elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 202109
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ASE.TRACON, CO
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class E ASE
ATC / advisory: TRACON ASE
Second aircraft: Medium Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Automation Air Traffic Control; Automation Aircraft RA; Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Airspace Structure

Narrative: Additional documentation for Aspen's need for Class C [Airspace]. Aircraft Y was departing; a VFR (Aircraft X); not talking to ATC; flew into the departure corridor; climbing.  Aircraft Y wasn't able to turn because of the mountains; was flying through a 12;100 foot MVA (Minimum Vectoring Altitude); was given a traffic alert. The VFR (Aircraft X) was at 12;200 feet; climbing; Aircraft Y got an RA and descended from 12;100 feet back into high terrain to 11;700 feet to avoid.  Had ATC been talking to the VFR (Aircraft X); they would have been able to turn Aircraft Y away from the conflict. Aspen needs Class C Airspace to require VFR aircraft flying through arrival and departure areas are talking to ATC.




Synopsis: ASE TRACON Controller reported a Traffic Conflict in Aspen airspace and recommends a change to Class C for the airport to avoid future similar conflicts.
Date: 201705
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Weather elements / visibility: Turbulence
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Reporter qualification: Flight Attendant Current
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Illness / Injury; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: In-flight
Result: General Physical Injury / Incapacitation
Contributing factors: Procedure; Weather
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: While working the galley; the seat belt sign came on; but we continued service. Turbulence was light. We were handing out water and ice cream; and also picking up from the A zone aft. Suddenly the aircraft severely dropped. I was lifted completely off my feet and hit the ceiling in the aft galley and then was just as quickly slammed back to my feet and the floor. I kind of crumpled down. Five flight attendants were on the floor plus one passenger. Two crew grabbed jumpsuits; but there are only two jumpsuits in the back. A flight attendant who was back helping also sat on the floor in front of the 4L lavatory. Eventually it smoothed out; but I was feeling back pain. I tried to file the claim while on layover; but the phone number and all 'links' to this page would not load overseas.




Synopsis: A Flight Attendant reported that during some light turbulence the aircraft suddenly dropped injuring a Flight Attendant.
Date: 201210
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: GFK.Airport, ND
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class E GFK
ATC / advisory: Tower GFK
Second aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Departure; Approach
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Human Factors
Primary problem: Company Policy

Narrative: Cessna 172 X was issued a 080 heading and he read it back right. I watched him turn. When Cessna 172 Y reached the same point as where Cessna 172 X turned; I turned Cessna 172 Y to a 060 heading. There should have been 20 degrees of divergence between them; and Cessna 172 Y should have been north of Cessna 172 X. However; Cessna 172 X apparently wasn't on a 080 heading as what it looked like and what he read back when I looked out the window again. I'm guessing he must have been on a 060 heading. He started turning further south and then I took action to turn Cessna 172 Y to a 120 degree heading and I provided visual separation as I told Approach Control to turn Cessna 172 X out to the northeast. The pilot did not have has directional gyro set right; can't read; can't listen; or all of the above. They did get separated; but I'm tired of these student pilots with new instructors constantly doing stuff like this. They are a danger to themselves and the flying public at large. [We] should stress harder to pilots to comply with ATC as it is in their own best interests!




Synopsis: GFK Controller described a potential conflict event when a aviation training aircraft failed to comply with issued instructions.
Date: 201204
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: A319
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Turbine Engine
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; General Declared Emergency; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: With First Officer flying; shortly after takeoff we lost power on the right engine and then gained power. Engine was surging with no compressor stalls. We brought right engine to idle and declared an Emergency. We returned to a landing visually.


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


Synopsis: A319 flight crew experiences engine surging shortly after takeoff and returns to the departure airport with the engine at idle.
Date: 201306
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: FCM.Airport, MN
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class D FCM
ATC / advisory: Tower FCM
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I confused Runways 10L and 10R with Runways 28R and 28L; probably because of their close alignment with the direction from which I was approaching (I was arriving from the west; so runways 10L and 10R somehow seemed more appropriate even when told to expect 28L).  After having confused the direction of the runways; being told to make a right midfield downwind for 28R made me think I needed to fly southeast bound to essentially come from the opposite direction toward what was really 10R. At this point I should have proceeded to query the Controller but flew southeast bound instead.  After just a bit of flight to the southeast; the Controller told me to fly southeast for the downwind to 28L (I'm giving her the benefit of the doubt; but I was still thinking 10R and that she'd said 28R); confusing me further.  Eventually after flying a left downwind for 28L; I asked if she wanted me to extend my downwind; but she replied that she then wanted a left base to 28L and cleared me to land; which I did without incident.




Synopsis: C172 pilot reports confusing Runways 10L and 10R with Runways 28R and 28L; while arriving from the west.  An inappropriate ground track is flown when instructed to make a right midfield downwind for 28R.  With ATC assistance a successful landing ensues.
Date: 201903
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Amateur/Home Built/Experimental
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Test Flight / Demonstration
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Ground Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Ground Excursion Runway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Aircraft is an experimental gyroplane undergoing its initial Phase I testing. The flight entailed testing cooling duct effectiveness while in pattern. Takeoff and climb were uneventful. Upon turning on downwind leg of pattern; pilot noticed engine coolant temperatures at redline; and asked Tower for full-stop landing; which was cleared.Approach and flare were uneventful; but upon initial roll-out; aircraft veered to right; and momentarily rolled off runway; before pilot was able to correct. Pilot then re-aligned on runway; and continued to decelerate; eventually leaving runway for taxiway. Tower asked if assistance was needed; but pilot declined; and taxied to hangar once rotor was stopped.Problem was caused by pilot's inattention to roll-out due to high engine temperature concerns; and improper directional control. Corrective action will entail: 1) aircraft will be grounded to allow additional cooling modifications; and 2) manufacturer's Chief Pilot will be contacted with request for additional instruction and possible flight training for pilot.




Synopsis: Experimental aircraft pilot reported a runway excursion upon landing.
Date: 201211
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Twin Otter DHC-6
Operator: Other Skydiving
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Skydiving
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Reporter organization: Contracted Service
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Fuel Issue
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Inflight Shutdown; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Pilot took off for an 18 minute flight for skydivers with 200 LBS of fuel per side indicated (400 LBS total). At 10;000 FT; the left engine fuel flow gauge began to fluctuate which could be confirmed audibly. Pilot flying switched fuel to right fuel tank which resulted in stable fuel flow indications. At 12;000 FT both engines flamed out. Climb attitude had been maintained. Engines were secured and feathered. All jumpers exited and landed safely. Aircraft proceeded to runway and conducted an emergency spiral descent over the runway before landing safely. Pilot flying had less than 20 hours in type. At the time of the failure; fuel gauges were both indicating 100 LBS.




Synopsis: DHC6 pilot with minimal experience in type on a skydiver mission; ran the aircraft out of fuel; got the jumpers out; feathered the engines; and made a successful dead stick landing.
Date: 201605
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: PA-28R Cherokee Arrow All Series
Operator: Personal
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Reciprocating Engine Assembly
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Instructor
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Immediately after rotation and while still in ground effect engine started running rough and lost what seemed like 30 percent of power. Pilot in Command chose to reduce power all the way and safely land on the remaining runway




Synopsis: PA28 instructor pilot experienced a loss of engine power just after rotation and elected to land in the runway remaining; which is accomplished without incident.
Date: 201708
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZID.ARTCC, IN
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class A ZID
ATC / advisory: Center ZID
Second aircraft: B737 Next Generation Undifferentiated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: This event was wake turbulence related. We were given a climb to FL360 by ATC (don't recall if ZDC or ZID Center) following in trail (approximately 9 miles) of another aircraft at FL360. Our optimum altitude was FL360; assigned speed of .75 Mach for spacing and autopilot engaged. At approximately FL355 we encountered wake turbulence which rolled our aircraft left; at which point the autopilot disengaged. The aircraft rolled to approximately 35-40 degrees angle of bank; at which point I was able to manually take control and returned to straight and level flight. We did get the aural 'bank angle' call out. I continued the climb to FL360 without any further incident. We reported the wake turbulence incident to ATC.Although the spacing looked good and winds negligible; perhaps we were too close to the aircraft ahead. I'll pay more attention to the aircraft in my vicinity.


Second narrative: I called ATC (Indianapolis Center I think) and told them of the incident. The Controller told us; 'a company plane; same type is in front of you.' We understood that to mean [another] B737. It was a very controlled/smooth recovery.


Synopsis: B737 flight crew reported encountering wake turbulence in trail of another B737 at FL355 while climbing to FL360.
Date: 202103
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: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Second aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Instructor; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Flight Crew; Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Student Pilot flying. On the 45 to enter downwind on [Runway] 16; at approximately 1;100 ft. MSL (TPA 1;000 ft.); a turn in the opposite direction caused potential collision with traffic on crosswind turning to downwind.  Situation was realized simultaneously by Tower and myself (CFI) at which point I took [control of] the airplane; as I saw other planes in the base for [Runway] 16. 'Traffic to follow' was mis-identified. To avoid collision the turn was continued to the left; away from downwind; at which point Tower instructions to climb to 1;500 ft. MSL and proceed east to a known reporting point were followed.  Situation was stabilized; instructions from the Tower to re-enter the pattern for 16 were followed and successfully completed.What contributed to this situation:1) Student and CFI not adequately briefing the approach based on ATIS.  2) Not correctly identifying 'traffic to follow'.    3) Student Pilot did not realize she could ask for clarification or question my thinking.  4) I did not have the correct runway (16) approach visualized; I was distracted with coaching the Student Pilot.How to avoid in the future: Slow down the process to adequately brief the approach and ask for questions to understand that my student and I are thinking the same procedure with the given information.  Properly identifying the 'traffic to follow' and verifying with Tower.




Synopsis: C172 Instructor Pilot reported an airborne conflict occurred in the traffic pattern when a 'follow traffic' clearance resulted in mis-identifying the aircraft to follow.
Date: 201807
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-700
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Ground Conflict; Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Flight Crew; Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: After landing on RWY XXR; we were instructed to hold short RWY XXL. The First Officer went off frequency to call Company. Approaching the RWY XXL hold short line; ZZZ Tower cleared us to cross RWY XXL. I acknowledged Tower and continued across RWY XXL. Several aircraft were holding short and one was in position for takeoff.Since our aircraft was still in motion; little time was required to comply with the taxi clearance. Tower rescinded the taxi clearance and instructed us to hold short moments later. It was too late as we were already entering the runway environment. I elected to continue the taxi to expedite the only alternative to properly clearing the runway. Tower issued an abort instruction to the departing RWY XXL aircraft.Airport operations at several airports conduct very rapid serial communications; instructions and aircraft movements. Understandably; it's required for an efficient NAS environment. However; potentially significant errors can be introduced with scant time for detection and mitigation. Upon shutdown; I called the Tower Supervisor to learn what occurred. He had yet to review the tapes but indicated it was an ATC error. ZZZ Tower did a very good job in correcting a dangerous situation. I don't know what systems Tower Controllers have and use to prevent such occurrences. Within the aircraft; I will ask the First Officer to remain on Tower or Ground frequency until all runway crossings have been accomplished.


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


Synopsis: B737 flight crew reported that ATC cleared the aircraft to cross the runway while another aircraft was cleared to takeoff.
Date: 202010
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZDV.ARTCC, CO
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 1 Eng; Retractable Gear
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZDV
ATC / advisory: Center ZDV
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness; Time Pressure
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; 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; Procedure; Equipment / Tooling; Human Factors
Primary problem: Equipment / Tooling

Narrative: I took airspace from previous controller. Aircraft X wanted to stay low to limit oxygen and couldn't take longer routing to save on gas. Previous controller let Aircraft X stay at the MIA (Minimum IFR Altitude) per request. Previous controller told Aircraft X he was going to need to climb to avoid terrain; which he acknowledged. In the briefing I was told about an Aircraft X needing to climb prior to terrain. As soon as I took the airspace; I asked Aircraft X if he could take a reroute to avoid terrain. Aircraft X said Center transmissions were starting to breakup. I tried multiple times to relay to Aircraft X to get Aircraft X to either change to a frequency he could hear me on or climb to 11;000 feet. Aircraft X unfortunately was unreachable through relays or ground transmitters. The transmitters were unable to reach Aircraft X at 10;000 feet prior despite MIAs being 10;000 feet. Aircraft X eventually climbed on his own to 11;000 feet after flying through an 11;000 foot MIA for several miles. I was able to relay through another aircraft and get Aircraft X to change to a frequency I could talk to him on. Frequency coverage of one frequency at lower altitudes in this sector is poor when at MIAs. Unless more transmitter sights are put in; the coverage at low altitude will continue to be spotty. Changing aircraft's frequency at low altitudes over sooner would help due to another frequency having better coverage in some spots between sectors.




Synopsis: A ZDV Center Controller reported they lost communication and could not issue a climb clearance to an aircraft due to poor radio coverage in mountainous terrain and the aircraft flew below the Minimum IFR Altitude before climbing on its own.