elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 202006
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: MEM.Airport, TN
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B MEM
ATC / advisory: TRACON MEM
Second aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Deviation - Speed All Types; Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Level at 3000 feet; 190 knots; Flaps 5. Minimum speed approximately 160 knots (aircraft weight about 250K).  Direct BUDEE to join RWY 09 LOC. Co-altitude and 4-5 miles behind a Aircraft Y (on TCAS). Flew through their wake turbulence. We initially rolled right 10 degrees; then rolled quickly left to 25-30 degrees left bank. Never got a bank angle aural warning. First Officer disconnected the autopilot and we simultaneously received a momentary (less than 1 second) stick shaker.  No other cautions or warnings or alerts. Received clearance for and executed the visual approach to 09. Landed with no issues. Made an AML entry. Flew through preceding plane's jet wash. More spacing but tough to judge in light winds.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported encountering wake turbulence in trail of another air carrier on approach to MEM.
Date: 201305
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZMA.ARTCC, FL
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: Gulfstream IV / G350 / G450
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class E ZMA
ATC / advisory: Center ZMA
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We were...heading 050 and given the clearance; 'Turn 030; join A699.' After acknowledging that clearance the Controller said; 'Make it a 010 heading;' to which the Copilot said; 'Okay; 010 to join.' We then got a frequency change. As the FMS joined A699 I saw a TCAS target about 20 miles or so to our east and was about to say something when the new Controller said; 'Are you on a 010 heading?' The Copilot said; 'We were; but were given a clearance to join the airway on that heading.' The new Controller gave us a turn to 360. After a minute or so he asked again; 'So were you assigned a 010 heading?' The Copilot said; 'We were given a 010 heading to join the airway; but now we are heading 360.' Nothing else was said after that point. When the Controller initially said; 'Make it a 010 heading;' my initial reaction was to ask if he still wanted us to join A699; but since the Copilot said; '010 to join' I thought our instructions were clear. Perhaps the Controller heard what he wanted to hear; as did we. It is the age old lesson again: when in doubt; ask.




Synopsis: After receiving a clearance to fly a heading to intercept an airway; a G4 flight crew interpreted a subsequent heading as an intercept also. Controller advised that the second heading was not an intercept.
Date: 201501
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ADS.Airport, TX
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 20
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class D ADS
ATC / advisory: TRACON D10
Second aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Instructor; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Automation Aircraft TA; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Airspace Structure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Aircraft overtook us while departing ADS. Instead of overtaking on the right; which is the correct procedure; the aircraft passed underneath us; and appeared to still be climbing up towards us. I heard the TIS warning; looked below; and saw the aircraft. Taking action was not necessary; as the other aircraft was much faster than us; and by the time I saw him; he was going to clear us by a few hundred feet. A collision was not imminent. However; separation was not adequate. This near-miss could have been avoided by 1) the other pilot using the correct procedure to overtake an aircraft. Also; the other aircraft was low wing; so visual scanning would not have been impaired; and it's possible that they were not looking above them for traffic. 2) we could have prevented this by looking below us for traffic; as opposed to looking out ahead; and side to side.




Synopsis: C172 Instructor experiences a NMAC at 2;500 feet with another aircraft overtaking from below after departure from ADS. TIS first identified the conflict but no evasive action was necessary.
Date: 201904
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: B767-300 and 300 ER
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Airframe; Maintenance Inspection Authority; Maintenance Powerplant
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; Flight Crew Inflight Shutdown; Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Staffing; Human Factors; Company Policy
Primary problem: Company Policy

Narrative: During flight from ZZZZ to ZZZZ1; left engine lost oil pressure and oil. The aircraft did a [priority] landing in ZZZ. I was called and told to fly to ZZZ to fix aircraft. I went to ZZZ and found that the Engine Tachometer generator had vibrated loose and lost oil. I also noticed the wrong hardware was used to install old generator. I ordered parts needed and repaired aircraft. After; the AMM (Aircraft Maintenance Manual) required a high power engine run; which I could not do at the gate; so we informed [Maintenance Control] and had pilots come out and we would do high power run before takeoff. During the high power run; the pilot over sped [the] engine and engine did a compressor stall. We [then] went back to the gate and started more trouble shooting according to the [Fault Isolation Manual]. We found the ATSU was bad and ordered another. While waiting on ATSU; Maintenance Control scheduled a maintenance ferry flight. I made my opinion clear this was not a good idea. We then received the new ATSU and installed [in accordance with] AMM. We did an engine run and engine did not pass. We reported this to [Maintenance Control] and went back to hotel. The next day; [Maintenance Control] is shooting out ideas and I requested an 18 month background report on this engine. When I read the report; I could not believe it. The maintenance history on this plane was unbelievable. I should have been given this information before I came out to work on plane. I was exhausted; my rotation days were up; [and] I was going home. I was frustrated and gave my two weeks notice. I proceeded home and before I got there; my company phone had been turned off and no access to my company email or safety program. When I tried to call the Director of Maintenance; no answer and he never returned my calls. I could not reach anyone in the company except for [Safety Manager]. After reporting the issue to him; he suggested that I make this report. For the past 35 years; I have been making planes safe for air travel and I will not jeopardize my license or human life for a company to make a dollar.




Synopsis: Mechanic reported experiencing questionable maintenance practices.
Date: 201204
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: DVO.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; High Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class E ZOA
ATC / advisory: CTAF DVO
Second aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 1 Eng; Retractable Gear
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Engineer
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness; Time Pressure; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Environment - Non Weather Related; Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: [I] made radio call inbound to DVO traffic pattern for entry to left traffic Runway 13. [I] observed an aircraft on takeoff roll as I entered the 45 degree. As I began my downwind entry; I observed the other aircraft turning off crosswind to downwind and was much faster than my aircraft. I was concerned he did not see me or hear my radio calls. To avoid conflict; and keep the other aircraft in sight; I needed to descend to 700 FT AGL and make a 360 degree turn over the airport. I rolled out on downwind at 700 FT while the other aircraft crossed overhead the airport. After landing; I did several radio checks. My handheld was receiving but not transmitting. Conflict was avoided by descending and turning overhead the airport.




Synopsis: A pilot landing DVO reported a NMAC during final approach as he executed a go around to allow traffic spacing and then discovered this hand held radio transmitter failed but the receiver was OK.
Date: 201706
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Bonanza 35
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: CTAF ZZZ
Aircraft component: Engine
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Inflight Event / Encounter Fuel Issue
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Aircraft
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Aircraft lost power immediately after takeoff. Aircraft performed normally during the run-up prior to takeoff. Airplane had just finished a small repair for running rough. Landed in a recreational complex immediately adjacent to the airport. Normal glide to landing. No damage and no injury. Towed the aircraft back to the airport for further inspection. Found debris in the main fuel drain screen and the screen to the injector body. Learnings: while we did maintenance for running rough we never found a smoking gun to indicate the issue. Suspected a vapor lock due [to] the heat of the day. After the Engine cooled down and run-up was normal we assumed we had determined the cause. On takeoff from the grass runway which was very rough terrain I could not hear the popping of the engine due to the bumping of the airplane as it accelerated down the runway. As soon as the wheels were up it was apparent that the engine was running rough and I could not maintain altitude and elected to land in the recreational field next to the airport. Conclusions (what I learned from this event). Make sure that the reasons for any aircraft performance issues is thoroughly discovered. And not to underestimate the terrain used when taking off after a repair/maintenance. I'm convinced had I used the paved runway (slight cross wind) I would have heard the engine running rough and aborted the takeoff. The grass runway was the longer runway and aligned into the wind.




Synopsis: Beechcraft Bonanza pilot reported an off-field landing due to loss of power on takeoff caused by debris in the fuel system.
Date: 202111
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Sky Clear
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 170/175 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class A ZZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZZ
Aircraft component: Pneumatic Valve/Bleed Valve
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew Diverted; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: During the initial climb of flight number service from ZZZ to ZZZ1; we got a BLEED 2 FAIL EICAS msg at FL320 and climbing to FL350; we immediately stopped the climb and I ran the QRH. The message did not go away; but we decided then to continue to ZZZ1 at FL310 in accordance with the QRH. BLEED 2 OVERPRESS appeared 42 min into the flight (maybe 10min after the first EICAS); also persistent; we followed the QRH as well; XBLEED was pushed out for the reminder of the flight and EICAS overpress was gone. The new QRH put a band aid on the plane that lasted about 5 to 10 min. The message came back after that; the QRH thus called to request priority handling and land in nearest suitable airport. The Captain; ATC and myself all agreed on ZZZ2. We executed a descent and ran the QRC for that and landed with no other issues afterwards. The Captain got himself numbers and worked the box; while I was briefing the approach; obtaining the ATIS and talking to ATC. He also took care of the PAs. We did not exceed any limitations; nor did we request priority into the alternate. The rest of the flight was uneventful.




Synopsis: First Officer reported receiving two BLEED AR EICAS messages in flight. The Flight Crew followed QRH procedures and requested priority handling to divert and make a precautionary landing at the nearest suitable airfield.
Date: 201606
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: SEA.Airport, WA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Medium Large Transport
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Electronic Flt Bag (EFB)
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Confusion; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Airport; Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Event # 1: In the vicinity of the final approach fix for the ILS 16R in SEA and beginning a missed approach; I referenced my Jepp ILS 16R SEA chart for information. The information that had been there a moment before was gone and all I saw was the airport information chart for Boeing field. This was disconcerting and distracting and took a few seconds to sort out. My immediate thought was to select app (approach). Of course this did not work because the airport had changed from SEA to Boeing field. This thought process took me at most 1 or 2 seconds to sort. As time and other tasks permitted and I recovered from my jaw dropping; I selected the SEA airport and approach which brought my ILS 16R SEA chart back. This happened at a really bad time. The good news is I nearly have the ILS 16R SEA chart memorized and so the issue did not rise above a very serious and poorly timed distraction during Event #2. Event #2: Event #2 was an out of control [congested] final approach frequency on 133.65. Due to a lack of radio discipline on the frequency; the controller was unable to communicate to us the turn to 130 degrees and intercept or cleared approach. Due to no clearance we chose to fly through the course and notify ATC except we could not notify ATC due to talk on the frequency. ATC gave us a turn back and approach clearance; except it was what pilots call a 'bad vector' due to it being too late in the process for a good vector. Intercepting final; we were way above glide path. About the time; I had decided a missed approach was going to be the outcome; the controller handed us off to tower. I stayed with approach intending to immediately convey 'missed approach'. However; due to frequency congestion there was never an opportunity to inform approach of the missed approach until approach finally queried us whether we were still with approach.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported an anomaly with their electronic flight bag and a heavily congested approach frequency during the same approach. The second issue resulted in a go around.
Date: 201909
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Second aircraft: PA-28 Cherokee/Archer/Dakota/Pillan/Warrior
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Workload
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC; Inflight Event / Encounter Unstabilized Approach
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach
Contributing factors: Procedure; Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We were cleared for a visual approach after [transitioning from an instrument approach]. We were told to follow a Caravan and were number two for the airport. I heard the Tower talk to a Cherokee and instructed them to enter the downwind and follow a 737 on final (us). As we got closer to the runway I queried the Tower about our traffic. They said we were now number one for the runway and company 737 was departing ahead of us. As we were lining up with the runway at about 500 ft. AGL I saw a Cherokee on a close in base leg to our left. He was joining final in front of us. I called out the traffic to the First Officer who was flying. He saw the traffic and pitched down to avoid the aircraft. The Cherokee passed directly above us by about 100-200 ft. Our approach was now unstable so I called for a go around. The First Officer asked if we were clear of the traffic (we now were) and then initiated the go around at 200 ft. AGL. We maneuvered to rejoin a visual approach to a landing. I reported a near miss to the Tower. I later found out the Cherokee did not have a transponder which explains why there was no TCAS alert. This also effected the ability of the Tower to track them. If I had known the Cherokee didn't have a transponder I would have been more vigilant about making sure we acquired visual contact.




Synopsis: B737 Captain reported NMAC with a Cherokee on final approach; resulting in a go-around.
Date: 201604
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: TNCA.Airport, FO
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
ATC / advisory: Tower TNCA
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors; Airspace Structure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: On final Runway 11 AUA utilizing the ILS system as a back up to a visual approach. At 1500 AGL; the tower controller advised the preceding aircraft on final to a caution for a departing ship in the harbor. We actually spotted the cruise ship moving left to right across the final approach segment. We also received the same ATC alert advising us to the ship crossing our path. I immediately configured fully to landing and slowed to final approach speed to give the ship time to pass clear of our final. It was unknown what the height of the ship was; but flying overhead was not an option. Fully configured; we communicated the potential go around if the ship didn't clear our lateral path. The ship cleared the final path and we continued to land normally. At no point did we fly over the ship.


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


Synopsis: B737 flight crew reported being advised of a vessel crossing their final approach path on approach to TNCA. Flight crew stated they did not fly over the ship.