elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201209
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Citationjet (C525/C526) - CJ I / II / III / IV
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Private; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Automation Aircraft RA
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: We were given a crossing altitude of at or above 3;000 FT over the airport to join downwind for [the] runway...given this; we crossed at approximately 3;080 FT and immediately turned and began a normal profile descent as we were in the pattern and on downwind. We received at least one traffic alert and immediately saw a training aircraft below us. We advised Tower they had just put us on top of another aircraft and we stopped our profile descent and sped up to get ahead of the slower aircraft. The Tower advised there was 500 FT separation and it should be fine; however; he immediately advised the other aircraft to stop their approach and made them turn. There was apparently some serious stress from this Controller as they immediately changed controllers. We finished our approach without incident and landed safely. I asked Ground for the Tower's number and spoke to the manager. I advised him that his Controller had placed us in the pattern on approach right on top of another aircraft needlessly. We spoke about 30 minutes but I never felt he really understood the whole matter and I strongly felt [traffic] could have easily been separated with better planning. This is how accidents happen as better separation with a bunch of student pilots at this airport would make the pattern a much safer environment.




Synopsis: C-525 Captain reported NMAC that he felt could have been avoided with better ATC technique.
Date: 201308
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Thunderstorm; Turbulence; Icing
Light: Night
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 190/195 ER/LR
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: Pneumatic Ducting
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Procedure; Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Aircraft was dispatched with Bleed System 1 on MEL. We were in icing conditions in cruise flight at FL260 indicating 270 KTS. We were working our way around thunderstorms and had the seatbelt sign on and the flight attendants had been instructed to remain seated due to turbulence. We got an EICAS message indicating a Bleed 2 Leak. As the aircraft could no longer maintain pressurization we immediately descended to 10;000 FT. We completed the QRH procedure. The cabin altitude climbed no higher than approximately 7;700 FT. We used the APU to maintain cabin pressurization and continued on to destination. One bleed system on MEL and second bleed system developed a leak.




Synopsis: EMB190 Captain reports being dispatched with Bleed System 1 on MEL then developing a Bleed System 2 leak. Flight descends to 10;000 FT and uses APU bleed air to continue to destination.
Date: 201205
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: PHX.Airport, AZ
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Haze / Smoke; 6
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: A319
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B PHX
ATC / advisory: TRACON P50
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict NMAC; Inflight Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure; Environment - Non Weather Related; Airspace Structure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Flying the Jacobs 2 arrival into Phoenix Gateway; Phoenix Approach assigned us SWIRL Intersection at 11;000 FT and 250 KT. We were in managed descent on profile passing thru about 12;500 FT and received a TA; within a few seconds a C-130 appeared out of the haze coming towards us from our 10 to 11 o'clock. After just a couple seconds of analyzing the closure rate and position it became frighteningly clear that evasive action was required immediately. I disconnected the autopilot; arrested our descent and started to climb. The C-130 passed directly below us; approximately 400-500 FT. We then rejoined our vertical path; made the crossing restriction and called ATC. ATC said they had seen the primary target but 'didn't report it because all VFR traffic is supposed to be below 3;500 FT in that area'.Smoke from wildfires reducing visibility on a VFR day; VFR traffic flying thru an IFR arrival with no Mode C reporting and no report from ATC of primary radar target. Suggestions: Better ATC handling while on IFR flight plan and Mode C requirement for aircraft flying around IFR routes.




Synopsis: A319 First Officer reported an NMAC with a C130 in the vicinity of IWA.
Date: 202111
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZZ.Airport, FO
Aircraft: A320
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Air Conditioning and Pressurization Pack
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Physiological - Other
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Attendant; Person Flight Crew
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate; Pre-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Shortly after the First Officer and I boarded the aircraft in ZZZZ the inflight crew said they smelled the dirty socks smell coming out of the air conditioning system.  I agreed with their assessment and we coordinated contract maintenance via phone with Maintenance Control.  After lengthy troubleshooting (including low power engine run) the fumes were isolated to Pack #2.  There was also a bit of residual fumes using Pack #1 on APU bleed air (however no fumes were noted using Pack #1 on engine bleed air).  Maintenance eventually decided to defer Pack #2 and dispatch our flight.  Oil servicing of the APU system was also checked; however no issues were noted.  The #2 Inflight crewmember reported to me that she had a headache that she determined was caused by the fumes.  We eventually departed 5 hours late for the flight to ZZZ1.




Synopsis: A320 Captain reported a fumes event during pre-flight. After a lengthy maintenance delay; Pack #2 was deferred and the flight departure.
Date: 201705
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: CLT.Airport, NC
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground CLT
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Airport
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: The South taxi lines in CLT are barely discernible especially between taxiway F and B. It was dusk when I was taxiing in and I assure you if it was night or wet there is no way to see these lines.This needs to be addressed. The taxi lines need new paint. Paint the taxi lines and address them on a recurring basis.

Callback: The reporter clarified that the taxi lines he was referring to are the ramp taxi lines west and south of the hard stands between spots 9 and 13S.



Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported the ramp taxi lines at CLT between spots 9 and 13S are difficult to see.
Date: 202108
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: BUR.Airport, CA
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground BUR
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Confusion
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Contributing factors: Airport
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: Gate changed to B1. Taxi lane paint stops before B1 and available concrete is dangerously close to aircraft parked on B2 - there is virtually no guidance from abeam B3 to the last gate; B1. Likelihood of contacting another aircraft is compounded at night. Inadequate airport taxi markings to assure separation from aircraft parked at the gate. Paint (continue) the taxi line. Or; provide tow-in; or require marshals from point of taxi line ending.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported inadequate taxi markings at BUR airport.
Date: 202101
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: B737 Next Generation Undifferentiated
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Pre-flight; Taxi
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: During pushback; the tug driver did not use proper terminology. I understand that the contract ramp personnel work many different airlines; but they should have a working knowledge on the aircraft that they are pushing back; as well as some type of standard phraseology and verbiage.Upon completion of the pushback; the tug driver asked me to set the parking brake; which I did; and using proper terminology; I told him 'Brakes Set; Pressure Normal.' A few minutes later; he said to me; 'Have a good flight.' I asked him if the tow bar was disconnected and if the bypass pin had been removed; and he said 'Not yet; I'll tell you when they are.' A few minutes later; he said again; 'Have a good flight' and he disconnected the headset before I could ask him again if the tow bar had been disconnected and if the bypass pin had been removed. I rang the Ground Call button; and I was trying to use hand signals to have the wing walker inform the tug driver that I needed to talk to him on the headset. During this time; I did see the tug backing away from the aircraft; with the tow bar; and a ramp person walking away with the bypass pin in her hand. It appeared that the ramp personnel were finally starting to understand that I was trying to get someone back on the headset; when I gave them a thumbs up signal. The ramp person gave me the thumbs up signal; and they knew we were all set to go. I received the proper Salute; started engines and we taxied away.The tug driver never told me that the tow bar had been disconnected and that the bypass pin had been removed. The tug driver needs to have a working knowledge of the proper terminology to inform the Captain that the towbar has been disconnected and that the bypass pin has been removed; and to wait for the Captain to tell him that it is OK to disconnect the headset; not to just disconnect the headset on his own.Communication is paramount to prevent an accident; and in my opinion; this tug driver did not understand nor use proper verbiage/procedure during the pushback.




Synopsis: B737 NG Captain reported miscommunication issues with ramp personnel regarding tow bar disconnect during pushback.
Date: 201211
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: A321
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb; Cruise; Descent
Airspace: Class A ZZZ; Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Physiological - Other; Training / Qualification; Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; 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 Diverted; Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Uneventful takeoff in clear conditions.  During climb; a Flight Attendant called flight deck to describe foul smelling odors in the cabin.  Although there was a brief smell of odors on the flight deck during the initial climb; they were gone just as quickly; not to return for the rest of the flight.  Stopping the climb at FL310; we consulted the QRH and called Dispatch.  In a attempt to clear the cabin; we secured the #2 pack.  Initial cabin reports were that the situation improved so we continued toward our filed destination.  After a few moments the fumes resumed and conferring with Dispatch; we changed our destination to an enroute airport.  Again; consulting with Maintenance Control; we descended to 10;000 feet; secured the #1 pack and opened the ram air valve in order to further clear the cabin with ambient air.  Attendants advised that fumes were lingering and passengers were complaining so we diverted to a nearby airport and landed without incident.  The four flight attendants sought medical follow up from the urgent care clinic in the divert terminal; one flight attendant split off the trip; returning to her home base complaining of 'symptoms' and all others continued with the trip.  To my knowledge; no passengers sought or asked for medical treatment.




Synopsis: An A321 Flight Attendant crew reported a foul smelling odor and; after consulting with Maintenance; the #2 pack was secured. Then the flight descended to 10;000 feet and with both Packs OFF finally diverted to a nearby airport; where the flight attendants sought medical treatment.
Date: 202111
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: A319
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked; Taxi
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Ground ZZZ
Aircraft component: APU
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Troubleshooting; Confusion
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew; Person Ground Personnel
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Evacuated; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: L1 door closed. Jetway removed. Cargo doors open. APU on. Large amount of smoke blowing from right side of aircraft. Cargo Smoke ECAM warning. Actions started. Ground crew chief appeared in front of aircraft giving hand signal to shutdown APU. APU auto shutdown. Aircraft dark. Confirmation from crew chief no active fire. Tower closed. ARFF (Airport Rescue and Firefighting) summoned via crew chief radio. Jetway brought to plane. Rapid deplaning of passengers.The startle factor to go from routine to not routine in less than a minute.No prevention would stop a repeat of this event. The positive outcome is directly attributable to the training that we receive. When the smoke appeared; we used a ' global assessment' to determine the aircraft's status. Using the resource of the crew chief we elected to bring jet way to aircraft to facilitate passenger deplaning and provide lighting.


Second narrative: Jet bridge removed; waiting on cargo doors to close when large plum of thick white/grey smoke came over the top of the airplane (winds were blowing strong from tail. Ground personnel came running from right side of airplane and gave the shutdown APU signal. Concurrently we received and Aft Cargo Bay Smoke ECAM message and began executing the procedures. The APU auto shutdown and the plane went dark. Ground personnel pulled the jet bridge over and we deplaned and called Maintenance. Crash/Fire was dispatched.APU tailpipe fire.


Synopsis: A319 flight crew reported a Cargo Smoke ECAM message and began checklist operations. Ground personnel signaled to shut down APU and APU auto shutdown. Passengers were removed from aircraft.
Date: 202106
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Aircraft: B737-800
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Second aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Approach; Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict NMAC
Detector: Automation Aircraft RA; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Responded to an RA on TCAS at 4;600 MSL. Advised ATC; ZZZ Approach Control. No response; 3 times we told Approach responding to RA. No response. Executed GA climbed out on LOC to 6;000 feet then they gave us Fly LOC to 6;000 feet. They did not respond to our 'Responding to RA' calls. I (Pilot Flying) was not actively monitoring guard 121.5; by my mistake I did not have it selected. Our radios did appear there was some static; but not a factor. We heard all other aircraft; I'm guessing ATC was shift change? Or ATC was saturated. ZZZ is a saturated airport. They normally stagger [Runway] XXR aircraft on approach with those on [Runway] XXC. Our RA was virtually next to us and within 400 feet of our altitude.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported receiving a TCAS RA and having difficulty notifying ATC of the resulting clearance deviation. Crew executed a missed approach.
Date: 201310
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: LAS.Airport, NV
Aircraft: B757 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class B LAS
ATC / advisory: TRACON L30
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Procedure; Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors; Airport
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: About 15 miles out we were cleared for a visual approach into LAS. We came from the northeast sector. I initiated a slow descent in a modified base leg. A few seconds later we inadvertently incurred into the terrain clearance floor triggering the EGPWS; the RA read 2;500 FT and we heard 'too low; terrain' once. I stopped the descent and climbed slightly. There is a 3;993 MSL hill [in that area]. I was on weather display and the First Officer on terrain. We passed the peak and continued the descent for an uneventful landing on 19L.I'd like to suggest that we keep the EGPWS check for departure and landing on the checklist.


Second narrative: I was the pilot not flying arriving LAS on a moonless night via the Tyson Arrival; Peach Springs transition. Around TYSSN Approach Control began vectoring us for Runway 19L. The vectors took us north and east of the field. We were stepped down to 6;000 FT and on a vector that had us on a left dogleg to final approximately 15 to 17 miles from the airport. The Controller pointed out some traffic to us. I reported the traffic in sight; and the Controller cleared us for a visual approach to Runway 19L. I was in the terrain mode on the EGPWS system. All terrain between us and the field was displayed in green. Looking back at this event I see how our revised training; which includes completely removing the EGPWS verbiage from the Approach and Descent Checklist; could possibly be setting us up for a bad situation in regard to terrain awareness. I'm concerned that this sort of culture could be hazardous.


Synopsis: A B757 flight crew descending at dusk for a visual approach to Runway 19L at LAS responded to an EGPWS terrain warning.
Date: 201710
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: BPK.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Light Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach; Landing
Airspace: Class E BPK
ATC / advisory: Center ZME
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Ground Incursion Runway; Inflight Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Airport; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We were cleared to cross COYAB at 3100 MSL and cleared for the ILS 5 approach into KBPK. Prior to reaching COYAB; PIC noted that Flippin airport [KFLP] can be mistaken for KBPK. After crossing COYAB; descended to 2400 for GOFSH. Passing 2400 PIC noted the airport 12 o clock and said we appeared high. PIC began descent and ultimately landed at Flippin airport [Marion County Regional Airport] which is 5 miles south of destination airport. PIC also noted on MFD that KBPK indeed looked farther ahead; but continued approach.On a number of occasions PIC has overflown Flippin and noted that it was on the localizer to KBPK. This was a case of loss of situational awareness.


Second narrative: ILS approach for rwy 5; BPK was briefed and reference to Marion County airport noted. ATC advised to cross IAF at 3100 feet; the chart minimum for the ILS 5 BPK. After IAF the charted mins are 2400 feet; the PIC executed a turn and began a descent to those mins and noted; 'there's the airport....; we're high'! The First Officer agreed and a descent was begun. At 300 feet AGL 'glideslope; glideslope; was heard but disregarded by both pilots. At 200 feet AGL noted; 'it doesn't look like BPK' but continued the approach to make an uneventful landing at the wrong airport (Marion County). In hindsight; the PIC had been into BPK on numerous occasions but always IMC.


Synopsis: Light transport flight crew reported landing at the wrong airport.