elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201811
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: FAR.Airport, ND
Flight conditions: Marginal
Weather elements / visibility: Icing; Snow; 4
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class E FAR
ATC / advisory: TRACON FAR
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: A safety of flight and potential collision hazard for a very high obstacle that is depicted against the surrounding obstacles exists on the VFR chart 29 miles SE of FAR. A GPS Direct route from ZZZ to FAR places an 1;100 foot tower 29 miles SE of FAR directly in my flight path. See the attached flight path. Ceilings were reported at 1;600 and 4 MI visibility. I establish an altitude of 2;100 for VFR cloud clearance. I called Fargo approach at 32 miles and prior to the TRSA boundary even though I was below the TRSA altitude of 6;000 feet. I received a squawk code from Fargo Approach and told I had radar contact. Fargo Approach then asked me if I had the tower in sight directly in front of me. I turned left to avoid the tower and told Fargo Approach that I did not see the tower nor did I recognize the obstruction on the VFR chart since it blended into the other obstacles on my VFR chart. Fargo Approach did a fabulous job of alerting me to the obstacle. It turned out that an IFR clearance and approach would have been a better option. I highly recommend making sure the greatest obstacle threat be made to stand out against the lower obstacle threat for the antenna tower at 2;556 feet. The flashing tower light symbol on the VFR chart is not apparent. The obstacle height is not apparent. The last digit of the altitude for the tower also blends into the TRSA boundary ring. This combination of VFR chart dependence and GPS direct flight path and lack of familiarity with the local obstacles created a hazardous situation that was compounded by low visibility and low altitude VFR flight conditions. An accident chain was set up; but averted by the Fargo Approach controller.




Synopsis: GA pilot reported ATC issued an alert regarding a tower located near the pilot's flight path on  route to FAR airport. The pilot believes the obstacle should be highlighted for better clarity on the VFR chart.
Date: 202109
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Gusts; 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: SR22
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Landing
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Ground Strike - Aircraft; Ground Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Ground Excursion Runway; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Approach to ZZZ flying with my wife from our home base at ZZZ1 via ZZZ2. conditions were good and VFR throughout. On approach to ZZZ Wind was 10 kts. gusting to 20 kts. from 320 degrees. I was confirmed to enter the left downwind for Runway XX. Runway XY was also available and another airplane was confirmed to land on [Runway] XY at the same time. Even thought [Runway] XY was shorter at 2;XXX ft. instead of over 4000 ft.; I chose [Runway] XY for the wind. I was given clearance to land on [Runway] XY and flew a 180 to join the right base for Runway XY.I failed to treat Runway XY as a short field landing (slowing to 80 kts. and striking within the first 200 ft. of runway). Instead I was thinking of the gusty conditions and approached at normal landing speed plus. We touched down and then had a gust give us added lift extending our runway roll when we didn't have any margin. I thought to go around but it did not appear to be the safest maneuver. So I used the elevator and hard wheel brakes but we rolled beyond the runway and impacted a fence before we came to a stop.No injuries.On post [event] review; contributing factors could include the fact that I made a sudden runway decision change after 6 hours of flying time; a small portion (20 minutes) of which was above 12000 ft. I should have landed on [Runway] XX as assigned and dealt with the added 20 degrees of crosswind. It would have been within my capabilities and experience and would have given me a margin for the unexpected that I simply did not have on [Runway] XY.




Synopsis: SR22 pilot reported a runway overrun during landing due to inability to stop in runway available. The excursion continued and the aircraft struck a fence. No injuries were reported and no additional information provided.
Date: 201605
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: PDK.Airport, GA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class D PDK
ATC / advisory: Tower PDK
Second aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Instructor; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control
Contributing factors: Airport; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: PDK has parallel runways 390 feet apart. A jet was awaiting takeoff clearance between the runways. We were cleared to land on runway 3L. The student was flying; we were on short final when the jet was cleared for takeoff on 3R. When we passed behind the jet we were about 20 feet AGL and the plane was blown sideways to the edge of the runway and instantly banked 60 degrees left. I took over the controls and landed the aircraft.This situation occurs frequently at PDK; when it does I instruct the student to land long to avoid the jet blast. This time I was occupied correcting the student's crosswind technique and failed to notice the jet waiting to takeoff.The Tower is good at reminding pilots of wake turbulence. A reminder of possible jet blast could have made a difference.




Synopsis: C172 instructor pilot reported his aircraft was upset at low altitude on approach to PDK when encountering jet blast from an aircraft awaiting takeoff clearance.
Date: 201811
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: A330
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Hazardous Material Violation; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Ground Personnel
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Dangerous Goods loaded into the container without being attached.




Synopsis: Ground personnel reported arrival HAZMAT shipment incorrectly loaded and transported.
Date: 201201
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Thunderstorm
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-400
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: Cockpit Window
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Time Pressure; Training / Qualification; Situational Awareness; Distraction
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Cruising at 33;000 FT First Officer's forward window cracked and kept spreading. [There was a] line of thunderstorms ahead; [we] descended to 10;000 FT. Many cracks were still spreading. Closest airport was off to our right about 35 miles. QRH said to land at 'nearest suitable' airport. We diverted. Possibly equipment fatigue. Contract Maintenance said he had never seen one quite that bad.




Synopsis: A B737-400 First Officer windshield cracked so the flight diverted to the nearest airport for a precautionary landing as per the QRH.
Date: 202201
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ORD.Airport, IL
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
ATC / advisory: Ground ORD
Aircraft component: Radio Altimeter
Component problem: Failed; Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Distraction; Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: While at the gate in ORD we experienced a momentary Radar Altimeter 1 fault. The fault resolved itself without intervention and we departed as scheduled.  On climb out passing 16;000 ft. near Dekalb; IL; we again experienced a Radar Altimeter 1 fault accompanied by a GPWS fault.  This fault also cleared without intervention and functioned normally for the remainder of the flight.Not sure if this is related to the 5GC rollout but wanted you to have the information.




Synopsis: Captain reported possible 5G problem associated with the radio altimeter; at the gate; and then airborne enroute.
Date: 202110
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZHU.ARTCC, TX
Aircraft: Military
Operator: Government
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZHU
ATC / advisory: Center ZHU
Second aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Time Pressure; Workload; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Automation Air Traffic Control; Person Air Traffic Control
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure; Staffing
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I was working combined sectors as traffic volume and complexity rapidly increased with an inexperienced supervisor D-side getting his mandatory 8 hours of currency time.  The sectors were commanded to be split around the time of the incident which temporarily adds to controller workload and complexity.  I had a military aircraft; Aircraft X; on vectors for an approach to Runway 31.  He was at the MVA of 022 for his area.  The tower changed the runway in use; so I had to vector the aircraft north to set up for an approach to Runway 13.  Meanwhile; I get a general aviation aircraft also en route to the same airport.  I hadn't decided the sequence yet; but I had time.  The two sectors started to increase in volume; and I felt that I was having to do more than I normally would with a D-side due to the less experienced D-side.  The GA aircraft advised that he had the airport in site; and I paused a few seconds before answering while trying to calculate whether I could still get Aircraft X to the airport first.  Name pointed out that the Aircraft X was on practicing; suggesting that I prioritize the GA aircraft.  I decided that would be okay and allowed Aircraft X to continue on a downwind vector.  I still thought I would be able to get him onto a base en trail of the preceding aircraft with no problem.  Unfortunately; the two sectors continued to get busier.  I was late turning the Aircraft X onto base; and he entered an area with a higher MVA of 024 by about 3 miles or so.   After I had already turned the aircraft back; Name was very helpful to point out that the aircraft had entered the higher MVA area so that we could get this event reported.  The Aircraft X continued to his destination without further incident. It would have been helpful to either have a D-side who works the airspace regularly; split the sectors in a timely fashion; or both.




Synopsis: ZHU Center Controller reported combined sector's complexity increased; without help; resulted in aircraft entering a higher MVA.
Date: 201407
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Ramp
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Other Person
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Flight was ready for departure when I remembered that the Hazmat Paperwork was not delivered to the flight deck. I used the belt loader to deliver the paperwork to the flight deck. I really didn't feel I did an unsafe action and followed steps to be safe. This is a common practice on the ramp and I really did not feel I was doing something wrong until a member of management brought it to my attention 4 hours later.




Synopsis: A ramp worker reports being admonished by management for using a belt loader to pass last minute paperwork to the flight deck crew.
Date: 201303
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: SNA.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-700
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class C SNA
ATC / advisory: TRACON SCT
Second aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 2 Eng; Retractable Gear
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Conflict Airborne Conflict
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Airport; Airspace Structure; Procedure
Primary problem: Airspace Structure

Narrative: During the downwind leg of our 19R approach into SNA; I noticed several aircraft in the vicinity on TCAS. We descended from 5;000 down to 3;000 and were on an approximate heading of 360 when we were instructed by SoCal Approach to turn right to a heading of 130 (or close to it). I commented that it looked like he was going to turn us right into traffic; but it was initially hard to determine if we were closing on the traffic or following him. I was concerned but I thought the Controller knew what he was doing. About the time we rolled out on our heading we received a Traffic Alert following quickly by a Resolution Advisory to climb immediately. I disconnected the autopilot and tried to follow the commands but was distracted by the GA light twin aircraft that flew underneath our right side. It was close enough that I could see the pilot's sunglasses and the color of the aircraft. I believe we climbed approximately 300 FT. I'm not sure how far underneath us the other plane was; but I can say with certainty it was only a few hundred feet. The Captain immediately notified ATC of our situation and helped get us back into a stable flight situation (reconnected the autopilot; verified speed; heading and altitude etc). We resumed the flight; joined the localizer and landed without incident a few moments later.My concern is the VFR area just below the airspace and just north of SNA. After we landed; the Captain spoke with Socal Approach via telephone and was informed that they weren't certain the other aircraft was technically violating VFR airspace....though he may have been 'pushing the upper end of the corridor'. He also stated that they are boxed in by mountains so they have to keep us in tight for all 19R approaches into SNA. I filed this report to make everyone aware of two things: 1. - there is a potential for this to happen again in SNA (Or anywhere) and 2. - See and avoid is still ultimately our responsibility. (Everywhere).




Synopsis: A B737-700 flight crew suffered TCAS TA and RAs while on vectors for landing Runway 19L at SNA.
Date: 201707
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 100
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: BAe 146 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 137
Mission: Utility / Infrastructure
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Second aircraft: Regional Jet 200 ER/LR (CRJ200)
Reporter organization: Contracted Service
Reporter function: Instructor; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Conflict Airborne Conflict
Detector: Automation Aircraft RA; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Airport
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: During descent to airport after a mission; a TCAS Resolution Advisory (RA) was issued due to proximity to a regional jet which had just departed. We followed the RA. The two aircraft passed each other at a safe distance. Without TCAS; this would have been a near miss at best.The wind was favoring; and all aircraft had been using; Runway XX all day. The CRJ took off the opposite direction because the winds were variable at 4. We were planning Runway XX on our initial descent and were prepared for the straight in Runway XX approach we had received previously. [This airport] does not have radar or an ATIS so we had no knowledge of the departing traffic until we checked on at 12 miles out.Based on the conversation I overheard between tower and the CRJ; it was clear that the CRJ did not know that there was no radar coverage in the area. They were much more concerned with talking to the tower about traffic they saw on their TCAS than maneuvering to avoid it. They also were unaware that other high speed traffic may be transiting the uncontrolled airspace without communicating to ATC. Vigilance outside the cockpit must be maintained. Pilots are way too distracted inside these days; and are not using a proper 'see and avoid' technique. Fortunately the TCAS equipment worked well.




Synopsis: BAE146 pilot on approach reported an airborne conflict with a CRJ200 departing from the opposite direction. The TCAS RA was complied with to maintain separation.
Date: 202103
Location: ZZZ.Tower, US
Aircraft: B757-200
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Flap/Slat Control System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Dispatcher
Reporter qualification: Dispatch Dispatcher
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; General Maintenance Action; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Notice the flight did a missed approach. Sent [Name] on ATC desk a teams message asking if he was aware of any issue since no ACARS was sent. Name checked and found out they [advised ATC] due to a flap issue and requested Runway XX.Maintenance issue with flap caused this issue.This was a mechanical issue with Aircraft X.




Synopsis: Dispatcher reported that B757 Flight Crew executed a missed approach due to a Slat Disagree message.
Date: 201402
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ELP.Airport, TX
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class C ELP
ATC / advisory: Tower ELP
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Inflight Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Airport; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Was conducting instrument training at ELP. We were cleared for GPS 26R approach. When approaching the runway I became confused due Runway 26R marked as a visual runway. There are no bars on the Runway for 26R and momentarily started to turn to Runway 26L. We were able to determine the right runway; however the runway should be marked properly to avoid confusion. The airport should mark Runway 26R with the proper runway markings.




Synopsis: C172 instructor pilot reports difficulty identifying Runway 26R at ELP during RNAV 26R approach. Runway markings are called into question.