elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201305
Location: TUS.Airport, AZ
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; High Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class C TUS
ATC / advisory: Tower TUS
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Instructor
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Human factors: Physiological - Other
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: While approaching TUS from the north; I heard two air carrier aircraft report being illuminated by a green laser on the ground. The first aircraft reported seeing the laser on about a 15 mile final; and the second reported being illuminated on about a 5 mile final. As I approached the airport (on about a 1.5 mile final); my aircraft was also illuminated by the laser; which appeared to be within about a mile of the final approach path; on the left side of the aircraft. Although my night vision was temporarily affected by the laser; my student was able to safely land the aircraft; and my vision returned to normal within a few minutes. All three incidents took place within roughly a 15 minute period; and the location of the laser source reported by the air carrier crews was in the same area I observed the source to be. Because the laser source was so close to the approach end of the runway; there was a clear potential for an accident to occur had a faster moving aircraft been illuminated at the same location where I was hit by the beam. Laser incidents have been a fairly regular occurrence in this area over the last two years; and I believe it is only the relatively low levels of nighttime traffic into the local airports that has prevented the laser events from causing serious problems.




Synopsis: Cessna pilot reports being illuminated by a green laser on a 1.5 mile final to TUS; causing momentary loss of night vision. The student continues the approach to landing. Two air carrier aircraft landing ahead of the reporter were also illuminated.
Date: 202112
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Tower, US
Flight conditions: VMC
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
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Second aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter; Inflight Event / Encounter Unstabilized Approach
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Procedure
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: About 50 feet from touchdown we encountered light to moderate wake turbulence from a B737 that had landed right before us on Runway XXR in ZZZ with little delay in separation. As a result; the left wing dipped down and I made the decision to execute a go around out of caution as we were low to the ground near ground effect with no room for error. Went around and circled back around for second approach and landed uneventfully and had plenty of fuel on board.




Synopsis: EMB-145 Captain reported executing a low altitude go-around at ZZZ after encountering wake turbulence from preceding B737.
Date: 202101
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Reporter qualification: Flight Attendant Current
Human factors: Physiological - Other; Situational Awareness; Time Pressure; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Passenger Misconduct
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: Other Takeoff roll
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: I was making my final walk through during taxi.  I made it to the back of the aircraft.  I made my checks and then the B Flight Attendant said there was a passenger being unruly during the safety briefing.  I had her point him out.  He was making snide remarks about the masks when they were mentioned in the PA's.  As I was conducting my walk through back to the front of the aircraft; I noticed this passenger had his mask down.  I asked him to return his mask and started to confirm with him his compliance and need to not interject during announcements.  During this conversation; we received the cleared for departure ding.  The B Flight Attendant was not in a jump seat but was in the galley confirming I had the correct passenger and keeping an eye on me.  I was trying to gain compliance from the passenger when the aircraft began to take off.  I was in the middle of the cabin dealing with this passenger and had to end the conversation and climb my way into my jump seat.  I did not confirm that we were cleared for departure with the pilots; nor did any other crew member.




Synopsis: Flight Attendant reported standing in the aisle talking with a non-compliant passenger regarding face mask policy when the aircraft began the takeoff roll.
Date: 201208
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZAB.ARTCC, NM
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Cruise
ATC / advisory: Center ZAB
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Traffic Management; Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Procedure; Weather; Airspace Structure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: There are two transitions on the GEELA arrival into PHX; both of which start in ZLA. Both transitions have very small corridors between restricted areas and Special Use Airspaces (SUAs). The BLH transition (or the north transition) on a perfect day has a 35 NM corridor and the BZA transition (the southern transition) has a nine NM corridor. Also; these corridors are used heavily by PHX/P50 satellite/TUS/ELP departures as well as southern tier over flights. On this day thunderstorms were impacting alternately; and sometimes concurrently; both transitions. Several aircraft just missed the north side of R2307 and the decision was made to move four aircraft on the West Coast of California to the Northwest corner post of PHX on the MAIER arrival. To be sure; weather was impacting the MAIER arrival but military airspace had been recalled and the aircraft that normally come from ZLA on the MAIER were deviating but making it through the cells. The PHX TMC Coordinator called ZLA several times to have the four listed aircraft moved. ZLA refused to move the aircraft and the protected airspace of R2307 may or may not have been deviated. CAR 40 does not seem to be taken seriously. When SUAs are on the boundary of two centers; it should be self-evident; plans should be jointly made about how the day might proceed. Currently; at ZAB there are at least three directives regarding recalling military airspace that say disparate things. Not all agencies are included in the directives. TMCs are not given the results of the Telecons and so cannot pre-plan. Adjacent Centers must comply with routing restrictions to keep aircraft out of restricted areas.




Synopsis: A ZAB TMU specialist voiced concern that requests from traffic management regarding routing's and weather impacts are not sufficiently considered during CAR 40 Telecons relaying an unsafe situation involving PHX arrivals.
Date: 202103
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
Second aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Troubleshooting; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Automation Aircraft TA; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Staffing; Human Factors
Primary problem: Staffing

Narrative: I was enroute on an IFR flight plan. Sometime after passing ZZZZZ intersection on my assigned route and altitude I realized I had not spoken to ATC in a longer period of time than expected. About 18 miles south of ZZZ [VOR]; I received a traffic alert on my ADS-B display of traffic 1;000 feet below; 2 miles. This prompted me to then call to ATC on my assigned frequency. Since I reached no one; and it had been longer than expected I figured they forgot about me and I searched for a frequency to reestablish contact. (I have had ATC miss handoffs occasionally before). I believe it was ZZZ Center I contacted; who then told me to contact ZZZ Approach. I was initially told they were 'too busy for flight following'. I advised them I was on an IFR flight plan. After another attempt or two to have them accept this; my communication with them was established. Several minutes later I was given a telephone number to call after landing; and upon querying why; they just said it was ZZZ Center. I do not know for sure what problem was supposed to be. But I suspect since I received the ADS-B traffic alert; it was a possible loss of separation. When I was somewhere in the vicinity of ZZZZZ intersection; a Controller told all aircraft 'don't call in; I'll call you'. I never received a call from this Controller; and it was only after I did not feel comfortable waiting longer for a call that I then called back to establish contact. I do not believe I missed a call or checking in on a frequency change. ATC was somewhat overwhelmed in spots in this area. I had noticed in my home area flying that some of the frequencies were not staffed  during the COVID pandemic; and I think some of the facilities may have needed to re staff more quickly as traffic began to grow again.




Synopsis: GA pilot reported a loss of communication with the ATC Center resulting in an ADS-B traffic alert.  Reporter cited possible COVID-19 related ATC staffing issues may have contributed to the event.
Date: 201701
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 6
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Sail Plane
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Landing
Aircraft component: Wheels/Tires/Brakes
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Instrument
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Ground Event / Encounter Object; Ground Excursion Runway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Glider sortie occurred at an uncontrolled airport.  While conducting cadet orientation ride in a glider VFR; Clear weather; wind calm; 70 degrees. Runway was clear. Pilot and [student] landed on the runway. Landed straight down middle of runway.  Applied full brakes and full spoilers. Brake failed. Glider was at slower than walking speed and rolled off end of runway; down small hill. Glider struck fence that was 15 yards past end of runway threshold. Damaged nosecone of glider. A ripple in top of right wing skin close to root was noted. Glider brake was locked when attempted to ground tow. No injury to pilot or cadet.




Synopsis: Glider pilot reported brake failure during landing and rolled off the end of the runway and down an embankment sustaining some damage.
Date: 201305
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skylane 182/RG Turbo Skylane/RG
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Landing
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Ground Excursion Runway; Inflight Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Inflight Event / Encounter Unstabilized Approach
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Weather
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was cleared to land on a straight-in approach for Runway 24. I was number 2 behind a B737. ATC did caution regarding possible wake turbulence. Winds reported from 180 at 9 knots. I had full flaps and floated somewhat during the landing. As I touched down; the aircraft began to veer quickly to the left; causing the aircraft to skid off the runway across the grass. I did not hit any airport lights; markings; etc. I taxied to the FBO to park the aircraft. Upon post flight inspection; I did not see any damage to the aircraft. Not sure what really caused the problem; other than my approach was high; and the speed was a little fast. Possible I might have had my foot on the left brake; but not certain.




Synopsis: C182 pilot reports loosing control at touchdown and swerving off the runway. No damage or injuries occur and the aircraft is taxied to the FBO.
Date: 201910
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B757 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach; Initial Approach
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure; Weather
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Due to crosswinds reaching near maximum and several reported go-a-rounds; we coordinated with dispatch and ATC desk in cruise to utilize a different runway. We were eventually cleared the RNAV (RNP) Z Approach to the different runway. Established on the approach we were handed off to Tower. Shortly before a fix the Tower Controller started making some interesting and quite distracting comments about us being 'high'. He said we would never make it being that high among other unusual comments as we proceeded to make the turns on the approach. The First Officer and I verified our course; clearance and aircraft performance several times to ensure we weren't missing anything. Finally; we told the Tower Controller that we were cleared to fly the RNAV Z Approach. No further comments were heard and we landed uneventfully.I called the Tower to discuss the ordeal and found that approach apparently never passed along the information that we were doing the RNAV approach to a different runway in lieu of the ILS or Visual approach to the advertised runway. He stated that approach told him we were just going to a different runway apparently never stated exactly how. Some aircraft were even shooting the ILS; circling to land. So in essence it apparently appeared to him that we were very high for a visual approach as we were number two for landing behind an aircraft on short final. His expectation bias; understandably so; caused him to assume we were doing a Visual Approach and the flight path he expected; was not commensurate with the flight path associated with the RNAV. However; the comments he made did introduce quite a distraction at; what I would consider; a critical time on that approach.




Synopsis: B757 Captain reported that a communication breakdown between ATC facilities caused the Tower Controller to believe they were flying a different approach.
Date: 201309
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZDC.ARTCC, VA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Light Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class A ZDC
ATC / advisory: Center ZDC
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Situational Awareness; Time Pressure; Workload
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Altitude Crossing Restriction Not Met; Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Descent had been initiated into RDU via routing of the Aldan 1 STAR. Altitude changes had been given in steps by ATC. About 2 minutes prior to arrival over SBV VOR the Controller hurriedly advised to 'descend via the Aldan 1' which meant we were now responsible for all altitude changes. This clearance was not given in time to program the VNAV and resulted in arriving over SBV VOR some 3;000 FT high. Once we caught up we were able to comply with subsequent crossing restrictions. This has become an all too common ATC approach to the 'descend via' STARS. Most of the time the clearance is not transmitted in time to allow an orderly programming of the FMS and results in a mad scramble to make initial crossing restrictions if they are made at all. When initial descents are provided by ATC and then the 'descend via' requirement is added; it appears that ATC is dumping altitude responsibilities off on the cockpit crew. Crews can and do make these STARs work every day but only when ATC communicates the requirement in a manner that allows enough time for programming and briefing. Short of that; it is a mad rush to catch up and safety of the flight is compromised. My plan is to ask ATC if we can anticipate the 'descend via' clearance as soon as possible and get it programmed ahead of time.




Synopsis: A Corporate crew was issued a descend VIA on the RDU ALDAN 1 STAR after being kept high on the profile and commented that ATC is expecting flight crews to 'catch up' and 'comply' after previous non profile step down descent clearances.
Date: 201906
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Learjet 35
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Ambulance
Flight phase: Climb; Initial Climb
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: While on initial climb out; myself and the medical crew noticed a burning smell coming from the back of the cabin. I turned off all the blowers and A/C (Air Conditioning) thinking as these might have been the cause; continuing to fly for some more time; it was evident that the smell hadn't gone away. I made the decision to turn back to ZZZ and swap planes. We did not need to dump fuel; and landed under max landing weight.




Synopsis: Learjet-35 Captain reported a cabin fumes event resulting in a return to the departure airport.
Date: 201210
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZZ.Airport, FO
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: B767-300 and 300 ER
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Climb
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZZ
Aircraft component: FADEC / TCC
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Human factors: Training / Qualification
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; Flight Crew Inflight Shutdown; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: On departure at approximately 7;000 FT experienced a left engine surge. Status MSG of L ENG ANALOG N2. Leveled at 8;000 FT and advised Departure we needed vectors to work on engine issue. Referenced MEL status MSG section. Next received an EICAS DISAGREE MSG followed by a L ENG CONTROL. First Officer called Maintenance Control to advise them we would be returning. Shortly after; noticed that oil temperature was high and oil pressure was low. Thrust lever was already reduced due to engine surge. Thought this was possibly related to EEC messages. Declared an emergency with Approach and advised we were returning and would be shutting down the engine. Engine was secured and off for approximately 5 minutes. Landed and taxied to the ramp with no further issues.


Second narrative: [Narrative #2 contained no additional information.]


Synopsis: A B767-300 EICAS alerted L ENG ANALOG N2 and L ENG CONTROL; then high oil temperature and low oil pressure lead the crew to shut the engine down; declare an emergency; and return to the departure airport.