elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201306
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ADS.Airport, TX
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Bonanza 33
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B DFW
ATC / advisory: TRACON D10
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was arriving to ADS from the northeast VFR under flight following and a discreet squawk. I received a DFW Class B clearance several miles out before receiving vectors due to congested traffic. After the first vector from Approach Control for what would be an extended 'downwind' for ADS; the Controller issued the following statement: 'Attention all aircraft that are going into Addison; you can just assume at this point that you are cleared into Bravo Airspace.' While I had already received a Bravo clearance; I found it unusual that a Controller would issue a broad clearance not specific to a tail number. Shortly thereafter; and while vectoring me; the Controller issued me a traffic alert for an aircraft at my 11:00 position; 2 miles and closing at my same altitude. He included an instruction for an immediate right turn to 220. It wasn't until I was established in my turn that I made visual contact with the traffic. I don't feel like there was an imminent collision potential; but given the Controller's workload and the 'blanket' Bravo clearance to other traffic; I felt it necessary to report simply for the sake of safety.




Synopsis: General Aviation aircraft inbound to ADS reported confusion with the 'blanket Class B Clearance' issued by ATC to all aircraft inbound to ADS.
Date: 201602
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: A319
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Anomaly: Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; Flight Crew Diverted
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: After departure; we had begun service when a passenger at approximately row 16 screamed. B Flight Attendant (FA) went aft. I looked back and saw smoke so I parked the cart in the First Class galley and obtained a halon fire extinguisher; asking the A FA to get the Protective Breathing Equipment (PBE). After donning the PBE; I went to the smoky area and began to search for the source of the smoke. The passengers from the three most affected rows were coughing and had gone to the back galley. B FA was passing out wet towels. Not finding anything obvious I got down on my hands and knees and looked at the floor. Not finding anything; I sprayed the smokiest row with the fire extinguisher with the halon and the smoke seemed to dissipate. I then went forward and told the A that there was no obvious source and the floor was not hot. I then returned aft and continued to monitor for fire. The pilots dropped the 02 masks due to the fact that the smoke was causing coughing and burned when it was breathed.Eventually the pilots called and said that the source of the fire was hydraulic fluid and that we were diverting to [a nearby alternate]. B FA got the passengers back into their seats and brought the cart from First Class. I went forward; removed and stowed the PBE. A FA stowed the halon. We donned our 02 masks and strapped in. We had a normal landing and deplaning.




Synopsis: A319 Flight Attendant reported their flight diverted to an alternate after a mechanical issue caused smoke in the cabin.
Date: 202103
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Tower, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: PA-28 Cherokee/Archer/Dakota/Pillan/Warrior
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Second aircraft: Cessna Single Piston Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict NMAC; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Automation Aircraft TA; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Another aircraft was cleared through ZZZ airspace en route to ZZZ1 and was approved to do so via ZZZ Tower; which indicated that it did not have a visual on that aircraft. ZZZ does not have radar.I was cleared for takeoff on ZZZ Runway XX around the same time. Tower gave a frequency change to the other aircraft approximately one minute later and advised them of the aircraft taking off (me). The other aircraft responded that they were looking for traffic. Tower gave me a frequency change one to two minutes after that and advised me of the other aircraft.I was unable to spot the aircraft; but saw them on my traffic system and used the visual display and audio traffic alerts to avoid the other aircraft. I kept searching for the plane; climbing away from their flight path during this time; but even so; the traffic system indicated that we came within 100 vertical feet of each other.I believe that ZZZ Tower should have visually identified the transiting aircraft prior to clearing me for takeoff; or required me to identify the other aircraft prior to clearing me for takeoff. Both aircraft were in ZZZ airspace at the time of the event; and yet I am fairly certain that the controller did not have a visual on either of us (but certainly not on the other aircraft).If in this situation in the future; I will delay my takeoff until I have identified any aircraft that could become a hazard during my takeoff and climb-out. In addition; I will execute a turn away from the other aircraft; even when in controlled airspace.




Synopsis: P-28 Pilot reported an NMAC event during takeoff departure. Additionally; pilot reported concerns regarding ATC's handling of airport departure and transiting traffic.
Date: 201508
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: SKBO.Airport, FO
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 20
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Heavy Transport
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Second aircraft: UAV - Unpiloted Aerial Vehicle
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: Conflict Airborne Conflict
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We were departing SKBO [Runway] 13L. I was the FO; Pilot Monitoring. Shortly after TO; in the airport traffic area; prior to the left turn on the SID; I spotted a small fixed-wing drone. It was ahead of and below us; flying relatively fast; in our same direction. We were climbing runway heading and passed it to our right. We didnt' take evasive action. I estimate it was about 200 meters to our right; below us about 300-400 feet; at closest.I called it in to SKBO tower and they kept saying it was a helicopter that they had on radar. I kept telling them that it wasn't a helicopter; and that it was a drone/UAV/RC fixed-wing aircraft. Some other Spanish-speaking pilot on tower frequency had to explain it to them...the tower didn't give us any feedback. I got the impression they weren't at all familiar with this threat.When I saw it; it was flying away from the airport; on a course approximately between the two runways; flying about our same heading (130 degrees); at about 700 feet AGL.




Synopsis: Air carrier First Officer reports sighting a UAV or model aircraft shortly after takeoff from SKBO. The UAV was at about 700 feet AGL and below their aircraft and flying in the same direction.
Date: 202011
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: LVK.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; High Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class D LVK
ATC / advisory: Tower LVK
Second aircraft: Aerobatic
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified; Flight Crew Student
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was training in Aircraft X; doing pattern work; and while on final to [Runway] 7R; I was looking out to my left and saw an Aircraft Y starting his turn from downwind to final for 7L. We originally were offset to the right as a precaution for traffic on 7L. As I was getting closer to the runway; I looked back again and saw that the Aircraft Y overshot his base to final turn and was on path to hit us (noticed him about 200-300 feet away). I took evasive action and went full power and a sharp turn to the right to get out of his path. About 3 seconds later he intercepted our path and if not for evasive maneuver; we would've had a mid-air collision.




Synopsis: Student pilot reported an NMAC with an aerobatic aircraft in the pattern at LVK airport.
Date: 202103
Location: MQY.Airport, TN
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class E BNA
ATC / advisory: Tower MQY
Second aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Instructor; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness; Time Pressure
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors; Company Policy; Airspace Structure; Airport
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: We were flying and cleared on the IFR approach and had 3 flight school planes come within 500 feet. One of the planes pointed straight at us at our altitude within 100 feet at us. I read their tail number. We veered immediately. All three planes climbed straight up out of an adjacent airport.  I notified ATC and they said it's a beehive there right now and he can't tell what's happened there.




Synopsis: A flight instructor conducting an instrument approach to MQY airport reported flight school aircraft from an adjacent airport flew into potential conflict with their approach course. The reporter had an NMAC with one of the aircraft requiring them to take evasive action.
Date: 201811
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZFW.ARTCC, TX
Aircraft: Small Aircraft
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Descent
ATC / advisory: Center ZFW
Second aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Developmental
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness; Workload
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Airspace Violation All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Was in the process of taking over sector MLC-L; which had been combined with MLC-H and KLB-UH. Sector became too complex to work as one sector due to volume and frequency congestion. While receiving the briefing from a trainee D-side; I noticed a traffic situation which appeared to be unresolved. When I asked the trainee about the situation she said she did not know about it. It appeared an aircraft was climbing out of 2500 ft for 10000 ft with traffic at 4000 ft. I told the trainee to standby and I called the Approach Control and instructed the RZC Approach Controller to stop the aircraft at 3000 ft for traffic and called RADAR contact. After finishing the briefing the aircraft entered the sector IFR climbing to 3000 ft in an area where the minimum altitude is 3000 ft. For approximated 5 miles the aircraft entered an area where the minimum altitude is 3900 ft; before returning to an area where the minimum altitude is 3000 feet. I climbed the aircraft to 10;000 feet as soon as traffic allowed. Due to myself taking over the sector and the traffic situation developing quickly; I made an error by not checking the minimum IFR altitude in that area; which is oddly shaped. Sectors should be split at a time of less complexity to allow for a complete briefing whenever possible. I also suspect the map of MLC-L is not up to date; as the minimum IFR altitudes inside RZC Approach are different than what the controllers in RZC Approach have (EG near FSM ZFW map shows 4000 ft is unusable however RZC Approach uses 4000 ft and can verbally verify their maps allow the altitude.)




Synopsis: Fort Worth Center Controller reported an airborne conflict which was remedied; but later developed into one of the aircraft entering a Minimum IFR Altitude that was higher than the aircraft's assigned altitude.
Date: 202111
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: LVK.Tower, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Operator: Fractional
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Initial Approach
ATC / advisory: Tower LVK
Second aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 1 Eng; Retractable Gear
Reporter organization: Fractional
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was approaching LVK 10 miles from the north at approximately 3000 ft. I picked up LVK ATIS; then contacted the Tower. I was cleared to enter a right downwind for Runway 25R. I requested to cross midfield with a left break entry into the left downwind for closed traffic Runway 25L. I was cleared as requested. At approximately 1 mile I was again cleared to cross midfield as requested and land number one on Runway 25L. As I crossed over the downwind for Runway 25R I saw [another aircraft] below me by approximately 500 feet at my 3 o'clock and passing behind. I called the Tower and reported [the other aircraft] in sight. On my base to final turn the Controller asked me to make this landing a full stop and taxi back. I landed uneventfully. I contacted LVK Ground who asked me to call the Tower. I taxied to a non-movement area and made the call and explained my actions.




Synopsis: Light aircraft pilot reported an NMAC in the pattern at LVK airport following an apparent miscommunication with the Tower.
Date: 202001
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Gate Agent / CSR
Human factors: Confusion
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Hazardous Material Violation
Detector: Person Gate Agent / CSR
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Lithium Collapsible wheelchair checked in at ticket counter.  Unclear if customer bypassed [company] rep. Lithium battery not removed.No pilot notification form.Wheelchair was collapsed.Wheelchair was delivered by [a different company] to baggage make-up and accepted.Issue was identified while loading.I have worked three other unreported instances with collapsible wheelchairs at gate area and customers are advising that they were allowed on a previous trip in.  This issue continues to surface.




Synopsis: Gate agent reported a Lithium Collapsible wheelchair was checked in at the ticket counter; without the Lithium battery being removed.
Date: 202009
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Helicopter
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Ferry / Re-Positioning
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Rotorcraft
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness; Time Pressure
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Aircraft; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Our helicopter's annual expired the last day of Month. The closest maintenance facility was closed for flights due to the COVID pandemic. On [date] we requested a special flight permit (SFP) to the FAA for a ferry flight to be conducted 5 days later. This was the first time I have done this type of application. The FAA takes time to process these applications and I became anxious; thinking the owner would not like [it] if we continued to delay the helicopter's maintenance. So; I made the decision to continue the flight 5 days later; although the SFP was pending. I let a non-existent external pressure influence my decision to conduct the ferry flight. The helicopter was in perfect condition; but I realized that it was a mistake and should have waited for the FAA SFP response to conduct the flight. I believe more training on CRM and aeronautical decision making and FAR knowledge will help me deter these types of situations in the future.




Synopsis: Pilot reported being under pressure and flew a ferry flight without proper documentation.
Date: 201303
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: A80.TRACON, GA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 5
Aircraft: SR22
Operator: Fractional
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Landing; Taxi
ATC / advisory: TRACON A80
Reporter organization: Fractional
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was returning late to my home base; PDK. I had been on an IFR flight plan talking with ATL Approach. I had reported the airport in sight. I was told to expect a visual to 21L and contact the Tower. Several minutes before this communication I had asked ATC if the PDK Tower was closed. I was uncertain because my latest information showed a 10pm local time closing. I was advised the Tower was open. I changed to Tower 120.9 [also the CTAF] and advised inbound; landing 21L; full stop. No response. Advised again [about 5 miles.] No response. Advised turning final. No response. Then heard an aircraft getting a clearance and I Landed. Departed the runway at the first available taxiway. Stopped at 21R. Advised crossing 21R a taxiway. Lady came on and told me to go to Unicom frequency and get off CTAF. She then cleared an air carrier for take off 3R. This was the other end of the runway I had landed on. This was not comforting. I changed to Unicom 122.9 and advised taxi. I was startled and confused by her directive. It appeared that she was ATL Clearance. My understanding was that I should use CTAF 120.9 for all communications. Given sequester related Tower closings; at busy airports like PDK; communications needs to be clear. I pulled my textbooks. It appears to me that she was wrong. It appears to me that all communications; including taxi information; should be on CTAF. This appears to me to be a potential conflict post sequestration at busy GA airports between ATC and pilots. ATC Approach told me to use 120.9. Neither the air carrier pilot nor the 'clearance' lady made any attempts to communicate with me until after I landed. This could have been a mess; given the air carrier plane was taking off in the opposite direction of my landing. Not good.




Synopsis: General aviation aircraft landing PDK was uncertain if the Tower was open or closed; and confused with the ATC provided information.