elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 202108
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Tower, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 13
Aircraft: PA-28 Cherokee/Archer/Dakota/Pillan/Warrior
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Second aircraft: Cessna Single Piston Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Instructor
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: As my student and I where approaching ZZZ airport Aircraft Y passed behind us possibly closer than 500 feet separation.They were approaching from the right and were descending. However; they adjusted course to pass behind us.We were on 6 mile final for ZZZ and at a lower altitude in communication with Tower. Aircraft Y was on a different frequency; most likely with Approach.I do not believe safety was compromised but am filling out a report because separation was close enough that is could be borderline for the regulations.




Synopsis: Instructor Pilot observed another aircraft passing 500 feet overhead and did not take any evasive action.
Date: 201509
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: 99CL.Airport, CA
Weather elements / visibility: clear
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E JCF
ATC / advisory: TRACON JCF
Second aircraft: UAV - Unpiloted Aerial Vehicle
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action

Narrative: Cruise at 6;500 level; 270 heading; abeam 99CL (Adelanto); PCAS flashing traffic dead ahead same altitude inbound closing FAST! Made contact of drone directly in my windscreen; hard right bank with forward push of yoke to avoid this traffic. Contacted Joshua approach immediately afterwards; controller said he issued a conflict warning but did not at that time have control of the drone.  I believe that if I had not conducted an evasive maneuver; I would not be writing this report. Approximately 9 months ago in this same area; I was returning home; 11;500 feet cruise; and I noticed a drone in the Edwards airspace parallel with my flight. The drone ascended to my altitude and turned directly to me on a collision course; crossed directly in front of me causing another evasive encounter on my part.  Then as to hide the fact my PCAS unit quit reporting the conflict as if the drone turned off it's transponder. Who is flying these drones? I'm scared.




Synopsis: Pilot took evasive action to avoid a drone near 99CL.
Date: 202005
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: PA-32 Cherokee Six/Lance/Saratoga/6X
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private; Flight Crew Instrument
Anomaly: Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Enroute from ZZZ1 to ZZZ2; we noted a scent in the cockpit similar to a forest fire smell but no smoke nor fire was visible. 1.5 hr into a 2.5 hr flight; the odor became stronger and I was abeam of ZZZ at 9;000 feet. I notified ATC I was going to divert and upon changing my GPS; noted I was 8 min out. At about 5 min out on normal descent we noted smoke coming into the cockpit area. I could not expedite my descent so I asked ZZZ for RWY XX but he was going to take me to RWY XY. I [advised ATC] and he gave me RWY XX. I executed a normal descent but opened the vent as I decided to avoid compromising my mental ability. It did not increase nor decrease the smoke. I executed a normal landing on RWY XX and noted the smoke stopped and communicated this to the tower. We opened the door; side window and vents on the ground and the smoke resumed.I immediately stopped the aircraft; turned off the engine; electric and fuel and exited the aircraft.It was determined that paper towels in the forward baggage area came to rest against the light bulb in the compartment and were smoldering. I removed them and examined the compartment; removed the cowling and examined the engine and we found absolutely no damage from the incident. We declined EMS (Emergency Medical Services) help but they encouraged a quick check which found we were just fine. I also appreciate their assistance and professionalism.I must add the top to bottom; ATC; ZZZ Tower; Fire and EMS were eminently professional and helpful and I'm deeply appreciative of all their assistance. I then flew the aircraft onto my destination; 1hour away without incident.




Synopsis: PA-32 pilot reported aircraft encountered smoke in the cockpit inflight and diverted.
Date: 201602
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Weather elements / visibility: Turbulence; 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Decathlon 8KCAB
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class G ZZZ
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Commercial
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Excursion Runway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed As Precaution
Contributing factors: Airport; Weather
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: Unaware of any local rule to the contrary; returned under VFR conditions for landing. Of two runways usually available; one has been closed for extension. Available runway 90 degree direct crosswind had increased to above demonstrated crosswind capability of tailwheel aircraft. With low fuel and very gusty conditions elected to land in grass parallel to closed runway in order to land into the wind. In the grass area there were no personnel and no construction equipment. Landing was without incident; but against local rules. This was done for safety.




Synopsis: The pilot of a Decathlon reported electing to land in the grass adjacent to a closed runway when the gusty winds made the crossing runway a safety concern.
Date: 201902
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZAU.ARTCC, IL
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Working Arrival Coordinator; listened in on a conversation between a C90 controller and BEARZ sector regarding turbulence on the WATSN STAR. The C90 controller used terms like 'More than moderate turbulence' and 'Severe Chop' on the line. There was also a recent [pilot report; PIREP] for 'One jolt of severe turbulence' just to the east. Multiple aircraft had reported these bad rides between 110-120 on the WATSN STAR.I called up the C90 TMC shortly after and asked about the ride reports; concerned that we should come off the WATSN STAR due to the turbulence. Was told no; they would slow to 250 and get more ride reports before changing arrivals.Then; I asked about the terms being used and made note that there's no such thing as Severe Chop. TMC told me that they were just relaying what the pilots told them; and that the pilots don't like to use the term 'Severe turbulence' because it means they would need to ground the plane.This kind of terminology muddying is dangerous. It both weakens the actual meaning of severe turbulence; and leaves in question the situation at hand. It could easily cause more aircraft to experience unsafe and possibly damaging turbulence. It is simply not clear communication; even if controllers are just relaying what pilots said verbatim.Outreach to airlines and all aviation groups about the meaning and safety issues behind turbulence reports. Encourage pilots to translate what they feel in to official terminology only. If something isn't actually severe; don't say severe. If it is severe; then say so and place safety above all else; particularly when it might affect a long string of aircraft following.Controllers should work to clarify with the pilot the precise terminology needed to define the turbulence with official terms for PIREPs. Just repeating conflated terms doesn't help the problem.




Synopsis: Chicago Center Controller reported confusing terminology being used related to turbulence severity.
Date: 201705
Location: MYV.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class G MYV
ATC / advisory: CTAF MYV
Second aircraft: Small Aircraft
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict Airborne Conflict; Conflict Ground Conflict; Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was on a straight-in visual final to runway 32. ASOS was calling winds 310/10. I announced my location at 5 miles and 2 miles on 123.05. On two-mile short final I saw a crop duster taking off runway 14 straight into me. I never heard him on the radios. I off-set left; called a go around on the radio; and pulled into a left downwind for 32. While deplaning; the same plane returned and again took off with a tailwind.




Synopsis: C172 pilot reported executing a go-around when a crop duster took off downwind and opposite direction to his planned landing.
Date: 201506
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZMP.ARTCC, MN
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 1 Eng; Retractable Gear
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class E ZMP
ATC / advisory: Center ZMP
Second aircraft: Small Transport
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute; Trainee
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Developmental
Human factors: Training / Qualification; Situational Awareness; Distraction; Communication Breakdown
Second reporter function: Instructor
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Ground Conflict; Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Separated Traffic
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I was training on the radar on Sector 3 and 4 combined. Aircraft Y had been issued weather and NOTAMS and was cleared to initial approach fix for an RNAV Approach into IWD when Aircraft X called for release off same airport.  Aircraft Y distance from the field and speed allowed for use of 3 minute rule for nonradar departure separation; so he was issued a departure clearance and void time with almost 2 full extra minutes as a buffer.As Aircraft Y approached the airport and not receiving initial call from Aircraft X who mussed their void time and didn't respond to multiple attempted transmissions; had to can Aircraft Y's approach clearance; climb him above MIA; and vector him away from the airport. More attempts to communicate with Aircraft X went unanswered. Finally Aircraft X calls airborne; was identified; told of the weather and cleared on course from departure instructions and aircraft Y was recleared for the approach. Separation was never lost.Issue departure clearance with a hold for release instruction. This is much less efficient; but eliminates chances for errors.


Second narrative: [Report narrative contained no additional information]


Synopsis: ZMP Controller report of having to cancel an approach clearance into an uncontrolled airport because of an IFR departure that had missed its void time. The Controllers did not have a loss of separation and recommended that they issue a hold for release in the future.
Date: 201303
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: 2
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: PA-28 Cherokee/Archer/Dakota/Pillan/Warrior
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Workload; Time Pressure; Fatigue; Distraction; Confusion; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; 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; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Weather; Human Factors
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: I was attempting for the third time the LDA 33 approach. I was cleared for the approach at or above 2;000 feet until established. I misidentified the final approach fix and had begun descending below 2;000 feet to 1;200 feet too early on the approach as a result. The Controller informed me that I was supposed to be at 2;000 feet or above; and I immediately began to climb. This event took place in less than 3 minutes; and the Controller's altitude/terrain collision avoidance system likely helped alert us about the situation. This was a holiday but ATC was clearly alert and the system and its safeguards helped avert a potentially serious incursion with terrain. (I was over water with few obstacles below me; but serious harm was averted thanks to the Controller's watchful eye and a functioning alerting system.) Fatigue and anxiety (my alternate airport was also rapidly approaching minimums) likely led to my increasing desire to want to land in the face of worsening weather (a 1.1 hr flight turned into 2.8 hrs); and these human factors likely contributed to my misidentifying the intersection. A functioning ATC system with appropriate safeguarding led to a positive outcome. Increased training and practice will likely correct this situation. I have practiced more frequently by simulator and consulted with an instructor since this event. In the future; after multiple missed approaches; I will select a more appropriate alternate (in retrospect; a nearby Class B airport would have been a better choice.) In addition; I will be more diligent in following closely the weather to better inform a go/no go decision.




Synopsis: An IMC PA-28 pilot began an early descent after he misidentified a final approach but was told by the TRACON to remain at 2;000 FT because of obstacles. Fatigue; anxiety and lack of proficiency were identified as part of the reporter's problem on two previous unsuccessful approaches.
Date: 201209
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: SCT.TRACON, CA
Aircraft: PA-28 Cherokee/Archer/Dakota/Pillan/Warrior
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class E SCT
ATC / advisory: TRACON SCT
Second aircraft: Skylane 182/RG Turbo Skylane/RG
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach; Departure
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Other / Unknown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings
Primary problem: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings

Narrative: A PA28 was on a base turn heading 140 degrees; 5 miles behind (increasing) a faster C182. All of a sudden ISR showed on the RADAR (increased separation required) and the target started tracking right at the lead aircraft now showing a good altitude (3;400) and 190 KTS. Instant loss of separation; I turned the PA28 further away heading 120 because of where the RADAR showed him. All of a sudden the PA28 target jumped back to where it should have been; 1.5 miles east; heading through the final; towards higher terrain. I turned him back to the final. Separation was never really lost; even though the RADAR said it was; and the RADAR equipment completely erroneous target and tracking caused me to turn this aircraft into a more dangerous position. Fusion run without its closest sensor working is not reliable.




Synopsis: SCT Controller described a near loss of MVA required standards; the reporter claiming the 'Fusion' RADAR system provided erroneous information regarding separation; prompting a turn which caused the event.
Date: 201204
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ATL.Airport, GA
Aircraft: No Aircraft
Flight phase: Taxi
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Ground
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings
Primary problem: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings

Narrative: I was working Ground Center and observed a vehicle stopped on Runway 9R and no corresponding tag on the ASDE-X. This has happened several times this past week when the vehicle is either moving or stopped on Runway 9R. Fix the ASDE-X.




Synopsis: ATL Controller described the failure of the ASDE-X to display a vehicle tag on Runway 9; noting several similar events over the past week.
Date: 201909
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
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 Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Troubleshooting; Confusion; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Airport; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: The ATIS for ZZZ reported 5 5 5 for Runway XXL. The ZZZ field condition report by Company Flight of 6 (dry) was reported. We were in a heavy -800 with gusty winds (VREF 146 V Target 161) and could not land with a [reported] 5 5 5 for [Runway] XXL. 130 miles out; I called ZZZ Clearance and asked if they could update the runway conditions. They responded with that the city does those inspections and they could not change it. This info was five hours old and my point is that if you can't put out accurate information; then don't put it out. If my memory serves me right; Company had runway departure in ZZZ during a heavy snow storm where there was conflicting runway conditions reported.




Synopsis: B737-800 Captain reported the runway condition report at this location was too old to use. Asked Clearance for update and received a reply that an update needs to come from the city.
Date: 201212
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-700
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Turbine Engine
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Troubleshooting
Second reporter function: First Officer
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Inflight Shutdown; Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: About 10 minutes into the flight while climbing up through FL260; we got a Number 1 Engine Oil Filter Bypass light flashing. We disconnected the autothrottle and slowly retarded the left throttle to idle. The light stopped flashing; but remained illuminated. We ran the checklist and shut down the engine. We coordinated with ATC for returning to the departure airport. Looking back; we did not declare an emergency with ATC and this was a mistake. On return; we completed all the necessary checklists and landed uneventfully. This problem was written up on the previous flight; but Maintenance could not duplicate.


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


Synopsis: A B737-700 Oil Filter Bypass light illuminated during climb. After completing the QRH procedure the engine was shut down; but no emergency was declared as the flight returned to the departure airport.