elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201909
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: AVL.Tower, NC
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skylane 182/RG Turbo Skylane/RG
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class C AVL
ATC / advisory: Tower AVL
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Local
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Developmental
Human factors: Training / Qualification; Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was training on Local Control; finishing a departure push. Aircraft X called ready for departure. A twin engine aircraft departed for touch and go's runway heading requesting single engine operations for training. I cleared the aircraft for takeoff on a heading of 080; the Local approved turn for a VFR aircraft. The aircraft departed and I told them to contact Departure Control. When the aircraft ID showed on the radar display it was on an IFR not VFR tag. The aircraft was already in the turn below the MVA of 4;100 ft. This occurrence can be avoided by better flight strip management and a better scan of all resources available in the tower.




Synopsis: Developmental Tower Controller reported mistaking an IFR aircraft for VFR traffic; resulting in vectoring the aircraft below the MVA.
Date: 201602
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: MKJS.Airport, FO
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Airbus 318/319/320/321 Undifferentiated
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
ATC / advisory: Center MKJK
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Time Pressure; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation - Altitude Crossing Restriction Not Met; 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; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: While inbound to Montego Bay our flight planned route (and clearance) was via the Omaxi 3 Arrival. Upon check in with Kingston Center we were cleared to AVRAT intersection; a waypoint on a 12 nautical mile final to runway 07. AVRAT is not on the Omaxi 3 arrival and while it is on the RNAV Rwy 07 approach plate it was not in the FMGC; which had ZAVKI as the first or initial waypoint/fix on the approach. This required us to type it in ourselves in order to comply with the clearance; which we did. Neither [my First Officer] nor myself thought to also type in the 3000 feet altitude published on the approach plate. Once we were handed off to Sangster Approach they eventually gave us a clearance to proceed to AVRAT; descend to 3000 feet and then cleared for the RNAV Rwy 07 approach. While still on a southerly heading and not yet at AVRAT; we armed the approach and the airplane very shortly thereafter began a descent to 2500 feet (the published altitude at ZAVKI). As we were leveling off at 2500 feet Sangster Approach asked us to confirm our altitude; which we did. Approach then indicated that our clearance was to maintain 3000 feet until AVRAT. We immediately climbed back to 3000 feet; completed the approach and landing (in VMC conditions) uneventfully. Neither [my First Officer] nor I heard or received a clearance to maintain 3000 feet UNTIL AVRAT; though that was the controller's intent and the proper procedure; given the published altitude on the approach plate.Given the relative few times that I've flown into Montego Bay (my previous entry being well over a year ago) we should not have allowed the VFR weather conditions to lull us into not paying closer attention to detail and proper procedure.Separate Domestic and International flight divisions would significantly enhance the safety of our flight operations. As for me; I will study the weather; expected arrival procedures and any unusual or unique characteristics in greater detail before arriving in the terminal area of airports where I have minimal familiarity.




Synopsis: Airbus Captain reported descending below a charted altitude on approach into MKJS.
Date: 201201
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: MD-80 Series (DC-9-80) Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Passenger
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged
Contributing factors: Weather; Aircraft; Equipment / Tooling
Primary problem: Equipment / Tooling

Narrative: We arrived at the gate without incident. As ground personnel moved the jetbridge into position; a station agent advised us there was a malfunction with positioning the bridge and airport maintenance was on the way. After approximately 3 minutes; the jetbridge was moved fully into position and the canopy was lowered over aircraft. The Lead Flight Attendant opened the aircraft door and immediately noticed the jetbridge was approximately 1 foot below the aircraft door which would have made deplaning difficult. I got out of my seat to look at the situation and agreed. At this time station personnel raised the jet bridge and I heard a slight but odd noise and queried the jetbridge operator as to what it was. She informed me that there was ice and snow on top of the canopy from the previous night and it was indeed falling off on the sides of the jetbridge. I looked closely along the sides and underneath the jetbridge and noticed no damage. I then completed the post/preflight inspection; re-boarded the aircraft and flew the next leg without further incident. Approximately one hour later I received a call from the Captain who picked up our aircraft stating that a boarding jumpseat pilot on his flight had noticed something odd above the L1 door. Maintenance had been called out and found a cut approximately 6 inches long and 1 inch wide high above the L1 door. It is very likely that the damage was caused by the canopy of the jetbridge during the events described above.




Synopsis: A malfunctioning jetbridge may have been responsible for puncture damage to the fuselage skin above the boarding door of an MD-80.
Date: 201310
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: Other Flight School
Operating under: Other 141
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Second aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Reporter organization: Other Flight School
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Instructor
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Flight Crew; Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We were instructed by the Tower Controller to follow traffic ahead of us for Runway 2.  The traffic we were following was on short final and we were still approximately 2.5 NM out.  After giving us our instructions; they issued instructions to another C172 (Aircraft Y) pilot to locate us on final; and proceed to follow us for the option Runway 2.  I was not aware at the time that the aircraft instructed to follow us was an initial student pilot solo. Tower asked if he had us in sight; he responded affirmative; and was instructed to follow us.  While establishing ourselves for landing; at approximately 450 FT something caught my eye directly above our left wing.  I immediately recognized that it was an aircraft and proceeded to take the flight controls and make an immediate descending right turn. While in the descending turn; Tower issued a warning to us saying that the traffic following us was rapidly approaching.  The student pilot in the other aircraft did not seem to see our aircraft or understand the following ATC transmissions we had with Tower.  We were instructed to make a right 270 degree turn and re-establish ourselves on final for Runway 2.  We did; and continued our flight uneventfully.  I am fairly certain if the student pilot was 10 FT lower our wings would have struck.  Out Traffic collision avoidance system did not sound until we were in the descending right turn.  Also; the student pilot did not seem to be phased at all by the events.




Synopsis: C172 instructor pilot experiences a NMAC on short final with a student pilot on his first solo flight. Evasive action is taken. Neither the Tower nor the onboard collision avoidance system alerted the reporter in a timely manner.
Date: 201603
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: DFW.Airport, TX
Flight conditions: Marginal
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: MD-80 Series (DC-9-80) Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class B DFW
ATC / advisory: Tower DFW
Second aircraft: A321
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Engineer; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control
Contributing factors: Procedure; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: We took off closely behind [an] A321 on 36R DFW with winds reporting on ATIS as 360/14. Right after we lifted off the ground we encountered dramatic roll to the left and then to the right from the wake of the A321. We both were on the controls and were able to maintain control of the aircraft. I am not sure of the angle of bank we obtained in either direction but I am guessing it was less than 30 degrees. It was a dramatic roll with some turbulence associated with it and I reported it immediately to tower as they handed us off to departure. After checking in with DFW departure I also informed them of the wake we encountered. The controller asked if anyone was hurt and I told him no. I added that I was aware that they are not required to give us extra separation from that aircraft but that the A321 is a large aircraft with large winglets. I am guessing that the wind had an effect as well with holding the wake longer on our path. I have talked with other pilots who have told me that they have also encountered this on following the smaller Airbus as well. Maybe it's time to take a look at this?!

Callback: Reporter reiterated concern with spacing behind A321-type aircraft with winglets [sharklets].



Synopsis: MD80 Captain reported encountering significant wake turbulence departing DFW in trail of an A321.
Date: 201906
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: DFW.Airport, TX
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class B DFW
ATC / advisory: Tower DFW
Second aircraft: Heavy Transport
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Distraction
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Procedure; Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: On approach behind a heavy aircraft. Experiencing wake turbulence. Maintained slightly high on approach in attempt to avoid wake turbulence. Configured aircraft for landing but did not arm spoilers. First Officer did not catch the error while running checklist. Deployed spoilers manually after touching down. Distraction due to wake turbulence. Batch processing of new checklist causes a breakdown in the last 40 years of checklist procedure. Learned that 'flaps 30; below the line' is one word.




Synopsis: B737-800 Captain reported landing with the spoilers not armed after being distracted by a wake turbulence encounter on approach to DFW.
Date: 201605
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Fire/Overheat Warning
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; Flight Crew Diverted
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: About two and a half hours into a routine ETOPS flight; during a crew bathroom break; we had a wheel well fire indication and bell warning. I notified [Oceanic ATC] that we were offsetting 15 miles north of the airway (in case of emergency descent) and started slowing (to comply with the checklist) while the copilot came back to the cockpit. After his return; we [advised ATC] emergency and lowered the landing (as per procedure). I raised the gear after approximately two minutes (airspeed was beginning to drop off and I felt it was prudent to not descend at this time). After looking at all the information; we came to the conclusion that it was a false indication but continued cautiously. We set up a phone patch with maintenance; dispatch and operations and came to the same conclusion. We made contact with an [air carrier] flight that was 1000 feet below us; on the same track. He received ATC clearance to deviate 15 miles off track and visually check our wheel well area. When he got into position; we once again lowered our landing gear. He saw no damage. After further discussion with my copilot and phone patch; I decided that the best course of action was to continue to [a suitable alternate] because of the long runway. We lowered the gear passing 15000 feet and configured early. There were several fire bell warnings as the faulty system kept resetting itself. The approach and landing were uneventful. I taxied off at the end of the runway where the fire trucks inspected the aircraft and found no damage. I then continued to the gate.


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


Synopsis: B737 flight crew reported they deviated to a suitable alternate after receiving a wheel well fire warning on an oceanic route. The fire warning was later determined to be false.
Date: 202007
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ramp ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Troubleshooting; Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Incursion Taxiway
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Chart Or Publication
Primary problem: Chart Or Publication

Narrative: On completion of pushback from gate; under current SIP guidance; we called for taxi. Ground Control informed us that in the future we must monitor 122.95 and advise prior to pushback. We queried ATC; they informed us this is a new procedure which commenced a few months back. The Jeppesen; SIP; briefing package cover page nor current NOTAMs reflect this. The Jeppesen 10-9B states 'Terminal ramp uncontrolled. Monitor 122.95 for ramp advisories'.




Synopsis: Air Carrier Captain reported chart instructions do not agree with ATC ground instructions for push-back.
Date: 201711
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Portable Extinguisher
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: While at cruise; the cockpit fire extinguisher discharged without any provocation. It was secured in its rack behind the First Officer's seat. I placed my hand over the top of the extinguisher and quickly opened the cockpit door; handing it to a Flight Attendant to be wrapped in a blanket. A very loud pressure release was heard and felt from where the plastic top meets the metal tank. Thankfully; it was only an air release. Had the white halon released; there would have been potential for an instant problem in the cockpit. There is currently a recall of Kidde Fire Extinguishers. I wonder if this is included on their list?




Synopsis: B737-800 Captain reported the portable cockpit fire extinguisher self-discharged at cruise altitude.
Date: 201512
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: Mixed
Weather elements / visibility: Cloudy; Rain; 2
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skylane 182/RG Turbo Skylane/RG
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Inflight Event / Encounter VFR In IMC; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Weather; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Due to certainty of flooding of the home airport; aircraft needed urgently to be moved to another airport. Weather was poor over the entire area; and was predicted to be so until well after the peak flood stage; so urgent waiting was done for VFR conditions. A different destination airport was originally chosen; but it was further away; which created more variability in the weather along the route.Finally; late in the day; conditions appeared to be VFR (with a scattered layer of clouds at 700-800 feet AGL) along the 12 nautical mile route to the destination airport; as determined by radar; METAR; and visual observation. Once aloft; conditions were better than expected over the flood plain where the departure airport was. About half way to the destination; a rise in elevation over a city area created what seemed to be a 'wall' of clouds. Descending was required to stay under this layer; but the layer became even lower; requiring descending even further.By this time the destination airport was only a few miles further; and attempting to turn around might have been even more dangerous because concentrating on the turn would have taken attention away from watching for obstacles (some of which were passed); so the flight was continued to the destination airport.This incident was due to 1. the unprecedented rain amounts in the region in late December 2. the urgency of moving the airplane away from a rapidly developing flood3. relying too much on the precise accuracy of the reports of weather4. not allowing a wider margin of safety with the weather 5. relying on GPS to keep track of position.Note: Without moving-map GPS; this flight would not have even been considered.




Synopsis: C182 pilot reported planning and executing a short VFR flight to avoid predicted flooding at his home airport in less than VFR conditions and at very low altitude.
Date: 201707
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: IXD.Airport, KS
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Learjet 55
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class E MCI
ATC / advisory: Tower IXD
Second aircraft: Sail Plane
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict Airborne Conflict
Detector: Automation Aircraft RA; Automation Aircraft TA
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Leaving IXD and following departure instructions; we received a TA/RA. 1 mile or so from our nose was a glider at what looked to be our altitude.  RA said stop climb; so I did.  I turned at a 45 degree [bank] away from the glider and started visually clearing in the direction of my turn when I spotted a second glider just slightly below our altitude and at about 2 o'clock so I leveled my wings. At about that time we received a notice that there were no more conflicts.  We then contacted ATC with the details and resumed following departure instructions.




Synopsis: Learjet 55 First Officer reported airborne conflicts with two gliders during departure from IXD.