elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201212
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: BOS.Airport, MA
Aircraft: Helicopter
Operator: Government
Operating under: Part 91
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class B BOS
ATC / advisory: Tower BOS
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Local
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I was working Local East combined with Local Helicopters and monitoring Local West. The West Controller needed a bathroom break so I had to combine West with my positions. While working the 3 separate frequencies; there were some blocked transmissions. I heard an aircraft check in on final and I heard Aircraft X calling at the same time; hearing only him checking in with his call sign. I said 'Aircraft X; Boston Tower; go ahead' but there was no reply. The West Controller returned and I briefed him on West and continued working the other two locals. When I was then relieved I briefed my relief on Aircraft X's call. He confirmed with me that Aircraft X had no clearance to enter BOS B airspace. I affirmed he did not; but added (somewhat tongue in cheek) 'unless he took 'go ahead' as a clearance.' My relief (also tongue in cheek) noted that perhaps he did. In my 2 minute post brief; I heard the relieving controller call Aircraft X and asked if he'd called. Aircraft X answered he did not. I joked to the controller 'then why is he on frequency?' Aircraft X then did ask for confirmation that he'd been cleared in to the BOS B via the PIKER route (a published helicopter route). Some sort of notification should be made to pilots (ATIS?) that frequencies are combined and to be aware that transmissions may not be heard and they may hear us talking to aircraft on other frequencies. Specific clearances for specific requests must be issued; authorizations to enter airspace should not be assumed or inferred.




Synopsis: BOS Controller described an airspace entry event when Tower positions were combined and frequencies were experiencing multiple 'blocked' transmissions. The reporter suggested some type of pilot notification be establish to alert pilots to multiple frequency use.
Date: 201506
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: MWH.TRACON, WA
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; High Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class D MWH
ATC / advisory: TRACON MWH
Second aircraft: Light Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Departure; Approach
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I was working radar and was the CIC.  Aircraft X was on a VOR 3 Runway 14L approach IFR.  Aircraft Y was doing some noise testing and was in the VFR pattern; and had already completed two passes.  I heard the local controller tell aircraft Y to extend downwind for aircraft X on an opposite direction approach.  I told aircraft X to keep their speed up and contact tower.  Tower decided to try and get aircraft Y in front of aircraft X when they were on about a 9 mile final.  Aircraft Y departed runway 32R when aircraft X was on about a 7 mile final for runway 14L.  The tower controller did not prep aircraft Y to expect an early crosswind; and in the previous two patterns they had flown a 5 to 6 mile upwind.  Traffic was issued and the local controller told aircraft Y to turn crosswind when they were about 3 miles apart; opposite direction; with aircraft X descending and aircraft Y climbing.  Aircraft Y did not respond to the first instruction.  The local controller issued it again and aircraft Y appeared to descend to avoid aircraft X and turned right into the crosswind.  It appeared on the radar that aircraft Y and aircraft X were less than a mile apart and 100 feet.  This is very similar to a recent incident involving the same local controller.  This person has been reported to management multiple times for dangerous situations.  No supervisor was present in the operational area at the time of this incident.My recommendation is that we have a supervisor in the operational area; and have them ensure traffic is being run safely.  Controllers should be held accountable as well as supervisors.




Synopsis: A MWH TRACON Controller reports of an airborne conflict attributed to the Local Controller not preparing the aircraft for what was intended. The Local Controller has been known to run a similar operation where nothing was done by management to correct the issue.
Date: 201911
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: EWR.Airport, NJ
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Taxi
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Confusion; Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Incursion Runway
Contributing factors: Airport; Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Taxiing out of EWR to Runway 22R; our instructions were to taxi 'Bravo; right on Juliet; cross Runway 22R; left on Papa; hold short of Runway 29 for landing traffic.' We complied with all. As we approached Runway 29; the Controller told us 'cross Runway 29; hold short of Runway 22R at Z'; noting HS1 (Hot Spot). As we crossed Runway 22R we all recognized the lack of room to clear Runway 29; and turn the airplane to hold short. The Controller then told us 'taxi into position and hold Runway 22R; hold short of Runway 29; landing traffic. Again; we realized there was very little room for this. As I made the left turn into Runway 22R; I noticed yellow chevrons with a solid yellow line a few feet ahead. Upon straightening the aircraft on the centerline; we all lost sight of the solid yellow line but I firmly believe the aircraft was short of this line; complying with ATC's instructions. I set the parking brake and an aircraft landed on Runway 29. Although we were short of Runway 29 as we waited for takeoff clearance; the landing aircraft's wing and our aircraft nose appeared close. In hindsight; and after briefing with the crew; we all agreed that we should have been more concerned with accepting the clearance to 'position and hold' based on the length available to us to hold short; as well as the length and turning radius of our aircraft.


Second narrative: EWR Ground had us cross Runway 22R at J; then taxi via P. Ground had us cross Runway 29 (in use for landing); then Z 'lineup and wait Runway 22R; short of Runway 29'. As we taxied into position; I realized we could not fit in position and hold short of 29. I asked the Captain if they were holding short. They stopped the aircraft. I could not see the 29 hold short line over the nose; but the Captain did think we were still short.


Synopsis: Air carrier flight crew reported runway incursion following Air Traffic Control instructions.
Date: 201312
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: LCQ.Airport, FL
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 30
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skylane 182/RG Turbo Skylane/RG
Operator: Government
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Utility / Infrastructure
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class D LCQ
ATC / advisory: Tower LCQ
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict NMAC; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Human Factors; ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: I was inbound VFR on the RNAV 10 approach to LCQ and made contact with the Tower at the IAF (DREBL) at 2;000 FT and stated that I was VFR coming in on the RNAV 10 approach over DREBL. Tower told me to contact him over TAZAN (FAF). I made my decent down to 1;800 FT and was about one mile inside of the IAF when a C414 came overhead at a higher rate of speed and about 200 FT above me. I asked the Tower if he had a twin inbound and he stated that Center had just called him to inform him of the twin on the RNAV 10 approach and that he was just about to inform me of the traffic. Tower then asked the pilot of the twin if he had seen me and the pilot responded 'No.' The Tower asked me how close the twin was and I responded 'close'. On a phone conversation with the Tower after I had landed; Tower told me that he had called the Center to ask if they had me on radar and they responded that they did not see me. A firefighting helicopter pilot that was in the pattern when this occurred told me that he seen me on TCAS. My transponder was active and indicated working at the time. In a conversation with the C414 pilot on the ground he had told me that Center changed controllers from a male voice to a female voice at the same time all this occurred. I don't understand why he wasn't handed off to Tower frequency before the IAF and why the Tower was not informed of the arrival before he passed the IAF. The twin pilot stated to me that he was on an IFR flight plan.




Synopsis: C182 pilot experiences a NMAC during a VFR RNAV 10 approach to LCQ. Center had cleared an IFR C414 for the same approach and it passed over the C182 just inside of the FAF.
Date: 201204
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: P180 Avanti
Operator: Fractional
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Pressurization Control System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Fractional
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Troubleshooting; Training / Qualification; Time Pressure; Human-Machine Interface; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Equipment Problem Dissipated; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Climbing out of 23;000 we experienced a Cabin Pressure Light as a result of an Auto Pressurization Mode failure. We notified ATC and declared an emergency as a precaution; they cleared us down to 10;000 and we began a rapid descent. In the descent we selected Manual Pressurization Mode and the Cherry Picker down per the QRH. Through 15;000 MSL the Cabin Pressure Light extinguished; the cabin began to descend and stabilize as a result of the Manual Mode selection. We leveled off at 10;000 and the cabin stabilized to normal in the Manual Mode. We informed ATC the situation was resolved and canceled our emergency. With the cabin pressurization operating normally in Manual Mode we continued to our filed destination at 10;000. Our continuation was arranged via specific permission from Approach with acknowledgment of our emergency cancellation.




Synopsis: A P180's Cabin Pressure Light alerted climbing through FL230 so an emergency was declared and during descent the Manual Mode selection restored normal pressurization. The emergency was canceled and the flight continued at 10;000 FT.
Date: 201901
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: Mixed
Weather elements / visibility: 100
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Super King Air 200
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Aircraft component: Electrical Power
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Approximately 20 minutes into flight received various error messages on MFD; engine instruments began to fluctuate; auto pilot disconnected; then the loss of all electrical power. All of which took place within minutes. Tried to regain electrical power to no avail; all non-essential electrical items where shut down. Turned off flight path toward [a suitable alternate] in search of broken cloud layers; utilizing standby attitude indicator; whiskey compass and ForeFlight iPad. Advised passengers of situation and that all was under control. Upon finding suitable visibility began spiraling descent out of altitude. When altitude permitted texted company Duty Officer and notified him of situation and requested he contact ATC and Tower advise them of situation and request permission to land. Minutes later received cell phone call from Tower and were given permission to land. Tower was able to advise us of our airspeed; crew manually extended landing gear; flew by Tower to confirm gear was down. Landed aircraft; taxied to parking.Flight crew utilized CRM to work the problem; unknown at this time the cause of problem.




Synopsis: B200 Captain reported diverting to an alternate airport after experiencing loss of all electrical power.
Date: 201811
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: MSO.Tower, US
Flight conditions: Marginal
Weather elements / visibility: Rain
Aircraft: Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class D MSO
ATC / advisory: Tower MSO
Second aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: We flew a VOR-B transition to a Visual circle to land. On breakout to visual conditions; I obtained visual contact of an aircraft conducting low approaches. On initial visual contact as we began our right turn to enter a left base and the [other aircraft] was pointed directly at our aircraft. They informed Tower they did not have us in sight and would begin a left 360 degree turn. As we were able to identify the traffic and situation we adjusted our descent rate to remain clear of the traffic. While maintaining a safe distance from traffic and terrain we were able to successfully and safely configure and comply with stabilized approach criteria with a safe landing. Good Situational Awareness and CRM were the keys to success on this event as the Tower created threats we were ultimately able to safely overcome.


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


Synopsis: Air Carrier flight crew reported upon breaking out of the clouds there was traffic in front of them for the same runway which they had to maneuver to avoid.
Date: 201910
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: GJT.Airport, CO
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 170/175 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class E ZDV
ATC / advisory: TRACON D01
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: Workload; Distraction; Situational Awareness; Time Pressure
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter Unstabilized Approach
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Runway 29 approach at night; cleared to shoot the RNAV 29 approach maintain 12;000 feet until passing CESBA Intersection. On the approach it is at or above 9;900 feet. With gear and speed brakes; we were unable to get low enough to shoot the approach. Thought I was on visual approach and executed a 360 left turn to get down. Landed normally. Was only cleared for instrument approach RNAV 29 to GJT.We were kept too high at CESBA intersection by ATC. Thought we were cleared for visual approach.In VFR conditions; make sure cleared for visual approach prior to CESBA Intersection or restrict it all together if not able to be cleared to 9;900 feet prior to CESBA Intersection. Descent is too steep from 12;000 feet at CESBA Intersection.




Synopsis: EMB-175 Captain reported being too high on approach that required a 360 degree turn and caused a deviation from clearance.
Date: 201606
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Navion
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: CTAF ZZZ
Aircraft component: Cowling/Nacelle Fasteners; Latches
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Gear Up Landing; Ground Event / Encounter Ground Strike - Aircraft
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Initial roll on takeoff was routine; rotating a little faster than normal due to the higher density altitude. I initiated gear retraction; which occurred normally. On initial climb; the large right engine cowling lifted up and began to bend and flutter in front of the windscreen. The movement of the cowling increased rapidly; then began to violently shake and distort.I estimate that half of [the 6;800 runway] was remaining and the plane had reached 20-25 feet altitude. The situation required a decision to continue flight; with an attempt to fly a pattern to an emergency landing; or to continue straight ahead and make an emergency landing on the remaining runway.In consideration of the unknown flight characteristics with the loose cowl violently shaking and/or possible loss of the cowling of the plane into the windscreen or empennage; I made the decision to make an emergency landing on the remaining runway.Contributing to my decision; terrain beyond the end of [the runway] consists of a short gravel run-off area; with large boulders at the perimeter. The terrain drops off steeply into a canyon beyond the boulders.I didn't believe I had the time to extend the landing gear and make the end of the runway. I pulled the throttle and landed straight ahead. This resulted in a gear up landing; with minimal impact. The plane remained on the runway and came to rest on the right edge of the asphalt.There were no injuries and no airport property damage. The plane suffered a prop strike and metal damage on the belly. The plane was lifted and the gear extended. It was towed from the runway on its own gear and stored in a hangar.The corrective actions I will take is to be hyper-vigilant of the doors; vents and cowls on preflight to assure that they are not only flush and closed; but also; that fastening devices are properly engaged; closed and secure.In addition to visual inspection for 'closed' panels; I will physically test the latching for correct retention.




Synopsis: Ryan Navion pilot reported executing a gear-up emergency landing on remaining runway when the engine cowling popped open shortly after takeoff.
Date: 202007
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
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
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Illness / Injury
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Enroute from ZZZ-ZZZ1; the Purser and relief Captain (who was in the cabin at the time) informed the Captain flying that one of the flight attendants was experiencing coughing and an itching feeling in the chest area. The Flight Attendant in question was isolated in the rear of the aircraft and instructed to continue wearing her mask and limit her interaction with the passengers and other crew members. After receiving the information; the flight crew called Ops control via SatCom in the flight deck. We were connected with MedLink and given a phone number and reference number to provide to the Flight Attendant with symptoms. Upon landing; she was isolated as much as possible; made contact with medical; and scheduled an appointment for consultation in her hotel room. The next day; she made me aware that her consultation resulted in a diagnosis consistent with a condition other than COVID-19.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported a Flight Attendant became ill during flight.