elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201404
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Aircraft: Caravan Undifferentiated
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Cruise
Aircraft component: Aerofoil Ice System
Component problem: Design
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: Captain; Check Pilot; Instructor
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Distraction; Physiological - Other
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Illness / Injury; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; General Physical Injury / Incapacitation
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Training flight on C208 Caravan with new TKS conversion. Operated TKS on preflight; observed streams of TKS from wing leading edge running into cabin ventilation intake at top of strut. In flight turned on TKS for demo; both pilots immediately noticed subtle chemical odor in cockpit; instructor's throat became irritated; dry; scratchy; and thirsty; strange taste in mouth and on lips. Student immediately said he was beginning to get a bad headache. Instructor's voice began to become very scratchy. Have noticed TKS aircraft have a film on entire aircraft inside and out. MSDS warns of touching fluid; and breathing vapor from fluid. FAA needs to look at TKS hazmat contamination of crews and rampers on C208 TKS aircraft. Lots of pilots getting sick on C208 TKS.




Synopsis: A C208 Instructor activated the TKS anti-ice system during preflight then again inflight. Both the instructor and student felt chemical effects with various symptoms: irritated throat; odd taste and odor; headache.
Date: 201507
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 145 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Turbine Engine Thrust Reverser
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Workload; Time Pressure
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
Result: Flight Crew Inflight Shutdown; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Procedure; Company Policy; Manuals
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Leveling at 16;000 feet; aircraft yawed slightly.  Captain (CA) noticed engine 1 roll back.  EICAS message E1 rev fail appeared.  Followed QRH and requested return immediately to ZZZ.  We ran landing checklist.  Relayed info to Flight Attendant (FA) and company.  CA made PA.  Landed ZZZ with no further issues.QRH for E1/2 rev fail refers you to precautionary engine shut down checklist.  It would be helpful if when the QRH refers you to another checklist; if it also included the page number of the checklist.  It would make a potentially high stress high workload situation a little bit easier.I communicated with dispatch regarding the situation.  I told dispatch we performed a precautionary engine shutdown.  Dispatch responded.  I replied that we would be [on] the ground in 7 minutes.  I was surprised when the dispatcher sent us another message.  I would have thought the dispatcher would know that with [an] engine shut down and 7 minutes to land; that it was not an appropriate time to query us for more information asking why we shut down the engine.  That information was not time critical.  It could have waited until we were on the ground.I do not think the company could have done anything to prevent this situation.  I think training served me well preparing me for potential emergencies such as the precautionary shutdown.  I will use today's event in combination with continued training to handle possible future events to the best of my ability.


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


Synopsis: An EMB145 had an engine rollback and EICAS displayed E1 REV FAIL when leveling at 16;000. The crew followed QRH; shut down the engine; and returned to land.
Date: 201707
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: MKE.TRACON, WI
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: SR22
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class E MKE
ATC / advisory: TRACON MKE
Second aircraft: Single Engine Turboprop Undifferentiated
Reporter function: Enroute; Instructor
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Confusion; Training / Qualification
Second reporter function: Enroute
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I was conducting training. Aircraft X was descending after dropping parachutes out at 14500 feet. Aircraft Y was VFR northwest bound with altitude at his discretion. Aircraft Y was indicating about 4000 feet; descending; and was about 10 miles SE of the airport. Aircraft X was descending around 4500 feet and I was going to give it a few more miles and then tell the trainee to turn Aircraft Y. Aircraft X reported jumpers no factor and the trainee terminated his RADAR services. He was also below Aircraft Y's altitude; so I was comfortable allowing him to overfly the airport. Almost 3 minutes later Aircraft Y reported that he had to deviate for a jumper. I communicated with him that we were told jumpers were no factor.The jump aircraft should stay above the highest jumper and not tell us they are no factor until all jumpers are actually no factor.


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


Synopsis: A TRACON Instructor Controller and their Trainee reported a VFR aircraft reported evasive action to avoid a parachutist.
Date: 201606
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: RSW.Tower, FL
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Airspace: Class C RSW
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Local; Supervisor / CIC
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: Routine Inspection
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Procedure; Manuals; Human Factors
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I was upstairs working Local Control/Controller in Charge (CIC) when the TRACON CIC called. TRACON CIC asked whether we would be willing to change runways to runway 6 for weather. I said yes and TRACON CIC responded by saying I'll call you back when I get all the information to switch the runway. In the meantime the South Controller calls and asks if we are going to runway 6. I respond 'I believe so I'm waiting for the CIC to call me back.'  He asked if he should start vectoring aircraft for runway 6 due to weather. I said affirmative. I never received a call back from the TRACON CIC leading me to believe we were still on runway 24. The ground controller was holding an aircraft waiting for the call back. Upon observing 2 aircraft being vectored to a 7 mile final for runway 6. I called downstairs to the TRACON CIC to inquire as to the runway status. No one had every told me we were on runway 6 officially; never coordinated a last departure for runway 24 or a first arrival to runway 6. This was an unsafe situation in which I could have launched a departure off of runway 24 had I not been aware of the situation. Upon calling the TRACON CIC the simple response was 'yes we are on rwy 6' still with no coordination as to whom is the first arrival. The WST controller called me to give me the first arrival for runway 6 when the aircraft was on a 5 mile final.We have a checklist in place to prevent this exact situation. The TRACON CIC failed to use this checklist. I heard from everyone on position in the radar room except for the 1 person I should have heard from. The point of a checklist and single point of communication is to prevent confusion and a potentially hazardous situation. Had the person upstairs been busier or potentially less experienced this situation could have had hazardous consequences. The only recommendation I have is for people to follow the checklist as designed and required to do. Maybe the whole facility could use another briefing on the checklist.




Synopsis: RSW Tower Controller in Charge (CIC) reported the TRACON CIC did not follow published procedures concerning changing active runways.
Date: 201910
Location: SJC.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: Medium Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
Airspace: Class C SJC
ATC / advisory: Ground SJC
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Incursion Taxiway
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Airport
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: After landing at SJC (Runway 30L); we were instructed to exit the runway left on Taxiway J; and then to taxi; via V; to the [FBO] ramp.  I was in the left seat; the PIC was in the right seat with the airport diagram up in front of him.  It was dark; and I was taxiing the aircraft very slowly as I attempted to identify the correct taxiway.  I saw 2 taxiways; the first (parallel and closest to the runway) was clearly marked 'W.'  I looked -- but could not see any signage for the second/next taxiway (parallel to the runway and closest to the ramp).  I asked the PIC if he thought that was; in fact; Taxiway V.  He looked at the chart and affirmed that he thought it was. With both of us in agreement that we had reached Taxiway V; I turned left and began taxing to [FBO] (parallel to the [FBO] ramp).  A couple minutes later; Ground Control informed us that we had turned on to the wrong taxiway (that we were on Taxiway W1).  We were then given an additional instruction -- to turn right to enter the [FBO] ramp.  There was no traffic conflict or other issue.  The signage in that area of SJC is not adequate -- especially at night; and the airport diagram is a bit confusing as Taxiway V appears to be the taxiway on to which we turned. Suggest better (additional) signage on Taxiway J --clearly delineating taxiways W; W1 and V (especially important for night operations).




Synopsis: Medium Transport aircraft First Officer reported a taxiway incursion at SJC airport.  First Officer stated Taxiway J signage for taxiways W1 and V are inadequate at night.
Date: 201703
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Clear; 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: King Air C90 E90
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Electrical Power
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Instructor
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Upon departure; suffered a complete electrical failure. First noticed when landing gear would not come up. Then all instruments and radios failed. Able to contact Approach and request return to [departure airport]. Then all systems failed again. Desired fly by at Tower to see if landing gear was down. Tower relayed to Approach landing gear appeared to be down. Turned downwind and landed without incident. Taxied to Maintenance Facility and shut down.




Synopsis: BE90 Pilot reported an electrical failure after takeoff and returned to departure airport.
Date: 201210
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ELP.Airport, TX
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ELP
ATC / advisory: TRACON ELP
Second aircraft: Amateur/Home Built/Experimental
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach; Departure
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Airspace Violation All Types; Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: The Skyhawk was westbound level at 10;000 FT and reported a near midair collision; the aircraft passed about twenty feet below him. I was not speaking with an experimental nor did I observe his target in time to call traffic to the experimental. After the Skyhawk called the NMAC; I did observe a target at his twelve o'clock and less than a mile. This target went on to clip Bigg's 'RED' airspace before calling my Relieving Controller for services. The Relieving Controller noted with 90% certainty that experimental was the offending aircraft. This occurred in the outer area; so the only thing that could be done is increasing my vigilance. The offending aircraft was reported as a jet; so maneuvering the Skyhawk out of his way; especially considering the lack of communication.




Synopsis: ELP Controller described a conflict event between an IFR aircraft and an unknown/unobserved VFR jet; allegedly the offending aircraft in this case.
Date: 201712
Location: DAL.Airport, TX
Aircraft: B737-700
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
ATC / advisory: Ramp DAL
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Although this is associated with a specific incident; you can multiply this ASAP by 10.Arriving at the gate; I set the brake; shut down the engine; looked up to see the Marshaler already giving the 'All Clear' signal to Ground Personnel before I gave the 'Engine Cut' signal. I have ASAPed this numerous times and it continues to get worse. This situation happens at least once per trip and is reaching what I would consider to be a crisis level. Marshalers are merely going through the motions and obviously have not been properly trained in the importance of keeping the Safety Zone clear until the Captain gives the appropriate signal. Is it going to take a fatal injury for this to improve?Preventative Measures: Training; training; training with a high level of emphasis on the critical nature of Safety Zone dangers. If I were in Management I would declare this an emergency that needs immediate attention.




Synopsis: B737 Captain reported he has observed multiple hazardous deviations from SOP in ramp operations.
Date: 201509
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: CVO.Airport, OR
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skylane 182/RG Turbo Skylane/RG
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class E CVO
ATC / advisory: CTAF CVO
Second aircraft: Small Aircraft
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Instructor
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure
Primary problem: Airspace Structure

Narrative: While on an IFR flight plan and executing the ILS 17 approach to circle to land Runway 27; we encountered an airplane conducting acrobatic maneuvers (loops; rolls) directly over the airport at our flight altitude; above and below. A NOTAM was issued that the 'acrobatic box' was active and we were aware of it. Reviewing the NOTAM we learned that the FAA had issued a waiver for pilots to conduct acrobatic flight within one mile from the center of the airport between 700 and 4300 feet AGL. This was not a public airshow. There is a direct conflict between IFR and VFR aircraft. No separation exists.This is an unsafe waiver - should be withdrawn.Sec. 91.303 -- Aerobatic flight.No person may operate an aircraft in aerobatic flight--(a) Over any congested area of a city; town; or settlement;(b) Over an open air assembly of persons;(c) Within the lateral boundaries of the surface areas of Class B; Class C; Class D; or Class E airspace designated for an airport;(d) Within 4 nautical miles of the center line of any Federal airway;(e) Below an altitude of 1;500 feet above the surface; or(f) When flight visibility is less than 3 statute miles.For the purposes of this section; aerobatic flight means an intentional maneuver involving an abrupt change in an aircraft's attitude; an abnormal attitude; or abnormal acceleration; not necessary for normal flight.

Callback: Reporter stated airport involved is CVO. Reporter further stated he heard no communication on CTAF frequency from the aerobatic aircraft.



Synopsis: C182 pilot on an IFR flight plan executing a circling approach noticed an aerobatic aircraft flying acrobatic maneuvers directly over the airport above and below their flight altitude. Reporter stated there was a waiver in place for the acrobatic box over the airport; but feels it was unsafe and should have been modified or withdrawn.
Date: 202103
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: A11.TRACON, AK
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class E A11
ATC / advisory: TRACON A11
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach; Instructor
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Training / Qualification; Workload
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; 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
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: While training on final radar Aircraft X was being vectored for sequence to the runway.  The aircraft was descended below the normal downwind altitude to avoid traffic in an adjacent sector airspace.  Due to traffic volume and complexity; the aircraft was vectored into a 6;000 foot Minimum Vectoring Altitude (MVA).  Upon realization of the error; he was immediately climbed and turned away from the higher MVA area.




Synopsis: A11 TRACON Controller conducting on the job training reported the trainee vectored an aircraft for sequencing below the Minimum Vectoring Altitude.
Date: 201504
Location: CYXX.Airport, FO
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Cessna Stationair/Turbo Stationair 6
Operator: Government
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Cruise
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Single Pilot; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Airspace Violation All Types
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert
Contributing factors: Chart Or Publication; Aircraft; Airspace Structure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: While flying an airplane on a local training flight; I inadvertently entered the Class D airspace to the south of the Abbotsford airport (CYXX). The aircraft I was flying is equipped with a Garmin 500 avionics suite and a Garmin GTN 750 GPS. Both units had current charts installed and are approved for navigation. The Abbotsford Control Tower's airspace was not depicted on either system. While I was monitoring 'Victoria Terminal;' I never heard them indicate that there was an aircraft operating outside of the norm.Shortly after landing at our airport of operation in Bellingham; WA (BLI); the tower controller requested that I call the Tower controller at Abbotsford. Upon contacting the Abbotsford controller; I was informed of my incursion. I apologized for the inconvenience. I was assured that there were no traffic proximity alerts as they had me in radar contact for the entire time and I stayed on a steady flight profile.Upon further research; it was determined that the airspace associated with Canadian airports are not depicted on the Garmin charts; even though the airspace extends into the United States. In addition; although the airspace is depicted on printed sectional charts; because of informational blocks printed in the area of the chart; the small class D depiction is easily overlooked.




Synopsis: C206 pilot reported an airspace incursion (Canadian Class D - CYXX) and noted that although the Class D extends into U.S. airspace it does not appear on Garmin avionics.
Date: 201912
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Human factors: Physiological - Other
Anomaly: Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Illness / Injury; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate; Pre-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Air quality event at the gate. I experienced extreme dizziness and nauseas as my head fell to my knees [in] the aft of the aircraft. Then made my way forward for fresh air. I felt sick continuously throughout the day.




Synopsis: Flight Attendant reported a fume event at the gate resulting in 'extreme' physiological issues.