elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 202107
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: PA-24 Comanche
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON NCT
Aircraft component: Communication Systems
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was on an IFR flight plan from ZZZ1 to ZZZ2 after having transitioned from [Victor airway] to direct VOR. As I did not hear any hand off from ZZZ Approach to the next sector; I attempted to communicate with the last assigned frequency at ZZZ; but I was unsuccessful as I was most likely out of range. I then called Center on and was advised that they we're looking for me and to immediately climb from 7000 to 8000 ft which I complied with. While on that frequency I was advised to call ATC when I landed which I did. I was informed that I had flown for a period of time at 7000 ft. While the minimum vectoring altitude was 7;200 ft; but had not yet arrived at the point where it was 8;000 ft. During the period of deviation where I was 200 ft. Below the MVA I had visual contact with the terrain below as conditions were VMC with clear weather the entire time. I also advised ATC of that fact after they ordered me to climb to 8;000 ft. I believe that it would have been helpful and possibly avoided the situation had I attempted to check in with ATC sooner after not hearing a hand-off.




Synopsis: PA-24 Pilot reported being out of radio contact with ATC while on an IFR flight plan due to distractions.
Date: 201702
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZFW.ARTCC, TX
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Medium Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Ferry / Re-Positioning
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class A ZFW
ATC / advisory: Center ZFW
Reporter organization: Fractional
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Communication Breakdown; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Equipment / Tooling; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Equipment / Tooling

Narrative: Our arrival into DAL was to Descend Via the JFRYE3; NUKLZ transition. At GREGS; an 89 degree left turn is required; as well as a crossing at 10;000' and 250kts. The arrival was correctly loaded from the FMS and the aircraft was on autopilot throughout the incident.The leading turn past GREGS was unusually wide; causing ATC to query us about why we were turning so far east of GREGS; and he subsequently as(as)signed a southerly heading to bring us out of unprotected airspace northeast of GREGS. The remainder of the flight was uneventful. While taxiing in; we were asked to phone Center to discuss the event.




Synopsis: C680 Pilot reported having issues with the FMS while flying a STAR requiring a large turn and altitude restriction.
Date: 201304
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: MD-11
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Pneumatic System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Confusion; Human-Machine Interface; Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors; Manuals
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: On departure we received a level one alert (Ice Det Single) followed quickly by another level one alert (Air System 1 off). The First Officer flew the jet while I worked radios and checklists. After reading the level one info; I didn't feel we had a manifold failure - just an anti ice issue and attempted to repressurize the system by introducing air from system 2. I then received a level 3 (manifold fail) warning. We complied with the appropriate emergency checklists and returned to [our departure airport]. The warning only lasted a few seconds as I cut off the air when the warning came on. Maintenance believes the manifold came apart during takeoff. The First Officer believes he heard a noise on takeoff roll. The level one warnings were inhibited until 400 FT. My action of trying to get the number 1 system back didn't cause the manifold failure; it only brought it to our attention.I think the reading of the level one alert could be more directive. It states not to repressurize the system if the manifold has failed. I didn't believe we had a manifold fail. It should simply state 'don't repressurize'.




Synopsis: Following an analysis of ice control and pneumatic manifold anomalies the flight crew of an MD-11 returned to their departure airport for maintenance.
Date: 201405
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ASN.Tower, AL
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Sundowner 23
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower ASN
Second aircraft: Beechcraft King Air Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Confusion; Distraction; Situational Awareness; Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Airport; Environment - Non Weather Related; Procedure
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: Tower had asked my enroute heading which I responded 359 I was given clearance to depart on Runway 22 and right turn onto heading approved. A Lear had taken off in front of me and there was a King Air waiting behind me. When I took the runway I was surprised the Tower had cleared me for a right turn onto heading; I had anticipated a climbing left turn back over the center of the airport and departing the area in a more traditional manner due the fact that the Talladega Super Speedway is right off the end of the runway to the right.As I rotated off Runway 22 I realized I was going to have to climb at Vx [best angle of climb airspeed] to gain enough altitude to safely make my right turn without going over the Speedway filled with spectators. At approximately 400 AGL I started my right hand turn and safely completed the turn at approximately 500 AGL at which time the Tower called out helicopter traffic at my one o'clock. I responded that I had the traffic insight and it would be no factor. However I did pass by the traffic closer than I would have liked; approximately 300 feet and at the same altitude.I realized after I was clear of the event and well on my destination that I had allowed the presence of a faster plane behind me to affect my decision. I now know that I should have climbed out at Vy [best rate of climb airspeed] as normal; stayed on runway heading until clear of the Talladega Super Speedway to the west then made a normal right hand turn to heading. Neither the Tower nor the King Air had said anything about expediting my departure. This was simply pressure I had put on myself and cause me to make a poor decision and could have had devastating results.In the future I know I have to fly to my and my plane's abilities and not allow other situations affect my decisions.




Synopsis: A pilot of a BE-23; departing Runway 22 at ASN (utilizing a temporary control tower facility provided during a major car race at a track immediately adjacent to the airport) was placed in a conundrum when the tower cleared him via a right turn on course to the north which would have placed him over the crowded race track and thousands of spectators.  A modest conflict with a helicopter in the vicinity resulted.
Date: 201811
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZFW.ARTCC, TX
Weather elements / visibility: Thunderstorm
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZFW
ATC / advisory: Center ZFW
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Traffic Management
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Training / Qualification; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance
Contributing factors: Procedure; Airspace Structure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: A line of weather extending from the Gulf of Mexico to Kentucky. It was a busy session due to aircraft filing from ZJX/ZMA/ZDC to DFW through ZFW. A TMI (Traffic Management Initiative) was in place for DFW arrivals. These aircraft typically file through ZFW. Additional traffic for IAH filed via [route]. ZHU requested 20 MIT (Miles in Trail) via [route]; which ZFW passed back to ZME. ZME requested to offload aircraft from [route] because of volume and TMU (Traffic Management Unit) stated that we could not accept offloads because we were also providing 20 MIT to IAH. ZME offloaded 7 aircraft anyways even though ZFW stated that aircraft need to remain on route. ZFW TMU had a TMI asking for 20 MIT to IAH. ZME did not provide the 20 MIT. ZFW stated that the ZME sector said that they were unaware of the MIT to IAH. ZME also routed IAH traffic through ZFW with [fix] still in the flight plan. ZFW was busy with IAH and DFW landing traffic and were caught off guard with the additional aircraft. The ZME OM (Operations Manager) called and apologized and stated that there was training on ZME and that it was a poor team decision. I would recommend a SSR (System Service Review) with a follow up of lessons learned briefed to the workforce.




Synopsis: ZFW controller reported ZME failed to comply with traffic management initiative and rerouted aircraft without updating routings.
Date: 201404
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZAU.ARTCC, IL
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Fighter
Operator: Military
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZAU
ATC / advisory: Center ZAU
Second aircraft: Small Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turboprop Eng
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Fatigue
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Airspace Violation All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Separated Traffic
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: It's been 4 days since an RDO; I worked; [then took] sick leave [the following two days]; back at it today. As I was relieving the previous Controller at Kokomo (OKK) I noticed the conflict alert activating. The MOA was in use; three military aircraft were leaving. Aircraft X remained; one was flashing conflict alert with the overflight; Aircraft Y and the Mode-C for Aircraft X showed FL184. The previous Controller broadcast on tactical for Aircraft X flight to check altitude; then issued traffic for the overflight. As I assumed the position; Aircraft X again showed 300 FT high; I broadcast on tactical and guard; no response; and issued traffic to Aircraft Y. Aircraft Y did not report Aircraft X in sight. Aircraft X later showed 300 FT high; I broadcast on guard and tactical; no response; but each time Aircraft X descended back into the MOA (up to but not including FL180). Later I was descending two MDW arrivals; immediately east of the military airspace. The first; a prop; was descending through 14;000 for 11;000 and the second was a Commercial aircraft at 17;000. Aircraft X then requested an IFR clearance after he had departed the airspace; without prior communication. I told him an IFR clearance was unavailable due to traffic at 17;000 and FL190; no altimeters for FL180. I issued the traffic to the Commercial aircraft. Aircraft X repeated his request for an IFR clearance; I reiterated none was available; and then transferred communication to OLK.It seems Aircraft X; was unfamiliar with Hilltop Procedures; which require them to monitor our tactical frequency in event of a spill out. Aircraft X's Mode-C showed him high 3 times; we never received a response any instance we tried to descend him back into the MOA. All participants in Hilltop must monitor our tactical. Aircraft X did not respond any instance where I transmitted on 243.0. We need better compliance from the participants.




Synopsis: Enroute Controller reports military aircraft in MOA spilling out and causing issues with overflight traffic.
Date: 201707
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Cessna Twin Piston Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Descent
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Engine
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Upon climbing out I noticed a slightly lower than normal manifold pressure on the left engine (31' vs 32' normally expected). Condition persisted through the cruise portion of flight though no other abnormal indications were observed. Upon descent from 6;000 to 4;000 feet; the indicator for 'Left Alternator OFF' illuminated. I ran the checklist; confirmed on the ammeter that the L alternator was off line; and the R was picking up the load as designed. On confirming that no circuit breakers had tripped; I attempted to recycle alternator which was unsuccessful.[Later in the flight]; I glanced out my side window at the left engine and noticed a trail of smoke emanating from below the left engine nacelle. I rechecked all my engine instruments and found nothing out of the normal range. This plane also has fire annunciating system with detection loops in each engine; and there also was no annunciation of a fire condition. I decided to divert at this point and [contacted] Approach informing them I had smoke coming from my left engine. They said [a suitable airport] was about 10 miles behind me and I said I would divert to there. Controller cleared me for the visual. Upon my turn back towards [the divert airport]; I noted that I was too high to perform a stabilized descent and requested a left 360 to lose some altitude. I was cleared to do this. Half way through my left 360; I noted the left oil pressure began dropping abnormally low and advised ATC that my left engine may be failing. I was re-cleared for the visual and subsequently landed without incident. ARFF followed me to the ramp and once the engine was shut down; the smoke dissipated. There was no fire. Upon exiting the plane and conducting an inspection of the left engine area; I determined the smoke must have been emanating from the exhaust pipe.




Synopsis: Twin Cessna pilot reported diverting to a nearby alternate after experiencing left engine abnormalities.
Date: 201508
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: EWR.Airport, NJ
Flight conditions: IMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 145 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class B EWR
ATC / advisory: TRACON N90
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude
Detector: Automation Aircraft RA; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Procedure
Primary problem: Airspace Structure

Narrative: While climbing out of EWR; we were IMC and assigned direct SBJ and 11000 ft; autopilot on in NAV and CLB. While passing through 6500 ft 5 miles east of SBJ; ATC calls and tells us to stop climb at 7000 for traffic (climb rate was ~2000fpm). While I; the flying pilot; was twisting in the altitude; TCAS gives a 'traffic' alert. As the aircraft is leveling at 7000 ft; not 3 seconds later; TCAS instructs us to descend. Since the aircraft was still leveling (6900 ft); I put both hands on the yoke; pressed the quick disconnect; and nosed down until the VSI was in the green arc (around -2000 fpm); and then retarded the thrust levers to an intermediate position as to not exceed 250 kts). The CA (PM) then called ATC informing them that we were in a RA descent. Once in the descent; we exited IMC and the target was visible at our 11:30-11:45 position. It was close enough to identify it as a brown or maroon single engine low wing (possibly a malibu; TBM; or similar). It directly overflew us by ~500 ft; with no lateral distance. At the time it crossed overhead we were around 6500 ft; and the descent was leveled around 6200 ft before returning to the newly assigned 7000 ft. Once the threat was gone; ATC assigned us 11000 ft once again; and no further communications or actions related to the event were taken.The aircraft automation was required to be overridden to stop a +2000fpm climb and transition it into a -2000fpm descent. Being in IMC; the TCAS alert to descend was our only guidance to evade an aircraft on a direct collision course until we were already established in the descent; at which point we exited IMC and were able to use visual references as well. I do not recall seeing a target on the TCAS screen until a second or two before the traffic alert. Continue to be vigilant of VFR traffic; the TCAS display; and follow TCAS RA directives per FOM when presented.




Synopsis: After being cleared to 11000 feet; an EMB145 First Officer is instructed to level at 7;000 feet for traffic passing 6500 feet. As the aircraft leveled at 7;000 feet on autopilot the TCAS called for a descent. The autopilot was disengaged and a descent initiated. The intruder was sighted and passed 500 feet overhead as the reporter's aircraft descended through 6;500 feet.
Date: 201202
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Snow; 2
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Local
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Weather; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was the relieving Controller on the local position. The field had just gone IFR and it was snowing. We had 2 miles ground visibility and it was decreasing. A C172 called approximately 9 miles northeast of the airport requesting to land. I told the aircraft to enter the left downwind to Runway 23 and report the mid field right downwind. I waited a minute and called the aircraft back to tell him that the field was IFR and to say intentions. He requested a Visual Approach; then corrected his request to a Contact Approach. I then asked the pilot if he was IFR rated; his response was yes. I was trying to get N90 on the line and no one was responding to me. I was discussing with colleagues whether or not I could clear the C172 for a Contact Approach or if he needed to be on an IFR flight plan and communicating with an Approach Controller. And I was trying to coordinate with N90 EWR sector; to no avail. My intention was to coordinate with N90 to have the aircraft contact them and be sequenced to the airport behind additional jet traffic. Unfortunately; I could not get N90 on the line. By the time N90 did respond the C172 was on the ground. I did not have the aircraft in sight and did not see him until he was adjacent to Taxiway F; at which time I cleared the C172 to land on Runway 23. I believe it happened for many reasons. Miscommunication and inexperience on my end and the pilot's played key roles in this event. The pilot had the current ATIS code; which described the field conditions as being IFR. The pilot should have known what that meant and what his responsibilities were. Also; the pilot; in my opinion was afraid of icing conditions developing on the aircraft was landing here no matter what. Having recently been certified; I have not been exposed to all Air Traffic situations and have never experienced a VFR aircraft in weather difficulty or a Contact Approach. Also; I was distracted because I couldn't get N90 on the line after several attempts. Recommendation; pilot awareness and knowledge on what their responsibilities are; consistent and recurrent training for Air Traffic Controllers; especially on situations that aren't frequently experienced.




Synopsis: Local Controller described a questionable 'Contact Approach' clearance issued when requested by the pilot and the weather conditions deteriorate to IFR.