elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201502
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: BUR.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 1 Eng; Retractable Gear
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class C BUR; Class E SCT
ATC / advisory: TRACON SCT
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Troubleshooting; Situational Awareness; Distraction; Confusion; Communication Breakdown; Workload
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Staffing; Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Ground advised me to contact SoCal on 135.05. After leaving SMO airspace I tuned to SoCal and I announced my call sign; altitude passing and final altitude to SoCal before entering Burbank Class C. The controller responded (clearly irritated) and said; 'Whoever is transmitting on 135.05 you're stepping over everyone; come to my frequency on 124.6.'I dialed in 124.6 and could not get a word in as the frequency was 100% busy. The controller was way too busy. Even announced; 'I can't call everyone twice....' Shows you how overworked controller was. I assumed that meant I had established communication as required by 91.130 but then when I was on 124.6 I heard controller giving a traffic warning to this twin above me and told the twin that; 'I'm not speaking to that pilot' which was referring to me.The frequency was 100% busy and by the time I was out of Burbank Class C airspace and in the zone that 125.5 looks after so I tuned to 125.5 and got a code for flight following without any further communication with the controller on 124.6.I've noticed these frequencies are very busy at times and why is the facility having one controller covering both frequencies when is clear to a lay person that the workload is too much. It's a crunch zone for SMO arrivals; BUR [and] VNY approach and departures.The last thing you want is departing SMO traffic circling around that area before Burbank Class C as they will conflict with SMO arrivals.




Synopsis: Small aircraft pilot reports frequency congestion when trying to obtain flight following with SCT while departing enroute to Burbank. Pilot offers concern as to why one Controller is responsible for two different frequencies.
Date: 201908
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Night
Aircraft: B767-300 and 300 ER
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Cargo Restraint/Tie Down
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Weight And Balance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Ground Personnel
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Company Policy
Primary problem: Company Policy

Narrative: Upon landing and deplaning in ZZZ; a ramp worker informed me that none of the lateral locks (on the sides of the cans) were in place in the forward lower cargo compartment. I climbed the loader to view myself and confirmed this to be the case. The same ramp worker stated this was the third time the same thing had happened recently on the afternoon flight to ZZZ1. This creates an obvious hazard. We noticed no noise or unusual handling characteristics in flight.




Synopsis: Captain reported that upon arriving at destination airport; Ramp Personnel advised flight crew that none of the lateral locks were installed on cargo containers in the forward cargo compartment.
Date: 201708
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: JLN.Airport, MO
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; High Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class D JLN
ATC / advisory: Tower JLN
Second aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Instructor; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; 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: While 10 nm east of Joplin was instructed to report 2 nm right base for Runway 36 and cleared to land. Was asked later of our position when were 4 nm east and was advised by tower of [another aircraft] 3 nm south maneuvering at 1400 feet; but said we were still clear to land; with negative contact. While descending on base leg about to turn final; attempted to clear final and saw incoming traffic heading directly for us about 200 feet below. Went full power to climb and reported traffic just as they flew right below us. Tower said; 'ok; you are cleared to land 36.' We were still in a position to make a visual approach on base; and since we had traffic in sight and they (traffic) had abruptly turned right away from final about ½ nm from the approach end of the runway; so we continued our descent and landed on Runway 36.




Synopsis: GA flight instructor reported a near mid air collision with another aircraft while turning onto final approach at Joplin Regional Airport.
Date: 202011
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Cessna 150
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Engine
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Private
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown; Inflight Event / Encounter Fuel Issue
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: We met at ZZZ. We walked through the FBO to the airplane parked out on the ramps south of the Tower. Pre-flighted the aircraft - [Pilot not Flying] sumped fuel - 100LL. We both visually inspected the fuel. There was 13-14 gallons of fuel. We checked the oil - 6 quarts of oil on the dipstick. Started the plane. Fuel gauge matched what we visually inspected. Fuel gauge showed over half on both tanks; which agreed with our visual inspection Listened to ATIS. Taxiied to [Runway]. Did engine runup. Everything in runup was good - magnetos checked and carb heat checked. Request touch n go's. Cleared for takeoff. Did touch n go's; everything seemed good & normal. While in pattern; [Pilot not Flying] noticed both tanks draining at equal rates. Right before last touch n go- approx. XA:00 because we had work at XB:00 and wanted to make sure there was enough time for one more touch n go. Fuel gauge showed on the quarter mark on both tanks. So we continued for the cleared touch n go. On the upwind; only approximately 300-400 ft. AGL the engine quit then sputtered once then fully quit. Checked throttle & mixture - both were full forward. [Pilot not Flying] declared engine troubles and making an emergency landing. First thing we saw was the helicopter pad. Aimed for it; dodged light poles; touched down; and then plane went into the dirt ditch and flipped


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


Synopsis: Cessna 150 flight crew reported engine failure on takeoff; resulting in an emergency landing.
Date: 201308
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: BWI.Airport, MD
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B BWI
ATC / advisory: TRACON PCT
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Workload
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Environment - Non Weather Related; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: On a right base approaching from the south for Runway 10 at 4;000 FT MSL; Potomac Approach called traffic to follow at two o'clock for the visual to Runway 10. The Captain; PM; responded; 'I have traffic at one o'clock at our altitude. Is that our traffic? Approach responded; 'Follow him. Cleared the visual Runway 10.' This traffic was on a left base from the north. Expecting our traffic to start his turn to final so we could follow; we maintained our last assigned heading and altitude. Just as we were about to query ATC; we received a Traffic Alert (TA) so began a descending turn to final. This was quickly followed by a RA. We complied with the RA (a descent) and heard the other aircraft say over the radio that they were responding to a RA. After receiving a 'clear of conflict;' we continued the approach and landing. I do not recall ATC requesting a call at any time after this event.




Synopsis: An air carrier on a visual approach to BWI Runway 10 took evasive action to a TCAS RA from unknown traffic as they were about to turn base from the south.
Date: 201910
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZAU.ARTCC, IL
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 170/175 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class E ZAU
ATC / advisory: Center ZAU
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Distraction; Workload
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Altitude Crossing Restriction Not Met; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Clearance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: This is one incident and report that I'm not sure exactly where to begin. It was the First Officer's leg; and right off the bat on climbout from our departure airport; ATC gave us a reroute. The ATC communications; instructions and clearances became increasingly frequent. ATC required multiple; and I repeat; multiple speed changes; heading changes; clearances to a fix; altitude changes and entire reroutes multiple times! Then; when we would change the frequency; the new controller would change it all over again; and then; the approach controller changed the arrival runway also. It wasn't that the flight crew was in inattentive; incompetent or inexperienced; it got to the point it was literally overwhelming. It was excessive!Both crewmembers were working full-time to keep up with ATC demands. One particular ATC clearance was to cross 30 miles south of Rockford VOR at 13;000 feet. It was put in the FMS; however the Pilot Flying failed to change the altitude alert and the Pilot Monitoring failed to notice due to the extremely busy nature of this flight. Both pilots and ATC all noticed about the same time that the aircraft was high on the profile and ATC asked if we were starting down. We had just started down; said yes; and expedited the descent. We were a little high crossing the fix; asked ATC if there was a problem with not making the crossing restriction and he said no. He handed us off to another ATC frequency.If ATC could limit number of instructions to flight crew unless absolutely necessary; it would reduce crew saturation.




Synopsis: EMB-175 Captain reported excessive number of ATC route modifications and instructions that resulted in a high workload and task saturation.
Date: 201208
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZNY.ARTCC, NY
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Workload; Situational Awareness; Confusion
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; Weather
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: This was the most unsafe thing I've ever seen! I was working with moderate traffic that I had fully under control. In the other sectors in the area; there were issues with DCA and BWI arrival aircraft due to weather. These sectors; working multiple aircraft going to these destinations over two different departure fixes from N90 and another sector working these arrivals from ZBW were shut off by the receiving sectors. This is where the chaos of what just happened started. Our area supervisor came over saying to use an alternate route and that it was worked out and approved. All of these many aircraft were turned towards this new route; but not everyone was on board with this! The sector that was to take this traffic said that they were not going to take any aircraft on this new route. At this point; planes started going everywhere. Safety was completely compromised and I was just separating aircraft the best I could and completely relying on the Controller who was working my RA side to make the point outs and do the coordination that was necessary. I was told afterwards that the ground stop that was put in place was completely ignored. When weather is affecting the route; better communication between the Terminal and the Center needs to happen. Way too many times; a controller will close a route due to weather; but the Terminal will keep departing aircraft filed on that closed route.




Synopsis: ZNY Controller described an unsafe condition during a busy/complex weather traffic period; the reporter claiming traffic management programs were simply ignored by the terminal facilities involved.
Date: 201812
Weather elements / visibility: Rain
Aircraft: B757 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Ramp
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Ground Personnel
When detected: Taxi
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Equipment / Tooling
Primary problem: Equipment / Tooling

Narrative: I was sitting [at the gate] when I began to hear a horn blowing like crazy then I saw a tractor trailer come to a complete stop and the horn was still being blown; then a [company] pickup truck comes into view and starts blowing their horn again; then I noticed a string of foreman carts sitting out in the middle of the runway. I retrieved the carts suspecting the brakes on the first cart wasn't working because the tongue was in the up position. Upon further investigation the brakes on the first cart wasn't working. The cart was tagged and removed from service and parked at our [ground service building]. A 757 aircraft passed the area just prior to the movement of the carts which move with surprising speed and a collision would have been unavoidable for that aircraft. Btw the [company] truck nearly collided with the string of carts as they began to move. It was dark; rainy; and windy.




Synopsis: Ramp employee reported a string of baggage carts rolled onto the runway when the brakes failed on the lead cart.
Date: 201601
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Icing; Rain; 10
Light: Night
Aircraft: PA-28 Cherokee/Archer/Dakota/Pillan/Warrior
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Ferry / Re-Positioning
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Time Pressure; Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; Flight Crew Diverted
Contributing factors: Procedure; Airspace Structure; Weather
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: Cruising east at 9;000 feet; we were instructed by ATC to climb 11;000 feet. In the climb we begin to pick up ice. We asked for lower but was told that 11;000 feet was the lowest for that route segment. We were offered we could remain at 10;000 feet. We entered heavier precipitation and ice accumulation increased. OAT was indicating +2 C. We requested vectors to the nearest airport with an instrument approach. We were offered an airport 18 miles northwest. The controller asked if we could accept an intermediate fix to runway 21. He did not answer our next three radio transmissions. Another aircraft on the frequency suggested I try the controller on guard and he would monitor us for a relay if necessary. At that time the controller came back on and said 'everybody just hold on; I had to go off line to get a Clearence I'm back now; tell me what you need'. We requested direct to the airport and lower. He said he couldn't give us lower until within 4 miles of the airport and then about 8;000 feet was the best he could do unless we could pick up the support visually. At this point; the aircraft would no longer maintain altitude at full power. The controller asked and we repeated again that we are accumulating ice and could not maintain altitude. We descended to 8;000 feet and had intermittent ground contact. We descended to 7;000 feet where we broke out into good VFR; we spotted the airport; cancelled our IFR and radar service and landed visually on runway 21 without incident.The leading edges of the wings and stabilator were still significantly iced over.I do not understand why the controller went off the frequency to get a clearance when he had an aircraft in distress.




Synopsis: Cruising in a PA28-235 at 9;000 feet the ATC instruction was to climb to 11;000 feet where the aircraft began to accumulate ice. Requested a lower altitude but ATC denied the request due to altitude restrictions in that area. Temporarily lost communication with ATC and landed at the nearest airport. After landing; the leading edges of the wings and stabilator were still significantly iced over.
Date: 201209
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZTL.ARTCC, GA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZTL
ATC / advisory: Center ZTL
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion
Second reporter function: First Officer
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: South of VXV; ATC cleared us direct to BUGME. The problem is both the First Officer and I thought we heard BKW (Beckley). Both these fixes arguably sound the same. We even read back; 'Company flight number; direct Beckley.' We then line selected BKW on the FMC and executed it. Approximately one to two minutes later; Center asked us where we were going; and said; 'Your course was way right of direct to BUGME. Turn to 360 and proceed direct BUGME; flight planned route.' We re-input BUGME and proceeded direct; then flight planned route. I'm not sure what we could have done differently. Both of us thought we heard 'Beckley.' We even read it back as Beckley. ATC is in my understanding required to correct us. But; we thought we were doing as instructed.


Second narrative: [Narrative 2 had no additional information]


Synopsis: A flight crew heard an ATC clearance to Beckley (BKW) but BUGME; 130 NM away on J91; was intended.