elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201901
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: Regional Jet 200 ER/LR (CRJ200)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: After checking in with Approach; I heard and read back cleared to descend to 2;000 [feet]. The Pilot Flying also heard 2;000 [feet] and set 2;000 [feet] in the ALT Alerter. Passing through approximately 5;500 feet; ATC said your assigned altitude is 6;000 [feet]. After the Pilot Flying was slow to react; I disengaged the autopilot and leveled the aircraft at 5;000 [feet] and started to climb back to 6;000 [feet]. ATC then assigned 5;000 [feet] and gave us vectors.Both pilots hearing the wrong altitude; or the Controller [made a] mistake of giving the wrong altitude. Passing through approximately 10;000 [feet]; I thought that 2;000 feet sounded a little low for our area. But I dismissed it because I was sure I heard it. Also 2;000 feet is usually the altitude given for the visual approach; so in that sense it sounded normal. At my first second thought; I should have asked the Controller for the altitude again.


Second narrative: The Captain [and I] heard an instruction from Approach to descend and maintain 2;000 feet upon checking in ~40 miles north on descent. I believe the Captain read back the 2;000 feet altitude instruction. The Captain and I followed the appropriate callout per the SOP after selecting 2;000 feet in the Alt Preselect. Reaching 5;400 [feet]; the Approach Controller informed us our assigned altitude was 6;000 [feet]; but that his MVA was 5;000 [feet]. He then proceeded to say everything was good and instructed us to fly a heading of 150 and maintain 5;000 [feet]. He then vectored us for a visual approach without further incident. Following the event; the crew reviewed and confirmed we both heard an instructed descent to 2;000 [feet]; which was verified and selected in the Alt Preselect. Next time; question a descent all the way down to 2;000 [feet] when in the mid-teens altitude wise with some terrain east of the airport.


Synopsis: CRJ-200 flight crew reported descending below cleared altitude on arrival after apparently misunderstanding the Approach Controller.
Date: 201202
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: Helicopter
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Mission: Ambulance
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Contracted Service
Reporter qualification: Maintenance Inspection Authority
Human factors: Other / Unknown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Hazardous Material Violation; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Maintenance
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Company Policy

Narrative: After performing maintenance on a helicopter Air Ambulance; I noticed an outbreak of a skin rash on my arms. Consequently; this was found to be caused by a shop issue. But; I inquired to the flight crew as to what cleaning agents are used to disinfect the interior after a patient transfer flight. The crew member responded by stating; they do not have any supplied cleaning agents and seldom will wipe down the medical interior. If they do; they will use the window cleaner or aircraft exterior cleaning soap.This practice puts the Maintenance personnel at risk for contamination. After researching general guidelines and several state requirements for Air Ambulance Operations; all were strongly in agreement as to post flight decontamination. Not so much from the actual patient; but the medical equipment such as gurneys; bags; attendants' shoes/garments as possible sources for biological contamination. Our Part 135 Manual states it is the medical team's responsibility to decontaminate the aircraft after use; but the team is usually busy with off-loading the patient while the aircraft remains running. The aircraft will depart with no medical interior cleaning performed. Recommendations: the cleaning should be part of the post flight operation and written into the operations specifications as such.




Synopsis: A Maintenance employee reported that the company's Air Ambulance Operations staff do not disinfect cabin interiors or medical equipment on their helicopters after each patient transfer; even though the requirement is in their Part 135 Manual. That practice puts Maintenance personnel at risk for contamination while working the aircraft.
Date: 201206
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: Marginal
Light: Night
Aircraft: Bell Helicopter Textron Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Mission: Ambulance
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Autopilot
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Aircraft Equipment Problem Dissipated; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Weather
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: During a night time IFR flight in VFR conditions autopilot # 1 stopped working; at the destination hospital deferred and MEL'd the autopilot. Aircraft restricted to VFR only. In cruise flight returning with patient I received weather of 1;300 FT on the AWOS at ZZZ1 and clear at ZZZ2. The weather between the two facilities appeared lower. At 700 AGL the flight became inadvertent IMC. I started a climb; declared an emergency with Approach. Approach gave radar vectors to the ILS 12R at ZZZ1. It appeared no other traffic was around at this hour of the morning. I flew the approach comfortably using the autopilot that was now working but MEL'd. Broke out from the approach and flew VFR to the hospital with out incident. I declared an emergency due to the aircraft was restricted to VFR; and inadvertent IMC. Don't fly the aircraft with a MEL'd autopilot. I don't know what I could have done differently with the weather. All indications were 1;300 FT and clear. Forecast was for 1;500 FT broken. I followed company procedures for deteriorating weather.




Synopsis: BHT-430 pilot inadvertantly entered IMC on a VFR approach and declared an emergency due to the fact that the helicopter was restricted to VFR flight because of an autopilot malfunction. While on an ILS approach coordinated by ATC; pilot broke out into VMC and landed VFR.
Date: 201206
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Aircraft: A319
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Hydraulic Syst Reservoir Tank
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; General Declared Emergency; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Approximately two hours after takeoff at FL370 we experienced a HYD G RSVR LO ECAM shortly followed by a FWS SDAC1 FAULT ECAM. Duties were delegated and the ECAM procedures were accomplished in reference to the Flight Manual. Dispatch was contacted via voice patch and Maintenance Control was also notified by Dispatch. A review of the situation was done; including en route and destination weather forecasts. Due to the forecast of thunderstorms and gusty winds at the forecast time of arrival and after; Dispatch informed us that holding times were starting to be issued. The decision to divert was made. The weather and the possibility of windshear and/or a go around and subsequent chance of divert with landing gear extended were driving factors. Dispatch took care of coordinating the equipment (tow in) on the ground and the notification of the station of our inbound status. An emergency was declared in order to facilitate handling and ensure a runway into the gusty wind would be available. The flight attendants were briefed and passengers informed of the situation. Upon arrival; the landing gear was gravity extended successfully; all pertinent checklists accomplished and uneventful landing made. As a note; the hydraulics were in the normal range on preflight. When the landing gear was gravity extended; the Green hydraulic level went to well over-serviced. The mechanics who met the aircraft at the gate also noted the reservoir was over serviced.




Synopsis: An A319 had a HYD G RSVR LO ECAM shortly followed by a FWS SDAC1 FAULT ECAM. Forecast weather at the destination led to a divert to a suitable alternate. After landing; the Green system reservoir was found to be over serviced.
Date: 202011
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Clear; 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: UAV - Unpiloted Aerial Vehicle
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Other 107
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I began the drone flight to inspect the subject property roof thinking I had the automated FAA authorization to fly in the Class D ZZZ airspace. After realizing that I had not written down the authorization on my work order I immediately discontinued the flight and landed the drone. I then tried to obtain the automated approval through the Airmap application. Per the Airmap application; approvals up to 400 feet could be obtained; however; the application stated that the approval was not available on an automated basis at that time. Flight was discontinued. The max height the drone climbed to was 110 feet without approval for a period less than a couple of minutes. Pilot error was not obtaining approval before flight. The pilot thought the approval was already obtained which was the reason the drone flight was started. Future corrective action is to include the approval verification in the preflight checklist.




Synopsis: UAV pilot reported pilot error in not obtaining authorization for the flight.
Date: 201907
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: Other Pipeline Patrol
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Other Pipeline Patrol
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Second aircraft: Helicopter
Reporter organization: Contracted Service
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Automation Aircraft TA; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We were conducting a visual inspection of a pipeline Right-of-Way (ROW) from the Class B surface area into [a] Class D environment. After establishing communications with Tower and being cleared on our transition through the airspace; my right-seat observer requested we circle to re-capture data in our computer-based patrol software at the southernmost extent of the Class D. I informed Tower I needed to circle to evaluate a sighting; and this was approved. We made a single circle; captured the data we needed; and continued on our way; roughly due north. As we approached the field (our pipeline route is inside the airport fence for a short distance) Tower advised us to let him know when we were back northbound due to inbound traffic. Realizing that he was not expecting us to be close to the field; I stated we were already northbound; began a climb and asked Tower if we needed to circle. At this time the Controller called helicopter traffic close to us about the same time as our traffic advisory system alerted us to the traffic. As we were already in a climb; we had between 200-300 feet vertical separation and the traffic advised Tower they had us in sight. The Tower advised the helicopter to maintain visual separation. We never got closer than 4-500 feet horizontally before passing the traffic but it was obvious that both I and the Controller had misunderstood each other's intentions and ended up with a traffic conflict. The helicopter pilot was obviously vigilant and had us in sight before we saw him. We continued our patrol without further conflict or incident. Upon reflection; I should have been clear with the Controller and stated that we needed to make a single circle and then would continue our patrol. This would have allowed him to plan for the inbound rotorcraft and avoided the conflict altogether.




Synopsis: C172 pilot reported an NMAC with a helicopter during his pipeline patrol.
Date: 201909
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class G ZZZ
ATC / advisory: CTAF ZZZ
Second aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 1 Eng; Retractable Gear
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Bird / Animal
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Approaching ZZZ while en route on a cross country flight; I experienced a near miss with a red and white low wing plane. I was flying at 500 AGL 6 miles south west of the field I decided to climb a bit and turn left to keep some distance between my flight path and the airport area. I lifted the nose and began climbing. After a brief climb (perhaps 100 feet) I saw some birds and leveled off; simultaneously increasing my left turn rate to continue further from the airport area. As I leveled off I saw the other plane for the first time. He was directly in front of and slightly below my flight path. I made an aggressive turn to the right while gaining as much altitude as I could. I'm not sure he ever saw me as his flight path never changed. I confirmed clearance from him and returned to my left turn and continued my flight as planned. I was monitoring CTAF during this whole time; but did not make any radio calls myself. There were no radio calls during this time that I received. My plane is not equipped with ADS-B. I believe we both may have assumed there was no traffic in the area thus neither of us made calls over CTAF. Next time I will either give more room for deviating around an airport or make a radio call with my intended path. I also didn't spend all that much time scanning for traffic below me since I was at 500 AGL myself. Clearly this is a lack of situational awareness on my part and will be a focused point of improvement moving forward.




Synopsis: C172 pilot reported a NMAC with traffic while avoiding birds around a non-towered airport.
Date: 202002
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 12
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skylane 182/RG Turbo Skylane/RG
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Private
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: On takeoff Runway XX ZZZ incoming aircraft announced 3 mile final Runway XX; incoming aircraft was spotted and I announced I had the incoming traffic in sight and had time to take off before he arrived. On starting my takeoff roll the incoming plane was closer than I thought and he passed over head turning out to the south and initiated a go around.




Synopsis: Pilot reported misjudging the distance of an approaching aircraft and took the runway for takeoff; causing the other aircraft to initiate a go around.
Date: 201306
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: MD-83
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty); Flight Attendant In Charge
Reporter qualification: Flight Attendant Current
Human factors: Fatigue
Anomaly: No Specific Anomaly Occurred All Types
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Company Policy
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was on reserve in June. On June XX I got a 2 day trip; 4 legs a day totaling 15:40. Two days later I got another 4 leg trip totaling 8:54. So in 3 days I did 12 legs totaling 24:34. I was exhausted after the [first] 2 day trip and was tempted to call in 'Fatigue'; but I didn't. Instead I went to my Supervisor and complained about all the awful trips we are given in ZZZ. After the 2 day; 4 legs each day trip; by the end of the 8th leg; I was Number 1 and could barely make the announcements without tripping over my words. I found myself accidently breaking a few wine glasses. I was very tired. After the next 4 leg turn; I was exhausted. I drove home and fell asleep at the wheel 4 times. I woke up heading for the center divider on the highway. It scared me awake; but then I ended up doing it again 3 more times before I made it home; thankful to be alive. In 45 years I have never flown such horrible trips; and my experience has been that no one seems to care. I have seen flight attendant's sleeping with their mouths open during the flights. Flight attendant's are constantly complaining about the 4 leg flights; and the 'Trans Cons and a half.' They are saying they think [the company] is trying to kill us. On international; if I flew 22 hours in 3 days; I would get a long layover and crew rest on each flight.




Synopsis: Senior Flight Attendant laments company scheduling practices at her base that result in extreme fatigue.
Date: 201808
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: BMI.Airport, IL
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Regional Jet CL65; Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class D BMI
ATC / advisory: Tower BMI
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was the First Officer and Pilot Flying for the visual approach to Runway 20 at BMI. We were cleared for the visual and I descended with the glideslope as a backup. Several miles out on the approach; the aircraft looked low and I immediately clicked off the autopilot and corrected the airplane's approach path. As I corrected the aircraft's flightpath; ATC called and said they had received an altitude low warning on our aircraft. We acknowledged and continued the approach and landed safely. The Captain informed ATC that the glideslope was giving incorrect information and ATC informed us that the glideslope was out of service. At this point we realized that the NOTAM for an inactive glideslope was still active and we had briefed that the NOTAM would not affect our approach. This event was caused by a misinterpretation of NOTAMs on the release. This event could have been avoided by thoroughly briefing the NOTAMs as a crew and not relying on a system that was out of service.




Synopsis: CRJ First Officer reported receiving a low altitude alert from ATC on approach to BMI. They realized they were following a glide slope that was NOTAMed out of service.
Date: 202007
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Aircraft: No Aircraft
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Environment - Non Weather Related; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I believe an unsafe situation exists at ZZZ ARTCC. Management has had supervisors in the building daily even though the COVID-19 pandemic continues. One of the supervisors tested positive and had interaction with controllers and been in the same working and break areas. We have since had a Controller test positive. I believe much of our risk could have been mitigated with better restrictions on who was and was not allowed to enter the building. I understand it's not entirely possible to eliminate all risks but I feel more thought and care should have gone into the way plans were laid out.Stop having ANYONE non essential to the operation enter the building. Including the highest levels of management. Especially if their work could be done from home.




Synopsis: Center Controller reported a Supervisor who had tested positive for COVID-19 had interacted with controllers. Controller suggested allowing only essential workers in the building.