elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201305
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: CBE.Airport, MD
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; High Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class G CBE
ATC / advisory: CTAF CBE; UNICOM CBE
Second aircraft: Small Aircraft; High Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Distraction; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Airspace Structure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Practicing landings (touch 'n goes) I was on a long final (due to practicing no-flaps approach and landing) to Runway 23 at CBE. I was about 1/3 to 1/2 mile from runway threshold and about 150 feet right of extended centerline. I happened to see an aircraft (I believe a small Cessna) about 200 feet below me and about 150 feet to my left.I initiated a go-around; and announced I was going around on UNICOM. Someone (presumably the pilot of that aircraft) said 'sorry about that - I was on the wrong frequency'; or something very close to that. I replied something to the effect of 'no problem; no one got hurt'.I did a couple more landings after the incident and put the aircraft away. I did not see the other aircraft or pilot.At no time did I hear the pilot of that aircraft on the radio; except immediately after I announced that I was going around. I do not know if he had flown a partial or complete pattern or did a straight-in approach.Preventive action to try to prevent this from happening again: 1) try to improve my scan for other aircraft. I was looking for other aircraft; but just did not see him.2) make sure I am on correct frequency; monitor radio traffic to build situational awareness; and clearly announce my position/intentions as we're supposed to do.




Synopsis: A pilot on short final to CTAF CBE Runway 23 executed a go-around after a near miss with an aircraft whose pilot failed to employ recommended CTAF communications reporting.
Date: 201901
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 190/195 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: Electrical Distribution
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: While in cruise at FL380; we received an SPDA (Secondary Power Distribution Assembly) FAIL; FUEL FEED 1 FAULT; and APU FUEL SOV CLSD EICAS messages. I transferred control of the aircraft to the F/O (First Officer) [and] complied with QRH procedures. I contacted Dispatch via ACARS and eventually did a conference call with Maintenance Control over ARINC. Maintenance explained that we were having secondary power distribution issues. However; after about 20 minutes; we experienced additional electric buses issues; hydraulics and fuel pumps failures; fuel crossfeed system malfunctions; and fire system faults. On the ELECTRICAL synoptic pages: AC BUS 2; TRU 2; DC BUS 2 started to flash amber. Then it started affecting AC ESS and DC ESS 3 BUS and BAT 2. Then the APU START BUS was showing that it was being energized by the BATT 1. We lost the ability to fuel crossfeed. The valve would open and then close again with the switch selected to either fuel tank. Loss of both tank 1 and 2 fuel ejector pumps. AC electric 1 fuel pump took over but was turning on/off. AC electric 2 fuel pump showed offline as well as the #2 fuel ejector pump and that the DC fuel pump (which is used to supply fuel from the #2 tank to the APU was supplying fuel pressure to the #2 engine. As the Captain and after discussing it with the FO; I overrode the fuel pumps to force to the AC electric pumps to run continuously since the fuel ejector pumps were showing that they were failing; turning the backup AC pumps and then turning them off and on. I wanted to make sure we had positive fuel pressure to the engines. I conferred with Dispatch and Maintenance Control over ARINC again. We all concurred to divert to [a nearby alternate]. As we were turning final and intercepting the LOC; we received a FIRE PROTECTION FAULT message and the FO lost ILS2. I took control of the aircraft; disconnected the autopilot and continued the landing visually. Landed under maximum landing weight. Failure of SPDA causing malfunctions and failures of other aircraft systems (fuel; fire; electrical; hydraulics and APU).




Synopsis: ERJ-190 Captain reported diverting to an alternate airport after experiencing multiple system failures associated with the loss of the Secondary Power Distribution Assembly (SPDA).
Date: 201502
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: BWI.Airport, MD
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: Small Transport
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground BWI
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical; Ground Event / Encounter Vehicle
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors; Airport
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: While taxiing to the ramp on taxiway Juliet from Runway 33R a catering truck barely missed my airplane.[It] was a clear dark night.  After Landing on runway 33 right I exited at the end of runway 33R; turned left on taxiway Juliet; contacted ground and was cleared to [the ramp] via Juliet.Approaching the service road that crosses taxiway Juliet I had on all taxi lights; landing lights; courtesy lights; and strobe lights. This is due to an ongoing problem with vehicles crossing the active taxiway without looking. I [then] noticed a vehicle on my left [had] just passed through the gate between the ramps. I confirmed the vehicle had stopped but then observed a truck on right that had not stopped. I now locked up my brakes and added full reverse; missing the truck [by] two to three feet and coming to a stop in the opposite lane of the service road. The hard braking and reverse forced the nose strut to compress. This created a spring effect that was multiplied by removing reverse thrust rapidly; the plane tilted back and the tail struck the ground then came back to its original position. I sat still for a few minutes observing the driver of the catering truck who now had parked the truck off on the side of the service road; and was standing outside the truck [and] visibly upset.  I then continued to taxi to avoid closing the only entry and exit into the cargo ramp.Better or more enforcement of traffic rules on this ongoing hot spot on the airport.




Synopsis: The pilot of a Small Transport aircraft; taxiing to the ramp at BWI; had to stop aggressively to avoid colliding with a catering truck whose driver apparently failed to note the illumination from the aircraft's fully illuminated landing; taxi; courtesy and strobe lights on a clear dark night. The reporter advised conflicts with inattentive drivers are common at the location where the event took place.
Date: 201408
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZZ.Airport, FO
Flight conditions: IMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: A320
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Human factors: Workload; Distraction; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Unstabilized Approach; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Automation Aircraft Terrain Warning; Person Flight Crew
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach
Contributing factors: Procedure; Weather; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We got high on the slide slope and started a descent to recapture it and had a high sink rate which gave us TERRAIN WARNING. At that point we did a go-around and got vectors to another approach to a landing.




Synopsis: An A320 Captain executed an IMC go-around in response to an EGPWS TERRAIN warning after he developed a high sink rate to capture the ILS glideslope from above.
Date: 201302
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: PIT.Airport, PA
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: A320
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B PIT
ATC / advisory: TRACON PIT
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT; Inflight Event / Encounter Unstabilized Approach
Detector: Automation Aircraft Terrain Warning
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: While on right base leg to Runway 28L at 3;000 FT. we were given a visual and accepted as airport was in sight. Airplane was at 170 KIAS and at flaps 3 with autopilot on. The vector put us on a heading to intercept final at 90 degree angle to final 28L and inside the FAF PITTZ which has a glide slope intercept altitude of 3;000 FT. The glide slope for 28L indicated we were high so I asked for gear down; managed speed; flaps full and final check as I recall. Then we set 2;000 FT in the altitude window and I selected open descent to start down and attempt to get on vertical profile while still correcting simultaneously to a 60 degree angle to final.We intercepted the glide slope and within 5-6 seconds of starting down we got a 'caution terrain;terrain' warning and immediately went to TOGA and disconnected autopilot and corrected situation and climbed back up to 3;000 MSL. We were 5 miles approximately north of the airport and I estimate we were at 2;500 FT MSL when we got the warning. We were not aligned with Runway 28L when intercepting glide slope but well north of the runway so we had no vertical protection. I then hand flew the airplane towards 28L but we were too high to make a safe landing so we proceeded to line up up with 28L and executed a normal go around and received vectors from ATC to return for a ILS 28L and made a uneventful approach and landing.


Second narrative: In my estimation; we were approximately 2;500 FT MSL (1;500 AGL) when the GPWS was triggered; on a vector of about 210 to pick up Runway 28L for the visual. It appeared we were taken inside the FAF (approximately 2-3 miles) during this vector; and with the field in sight we were cleared for the visual approach. It could have been a Tower or the ridge on the south side of the river that triggered the caution terrain. The weather was VMC so we could see the ground; although we appeared to be high on approach by virtue of our tight vectoring; wich put us on an aggressive intercept to 28L northeast of the field.


Synopsis: A320 Captain flying visual approach to PIT got a GPWS terrain warning; and after adjusting altitude was too high to continue approach.
Date: 202105
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Weather elements / visibility: Turbulence; 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Cessna 402/402C/B379 Businessliner/Utiliner
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Ferry / Re-Positioning
Flight phase: Final Approach
Aircraft component: Engine
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Ground Event / Encounter Ground Strike - Aircraft; Ground Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: I acted as the pilot-in-command and sole occupant of a Cessna 402 aircraft on a flight in visual meteorological conditions. Prior to departure; I conducted a preflight inspection in accordance with the manufacturer's recommended procedures; and I followed the preflight checklist. All systems appeared to operate normally during takeoff; climb; and cruise flight.During the approach to landing; I monitored the UNICOM frequency when another pilot approximately 4-5 miles ahead of me; approaching the same runway; advised that there was turbulence on final approach. While on short final approach; I experienced turbulence and added power to maintain a proper glide path.  At that point; I noticed that the left (i.e.; critical) engine was no longer producing power. As a result; the aircraft nose yawed left (i.e.; toward the dead engine) and I applied full right rudder to maintain directional control.Since I was on a short final approach to the runway; I reduced power in order to land while maintaining my airspeed above Vmc (i.e.; minimum controllable airspeed with critical engine failure). However; the gusty wind drifted the airplane to the left of center line. Since I had applied full right rudder to maintain runway centerline while in flight; upon touchdown the airplane aggressively spun to the right and departed the runway; which caused the landing gear to collapse.When the aircraft came to a complete stop; I shut down the right engine; secured the aircraft; and exited through the cabin door without incident.




Synopsis: Cessna 402 pilot reported experiencing an engine failure on final approach; followed by loss of directional control after landing that resulted in damage to the aircraft.
Date: 201511
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZBW.ARTCC, NH
Light: Night
Aircraft: Regional Jet 900 (CRJ900)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZBW
ATC / advisory: Center ZBW
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: [En route] Boston center offered us a shortcut; we replied that yes we would take it if it will keep us within 50 NM offshore. They replied that yes it will keep it us within 50 miles from the coast. Then we received the route that was direct to ZZZ then direct destination; we input that on the FMS and to us [it] looked like the first portion would keep us over land but we were not sure about the second segment. Immediately we did send the new route to the dispatcher to verify that we were going to be within the 50 NM. Just [a] few seconds after we sent the route to dispatch center switched [us] to a new frequency; once we were on the new frequency we queried again that new controller about the route; we did ask him if that would keep us within 50 NM; he replied yes and added that the route was a route designed by ATC specifically to meet the 50NM requirements.Soon after dispatch replied to our message and his answer was that the new route would not keep us within the 50 NM. Immediately we told the controller what dispatch told us and the controller reply again that it was within 50 NM and repeated that it was designed by ATC.Then we decided to request a heading towards the West (land); ATC approved and soon after gave us a new route (they were not pleased).The new route was sent to the dispatcher and he agreed that the new one was good.The rest of the flight was normal.Create a pictorial route options for that particular flight.




Synopsis: CRJ-900 Captain reported ATC issued a clearance that would have taken them beyond the 50 nm from land limit; at least according to their Dispatcher.
Date: 201507
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Dash 8-300
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
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: Distraction
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR
Detector: Automation Aircraft RA; Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Clearance; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure
Primary problem: Airspace Structure

Narrative: We had just departed ZZZ from Runway XXC. Climbing through approximately 3500; ATC alerted us to traffic on our climb out. Climbing through 3500ft we received a TA from our TCAS system. I notified ATC that we had received a TA.We were level at 4000ft heading 270. We received an RA to descend. We complied with the RA; notified ATC of our descent in compliance with the RA. At 3840 ft; TCAS notified us 'clear of traffic'. We climbed back to 4000 and notified ATC that we were climbing back to our altitude. ATC had pointed out traffic to us. I told him when we received a TA that we had received a TA to give him a heads up in case we received an RA. When we got the RA and notified him that we were descending in compliance with the RA; he said; 'I pointed that traffic out to you.' I told him that I was required to comply with the RA.




Synopsis: A Captain reported receiving a traffic alert (TA) during climbout. This was followed by an RA which commanded a deviation from the cleared climb profile. After the RA was resolved; a normal climb was resumed.
Date: 201506
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: DFW.Airport, TX
Flight conditions: VMC
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 B DFW
ATC / advisory: TRACON D10
Second aircraft: UAV - Unpiloted Aerial Vehicle
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Distraction
Anomaly: Airspace Violation All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: On the DFW HRPER departure two hours after sunrise; at about 9000 feet; the First Officer asked if I saw an object go by at close range.  I did not.  I asked him if it was an airplane.  He said no.  I asked if it was a balloon.  He said no.  I asked if it was a drone.  He said it could be.  He then notified ATC.  The flight continued uneventfully.




Synopsis: An air carrier aircraft departed on the DFW HRPER2 Departure (RNAV) mid-morning and at 9;000 feet the First Officer saw an object believed to be a drone pass by at a close range. The flying Captain did not take evasive action.
Date: 201205
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZNY.ARTCC, NY
Aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Cruise
ATC / advisory: Center ZNY
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Oceanic
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: At approximately XA:55z; I took over the non-radar controller position on sector 24 of ZNY North Atlantic Airspace. During the position relief briefing; I was informed that Air Carrier X was coordinated at FL400 with Santa Maria; but was currently at FL390. The aircraft would not be clear of traffic until XA:57z and was estimating 39N040W at XB:10z. After taking the sector; I immediately sent a clearance to the aircraft to maintain FL390 and then at time XA:59z climb to maintain FL400 by XB:07z. The aircraft was Controller Pilot Data Link Communications (CPDLC) and roger'ed the clearance. At XB:04z; the aircraft stated uncertainty with the clearance. The clearance was immediately resent. Prior to the aircraft progressing and reporting 40W; I informed Santa Maria that the aircraft did not receive the climb clearance and was their control to climb. Santa Maria issued the clearance and the next automatic position report received by the aircraft reported FL400 just past 40W. Upon review of the aircraft messages; I determined the confusion was caused by the initial clearance which was maintain FL390 then at time climb and maintain FL390. The climb and maintain FL390 clearance was then resent when questioned by the pilot. Improved vigilance when reading the clearances being sent out. In an effort to meet the time constraints that were imposed by the situation; careless mistakes were made.




Synopsis: ZNY Controller issues FL390 to aircraft believing he had issued FL400; resulting in airspace deviation.
Date: 201410
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZDC.ARTCC, VA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: A320
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZDC
ATC / advisory: Center ZDC
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Inflight Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert
Contributing factors: Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Flight was in cruise at FL310. ATC informed us of a rocket launch scheduled to occur at our 2:00 and 15 miles. When the launch attempt occurred (the rocket exploded shortly after liftoff); the aircraft was within approximately 5 miles. It seems that the aircraft was routed much closer to the launch site than safety dictates. ATC apparently has more faith in the rocket launch people than is warranted.




Synopsis: Air Carrier First Officer at FL310 reports being routed a little too close to a rocket launch that explodes just after lift off.