elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 202105
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: N90.TRACON, NY
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B LGA
ATC / advisory: TRACON N90
Second aircraft: UAV: Unpiloted Aerial Vehicle
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Time Pressure
Anomaly: Airspace Violation All Types; Conflict NMAC; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Unauthorized Flight Operations (UAS); Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; General Police / Security Involved
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Flew Korry 4 arrival and proceeding visually up the Hudson River at 4;000 feet. Cleared to descend to 3;000 feet. Descending out of 3;500 feet about abeam the museum; noticed an object at our 12 o'clock; flying very stable; and appeared to be flying towards us; at the time our speed was 250 knots. We made no corrective action with our aircraft and continued on descent and heading as there was very little time for it to come and go. It passed approximately 100 feet under the aircraft and was flat oval in shape and a very shiny black in color. I have seen many Mylar Balloons and it definitely wasn't one of them. It had the appearance and actions of a DRONE. We immediately reported it to Air Traffic Control and followed up with law enforcement.We were at the end of a 4 leg day all flown in high density airspace of DCA and LGA. Luckily it was a beautiful weather day and we were both looking out the window at the river and city when the flying object appeared and flashed under the nose.Vigilance is always required as is protection of airspace.




Synopsis: Air Carrier Captain reported a near miss with a UAS while on approach.
Date: 201811
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, IL
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Regional Jet 200 ER/LR (CRJ200)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: APU
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness; Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: General Work Refused
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Noticed APU [Auxiliary Power Unit] Deferral; checked the write-up; no sticker on overhead panel; write-up stated simply that APU will not start. Attempted restart after APU tested good; APU started normally. FO (First Officer) reminding me in a inappropriate manner about SOP's etc. starts arguing with me and not allowing me to resolve this conflict in a peaceful manner; storms off the aircraft almost knocking down the FA (Flight Attendant) on the way out. I understood that I should have contacted maintenance first about the deferral. After talking with the Chief pilots and waiting for a change of FOs; I did call maintenance about the deferral and they refused to clear the deferral; though they had sufficient time to do so and told me they did not want to take the delay and would work on it later that night. So we had to take this aircraft into icing conditions with no APU and perform unpressurized TOs and LDGs (takeoffs and landings) unnecessarily.Error on my part was not calling maintenance first and possibly doing a better job at conflict management. Threat was having to deal with an insubordinate FO. Had I called maintenance first there would be no need for this to have taken place.




Synopsis: CRJ-200 Captain reported disagreeing with First Officer over correct procedures regarding an APU deferral.
Date: 201905
Location: FXE.Airport, FL
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Aircraft: Small Aircraft
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class D FXE
ATC / advisory: Tower FXE
Second aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Instructor; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: My student and I were doing takeoffs and landings at FXE. We were on the first quarter of the right downwind. My student and I noticed a plane about 50 feet above us from the right window and we promptly put the nose down. Right before this happened; Tower was trying to figure out if the plane that almost hit us had traffic in sight and both Tower and the traffic seemed very confused. After we avoided the traffic I told Tower that the traffic flew about 50 ft above us. The plane that flew above us explained that they were following the wrong traffic (the traffic that was in front of us). I tried to call Tower to inquire about this event and what we can all do differently to avoid it next time but they did not answer.




Synopsis: Instructor pilot reported an NMAC with another aircraft that was supposed to follow them but was following traffic ahead.
Date: 201411
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: P80.TRACON, OR
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E P80
ATC / advisory: TRACON P80
Second aircraft: Small Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turboprop Eng
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Distraction; Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Contributing factors: Equipment / Tooling; Human Factors; Procedure; Staffing
Primary problem: Equipment / Tooling

Narrative: HOOD and NEWBERG were combined and it was a busy period.  NEWBERG should have been split off and I was told afterward that we didn't have the staffing.  We have a tendency at P80 to save on the overtime budget and not call when we are below the numbers allowed.  Aircraft X was executing a procedure turn at OZIER for an approach into MMV.   Aircraft Y was descended to 3;200 feet for the visual approach and changed his mind at the last second and wanted an RNAV approach.  With a CL60 retuning to Hillsboro and the complexity of traffic; and most of all the late and poor updates that FUSION allows us; it was hard to efficiently stay on top of this situation.  I don`t know for sure; but I believe the two aircraft involved were within 3 miles of each other.  I might have had divergence but it's hard to tell with FUSION.When we are short staffed; OT must be called.  I know the manager frowns on this but safety should come first.  FUSION should be optional.  I would have had a better target display on the PDX site.  Tracking is more consistent.




Synopsis: P80 controller describes possible loss of separation and advises FUSION radar as not giving adequate updates as it should.
Date: 202007
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Flight conditions: IMC
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 B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Radio Altimeter
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness; Time Pressure
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Equipment Problem Dissipated
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Took off normally on the SID out of ZZZ. On initial climb out the RA on both sides started indicating erratically. Despite being on course; positive rate of climb and flying over water; we got an oral 'Terrain'. I checked my instruments and before I could perform the escape maneuver; the RA started functioning normally and the warning ceased. Erratic RA. The RA had two previous write ups.In the future if I see recent RA write ups; I will brief actions in the event of an erroneous EGPWS.




Synopsis: ERJ175 Captain reported during climb out and over water the radio altimeters began to give a terrain warning.
Date: 201511
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: LAX.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: B787 Dreamliner Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower LAX
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew; Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We were given a takeoff clearance on Runway 25R in LAX. As we were rolling down the runway the LAX ATC tower controller told us to go Rnav direct DOCKR. We thought we were on the LAXX7 not on the KARVR3 departure. I told her were on the LAXX7. I also told her we were unable to do that new departure [and] needed to get a heading. She would not comply with our request. This controller was arguing with [me] as we were rolling down the runway [and] again after takeoff. We figured out what had happened; re-programmed the FMC [and] complied with the KARVR3 departure. I do have the copy of the ATC clearance. I looked [and] did notice [but] did not see a pilot alert box with a new RNAV departure change.In my opinion; this is a big distraction [and] do not wish to argue with a controller during a takeoff.


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


Synopsis: B787 flight crew reported they missed a routing change in the PDC and were alerted by Tower during the takeoff roll.
Date: 202007
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant In Charge
Reporter qualification: Flight Attendant Current
Human factors: Physiological - Other
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Illness / Injury
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure; Environment - Non Weather Related; Company Policy
Primary problem: Company Policy

Narrative: After takeoff out of ZZZ while wearing my mask I got hot and sweaty and nearly fainted.  I was on the forward jump seat.  I had to remove my mask and fan myself and the D Flight Attendant was so concerned that she was going to grab oxygen.  Fortunately; I was able to cool off and regain composure.  The D Flight Attendant had mint essential oil in her suit case and had me put a drop behind my neck and ears.  This helped tremendously; but this was incredibly embarrassing.  I know passengers took notice that I was having a difficult time getting oxygen.  A few have pulled me aside and asked if I was OK.  This is not a good look for any airline; in that we are forcing our crew members and our passengers to comply with the mask rule when they could he creating a more serious medical situation.We have a mask policy in place that has absolutely no wiggle room for passengers and crew who have underlying medical issues that prevent them from being completely compliant.  This is unacceptable!!  I assume that the general public knows that masks should be on and I assume also that everyone has a mask with them; what I'm concerned about is having a guest (or a crew member) pass out from lack of oxygen and of course the worst case scenario of having a death on board.  I've seen flight attendants become aggressive with this policy and I am fully convinced that it will get worse.  Please re-evaluate this policy and put specific limits as to how crew members are supposed to handle it.




Synopsis: Flight Attendant reported feeling hot; sweaty and nearly fainting while having to wear a COVID-19 mask during flight.
Date: 201902
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: A320
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ramp ZZZ
Aircraft component: Nosewheel Steering
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Gate; General Maintenance Action; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Human Factors; Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: As we started our taxi-out from our gate approximately halfway through the turnout we lost nose wheel steering. After talking with maintenance it was decided that we were to be towed back in to the gate due to this being the 5th nose wheel event in about the last 3 days. A [maintenance release] was entered and operations was contacted. The First Officer and I both believe that operations heard from maintenance that the fault cleared with a reset and we could taxi back ourselves. The First Officer informed operations two times that we would not taxi the plane due to the maintenance event. After the 3rd time I took the radio and informed ops that we agreed with maintenance that the plane needed to be towed in; a [maintenance release] was entered and we had a broken [electronic logbook]; because of the extensive history we didn't trust the reset and when the Nosewheel Steering failed the nosewheel centered and took us off the tight lead out line and towards another gate and with the tight tolerances we couldn't be sure we would remain clear of the plane at that gate and I finished with I would not move the plane under its own power. The response I got was 'well it will be a while then'. After about 1 hour we got a tug to tow us back. Operations way overstepped their bounds and should never pretend to know how a plane should be operated.




Synopsis: A320 Captain reported after a temporary loss of nose wheel steering company operations requested that the crew taxi back to the gate without a tow.
Date: 202002
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: WHP.Tower, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Beech 1900
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Other Traffic Pattern
Airspace: Class C WHP
ATC / advisory: Tower WHP
Second aircraft: PA-28 Cherokee/Archer/Dakota/Pillan/Warrior
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Separated Traffic; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I had been contacted by a gentleman who recently had purchased a Beechcraft BE19 Sport. He was interested in finding a CFI to help out with some flight training. Since I have flying hours in comparable types; but not the BE19; I wished to fly with him in his airplane to get a feel for it and build some experience. He was in the left seat and I was in the right seat. We were granted takeoff clearance off right closed traffic was approved.The departure and crosswind legs were normal; as was the initial downwind turn. While we were midfield downwind; another aircraft made a radio call along the lines of 'I sure hope that airplane in front of me isn't landing here'. I immediately felt something wasn't right and looked to my 5 o' clock position. Sure enough; a Piper Cherokee was also flying the downwind with us. He was a little lower and overtaking. It appeared he had taken evasive action to the right of course; and we elected the safest option was to proceed straight ahead and do not alter course.Tower then said; 'Oh yeah; that guy is definitely not supposed to be there.' It appeared the Controller had forgotten talking to us shortly beforehand. I called up and said '...we were cleared for right closed traffic.' Tower gave us a left 360 and had the Cherokee land first. Our landing was uneventful. Once we landed; I called Tower on the phone. I spoke to the Local Controller and told the Controller that I wished to file an NMAC. I am awaiting the supervisor's call.The Controller admitted making the mistake; but this was a great learning experience for all involved. Contributing to this was how this was my first flight in this airplane. Because of this; I was concentrating more on flying tasks and system operations; and if this was a more familiar airplane; my eyes would have been outside more and perhaps I would've spotted the Cherokee on an extended downwind. This event was a reminder that pilots must remain vigilant at all times and always clear every single turn - even with a control tower or ARTCC/Tracon - especially in the traffic pattern.




Synopsis: An instructor pilot reported a NMAC with another aircraft on the downwind leg.
Date: 201507
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: MCO.Airport, FL
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
Aircraft component: Winglet
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Vehicle
Detector: Person Other Person
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Today; I was contacted by the Assistant Chief Pilot. He notified me that upon parking in Orlando; our -800 with scimitar winglets experienced winglet damage from a provisioning truck. This was a surprise because upon arrival at the gate; both Crew Members were unaware of any aircraft damage. After landing in Orlando; we held out for the gate. Once notified; the gate was available; we taxied toward the safety zone. Approaching the safety zone; we noticed a provisioning truck was parked on the left edge of the safety zone. We discussed the provisioning truck and determined that it was close to the safety zone but appeared to be clear of the safety zone. We proceeded to follow the Marshaler to a complete stop. At no time during the taxi in did we think the aircraft was at risk of striking the truck or any other equipment on the ramp.We had a scheduled aircraft swap in MCO. During the parking process; neither Pilot noticed anything unusual that might indicate the aircraft had struck a provisioning truck. After completing all flight duties; we both exited the aircraft into the jet way and met the next assigned First Officer having nothing of interest to report.




Synopsis: B737-800 first Officer is informed days later that her aircraft may have contacted a catering truck while parking at the gate under a Marshalls direction.
Date: 201205
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Dawn
Aircraft: MD-11
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZID
ATC / advisory: Center ZID
Aircraft component: Powerplant Fire/Overheat Warning
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Inflight Shutdown; Flight Crew Diverted; General Declared Emergency; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: I was the pilot flying. We had been in cruise for approximately ten minutes at FL 37;000 FT when we received Level 3; Engine #2; Fire aural and visual warnings. I completed the associated memory items and then called for the appropriate QRH checklist. We then declared an emergency with ZID and began a turn and descent toward the nearest suitable airport where we flew an uneventful visual approach and landing backed up with the ILS to Runway 10R. Airport ARFF met us after we cleared the runway.  No indication of fire was identified. We taxied to parking; made appropriate AML entries and secured the aircraft.




Synopsis: While in cruise at FL370 an MD-11 Flight Crew declared an emergency and diverted to their nearest suitable airport after responding to Engine number two fire warnings (later determined to have been false).