN
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: There were several actions I could have taken before allowing the aircraft to descend to 6;000 feet. I could have leveled off at 6;700 feet when I first knew that we were descending below the GS; taken manual control of the aircraft and hand fly back up to the glideslope; [and] follow SOP. I understand that my poor decision could have placed the aircraft in a hazardous situation. I have learned a tremendous amount from this event and know that I will not make the same mistake again. I hope others can learn from my poor decisions during this event.




Synopsis: A321 pilot reported descending below a certain altitude and receiving a low altitude alert.
Date: 201709
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: DA40 Diamond Star
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: CTAF ZZZ
Second aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Instructor; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: While established on a right downwind for runway 23; a Cessna reported over CTAF that they would be performing a 45 degree entry to the right downwind for runway 23. Our aircraft then observed the Cessna traffic flying directly toward us in an opposite pattern and the same altitude. Our aircraft took immediate action and dove down away from the oncoming aircraft; which then passed directly over us. Our aircraft had been making position reports for upwind; right crosswind; and right downwind runway 23 before this conflict occurred. While turning base; our aircraft observed the Cessna making a right 180 degree turn to enter onto the appropriate downwind. The Cessna traffic was making position reports stating right downwind runway 23 while they were flying the opposing downwind. I believe the other pilot may have been confused on how to perform a proper traffic pattern entry; and as a result was making incorrect position reports.




Synopsis: Flight instructor reported another aircraft entered the traffic pattern in a direction opposite that previously announced; resulting in a near-mid-air-collision.