elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201505
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: Marginal
Weather elements / visibility: Rain; Thunderstorm; Turbulence; 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: SR22
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Landing
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Incursion Taxiway; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Airport; Environment - Non Weather Related; Weather
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: We departed early hoping to beat strong thunderstorms moving into the entire area. We had to fly approximately 50-75 miles off our flight path due to weather. We descended through the layers of broken clouds in strong winds and severe turbulence. We radioed ZZZ several times with no response. We lined up on final for Runway 17 With a strong thunderstorm just to the South of the airport moving North quickly on 1/2 mile final for 17 we observed construction equipment on the runway. With the thunderstorm moving close and strong turbulence; I made an immediate decision to move to the left 50 or so feet and land on the taxiway. The taxiway was clear of any equipment and personnel and the landing was successful with no incidents.




Synopsis: At the destination airport; an SR22 Pilot encountered construction equipment on the runway and; due to severe weather in the area; landed without incident on an adjacent taxiway.
Date: 201910
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZDC.ARTCC, VA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: A320
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZDC
ATC / advisory: Center ZDC
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Confusion; Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; 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 Issued New Clearance; Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Captain was Pilot Monitoring; First Officer was Pilot Flying. We were at cruise altitude FL230. We were cleared from 16;000 ft. to climb to cruise altitude upon check-in with Center. There was poor illumination of flight instrument displays and a high level of glare in the flight-deck due to sun location and time of day. The ATC Controller was experiencing microphone difficulties due to a stuck microphone. ATC queried the crew about our assigned cruise altitude while the Captain was off frequency delivering a passenger PA. The First Officer responded to ATC query and advised the Captain of the ATC inquiry. The flight proceeded normally to destination. The Captain and First Officer discussed the Flight Plan cruise altitude of FL220. High task loading occurred during the climb due to the short duration of the flight. The ATC query created doubt to the flight crew as to whether we had received and responded to the ATC climb clearance properly; particularly with regard to the reduced ability to see the altitude selection window on the FCU and the Airbus altitude window potential for digit 'skipping'.They 'why' of the event is because ATC queried the crew about the assigned cruise altitude; therefore It appears that ATC did know or remember what altitude they cleared the flight too. Improve the illumination of the FCU unit altitude window.




Synopsis: A320 Captain reported that an ATC communication issue combined with glare and visibility issues on the flight deck resulted in an altitude deviation.
Date: 201306
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: MMTO.Airport, FO
Aircraft: McDonnell Douglas Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Tower MMTO
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Ground Incursion Taxiway
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Chart Or Publication; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: After landing; Tower cleared us to taxi to the ramp via A.  On taxi chart; A is depicted as parallel to runway.  Exited the runway at C.  On C; tower stated; 'Your instructions were to join A.'  I queried; 'would you like us to join A here?'  ATC said 'affirmative.'  As we taxied down A; noticed taxi sign at end of runway joining A to the end of the runway.  This is NOT depicted on Jepp charts.  I should have asked where ATC wanted us to join A.  Commercial charts need to be corrected to show A at the end of the runway.  ATC needs to be clear on their instructions.




Synopsis: Air Carrier First Officer reports a taxiway incursion at MMTO due to a vague clearance and depiction of the A taxiway on the airport diagram.
Date: 201907
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: MLB.Airport, FL
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Duchess 76
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class D MLB
ATC / advisory: Tower MLB
Second aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Instructor
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown; Distraction
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Aircraft; ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was cleared for takeoff Runway 9L by MLB Tower (in Aircraft X) and started my roll. I was only monitoring Tower frequency. As I was continuing; the other aircraft (Aircraft Y); crossed Runway 9L via Taxiway Quebec. My student and I continued our roll and cleared the aircraft by about 200 feet vertically.  Following the incident; witnesses reported that Aircraft Y was cleared to cross Runway 9L via Taxiway Quebec after I was given takeoff clearance.  A dedicated Controller for Ground and Tower frequencies (each) might have prevented this incursion.




Synopsis: Flight Instructor reported that on takeoff roll; another aircraft crossed runway in front of them; causing Pilot to rotate and overfly other aircraft.
Date: 201303
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZID.ARTCC, IN
Aircraft: No Aircraft
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings
Primary problem: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings

Narrative: We have 121.5/243.0 Emergency Frequency at our FLM workstation VSCS. We leave them on speaker with the volume set so we can hear when the frequency is in use. We use this to help contact NORDO aircraft; communicate with aircraft in distress; and also have used it to relay information to aircraft that are below our frequency coverage. Recently; we had approximately 4-5 seconds of Ghost Busters song on. Then approximately 2 minutes later we had a 1-2 second blurb of another song go out over 121.5. This has seemed to be on the increase lately. This particular transmitter/receiver is located at IND remote site. I will continue to try to get more reports each time it happens so maybe we can get it stopped. I would like the emergency frequency clear of all transmissions except those needed for ATC purposes.




Synopsis: ZID Controller voiced concern regarding the interference being received on 121.5/243.0 at FLM work station.
Date: 202005
Local time of day: 0601-1200
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: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Illness / Injury
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Had a lot of confusion and miss communication at the beginning of a passenger event. Originally I was told that there was a passenger at the gate who does not have a face mask isn't going to wear one. Also that that passenger was telling people at the gate of having had the virus already. On top of that I was told this passenger had a medical problem they were traveling to ZZZ to be worked on. I was also hearing that passenger was being disruptive.One of my flight attendants had a concern of this passenger still being contagious and being a disruptive passenger. With the passenger still being at the gate I started to receive more information I was told to contact MedLink. Turns out that the gate had already been in touch with MedLink and the passenger had already been cleared by MedLink. As for the pre-existing medical condition; the passenger told the gate of not wearing a mask because it causes asthma attacks. I verified this to be a possibility with MedLink on my side.As for the disruptive behavior I spoke with the station manager and he informed me that the passenger was being cooperative and only just understandably a little frustrated. I asked him if he thought passenger would be an issue in flight and he indicated that he did not believe that to be the case. After speaking with my flight attendant about her concerns we decided they had all been resolved and we allowed the passenger to board the flight. I think this is new to all of us and I don't think I could do anything different.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported a series of miscommunications regarding a boarding passenger who was possibly contagious with COVID-19. After the Captain spent time resolving the issue; it was determined that the passenger could be allowed to board.
Date: 201412
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: CAK.Airport, OH
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: Regional Jet 700 ER/LR (CRJ700)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class C CAK
ATC / advisory: Tower CAK
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Workload; Training / Qualification; Situational Awareness; Human-Machine Interface; Distraction; Confusion
Anomaly: 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 Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: IOE FLT; I was acting as Pilot Flying on a familiarization FLT to CAK. The FLT was proceeding as normal. We were cleared for the visual into CAK. While flying; I was focused on the runway to make sure I was not going to overshoot since I had never been there before. Instead of spinning in pattern altitude; I spun in an altitude that was below pattern. When we descended and I was looking at the runway; an aural alert went off when the gear was not down that I was slightly less than 1;000 Ft above terrain within the airport environment. I quickly corrected to a correct altitude and was fully configured and stable for the approach at the correct altitudes and speeds.There was an aural alert that the gear was not down and we both confirmed it was an incorrect input of the altitude while cleared for the visual approach to landing.I was on IOE and differences training at an unfamiliar airport. The bug was spun too fast and I did not reconfirm it with the check airman was we were cleared for the approach into CAK.When the error was identified; I quickly corrected my altitude back to a safe level prior to turning final to continue my visual approach to landing.POH calls for reconfirming altitude changes after any inputs are made with the Flying Check Pilot. I have since studied in detail each airport flown into the night prior to make sure I am more familiar with the airport and appropriate altitudes. When expecting a visual approach I also confirm appropriate pattern altitude for that airport in my approach/arrival briefing to make sure I am making a mental note of it along with having the Captain on the same page as me.




Synopsis: An aircrew on approach descended below 1;000 FT not configured for landing. An aural alert sounded; they returned to the correct altitude; configured the aircraft and landed.
Date: 201908
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 170/175 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Reporter qualification: Flight Attendant Current
Human factors: Physiological - Other; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Illness / Injury; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Attendant; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Gate; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: While deadheading ZZZ- ZZZ1 the cabin of the aircraft started having a weird odor of dirty wet socks. The pilots returned to gate. I started getting a headache and queasiness. I went to talk to the Supervisor about going and getting checked out due to my sudden headache and queasiness. I then called Scheduling and informed them of the situation and that I was going and getting checked out to be safe. They told me I was getting a[medical absence]. I went and got checked out at [hospital]. Doctor stated I was fine; and my headache should go away in a few days but have to do a follow up appointment.




Synopsis: EMB-175 deadheading Flight Attendant reported fume event which resulted in experiencing health issues. After ground return to gate; Flight Attendant was administered a medical evaluation.
Date: 201208
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: TEB.Airport, NJ
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Gulfstream G200 (IAI 1126 Galaxy)
Operator: Fractional
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class D TEB
ATC / advisory: Tower TEB
Second aircraft: Small Aircraft
Reporter organization: Fractional
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Automation Aircraft RA; Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: While on the 19 ILS in visual conditions (cleared visual approach) and approximately at TUGGZ fix; ATC notified us of traffic that just showed up on radar. At the same time we noticed traffic advisory on MFD. We were able to visually acquire the aircraft and shortly thereafter; a TCAS Descend RA was commanded. Auto pilot was already off and PIC immediately complied with RA. No limits were exceeded and approach was not destabilized. The other aircraft came very close to us on a direct; perpendicular flight path. Estimated distance was approximately 300 FT horizontal and 0 FT vertical. It appeared not to have used it's transponder before ATC notification/TCAS display of aircraft. As we quickly cleared other aircraft; we safely continued the approach and landing to Runway 19. We queried ATC as of status of the other aircraft. They advised us they were not in radio contact and that it was violating the airspace. They also told us they were tracking the aircraft on the radar. I advised them of RA compliance in the air and also that it was a low wing; small aircraft. Chief Pilot was notified of event over phone and PIC was told to complete an Operational Irregularity Report. In conclusion; as crew debriefed the event; we feel that we did what we could to avert a potential disaster; complying with SOP and company policies. Communication from ATC was very good and I commend PIC for not overreacting during RA; but rather executed a smooth; safe maneuver.




Synopsis: G200 First Officer experiences a TCAS RA at TUGGZ FAF; with the Captain flying; during a visual approach to Runway 19 at TEB. Intruder was inside the Class D and not in contact with ATC.
Date: 201909
Location: ORD.Airport, IL
Weather elements / visibility: Thunderstorm
Aircraft: No Aircraft
Operator: Air Carrier
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Other / Unknown
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Time Pressure
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Maintenance
When detected: Routine Inspection
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Airport; Equipment / Tooling; Weather
Primary problem: Equipment / Tooling

Narrative: In the early morning; there were thunderstorms in the area of ORD. The lightning warning lights on [Company X] hangar came on due to lightning being close to the airfield. A WSI weather alert email was auto generated for lightening being detected 4.3 miles northwest of the airport. Prior to this email being sent the lightning lights at [Company X] facility were already on. About 5 minutes after this email alert lightning struck on the airfield in the vicinity of the [Company Y] hangar which is less than 300 yards from [Company Z] hangar. It was not until 4 minutes after lightning had already struck the ground on the airfield that the lightning warning lights on [Company Z] hangar were turned on and the ramp was finally closed.Clearly there is something wrong with the sensitivity and the range of lightning from the airport that [Company Z] is using to determine whether or not to close the airport. This failure of the system we have in place to close the ramp prior to lightning hitting within just yards of our hangar ramp area could have easily resulted in serious injury or even the death of one of our employees. We need to improve our system for the safety of our employees.




Synopsis: A Maintenance Technician reported the ramp and hangar area lightning warning system does not work in a timely manner.
Date: 201206
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZNY.ARTCC, NY
Weather elements / visibility: Thunderstorm
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZNY
ATC / advisory: Center ZNY
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Procedure; Weather
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: Approaching JAINS on L451 had to deviate around a line of thunderstorms.  Received a clearance to deviate left of course.  It turned out that we needed an additional 30nm.  We were unable to contact ATC on HF; so we used weather deviation procedures; (lights on; blind broadcasts of pan pan and our position).  Approximately 1 min later while typing a request on CPDLC established comm with ATC and was cleared direct ILIDO int.




Synopsis: Air Carrier Captain reported difficulty communicating with ATC over the western Atlantic.  Emergency authority was exercised to avoid weather prior to receiving clearance.
Date: 201208
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZZ.Airport, FO
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B767-200
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Climb
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZZ
Aircraft component: Autoflight System
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Diverted; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Procedure; Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: During pre flight; the upper EICAS went blank. Maintenance was called and a popped circuit breaker was found: 115V AC BUS1 SEC2. The Mechanic reset the breaker but it immediately popped again. I then observed the Mechanic remove the upper EICAS; check for proper ventilation then reset it. More actions were accomplished but I did not observe them as I was out of the flight deck by then to give the mechanics room to work. The breaker was reset again and remained set. I was informed that the airplane was released to fly. Shortly after take off the breaker popped again. We observed multiple failures: upper EICAS; autothrust; flight directors; transponder; weather radar; and EGPWS. We restored what we could through backup systems then called Dispatch and Maintenance to relay our situation. Maintenance instructed us not to reset the breaker and that we needed to land before ETOPS operation. Dispatch decided on a diversion station best capable to handle our maintenance and passenger situation. After consulting the QRH I determined that it was not 'a condition that dictates it to be safer to land overweight than to continue flight.' We informed ATC of our need to hold in order to burn off fuel to our maximum landing weight. We began an accelerated fuel burn by first extending the speed brakes and then as altitude and speed permitted we lowered the landing gear and flaps. After burning fuel we conducted an uneventful approach and landing. We were informed after the repair that the circuit breaker was faulty. That caused the event.




Synopsis: A B767-200 departing Europe on an ETOPS flight had to divert for maintenance when multiple system components failed due to a faulty Circuit Breaker. The breaker had been worked on by Maintenance prior to departure as a result of an inoperative EICAS screen but was deemed ultimately to have been fixed.