elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201706
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: CPR.TRACON, WY
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Medium Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class E CPR
ATC / advisory: TRACON CPR
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors; Chart Or Publication; Airspace Structure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Aircraft X was being vectored for a straight-in Runway 21 approach. I issued a correct clearance to cross BUWME at or above 7;500 ft. The pilot read back 7;000 and the error was not caught by me. These events occurred in an MVA of 7;500 ft. I observed the aircraft descending to 7;200 ft and corrected the aircraft. The lowest altitude observed was 7;000 ft. Once corrected the pilot stated that he could maintain his own terrain and obstruction clearance; which in this case is not applicable. I reissued the correct crossing altitude and clearance; and the aircraft landed without incident. The FLM on duty was working LC/GC/FD/CD/CIC combined at the time due to low traffic volume. He was immediately aware of the situation as it was happening and after the aircraft landed; he was issued a BRASHER warning.Ensure correct read-back of instructions despite traffic volume. I was monitoring the altitude and was able to correct it once the 300 ft variance was no longer a factor; so proper scan will correct it; even if you miss the read-back.




Synopsis: CPR Approach Controller reported an aircraft cleared for an approach descended below the assigned altitude and below the MVA.
Date: 201411
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: Seaplane or Amphibian
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Descent
Aircraft component: Engine
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; General Evacuated
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Started to lose engine power at 1300 feet AGL. Made a precautionary landing in a farmer's field. No injuries and no damage to the aircraft or the field.


Second narrative: While on initial descent from 2000 feet in VMC conditions (there was a ceiling a few thousand feet up but I don't recall how high) with visibility at least 10 miles; about 6 miles from our [destination] at an altitude of about 1500 feet the aircraft experienced power failure consistent with an engine failure. I was not at the controls. I queried the pilot flying and he confirmed that his left foot was dead foot. I began looking for a field while simultaneously using the nearest function of the Garmin 530 to look for an airport. Seeing the nearest was more than 5 miles away and our altitude was at 1200 I believed the best course was a field and began looking for one. After the pilot flying ran through levers and switches to restore power the engine(s) briefly roared back to life at about 300-400 feet above ground level; and we gained about 1000 (approximately) feet of altitude before the same thing happened again. I recommended a field to my right but the pilot flying stated he had one in sight on his left and turned towards it on base while securing the engines. He turned final and landed the plane in a field. There were no injuries to myself or the pilot flying; the only occupants; and no damage to the plane. The right wheel sunk into the turf about 6 inches in the last approximately 10 yards making it immobile but again; there was no damage to the plane.


Synopsis: When both engines failed simultaneously on the UC-1 'Twin Seabee' the two pilots aboard collaborated to land safely in an open field where one wheel became mired but no damage or injuries resulted. No mention or speculation as to the cause of the dual failures was provided.
Date: 201901
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZMA.ARTCC, FL
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class A ZMA
ATC / advisory: Center ZMA
Second aircraft: Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was working the R-side when this occurred. I had no D-Side. I climbed Aircraft Y to FL340; and he was climbing at 4000 feet per minute. As he was out of FL300 I assigned FL320 to Aircraft X; who was only out of FL240 and climbing at around 500 feet per minute. When Aircraft Y hit FL320 he reduced his rate of climb from around 4000 to 400. Aircraft X; conversely who was only doing around 500 increased it to 2000-3000 FPM. It was flashing when it was out of FL260 for 320 but I didn't really believe my conflict alert; because we get a ton of bad advisories and I had just checked the VRI (Velocity Reference Indicator). It flashed for around 2 minutes; and I went on for something else. When I went back to it; Aircraft X had climbed through FL315 and Aircraft Y was through FL325. I was thinking Aircraft Y was still climbing well; but he significantly shallowed his descent and I missed it.Military airspace was hot to the east of both airlines; which had put them on the same route (different fixes but overlapping). This provided for further complications in routes that are normally separate. Prior to plugging back into the position; my wife had called and texted me that she was crying about the shutdown; she was concerned with how long it was going to continue. I had tried to force this from my mind as I worked airplanes; but I believe it played a small part into what happened.I should use positive separation and less interpolation of altitudes and assign what I have available; instead. It's completely my fault.




Synopsis: Miami Center Controller reported a loss of separation due to different climb rates of two aircraft and failing to notice due to distractions.
Date: 201401
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: CYUL.Airport, PQ
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Snow; Icing
Light: Night
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground CYUL
Aircraft component: Aero Charts
Component problem: Design
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Workload; Distraction; Confusion; Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Airport; Chart Or Publication; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: All ramp and airport area charts are grossly out of date (10-9; 10-9B; 10-9C). The depicted ramp taxi areas in the U shaped terminal area as depicted on 10-9C do not exist. The ramp has been extended to the west about 2;000 FT with new taxi lines and names. The area spots of 4A; 4B; 5 are currently in a construction area of about 300 yards by 300 yards. The buildings depicted opposite of the U terminal are gone. This area is now ramp. With the ramp snow and ice covered I was unable to determine the proper taxi lines because they were snow covered. I'm sure we deviated from the proper lines because we don't have charts to show even the approximate area of those lines.

Callback: The reporter stated that the ramp and taxiway changes are so extensive that it is difficult to explain if one cannot see the transformation. The ramp west of the terminal feels like a huge no man's land; with new taxiways and taxiway designations. A construction 10-8 would helpful.



Synopsis: A B737-800 Captain reported the CYUL ramp area west of the terminal is under construction with ramps modified and buildings removed. Most importantly; when taxiing around the terminal; taxiway looks and signage are nothing like the current charts.
Date: 201910
Local time of day: 1801-2400
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: Landing
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: Pre-flight; Taxi
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Arrived at aircraft that had flown in and crew had left. A deadheading Flight Attendant said she had smelled fumes. The inbound crew had not noticed anything. The source was not determined. I went from front to back and noticed a very faint odor. We agreed to commence and to monitor the cabin air. If anything was not acceptable the flight attendants were to notify me. Prior to takeoff; I spoke with #1 Flight Attendant and asked if the odor had returned and if it was acceptable to continue. I was told that the cabin air was satisfactory. We departed. Upon landing in ZZZ I was informed that there were odors in the back of the aircraft. I went back after the passengers had deplaned and could not detect anything unusual however wrote the fumes event in the Maintenance Log. I do not know where or how the fumes were produced.


Second narrative: During rollout after landing in ZZZ; one of the flight attendants called the flight deck. The Captain had control of the aircraft. It was obvious due to the time of the call and the work load of Captain I was to respond to the cabin. I did and it was an Flight Attendant calling to report fumes in the cabin. Due to time of the call I assumed the situation was severe but the Flight Attendant stated they had a crayons smell in the cabin. I asked if they could physically see the fumes. Negative. I asked if everyone was in good health. Affirmative. I asked if there were any other problems associated with her call. Negative. I told her if the situation changed to call back. Work load permitting I relayed the conversation to the Captain and we agreed the best course of action was to get to the gate. After arriving at the gate we finished checklists and opened the flight deck door. We found it difficult to sense the smell it's self let alone the origin or cause. The Captain wrote the issue in the log book and I called Maintenance.


Synopsis: Airbus flight crew reported Flight Attendant notification of fumes in the cabin during landing rollout.
Date: 201405
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: TEB.Airport, NJ
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Haze / Smoke; 4
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: Medium Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class B EWR
ATC / advisory: TRACON N90
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Fatigue; Communication Breakdown; Distraction; Workload
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Chart Or Publication; Procedure; Weather; Human Factors
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: During initial departure and climb-out on the cleared RUUDY4.RUUDY SID from TEB airport; the initial level off altitude of 1;500 FT MSL at WENTZ Intersection was inadvertently climbed through and exceeded by 150 FT; in which case I; the pilot flying; took immediate and evasive action to manually return the aircraft via a descent to the appropriate altitude. I would attribute 2 major factors toward this minor and fortunately corrected deviation: 1) Upon initial contact with the Controller of 'New York Departure'; the Controller's response to the pilot not flying's checking in was 'N_____ you need to cross WENTZ Intersection at 1;500 FT'. The resultant response in management of the aircraft was to increase climb rate with pitch. The presumption with regard to this challenge from the New York Departure Controller was that the climb rate was not sufficient; and having knowledge that the RUUDY4 departure procedure requires a minimum climb gradient pertaining to the next subsequent waypoint I felt that this performance issue was what was implied by the controller. 2) After having already had a reasonably long duty day; combined with near record delays due to convective weather in and around the NY TRACON and Center air spaces areas; fatigue and stressors of our environment played a contributing factor. In addition; by this point our 'time since awake' would have been approximately 13 hours. Our 'gate hold' delay on the ground in TEB was 3+ hours.




Synopsis: A fatigued First Officer flying the TEB RUUDY4 exceeded the 1;500 FT altitude constraint by 150 FT when ATC questioned his low climb rate and after thirteen hours awake with a three hour gate weather hold.
Date: 201706
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: SCEZ.ARTCC, FO
Aircraft: B777-200
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
ATC / advisory: Center SCEZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Relief Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: In early June and again one week later; we experienced laser events that hit directly into the flight deck area. I was sitting in the relief pilot seat and the first laser hit me directly followed by four hits to the Captain. It always occurs on the arrival UROSO1C while making the turn from UTBUR intercepting 09R.  This has happened to me three of my last four trips arriving in the early evening. Recommend an immediate message be sent out to alert future flights arriving this time period.




Synopsis: B777 First Officer reported laser strike events arriving SGBR near UTBUR on three separate occasions.
Date: 201501
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: MDW.Airport, IL
Flight conditions: Mixed
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground MDW
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Airport; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: This report is being generated due to the extreme congestion on Ground Control frequency at MDW during peak hours of operation. I believe that there is a serious risk to safety. Flight Crews and Ground Control are continually stepping on each other. Ground Control at MDW typically takes the handoff from Tower after aircraft clear the active runway. The critical aspect of taxiing at MDW is the multiple runways that need to be crossed to get to the terminal. I personally feel that it is just a matter of time before a clearance is misunderstood; or not heard; that could lead to bigger problems.  I further feel that if Ground had to make a split second radio call; it might not ever make it to the intended receiver. I suggest that MDW adopt a comm plan similar to BOS where Air Crew contacts CD when ready to push with gate number.  CD advises Air Crew to 'monitor ground freq.'  CD advises Ground Controller (through their channels) and thus reduces the comm jamming problem.  I realize this is just a problem at certain times of the day; but it's been going on long enough; it needs to be addressed




Synopsis: Air Carrier pilot reports Ground control frequency congestion at certain times of the day at MDW and suggests a BOS style program to contact Clearance Delivery when ready to push and then monitor Ground for taxi instructions.
Date: 201502
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Windshear
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Human-Machine Interface
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Deviation - Speed All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Exited Penetrated Airspace; Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control
Contributing factors: Weather
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: We took off from BNA on Runway 20 left in a heavy -800. Right after takeoff; we encountered light to moderate turbulence and moderate rain.  At 1;000 feet I asked for flaps 1 and then flaps up as the aircraft was accelerating quickly through 195. Within seconds; the airspeed began to decrease rapidly and we were quickly in a 1;200 fpm descent. I reduced the angle of attack to approximately 10 to 12 degrees and added full thrust. At about the same time; we got the stick shaker for about a second. I put two hands on the yoke to get control of the aircraft and my First Officer put his hands on the thrust levers. I reduced the angle of attack; the aircraft begin to accelerate quickly; and we continued our climb.Possible Preventative Measures: We used the autothrottles on takeoff and at 1;000 feet the throttles began to come back as we were cleaning up the aircraft. In the future; if I encounter the same weather conditions; I will not use the autothrottles for takeoff.


Second narrative: [No additional information was contained in the secondary narrative].


Synopsis: A B737-800 flight crew described a low altitude encounter with severe windshear including rapid acceleration; deceleration and loss of altitude.
Date: 201708
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: LRJ.Airport, IA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Single Engine Turboprop Undifferentiated
Operating under: Part 137
Flight plan: None
Mission: Agriculture
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class G LRJ
Second aircraft: UAV - Unpiloted Aerial Vehicle
Reporter organization: Contracted Service
Reporter function: Single Pilot; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Distraction; Confusion
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: After completing an aerial application of a farm field approximately 10 miles southeast of LRJ airport; I was climbing out to the northwest to my typical ferrying altitude of 500 feet AGL to return to LRJ. One mile to the northwest of my target location while climbing; at 350 AGL I notice briefly a white object appear in my lower right corner of my windshield. I initially believed it to be a seagull as birds are rarely white this time of year; but when the object reappeared under the right wingtip of my aircraft I noticed it was in fact a white colored quad-copter type UAV. I estimate the UAV missed my right wingtip by approximately 50 ft horizontal and 20 ft below vertically. I had no time to take any evasive actions prior to noticing and passing the UAV. After discovering the object was in fact a UAV; I circled the field to observe the UAV was in a stationary hover approximately 350 AGL above a farm field. I then observed what I believed to be the operators of the UAV inside the cab of a pickup truck; located on a siding adjacent to the field facing to the west. I did not see any operators or observers located outside of the pickup. After 2 orbits of the field the UAV; began a descent to the road along the parameter of the field; and the truck drove to intercept it. I then continued my flight direct to LRJ with no further incidents.




Synopsis: Agriculture aircraft pilot reported a near miss with a UAV approximately 10 miles southeast of LRJ.
Date: 201507
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: WST.Airport, RI
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Fog; 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Cessna 210 Centurion / Turbo Centurion 210C; 210D
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class G WST
ATC / advisory: CTAF WST
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We entered the pattern at WST after cancelling our IFR flight plan in good VMC. At that time; a pilot in a Cessna Cardinal departed Runway 14 and announced that he had flown into a fog bank and would be flying eastbound. I made all usual callouts on the CTAF while approaching and entering the pattern at WST. These included 10 miles out; 5 miles out; intention to enter left crosswind; left crosswind entry; left downwind; left base and final. During our transit of the traffic pattern; the other pilot made similar callouts. He had decided to stay in the airport traffic pattern. We were ahead of him in the pattern. On short final (less than 0.5 miles from the runway threshold) and about 300 feet AGL; he flew underneath our aircraft. The separation was 200 feet or less.




Synopsis: Cessna P210 pilot reported an NMAC (Near Midair Collision) in the pattern at WST.