elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 202103
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: A11.TRACON, AK
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Light Transport
Operator: Air Taxi
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class C ANC
ATC / advisory: TRACON A11
Second aircraft: Widebody; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter
Detector: Person Flight Crew; Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance; Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Aircraft X; cleared Visual Approach  off a downwind turn behind a Heavy. Aircraft X was pointed away and behind Heavy when cleared to follow the traffic and issued caution wake turbulence. The pilot turned to follow the Heavy at his discretion towards the traffic and the field to a dog leg at about 5.5 miles in trail of the Heavy. Aircraft X joined final approach behind the traffic and I; the Final Radar Controller; observed what looked like a quick radar track anomaly. Quickly followed was an observed turn and quick descent and climb by Aircraft X back towards the field. The pilot promptly advised of a 'complete upset' and that he was back on the turn towards the traffic and on the Visual Approach with out a chance for me to issue any instructions.Later to find out this verbiage meant the aircraft had been sent into a complete roll to the right in which the pilot continued to recover the aircraft. No official cause but I can only guess wake turbulence from the Heavy traffic sent him into an uncontrolled roll. I acknowledged; inquired if any assistance was required to which the pilot responded in the negative; and I continued to work the traffic to include breaking out a Heavy behind him to allow him to continue the Visual Approach. The aircraft continued on the approach and double confirmed that everything was okay and no assistance was required before sending him to the Tower for landing.No recommendation; but awareness for all pilots of potential wake turbulence induced events. I personally could have ensured the aircraft was at a higher altitude to possibly prevent the wake trajectory; but I was originally setting up Aircraft X for an ILS Approach to follow at the appropriate  wake turbulence minimums. Only after the pilot called traffic and field in sight was he given the Visual Approach clearance to follow. If the pilot did not feel comfortable with this; I did not know or could have recommended a different method of approach.




Synopsis: A TRACON Controller reported a twin prop aircraft temporarily lost control when it was cleared for a Visual Approach and turned final behind a Heavy and encountered wake turbulence.
Date: 201507
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: DCA.Airport, DC
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Regional Jet 200 ER/LR (CRJ200)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B DCA
ATC / advisory: Tower DCA
Second aircraft: Helicopter
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Flight Crew
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: [Our flight] into DCA was in a NMAC. We were supposed to circle from the visual Runway 1 to instead land on 33. We followed the [company] station bulletin procedures exactly as planned and came within very close contact of another aircraft. This occurred about 400 feet off the ground to the point where the pilot monitoring had to take the controls to make a correction in order to prevent it from becoming a midair collision. After there was action taken to make a correction from the close call; we were then informed by DCA tower of close traffic although at that point it would have been too late. I have flown with people who for the purpose of having a better chance of a stabilized approach would have had a wider circle to land procedure which I'm sure would have almost definitely ended in the collision of two aircraft over the turn to final for 33 in DCA. There was an extreme lack of communication between DCA Tower to [our flight] or DCA Tower to the associated helicopter who did not ever pop up on TCAS which I'm assuming is due to a lack of an operating transponder. No TCAS RA was associated with this event.This occurred due to an extreme lack of communication between DCA Tower and [our flight] or DCA Tower and the associated helicopter. Otherwise the other reason this may have happened is because of an unclear idea of where aircraft should be located during Runway 33 circle to land operations. I believe I was on track with what the [company] guidelines are for that particular procedure but there is a possibility that the other traffic operating around that area may not be aware of where exactly we are located or maybe they don't have a specific guideline to keep the arriving traffic separated from the low flying helicopters.


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


Synopsis: A CRJ-200 flight crew reported a NMAC with a helicopter on approach to Runway 33 at DCA. The crew stated the traffic call from Tower came too late to be effective.
Date: 201205
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Aircraft: Stratolifter (C-135 / 717)
Operator: Military
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Second aircraft: Eagle (F-15)
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Second reporter function: Enroute
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: A K135 cleared into refueling area; accepted RADAR from NVF on a group of F15. Asked the K135 to advise MARSA with the F15s and advise F15s requested altitude for entry. The K135; replied; 'We will; uh we advise MARSA and have the F15s at FL200. Then asked the K135 what heading he would like the F15s on; the K135 replied heading 230 after working out the F15s radio issues; the F15s was given clearance and switched to tanker frequency. When the F15s were 7 miles from the K135; the K135 advised MARSA again. When questioned; the K135 replied that he had not previously advised MARSA. Recommend standard phraseology for the tanker aircraft to advise MARSA 7110.65 and 7610.4 only share knowledge that the aircraft will advise MARSA; but no set phraseology.


Second narrative: [Narrative #2 contained no additional information.]


Synopsis: Enroute Controller providing OJT described a confused communications event with military aircraft participating in refueling activities. The reporter noted that increased standardized of phraseology during these instances is necessary.
Date: 202104
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ATL.Airport, GA
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
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
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Hazardous Material Violation; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Ground Personnel
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate; Routine Inspection
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Parked aircraft at gate in ZZZ1. Ops Agent notified us we carried a aircraft battery and had not been notified of the HAZMAT Cargo.  Contacted Dispatch and informed them of the situation.


Second narrative: We departed ZZZ with HAZMAT aboard which was not disclosed to the Flight Crew. We were notified on arrival to ZZZ1.


Synopsis: Air Carrier flight crew reported being notified upon arrival by Ops Agent of undocumented aircraft battery was transported on their flight.
Date: 201405
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: RND.Airport, TX
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Rain; 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Light Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class C SAT
ATC / advisory: TRACON SAT
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Workload; Distraction; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Weather
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Starting down into the San Antonio area; ATC started down with a tight crossing restriction on an arrival. Once being sent direct to a couple of fixes; we were then being vectored instead. Autopilot was not engaged. The Captain setup the RNAV approach into RND and we exchanged controls; so I could then brief the approach. As I briefed the approach; I heard a 'ding' as the altitude alerter went off at 400 FT below assigned altitude. ATC advised us to climb to 5;000 FT/assigned. Once stable; I finished the brief and took the controls back.Next being vectored for the RNAV; we were assigned an intercept heading which made joining final require more than standard rate. I banked to try and intercept; but started to lose altitude in the process. ATC advised us of a low altitude alert again. The Captain helped me at the controls and to get back to being stabilized. Once on stable; we followed the GPS and altitude restricts on the approach. Just before we broke out; ATC advised us once more that we were way off course on the non-precision RNAV. We broke out as they advised us and we told them we were stepping over to straighten up on final. The GPS indicated we were on course the whole time.




Synopsis: A First Officer with low time in his aircraft type reported difficulty flying an IMC RND RNAV approach and experiencing both altitude and track deviations about which ATC issued advisories.
Date: 201206
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: BOS.Airport, MA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 190/195 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Tower BOS
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Human factors: Confusion
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Airport; Human Factors
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: As we approached BOS; we were cleared via the KRANN 1 arrival; 27 transition for the ILS 27. I (as pilot flying) briefed the approach including our normal taxi route inbound which is a right turn off the runway on K to hold short 4L APPR at hot spot 3; then cross on K and A; E to the ramp. Approaching 27; the Captain queried Approach Control as we were not handed off to the Tower and were promptly advised to contact Tower on 132.22. When we did; Tower advised us of a MD-80 landing on the crossing Runway 22L and would hold short of our runway. We then had the MD-80 in sight and some of our attention was on that aircraft to ensure they were holding short. Upon landing it was apparent that the MD-80 was in fact holding short and would not be a factor. On roll-out; Tower advised us to roll to the end of the runway and turn left on Taxiway M as FOD was reported on our normal taxi route. Upon turning onto M; we were instructed to turn right on Taxiway B to hold short of 4L APPR and to switch to Tower on 128.8. As I switched frequencies I noticed we were turning onto B and were not going to hold short of the 4L APPR hold line which is in the turn. I advised the Captain and we stopped on the hold short line. Another flight was taking off on Runway 22R however he was well airborne and no evasive action was necessary. We then taxied to the gate with no further incident. Contributing Factors: 1. Unusual taxi instructions inbound that were not briefed 2. Distractions included a late frequency change on short final and an aircraft landing on an intersecting runway. 3. The hold short signs and hold short lines for 4L APPR from Taxiway M to Taxiway B is on the right side of the aircraft; difficult for the Captain to see off the right of the aircraft 4. My (First Officer's) attention being heads down in changing the Tower frequency. I should have briefed more options for possible taxi instructions inbound. Also; ATC may have given a hold short of Taxiway B as the 4L APPR hold short line is in the turn onto B.




Synopsis: Air Carrier taxiing to the gate after landing BOS taxied across the hold lines for Runway 4L; the reporter listing hold line identification difficulties as one contributing factor.
Date: 201209
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skylane 182/RG Turbo Skylane/RG
Operator: Government
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Landing
ATC / advisory: UNICOM ZZZ
Aircraft component: Nose Gear
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Instructor; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Ground Event / Encounter Ground Strike - Aircraft
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: I had nearly completed a flight on an IFR flight plan from a major city to this small town as the pilot flying. I asked the pilot not flying if he wanted to do some landings and take offs at the small town airport. He said yes and I transferred control to him. He landed the airplane normally. He then departed the airport to come around for a short-field landing. His approach was good and he appeared to land on the mains. He had pulled the throttle to idle before touchdown. Within seconds we heard what sounded and felt like a flat nose gear tire. After a few more seconds we heard the prop striking the asphalt. The aircraft came to a halt. We observed that the nose wheel had been pushed fully forward; allowing the prop to strike the asphalt. There was no damage to the nose wheel tire itself. It was fully inflated. There were no injuries to either pilot. Since the pilot flying was attempting a short field landing; it is possible that there was a three-point landing; causing stress on the nose gear. When practicing short-field landings; land fully on the mains before letting the nose wheel drop.




Synopsis: The nose landing gear collapsed during a short field landing in a C182 for unknown reasons.
Date: 201503
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: SAT.Tower, TX
Aircraft: MD-82
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Called Ground Control for taxi instructions after engine start and received the clearance to taxi to runway 30L via G2; G and runway 4. We were not told to give way to or follow any other aircraft. Leaving the ramp and starting to enter taxiway G from G2 I looked left and saw a small red and silver single engine low wing aircraft taxiing at a high speed just in front and left of our nose. I braked firmly to avoid the aircraft. Not sure what type it was but my FO believed it was a Cirrus. We reported this to ground control. No one onboard was injured. We took off and proceeded to [destination] with no other incident.


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


Synopsis: MD-82 flight crew reported that during taxi out at SAT they had to brake 'firmly' to avoid a collision with a light aircraft.
Date: 201901
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: LGA.Airport, NY
Aircraft: Large Transport
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Contributing factors: Airport
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: The purpose of this report is to describe what I believe is an unsafe situation in regard to LGA gate. The location of the construction fence at the bottom of the alley combined with the narrow alley width makes it virtually impossible to make the 115 degree right turn without adding power. Additionally; the pavement leading up to the parking spot is very uneven especially closest to the stop point where there is a significant bump and the aircraft is already slowing down since it is close to stopping - resulting in the need to add power. To make matters worse; the construction fence crowds [nearby] gate across the alley and service vehicles like fuel trucks therefore extend into the alley. The Ops Advisory Pages in Jeppesen clearly state that power should not be added and the aircraft should not stop in the turn. In my experience at gate; it is simply not possible to perform this tight turn without adding power or stopping so I hope every consideration is given to designating the gate tow in only.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported construction fence in narrow alley taxiway creates unsafe taxi conditions. Recommends adjacent gate be designated tow in gate.
Date: 201205
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: SAC.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Light Sport Aircraft
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Tower SAC
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Sport / Recreational
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: Taxi
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Procedure; Airport; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: After landing on Runway 30 I was asked to taxi off on Hotel and contact ground (frequency not given by Tower.) I taxied off onto Hotel and slowed and stopped to confirm the ground frequency before I had gone too far without ground contact.  Before I could contact ground; Tower urgently told me to taxi forward and get off the runway!  I did not know I was on the runway.  Turns out Taxiway Hotel is between the approach end of Runway 16 and Runway 30.  It is not marked well; and there are no runway markings (e.g.; centerline) there.  Also; it is weedy and unkempt; certainly not like a runway.  I had never landed on Runway 30 there and was unfamiliar with that segment of the Taxiway Hotel being online with Runway 16/34.  This seems a potentially confusing and hazardous area that is not marked as a place to not be!  Also Tower accused me of stopping on the runway; but the airport diagram shows this area of Taxiway Hotel not as runway; but just north of (and in line with) the approach end of 16.  I would suggest improved taxiway and runway markings and signage for this area of SAC.  I acknowledge now that I did not cross runway holding position markings before pausing; but I must reiterate that it was not clear to me that I was not safely on a taxiway and needed to contact ground before proceeding further.




Synopsis: After landing on Runway 30 at SAC LSA pilot is told to exit on Taxiway H and contact ground.  Stopping clear of Runway 30 to confirm the Ground Control frequency; the reporter is admonished for not clearing the the runway (not across the hold line).