elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201411
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZAU.ARTCC, IL
Light: Night
Aircraft: No Aircraft
Airspace: Class A ZAU
ATC / advisory: Center ZAU
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Instructor; Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Confusion; Workload; Troubleshooting; Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown; Distraction
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Several TFRs were going active and there was no preparation at the sector for this. All of this happened while I was conducting OJT and the traffic volume and patterns were already being affected.  When I assumed control of the sector some TFRs were displayed at the sector even though they were not active yet.  I assume those were placed there by TMU (definitely not drawn on by the previous controller).  Five minutes later those depicted TFRs vanished for unknown reasons.  The CIC announced TFR areas A and B were now active.  I had no idea what areas A or B were.  I was then given a sheet of paper listing 4 TFR areas and there lat/longs.  While instructing my developmental on how to use the draw tool to display circular areas we discovered the lat/longs provided on the sheet of paper were not the correct format that ERAM uses for its draw tool.  When we got our first circular TFR depicted on our display we then looked to our not-so-informative sheet of paper to find out the radius of the TFR only to find it not listed there.  The CIC then went to TMU and found out the proper radii for areas A and B and ~10 minutes after they went active; we had our TFR's properly displayed.  Around 15 minutes later it was announced that TFR area D was now active.  To find area D we went back to our trusty sheet of paper and entered that on our display.  Of course no radius was listed so another trip to TMU was made by the CIC.  When finally displaying area D we found it was exactly the same as area B.  Another trip to TMU was made by the CIC and we then learned that area D was not active; Area C was active and Area B was no longer active (Area D which is the same as Area B would be active at a later time).  The CIC didn't see it coming but we again needed the radius of Area C to properly display it on our monitor.  Now imagine trying to conduct OJT while all this is going on.  Imagine you are the developmental being trained while all this is going on.  Yeah.Come up with a better plan!  If you need each sector to manually draw TFR's onto their monitor then give them plenty of time to do so during less busy time and before such airspaces go active.




Synopsis: ZAU Controller describes situation where he is trying to display a TFR on the radar scope; and has to go back to the TMU multiple times to find the correct radius.
Date: 202107
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Tower, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 145 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
Second aircraft: UAV: Unpiloted Aerial Vehicle
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Distraction
Anomaly: Airspace Violation All Types; Conflict NMAC; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Unauthorized Flight Operations (UAS); Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: The flight was cleared for the ILS Runway XX in ZZZ with VMC conditions. On final approach; at approximately 4.8 DME a drone was sighted along the final approach course; approximately 200 or 300 ft. below the aircraft flight path; and slightly right of the localizer. Drone in Class B airspace without clearance. [I suggest] continued public education on the proper use of drones. Limitations on the selling of drones to qualified individuals.




Synopsis: Air carrier flight crew reported a UAS 300 ft. below on final approach.
Date: 201302
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZZ.Airport, FO
Aircraft: B767-300 and 300 ER
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Workload; Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown
Second reporter function: First Officer
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Automation Aircraft Terrain Warning; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: While on approach on the [STAR descent] to Runway XX; we were given updated direct clearances to intersections and cleared for the ILS XXR. Last clearance to [an intersection] was to maintain 4;700 FT until 4 miles prior. We were at 6;000 FT at the last clearance. On descent we received a single terrain warning and corrected by disengaging the autopilot and leveling at 4;700 FT. We were in visual contact with the ridge on the left side of our path and acknowledged an inquiry from Approach Control. Cutting the corner in a descending flight path with rising terrain was determined to have triggered the terrain alert. No ATIS and a misread back altimeter setting of 1;009 MLBS; 1;019 MLBS actual put us at higher altitude.


Second narrative: Do not accept clearance with that specific parameter. Stay on STAR and decline shortcut.


Synopsis: B767-300ER flight crew received GPWS alert during approach. Captain stated change in their clearance put them in direct flight path with rising terrain.
Date: 201211
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZTL.ARTCC, GA
Aircraft: A300
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class A ZTL
ATC / advisory: Center ZTL
Second aircraft: MD-80 Series (DC-9-80) Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: While working; Hampton Sector 27 descended both aircraft into Macons Airspace. I would assume they pointed the two aircraft out to a sector in their own area; keeping track control of the two aircraft and never called and coordinated with me. The BGRED departure goes right through the path of the CLT arrivals which usually start over ATL and proceed east over GRD. A lot of time the BGRED's file for FL340 or higher and are level by the time they get to BGRED intersection. It has become more and more 'normal' for Sector 27 to descend aircraft into a stratum they do not own and not APREQ it. I was trained; 'if you don't own it you can't use it with out coordination'. I asked my co worker sitting next to me if I should make a stink and he has become so worn out by their lack of competence and professionalism his response was 'what is the point?; they'll still do it next time' as it turns out I did not have BGRED's in the way but it only takes one time when I'm busy and it has become such a habit for them they'll think about the consequences less and less that someone could have a serious deal. Time and time again they're excuse is Macon approved it; they own the stratum; and the aircraft entered my airspace level at FL330. This does not seem safe at all. Macon does not know what we have going on. If we could 'quick look' everyone just to see what they have going on; why are the areas and sectors set up the way they are? I highly recommend that the controllers in Area 4 do their jobs correctly. It isn't that hard. If it is; then ask for a D-Side. All I want is for them to do the coordination if an aircraft isn't doing what a letter says it should be doing; or if they're descending an aircraft into my stratum.




Synopsis: ZTL Controller voiced concern regarding the continued failure of Area 4 controllers to comply with established procedures.
Date: 202002
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: S56.TRACON, UT
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 100
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Gulfstream G650
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B SLC
ATC / advisory: TRACON S56
Second aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter; Inflight Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Denver and Salt Lake centers were metering into SLC. Everybody had to cross CARTR at 15;000 feet and 250 KIAS; except us. We were told to maintain 280 knots until required to slow to meet the 250 knot restriction at CARTR. Which we did. As we crossed over CARTR we encountered moderate turbulence; then the aircraft rolled to more than 30 degrees of bank; and 15 degrees of pitch down. Immediate recovery was initiated and executed with minimal loses of altitude and speed control. Unfortunately; the boss was in the head at that time.He was not happy with the aerobatics. We reported moderate turbulence to SLC approach; the airliner behind us reported that the area was smooth. That is when we figured that the encounter was aircraft wake induced; and not wind over the mountains.What I can't understand is why ATC has to run everybody from everyone over the same fix and work so hard doing it; only to separate every one out for three runways.  They make their own bottle necks; create their own problems; then try to justify it with a 'they're smarter then we are' attitude.This situation can be alleviated some what by using three fixes; one for each runway. Business aircraft will always want to land on Runway 35/17. That is where all the FBOs are located. The airlines will always want the parallels 16/32 left and right runways.Yet everybody has to fly over the same fix; then split off as ATC deems; with airplanes assigned to runways that require taxiing all over the place. IE; airliners on Runway 17; the farthest from their gates; and corporate jets landing on 16R; the farthest from the FBOs.




Synopsis: G650 Captain reported encountering wake turbulence that resulted in significant pitch and roll deviations on arrival into SLC.
Date: 202201
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Tower, US
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Local
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness; Distraction
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Ground Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence; Ground Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control
Detector: Person Flight Crew; Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: Taxi
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Weather; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: Aircraft X was taxied to the ramp off runway XXL by local control via taxiway E; H; M; to the ramp. I was working Local and obtained approval to taxi in Aircraft X from ground control in order to discuss with the pilot braking action; and other pertinent weather information for the safety of the operation. Once Aircraft X was on taxiway H approaching taxiway M; a snow plow cut off Aircraft X and began sliding and finally came to a stop to avoid the snowplow. Airport operations had a vehicle on my frequency and heard the report and stated he would take care of it. I advised the FLM of the situation and gave him the airport operators cell phone number.  Later I was told that the plow cut off Aircraft X because they monitor the ground control frequency and never knew he was coming as I kept him on tower frequency.  Seems like the blame game is being played here because airport operations snow crew lost sight of the see and avoid aircraft. Airport operations and snow crews should monitor all frequencies at all times if the option exists.




Synopsis: Tower Controller reported a commercial aircraft sliding to a stop to avoid a snowplow.
Date: 201709
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZZ.Airport, FO
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation - Speed All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: On departure from ZZZZ the controller was talking in a very low tone and his English was not too clear. He said we were number three aircraft going to the same destination; and same altitude; and climb to FL250. After he said that we continued the climb to the assigned altitude of FL250. The first officer was the pilot monitoring and is the one that checked in with ATC. Once passing 10;000 feet I elected to stay at 250 knots as we appeared to have good spacing from the airplane in front of us on the TCAS. Shortly after that he called back and was upset that we were not going 200 knots as he had assigned us. I decided to talk to him on the radio and politely told him that we did not hear that part of the clearance and what speed would he like. He said maintain 17;000 feet and you should have been doing 200 knots. I asked him again if he now wanted us at 200 knots or present speed and his reply was I told you 200 maintain 17;000 now. We NEVER read back any speed reduction the first officer just acknowledged the information about being number 3. He was talking so much about same airport; same airplane; same altitude; same type plane; etc that his speed reduction instruction was lost somewhere in the talking.




Synopsis: B737 Captain reported that there was miscommunication with foreign ATC regarding aircraft speed due to a language barrier.
Date: 202201
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: VABF.ARTCC, FO
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Haze / Smoke
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
ATC / advisory: Center VABF
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: Communication Breakdown
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Automation Aircraft Terrain Warning; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: On arrival we were assigned 3;000 feet. 4 crew members heard the same instructions. ATC delayed our turn from downwind to base to final. I configured accordingly in anticipation of a short approach. At some point; we received a terrain warning. I immediately turned right and climbed as I deemed appropriate; ATC never assigned a heading and simply advised us that we should be at 3;800 feet. We kept asking for a heading and approach clearance at that point. He seemed a bit confused and I believe he forgot about us and never monitored our position on final. We had a stable final approach and landing. I called the tower to address the approach controllers clearance and they said it was normal and it was not an issue; of course this is what's I heard; a lack of communication and a different English dialect may have been a distinct factor in this event.


Second narrative: On the Pokon 2A arrival. Assigned direct to EMROS and 3;000 [feet]. All 4 confirmed assigned 3;000 [feet]. Weather was VFR; smoke; and twilight. On extended downwind leg; terrain was approaching to east. Pilot Monitoring asked about approach clearance or turn and simultaneously we got a GPWS terrain warning ahead. Pilot Flying initiated a right turn and climb. ATC then advised a climb to 3;800 feet. We climb and asked for a heading. Finally received a heading of 310 and clearance for ILS; made a stable approach and landing. We asked ATC upon landing and they said it was a normal approach and not unusual. Language barrier was present.


Synopsis: Flight crew reported a terrain alert due to ATC communications failure; resulted in taking evasive action.
Date: 201403
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: MYF.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 7
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: EC135
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class D MYF
ATC / advisory: TRACON SCT
Aircraft component: GPS & Other Satellite Navigation
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Single Pilot; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Equipment Problem Dissipated
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Aircraft
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: During initial climbout from MYF; lost reception on a Garmin 530 GPS unit. Unit reacquired satellites in a few minutes.




Synopsis: EC135 pilot experiences loss of GPS signal during departure from MYF. Normal operation returns a few minutes later.
Date: 201501
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Turbulence
Light: Night
Aircraft: B767-200
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: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Anomaly: Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Illness / Injury; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General Physical Injury / Incapacitation
Contributing factors: Weather
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: We had departed a non-controlled airport. We had received our clearance via cell phone from ZZZ and had departed under VMC conditions prior to our clearance void time. The initial cruise altitude was FL240 and were to contact ZZZ on HF for further climb due to additional inbound aircraft. My copilot was the flying pilot and we were at initial assigned cruise altitude FL240. We were contacting ZZZ radio on HF for further climb clearance to FL380 when we encountered moderate turbulence for approximately 10 seconds. The flight conditions were smooth and showed nothing on the radar prior to and after this event. The Flight Attendants (FA) were preparing for the initial food and beverage service. Post turbulence I was informed by the 'A' FA of injuries to a flight attendant involving her ankle and 2 cuts on her face from a beverage cart. As soon as time permitted I requested the door to be blocked so I could go back and check on her myself. She seemed comfortable and had her leg up and ankle on ice.I was not aware until landing that 2 other FAs were additionally injured; one who complains of hurt back and one who complained of a knee injury.




Synopsis: B767 Captain reported encountering unforecasted and undetected moderate turbulence at FL240 that resulted in injuries to three flight attendants.