elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 202105
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: MYR.TRACON, SC
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Turbulence; 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; High Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class C MYR
ATC / advisory: TRACON MYR
Aircraft component: GPS & Other Satellite Navigation
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Equipment Problem Dissipated; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: I was flying VFR cross country to ZZZ from JZI flying direct with a planned northern deviation towards HYW to avoid MYR airspace. Altitude was 3;000 AGL due to moderate turbulence. As I was nearing MYR airspace the GPS encountered interference and the aircraft indicator on the moving map was blocked (later determined to be ADS-B shadow). When the GPS self corrected; I realized that I was near or touching the outer ring below the 4;000 upper limit and above the 1;200 lower limit. I immediately executed a 180 degree turn and then turned north and skirted the outside ring as planned. I did possibly touch the airspace but did so for only the minute it took to turn away. The certified GPS never gave the warning that it usually does when class airspace is entered; I had to range the GPS out near maximum to even see the touching of the outer ring; so I do not know what the ATC radar would have shown. I do not expect a re-occurrence as I better understand how the ADS-B shadow sometimes disguises the aircraft symbol. I have been flying nearly 40 years and have never had a violation or an airspace incursion.




Synopsis: Pilot reported GPS problems associated with ADS-B issues and a possible airspace violation.
Date: 201909
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: DFW.Airport, TX
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Cessna Aircraft Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class B DFW
ATC / advisory: TRACON D10
Aircraft component: GPS & Other Satellite Navigation
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Training / Qualification; Confusion
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: During a local VFR flight on a clear weather day I was flying and my aircraft lost GPS signal to the Avidyne IFD 500 instrument and might have affected the Mode S transponder that is also linked together with WAAS GPS position.  I did notice a message that the GPS position had lost signal on my IFD 500 panel mounted instrument; but I didn't realize during my flight that the Mode S transponder may have been without GPS signal also which provides position and altitude to the local ATC radar.  My flight had me flying 'Below Class B' airspace in the DFW area to my local airport. My two month old avionics upgrade to include IFR WAAS GPS and a remote mounted Mode S transponder is still something I'm getting used to seeing the visual displays and all associated messages. After talking with my avionics shop and resetting the GPS and Avidyne IFD 500 unit at our airport I realized the Mode S transponder may not have been sending the proper info to the DFW 'Regional Approach' radar folks. In the future I feel the transponder itself should send a message to the pilot if it has lost GPS signal or better yet fail to the 'send position and altitude' Mode S function straight from the GPS WAAS antenna if the IFD 550 display messes up.




Synopsis: Cessna pilot reported a malfunctioning GPS receiver.
Date: 201709
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: BIRD.ARTCC, FO
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Large Transport
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A BIRD
ATC / advisory: Center BIRD
Aircraft component: Communication Systems
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Communication Breakdown; Troubleshooting
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Clearance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Procedure; Aircraft
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: While operating on NAT X; CPDLC and passing ZZZZZ to BIRD Flight Information Region (FIR) boundary; we received two ATC alerts - (white ATC EICAS message and audible ding). First ATC alert at XA:41; selecting ATC button on FMC; CPDC message was: This is an automated message to confirm CPDLC with Reykjavik Centre. We sent our response: 'Roger.' Less than a minute later; received a second alert at XA:42: 'Confirm assigned route.' We responded by selecting the prompts to confirm Route 1; and sent the response.Just to verify that all was well; I selected the ATC log page; which details all received and sent ATC messages. This is when we found an unanswered ATC message - also sent at XA:42- directing us to 'Squawk ZZZZ.' We answered the message with 'roger' and changed our squawk; so no real failure to follow ATC instructions occurred. What I wanted to point out with this report is that there were three messages sent from ATC within one minute - only two messages displayed when the ATC prompt was selected on the FMC; and if we had not investigated the LOG page further; we would not have known that ATC had sent a third message directing the new squawk. This is a potential safety point of failure; since it is not in our normal process to constantly check the LOG page to make sure that we are getting all our messages.




Synopsis: Captain of a Part 121 turbojet reported difficulties interfacing via CPDLC with ATC.
Date: 201811
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: SCT.TRACON, CA
Light: Night
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class E ZLA
ATC / advisory: TRACON SCT
Second aircraft: PA-28 Cherokee/Archer/Dakota/Pillan/Warrior
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach
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
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Separated Traffic
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I was working Harbor Radar.  LGB was flipped; to RWY12 operations.  Aircraft X came in for the Visual approach to RWY 12.  Everyone in our area that I know of agrees that this is an unsafe operation.  When Aircraft X came to me; I had multiple targets between him and the airport.  I have to make a judgment call to descend or stay high to avoid the cluster of VFR targets in the vicinity.  In this situation; I chose to descend Aircraft X to get underneath traffic (that may or may not descend also; however; I can only work with what I know).  I descended Aircraft X to 3;000 [feet].  There was a target aiming toward him that I didn't know if it would descend; turn; climb etc.; so based on the information I had; I decided to descend below the target to 1;600 [feet].  The target started to descend also; and at this point; I had already told Aircraft X to 'Expedite'; so stopping him at 3;000 [feet] was not an option because if the pilot started his descent already; then we would have another issue.  I issued a hard vector from a 310 (estimated) [heading] to a 220; then 210.  Now Aircraft X was aimed into a new cluster of aircraft; all low (1;100 [feet]; etc).  LGB yelled over that the prior target was a Cherokee who had Aircraft X in sight. Of course they did not turn the Cherokee away from Aircraft X because their culture is not one to do something like that.  I issued a hard turn back to the right once Aircraft X was under the target to get away from the other targets.  I cleared Aircraft X for the visual approach to avoid any MVA problems.  In hindsight; I could have kept Aircraft X high; but there was also the risk that the VFR traffic would have climbed into him; and if he would have then I would still be writing the report.  This is how the Long Beach 30 departure corridor/Long Beach 12 arrival corridor is; we get lucky sometimes; and sometimes we don't.  The Long Beach practice area is completely unsafe.  I've reported it many times and so have my coworkers.  Class Charlie airspace; one that is well thought out and doesn't push the problem to another area.




Synopsis: SoCal TRACON Controller reported an unsafe operation relating to Long Beach runway configuration with VFR and IFR Traffic congestion.
Date: 201310
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: EWR.Airport, NJ
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: A320
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class B EWR
ATC / advisory: Tower EWR
Second aircraft: Helicopter
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Flight Crew; Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: We were informed that there was a helicopter that had us in sight and was maintaining separation. Shortly there after; I got a TCAS RA to adjust vertical speed at 1;000 FT MSL on approach to [Runway] 22L at EWR in darkness. I saw 200 FT separation on the TCAS altitude. After telling Tower about TCAS Climb; I got 'clear of conflict' and was in a safe position to continue to land. Landing was uneventful.


Second narrative: We NEVER saw the helicopter. VERY unsafe. When we informed Tower of our conflict he was not concerned. After landing Tower had NO comment on the conflict that had transpired. We expressed our concerns over the conflict again with Tower once we were on the ground. Tower had no comment. Very unsafe practice.


Synopsis: A320 flight crew reported a NMAC with a news helicopter on a night visual approach to EWR. Crew mentioned they were unhappy with the Tower's handling of the event.
Date: 201502
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: LGU.Airport, UT
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 2 Eng; Retractable Gear
Operator: Government
Operating under: Other Part 141
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class G LGU
ATC / advisory: CTAF LGU
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Workload
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: During my multi-engine check ride; we were circling from the ILS 17 to runway 35 just above circling minimums with the left engine simulated as failed. The examiner had failed the engine just before beginning to circle. I made a traffic call that we were splitting off of the ILS 17 and circling for runway 35 with a simulated engine failure; I believe that I included altitude of 4;900 but am unsure. Due to the amount of traffic congesting the radios and being distracted flying the plane with the simulated engine out; I was unable to make another pattern call until we were midfield left downwind for runway 35. I heard a call that stated that someone was on left downwind but did not completely hear who they were. After asking the left downwind traffic to repeat; they stated that were at 4;800 feet; a helicopter; and that we were directly overhead. During the downwind phase of the flight our altitude varied from 4;950 to about 5;100. I was able to see the helicopter below us after we passed it off of the rear left side. The examiner was not able to view the helicopter. This helicopter was being used to provide flight training from a different flight school at the airport. The helicopter traffic was unknown to us until we had passed the aircraft; therefore we did not take extreme corrective action but increased altitude slightly. I believe that due to having the left engine failed upon beginning to circle and having a large volume of traffic calls; the examiner and I were unable to distinguish helicopter position calls and find the helicopter operating below the normal airplane flight pattern.




Synopsis: Light twin pilot receiving instruction reported an NMAC with a helicopter in the pattern at LGU.
Date: 201204
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: MCI.Airport, MO
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Haze / Smoke; 5
Light: Night
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 145 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B MCI
ATC / advisory: TRACON MCI
Aircraft component: FMS/FMC
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Fatigue; Confusion
Anomaly: Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: It was a late flight and both of us were getting tired from the long day. It was leg three plus I had commuted by air to start the day. The total flight was 3 hours. Everything went great until we were cleared for the approach. It was hazy with a visibility of 5 miles. I was looking for the runway but because our windows were fogged up more than usual I could not see very well. As I armed the approach I did not realize I had the VOR; not the ILS tuned as the active frequency. It was in the backup. As I looked at the FMA; I noticed it had VAPP instead of LOC. I finally saw the runway while still on the initial heading the Controller had given to us and by that time--as I tried to turn--the Controller cancelled our approach clearance and we were vectored back around. Because the LOC was not tuned; nothing was ever captured. It was very late and both the Captain and I were very tired from the day. We should have been more vigilant; checked and cross checked everything more than usual. Someone could have been landing on the parallel runway and that would have been an even bigger issueLearn to check everything 10x more when you are very tired with late flights. You may catch something new each time you cross check. Be sure the correct frequencies are in the right position to be armed.




Synopsis: A fatigued EMB-145 flight crew on a vector to intercept the LOC failed to notice their ILS frequency was not selected as active and they through the LOC and may have infringed on the parallel runway approach. The error was noted by ATC and the flight re-sequenced to a safe landing. A prior commute to work was cited by the reporter as a contributing fatigue factor.
Date: 201701
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 30
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: TBM 700/TBM 850
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Pressurization System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: While leveling off at final altitude; I switched the bleed switch from Auto Bleed to Max Diff. The cabin then depressurized. I descended the aircraft to a breathable altitude and resumed flight at 6;000 ft.




Synopsis: TBM-900 pilot reported changing the bleed air switch from auto to Max Diff. This caused a depressurization and the pilot had to immediately descend to 8;000 ft.
Date: 202005
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Weather elements / visibility: Clear; 10
Aircraft: Small Aircraft
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Instructor; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Rotorcraft
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: I was instructing in Aircraft X. I was in the traffic pattern for Runway XX at ZZZ. My student turned final and was about to put in his final flaps. I was looking outside and talking to the student about the runway alignment and sight picture. I heard the RPM decrease and told the student to hold 1700 RPM at which time he said that he had the throttle full in. I looked down and saw that he did have the throttle full in but the engine was idling around 200 to 400 RPM. I took control of the airplane; retracted the flaps. established best glide and made a Mayday call. I could not make the runway and elected to land on the highway. Landed without incident. Maintenance came and towed it back to the airport with police escort. Cause is under investigation.




Synopsis: Small aircraft pilot reported that an engine failure on final approach resulted in landing on a highway.
Date: 201511
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: C90.TRACON, IL
Light: Night
Aircraft: A319
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class B ORD
ATC / advisory: TRACON C90
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach; Supervisor / CIC
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Human-Machine Interface; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Chart Or Publication; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I was advised by the Feeder Sector that Aircraft X checked in on the arrival descending to 4000 feet. The controller caught the target altitude upon check in and instructed Aircraft X to maintain 7000 feet instead. I called ARTCC to ask what Aircraft X was issued and they said 'Descend via the arrival; maintain 300 knots.' I had Aircraft X call so I could inquire about the error.  I spoke with the Captain for the flight; about how he interpreted the arrival and why his actions differed from everyone else. He apparently understood the segment altitudes to be the bottom altitude on the arrival that he could rightfully descend to after the mandatory crossing.The assortment of altitudes on the STAR seem unnecessary if the Descend Via only authorizes 110. However; if ZAU cleared the aircraft to Descend Via except cross FYTTE at and maintain 110; it would certainly help clear up any confusion for the occasional confused crew.




Synopsis: C90 Controller reported an ORD arriving aircraft on a STAR issued 'descend via' clearance descended through a crossing restriction on the arrival. The reporter spoke to the pilot who did not understand how to comply with the restrictions on the approach once issued 'descend via' ATC phraseology.