elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201507
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZZ.Airport, FO
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Thunderstorm; Turbulence
Light: Night
Aircraft: Gulfstream G200 (IAI 1126 Galaxy)
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZZ
Aircraft component: Turbine Engine
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Inflight Shutdown
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: While at cruise at FL350 and deviating to the right of course because of weather and lightning the EICAS displayed R BLEED AIR LEAK. Crew followed QRH step by step but EICAS message remained illuminated. The QRH directed to shut down the right engine and land as soon as possible. Passengers and crew smelled a burning oil smell and using CRM the Crew shut down the right engine. Crew donned their masks and requested lower altitude. Another airplane relayed our radio calls to ATC because radio communications were very scratchy. There was traffic below our position and there was weather below. The speed was decreasing and flying pilot using CRM elected to disconnect Autopilot. ATC gave us vectors off the airway to clear us of traffic and weather; initially step descent us to FL320; then FL 300 to prevent running into traffic below and weather. ATC gave us a heading of 360 and lower to descend unrestricted to 6000. Crew engaged the autopilot again and prepared to land single engine into ZZZZ. The EICAS message remained illuminated and QRH indicated to select an alternate source of pressurization. Crew started the APU and at FL180 used APU air to pressurize airplane. EICAS message remained illuminated until below 10;000 ft MSL. Crew finished all checklist and confirmed passengers were okay. ATC advised to expect VOR/DME [approach] but Crew requested longer runway and ILS approach. [ILS runway] was closed but airport opened the runway for us. The single engine checklist was completed and we landed safely and uneventfully. Passengers were in good spirits and commended and praised us on the skill; CRM; calmness and collective way to handle the emergency.We are very happy that the training and ATC support we had help us and the uneventful landing.


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


Synopsis: G200 flight crew reported precautionary shutdown of right engine after EICAS displayed R BLEED AIR LEAK.
Date: 201510
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: SMF.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: B737-700
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
ATC / advisory: TRACON NCT
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Airspace Structure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Upon being seated in the hotel van; the van driver showed me a piece of paper with 'MLS Tower' and an area code and phone number and told me that I should call that number. This was the first indication of anything possibly going wrong with our flight. As per Union instruction; I did not call the number. When I arrived at my room; I looked up 'MLS Tower' and found it to be an airport in Montana; so I figured the message re: MLS was probably in error. The more I thought about it the next day; I came to realize that during transition from the SUUTR1 Arrival to the visual approach; it is possible that we transited SAC Exec Airport Class D airspace. NorCal cleared us for visual approach to 34L and I turned slightly to the right around ELMAC toward the FAF (HADSU). At about this time; NorCal issued us a traffic advisory. We did not see any traffic where the controller described visually or on TCAS. We were both busy looking for that traffic as I descended toward the FAF altitude; all the while remaining above the 34L glideslope.It is possible; looking at the airspace later; that we may have inadvertently clipped the edge of SAC Exec Airport Class D airspace; which is a five mile ring up to 2;500 feet. I have been flying into SMF for [many] years; and have never noticed how close that airport is to the arrival corridor to 34L and 34R. It is possible with the fairly recent advent of the SUUTR 1 STAR; that we are being brought closer to the Class D airspace than we were previously when we typically were vectored by NorCal. It is also nearly impossible to tell exactly where the five mile boundary of that Class D is when you are flying the arrival/approach unless you happen to see the airport itself; which we did not.If this is indeed what the 'phone call' was about; we should inform company crews of the need to stay on the LNAV arrival all the way to ELMAC and/or be very careful of the SAC Exec Class D airspace.




Synopsis: B737 Captain believes that he may have passed through SAC Class D airspace during a visual approach to Runway 34L at SMF.
Date: 202005
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed As Precaution
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Aircraft X was on an IFR flight from ZZZ to ZZZ1 at 4;000 feet. Was flying the GPS XXR approach into ZZZ1.  Approach at XYZ.X cleared me for the approach into ZZZ1 and to contact Tower.  Approach did not give me the Tower frequency and I looked up the frequency on the approach plate and mistook the UNICOM frequency of XYY.AB and broadcasted my position and intentions.  I thought it was odd that I did not hear any response; but with COVID-19 conditions I was not sure and continued to broadcast to short final and landed.  I taxied back for an IFR flight back to ZZZ2 when a pickup truck pulled up beside my plane.  I used ground XYX.C to find out my deviation and followed the truck to park and call Tower.  I realize now that the correct Tower frequency is XYD.X.I picked up an IFR flight plan back to ZZZ2 without incident and flew the GPS XY approach into ZZZ2 to a full stop.




Synopsis: Pilot reported being on the incorrect frequency and thinking it was odd that no other aircraft were heard while landing.
Date: 201308
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ATL.Airport, GA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 5
Light: Night
Aircraft: A300
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class B ATL
ATC / advisory: Tower ATL
Aircraft component: FMS/FMC
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Departing ATL Runway 26L on CADIT 7 Departure RNAV to MPASS. We turned the autopilot on at 1;000 FT with Profile and NAV selected and began the slat retraction 10 knots after reaching 's' speed. After the turn to 300 degrees RNAV to MPASS; ATC told us to delete the 250 KTS speed restriction at ZELAN. After deleting the speed the aircraft automation turned the aircraft inside of MPASS. ATC advised us that 'In the future deleting the speed restriction at ZELAN does not mean go direct to ZELAN.' We indicated that the automation was flying the departure and we showed us .1 mile left of course. He indicated we were well Right of course.  The FMC logic apparently does not understand flying over a point after deleting a speed. We would recommend not deleting a speed until passing MPASS. A contributing factor may have been changing the clean-up altitude to 1;500 FT instead of leaving it at 3;000 FT. At 1;500 FT we are closer to the airport and get to S+10 much sooner.




Synopsis: A300 Captain on the CADIT 7 Departure from ATL is told to delete the speed restriction at ZELAN which is accomplished in the FMCG. This results in a turn direct ZELAN bypassing MPASS and an ATC admonishment.
Date: 201810
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Second aircraft: Tracker S-2
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: After doing touch and go's; my CFI and I departed the pattern to the east to return home. After our final touch and go a Grumman S-2T took off behind us. Immediately after departing the Delta airspace and changing frequencies the aircraft overtook us on our right side. I remember being able to clearly read the letters on the side of the aircraft. It is unclear if the aircraft ever had visual on us; however; we were never warned of a potential traffic conflict by Tower. This may have been avoided by better situational awareness of the traffic in the area and of what is being said on the radios.




Synopsis: C172 pilot reported a NMAC with a Grumman S-2T shortly after takeoff.
Date: 201508
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ORD.Airport, IL
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground ORD
Aircraft component: Tablet
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Ground Incursion Taxiway
Detector: Person Flight Crew; Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: Taxi
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Aircraft
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: On taxi out we were planning Runway 22L and received Runway 28R A9; T; N; B. Hurry up and get in front of the 767 under tow. Just as I was looking at the taxi diagram; iPad went blank in the power save mode. I continued while trying to get the iPad back up and turned on Bravo instead going to Tango. Co-pilot's head went down to change runway in the box. About the time I noticed we were on the wrong taxiway; so did Ground. We went down to A13 and back around to get on Tango.


Second narrative: [Report Narrative Contained No Additional Information]


Synopsis: B737 flight crew reported a taxiway incursion when the Captain's iPad went dark at a critical time.
Date: 201304
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Cheetah; Tiger; Traveler AA5 Series
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Second aircraft: Learjet 45
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: The Air Traffic Manager had a Trainee on Local. The Manager did not notice the Learjet 45 on a right base for Runway X descending out of 020; 3 miles southwest of ZZZ airport. The AA5 was on a right downwind for Runway X level at 010. A collision alert sounded because the targets were merging. The Trainee told the AA5 to turn left to avoid the LearJet 45. This was a good thing. The Manager transmitted over the Trainee and told an AA1 to turn northbound while on short final Runway X. I have 2 problems with this. The easiest thing to do would be to tell the Learjet 45 remain at or above 015 and tell the Grumman AA5 to remain at or below 010. This is impossible at ZZZ because the Manager has the whole facility convinced we are a VFR Tower and cannot assign altitudes to avoid collisions. Thus; day after day I watch controllers point 2 aircraft at each other as a collision alert sounds and only call traffic when an altitude assignment or suggested headings would remedy the situation. Please tell the Manager we can assign altitudes and suggested headings in a Class D and it is a good idea. It is much better than watching 2 targets merge with a collision alert sounding and frantically calling traffic. My second problem is the Manager is the certifying official and he was tubing with 5 airplanes. He told an airplane on short final; the AA1; to turn northbound. You should have seen what the AA1 looked like out the window. Ugly! On top of that; if the manager had gotten the call sign correct; the AA5 would have been underneath the Learjet 45 descending out of 018; and flying in the same direction. Thank God the Trainee saved the day and the Manager got the callsign wrong. Explain to my Air Traffic Manager that we can assign aircraft altitudes in a Class Delta. Please force him to put out an R&I to the entire facility stating so. I try to teach trainees it is easier to have a helicopter transition overhead mid field at 015 so in the event of a go-around you can tell a Learjet 45 maintain 010 until the conflict is averted. Right now the majority of the facility just calls traffic and prays. Please help!!!




Synopsis: Tower Controller described a conflict event when the facility manager; providing OJT; discouraged the use of assigned altitudes by VFR Tower controllers in Class D airspace.
Date: 201210
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Airbus Industrie Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Human factors: Training / Qualification; Situational Awareness; Human-Machine Interface; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: No Specific Anomaly Occurred All Types
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Aircraft
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: [Aircraft was] on autopilot; descending via the BAZBL STAR. Due to rain showers along the STAR plus other traffic; Center had kept us at 250 KIAS and too high to make RIICE at 10;000 FT. Center was informed and said to just do the best we could; so this was not an issue.) Center had released us from the 250 KIAS speed restriction (the other traffic was no longer a factor). Out of about 16;000 FT I used vertical speed plus speed brakes to make RIICE at 10;000 FT and 250 KIAS. Out of about 11;300 FT; we were handed off to Approach. Several things happened at once: (1) the FMC went into 'ALT ACQ' mode (v/s window blanked); (2) aircraft was decelerating to 250 KIAS; and (3) Approach cleared us down to 8;000 FT. The Captain (PM) went to set the MCP to 8;000 FT; but the aircraft was still in 'ALT ACQ' mode with the speed still about 290 KIAS. I raised my hand in front of the MCP altitude window and said; 'Not yet. It's still in 'ALT ACQ' mode; wait until we see 'altitude hold'.' The Captain waited until it went into altitude hold mode; then he selected 8;000 FT; I then waited until we were at 250 KIAS before pushing 'level change' to descend to the new assigned altitude of 8;000 FT. We did not deviate from altitude or airspeed during the event. The purpose of this report is to show the types of events that are possible with the new procedure of PM setting altitudes in the MCP; while on autopilot. If I; as the PF; had been in control of the altitude selector in the MCP during the descent (old procedure); I would have delayed the setting of the new altitude in the MCP until it had gone into 'altitude hold' mode; thus eliminating the potential for an altitude deviation.




Synopsis: When ATC kept them high on an arrival the flight crew of an Airbus experienced a minor disagreement as to the desirable pilot PM/PF SOP that are best applicable to expediting their descent utilizing the FMS modes and the Altitude Alert window.
Date: 201411
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; High Wing; 1 Eng; Retractable Gear
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
Aircraft component: Engine
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Maintenance Powerplant; Maintenance Airframe; Maintenance Inspection Authority
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Diverted; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: I fueled my aircraft to full capacity on the evening prior to flight. The aircraft had not flown that evening or night. The next morning I departed to ZZZ. Ten minutes into flight the engine quit; so I made an emergency landing on a road. There was no damage to aircraft or me or my 1 passenger and I just rolled into a big field on side of road. I gave statements to police; fire dept.; and FAA.  Witness observed my full tanks dripping fuel from the overflow vent so I repositioned the wing low on that side so it wouldn't drip so he knew it had full fuel. I then hired a flat bed and took aircraft; police escorted to my hangar. At time of emergency I radioed a fellow pilot on same route who alerted ATC. Engine failure cause is broken push rod on exhaust of #1 cylinder. Also; results of the backfiring that caused induction pipes to get blown apart are available on request.




Synopsis: Pilot experienced an engine failure and performed off-field landing.
Date: 202005
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: Mixed
Weather elements / visibility: 8
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Second aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Automation Aircraft RA; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Due to COVID-19; ZZZ Tower had reduced staffing resulting in 1 Controller working Tower; Ground Control and Clearance Frequencies.  A relatively nice day and lifting of stay at home restrictions caused a very high amount of air traffic; with a mix of IFR and VFR; with a lot of training and pilots trying to get back to flying.  On departure we leveled at 2;500 feet flying runway heading (departed XXL); once above traffic that was staying in the pattern for XXR; we were given a right turn to 230.  In the right turn to 230; traffic was observed on TCAS at 12 o'clock; same altitude; opposite direction; just outside of a mile; increased rate of turn and initiated a climbed to 3;00 feet to ensure separation; returned to 2;500 feet when clear of traffic on 230 heading. Was handed off to ZZZ1 Departure with no further/other traffic conflicts and no apparent problems arising from our altitude deviation.




Synopsis: GA pilot reported experiencing an airborne conflict during departure having to take evasive action.  Reporter cited an increase in traffic due to the lifting of stay at home restrictions as a contributing factor.
Date: 201205
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Aircraft: Lockheed Corp Undifferentiated or Other Model
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Airspace Violation All Types
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: An F35 test flight was climbing out of my airspace. He had changed frequencies to the next sector and declared an emergency. I approved FL190 on a 180 heading. Then I pointed the aircraft out to R-XY and they said 17;000 FT was approved. I called Approach to coordinate lower and direct destination. They approved 12;000 FT direct. I issued this clearance; did a quick traffic scan of the rest of my sector and realized the emergency a/c was going to clip R-ZA before descending into Approach. I called on the boundary to point out the aircraft; R-ZA said point out approved. The aircraft continued descent and landed without any issues. I had an expectation that the aircraft was going to descend more rapidly than it did. A D-side would have helped with the coordination; however there was no one in the area at the time to assist. We were very short staffed for this shift; having an extra person available to work a D side may have helped the situation.




Synopsis: F-35 in emergency status descended slower than the enroute Controller anticipated; resulting in an airspace violation.