elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201506
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZLA.ARTCC, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Gulfstream IV / G350 / G450
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class A ZLA
ATC / advisory: Center ZLA
Second aircraft: MD-11
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control; Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Procedure
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: We were in a climb 'Direct' to DRK VOR in the vicinity of PSP at .75 Mach going through about FL340 climbing to FL410 when we encountered an upset from wake turbulence. Autopilot and yaw damper disengaged. The aircraft rolled about 45 degrees left with moderate to severe turbulence.  I manually steered the aircraft to the left off course and we advised ATC of the encounter. ATC responded that we were following a 'Heavy Jet Ahead' (I believe it was an MD-11) and the ATC authorized an offset. We re-engaged the automation with a 2 NM left lateral offset.




Synopsis: Gulfstream IV Captain reported an upset with a 45 degree bank from wake turbulence in trail of an MD-11 at FL340.
Date: 201307
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Aircraft: A300
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Indicating and Warning - Flight & Navigation Systems
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Equipment Problem Dissipated; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Weather
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: At takeoff multiple ECAMS and system failures: ADC failure; airspeed indicator; then FADEC; Engine Number 1 and 2; autothrottle failure; yaw damper failure; and we may have been late turning on course on the SID. No traffic alerts and no altitude deviations. Failures may have been due to hot temperatures...exercise caution in hot [weather] operations.


Second narrative: [No additional information contained in this report.]


Synopsis: During takeoff the crew of an A300-600 was presented with multiple indication and system failures. It is not mentioned in either report if an emergency was declared or a diversion was made; so it must be assumed the problem corrected itself and the crew continued uneventfully to destination.
Date: 201411
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: IAD.Airport, DC
Aircraft: B777 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground IAD
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Physiological - Other; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: No Specific Anomaly Occurred All Types
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Contributing factors: Airport; Weather
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: Taxing in after an autoland approach to Rwy 19L in Dulles; it was very difficult to make out our way back to the gate. The reported RVR was 800 FT though we encountered visibilities significantly less while taxing in. There was no centerline taxiway lighting; several taxiway edge lights were missing/burnt out; and the taxiway centerline markings were extremely difficult to see/follow (they should be freshly painted; with two high-reflection yellow lines; separated by a black line; in between). The taxi lines in the ramp area; as well as the lead-in lines to the gate were also difficult to see; and also require repainting. It would be suggested that until this problem is corrected that the airport operation be restricted to taxi movements in RVRs of 1000 FT or more; particularly in areas where there is no centerline taxiline lighting (i.e. south-landing operations). Follow-me vehicles should be readily available to assist aircraft to the gate; as an alternative; pending the suggested changes.




Synopsis: A B777 Captain reported extreme difficulty in taxiing to the gate following a low minima autoland on Runway 19L at IAD. Inoperative taxiway lights and inadequate taxiway markings were cited as contributing factors.
Date: 201708
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZOA.ARTCC, CA
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Fighter
Operator: Military
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class A ZOA; Special Use W283
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Troubleshooting; Situational Awareness; Distraction; Confusion; Workload; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Airspace Structure

Narrative: FASFAC (Fleet Area Control and Surveillance Facility) has been taking W283/285 A/B/C/D; which shuts down the offshore/coast departures.  This puts all the departures in the same corridor.  It is unsafe because of the different types of aircraft props/business jets/commercial. It adds complexity and more coordination with sector 11 and 13.  It also adds to the AVE traffic area.  A lot of these aircraft are going to Mexico or SAN and don't level off until Los Angeles' airspace. I know management is pulling data to see if the military is utilizing that extra chunk of airspace.Don't let the military shut down the offshore and coast routings. It doesn't provide service to the user and causes more complex coordination and traffic situations.




Synopsis: ZOA Center Controller reported problems associated with the military; its use of special airspace; and the repercussions on commercial aircraft.
Date: 201910
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Cloudy; Rain; 5
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Super King Air 300
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Ferry / Re-Positioning
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Confusion; Communication Breakdown
Second reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew FLC Overrode Automation; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: During approach into ZZZ; Approach Controller gave us a vector and said intercept final approach course. Because the final approach course was offset from the course between ZZZZZ and ZZZZZ1; the PIC queried him as to whether he wanted us to intercept 335 course to the runway or course between ZZZZZ and ZZZZZ1. Response was; 'intercept the final approach course.'Upon reaching ZZZZZ; extended centerline off of runway (final approach course). Controller said something to the effect of; 'you went a little past it; turn right (I think he gave us a heading); cleared for the approach. Then handed us off to Tower.Armed the approach; armed VNAV. As I was inside ZZZZZ at 3;000 feet (minimum at ZZZZZ was 2;200 feet); began descent to Glide Path (GP). The PIC disengaged the autopilot as we descended through GP and corrected up toward glide path at the same time as Tower gave us a 'low altitude alert; check altitude immediately.' The PIC corrected to glidepath; acquired the runway prior to reaching the MDA; set missed approach altitude and descended for an otherwise uneventful landing.


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


Synopsis: Super King Air 300 flight crew reported confusion over ATC vectors and relied on automation incorrectly; causing a low altitude alert.
Date: 201701
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 140 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Electrical Wiring & Connectors
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
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 Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Inflight I smelled something which reminded me of an electrical burning. I confirmed with the CA that he also smelled the odor. I concurred and called ATC and requested direct to the airport. While I was talking to ATC the CA was confirming with the FA that she also smelled the odor and further advised him on the situation. I continued to communicate with ATC and advised him of souls and fuel on board. After I continued to check for any further action needed and communicated with Dispatch who agreed with the decision to continue to destination; during which the smell dissipated. ATC had given us pilot's discretion from our cruise alt of 15000 to 13000. After being handed off to the next controller we descended to 10000 per ATC instructions when the smell returned. During decent we ran the decent checklists and the CA briefed the approach. We asked for fire trucks to meet us at the runway. After exiting the runway the CA made a PA to the passengers and I communicated with CFR who asked if we needed them to enter the aircraft or just do a heat sweep. I informed home we only needed a heat sweep which he performed and found no abnormalities. We then taxied to the gate. During the deplaning process several passengers informed us that they also smelled a burning smell.




Synopsis: EMB-140 First Officer detected an electrical odor at 15;000 feet approaching their destination. Expedited handling was requested and the flight landed safely at their destination.
Date: 201910
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: GSP.Airport, GA
Light: Night
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class E ZTL
ATC / advisory: Center ZTL
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Workload; Distraction
Anomaly: Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter Unstabilized Approach
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Airspace Structure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We were descending cleared direct OXABY maintain 3;700 ft. Approaching approximately 4;000 ft. ATC issued a Traffic Warning 'pop up traffic 5 miles 4;000 ft. converging; moments later I had visual on the traffic and requested a hard right turn to avoid. We turned approximately 90 degrees right. When clear of traffic we were vectored left turn back to the airport. The First Officer (Pilot Flying) who was familiar with the airport said he had the airport I called the field insight and we began approach to Runway 4. Initially we were on glideslope and PAPI but no Localizer. I verified that ILS frequencies were correct. Then glideslope started showing us low still on PAPI. I concluded something was amiss and called for a go around with ATC. ATC said they suspected we were lined up on Runway 5 at GHY approximately 10 miles to the west with no previous warning. We were given vectors back to a 19 miles downwind cleared to OXBY and cleared ILS Runway 4 at GSP. Approach and landing was normal and standard. I canceled IFR clearance on the ground (Tower was closed) and continued to the gate.There were several circumstances that contributed to this event; first and foremost was the traffic alert at low altitude that required evasive action. After being turned back to the airport a bit task saturated led to some navigational and situational awareness being a bit behind. This is why I elected to initiate a go around. This gave us the crew time to set up the approach with no traffic distractions and conduct a normal standard approach and landing to the airport. In addition this was the First Officer flying first line trip after completing IOE with 29 hours in the B737. As pilot monitoring; I needed to be more attentive than flying with a pilot with more experience. Had the Tower been open and operating may have also helped in this situation.




Synopsis: B737 Captain reported distraction and workload due to a traffic conflict that caused them to line up with the wrong runway.
Date: 201409
Location: NMM.TRACON, MS
Aircraft: No Aircraft
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Coordinator; Approach
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Distraction; Situational Awareness; Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings
Primary problem: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings

Narrative: This is a FAA facility working on a military air base. This issue involves issuing weather to pilots. The military has changed our weather vision so that issuing the weather to pilots is extremely difficult and sometimes impossible. The weather constantly scrolls on the screen which makes it impossible to read it to a pilot without having to pause while it shows on the screen again. During periods of heavy traffic this creates an enormous safety hazard to aviation. Also; the font on the screen is so small because of all the information makes it difficult to read. The military has on occasions cut the feed of weather to it before the aircraft are finished flying which was the case the other day; when an aircraft declared an emergency and the weather could not be issued for the aircraft if the pilot wanted to return and land. The screen and font is so small some of the weather is actually off the screen and cut off so that you can't see it. The military has been notified of this safety issue and they refuse to work with the FAA manager and FAA personnel on this issue. Weather is very important to aviation and this issue needs to be addressed immediately. Thank you for your time and consideration.




Synopsis: NMM TRACON Controller reports of weather system provided by the military at this facility that is hard to read.  Controller states the information constantly scrolls and the screen and font are so small that it is hard to read the weather.
Date: 201305
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: IAD.Airport, DC
Weather elements / visibility: Thunderstorm
Aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Flight plan: VFR
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class B IAD
ATC / advisory: Tower IAD
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Local
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: There were thunderstorms and lightning over the field. PCT was still running arrivals. There were also windshear alarms. I advised the Supervisor to tell PCT that I need the approaches staggered; because if my aircraft went around; they could not go south or east. They would have to turn west towards the other arrival runway. I saw the Supervisor go on the line to call them. About 10 minutes later PCT not only put the [Runway] 19L and [Runway] 19C side by side; they also put a [Runway] 19R side by side. So we had 3 aircraft on the finals; on visual approaches side by side. At this point I could not see the end of the runways. I told the aircraft that there were 2 aircraft to their right; and that there was windshear. I asked the aircraft if he wanted to break off the approach since if he had to go-around; they would have to turn the aircraft east into the weather. I found out from the Local Control 3 Controller that he told the [Runway] 19C aircraft if he had to go-around; they had to fly south into the weather. This was a very unsafe operation; especially with windshear. Luckily my aircraft landed safely. If he had to go-around he would have had to fly into a thunderstorm. There was plenty of room for PCT to vector the aircraft for staggered approaches. Give PCT a class on the effects of flying into a thunderstorm. Give PCT a class on understanding what aircraft have to do to avoid weather. Give PCT a class on aircraft accidents; so they understand what could happen if an aircraft flies into weather or has to turn away towards other traffic in IFR conditions; since over the field was IFR at that time. Give PCT a class on understanding that air traffic control is based on having outs if something goes wrong and not relying on LUCK. Give PCT a class on listening to the Tower when they tell them they need this for safety.




Synopsis: IAD Controller expressed concern regarding PCT's alleged failure to consider weather and other traffic factors during a significant thunderstorm/lightning event; noting PCT's performance was unsafe.
Date: 201606
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: BUR.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Airport; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Upon arrival at gate in BUR I exited the aircraft and walked down air stairs to the ramp area. I looked to my left and noticed that we were deplaning at the rear of aircraft in conjunction with forward exit. I was shocked to see just how close the passengers were to the number 1 engine. The family in question was approximately three to four feet from the engine as there was not a cone or employee nearby to guide anybody into terminal.The children were free to roam and could have easily touched the engine cowl; exhaust or gear and brake assembly (which just slowed us on Runway 8 to BUR). I immediately mentioned this to the Agent who had a cone placed under the wing. Upon returning to the cockpit; I noticed another Company aircraft pulled in several gates down and began rear deplanement. Again; no cones or guidance from employees for the passengers.This time I watched as a dad walked between the engine nacelle and the fuselage; jumping out the other side (much to the delight of his family; all laughs). I could not believe my eyes as these passengers are given free reign of the left side of a 737 that was inflight only moments earlier.BUR and (Company) need to be more aware of passenger movement on ramp during deplanement. I feel an employee should be standing by the number 1 engine until passengers are in terminal. It will only take one time for a passenger to reach up and touch that exhaust or a child to touch the brake and gear assembly. I would even go stand there; as the First Officer; to point passengers in right direction.




Synopsis: B737 First Officer reported observing passengers come in close proximity to hot tailpipes and brakes during ramp deplaning process.
Date: 201208
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: Super King Air 200
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Turbine Engine
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Single Pilot; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Workload; Training / Qualification; Time Pressure; Situational Awareness; Distraction; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Inflight Shutdown; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Environment - Non Weather Related; Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: I was flying into a busy Class B airport talking with Approach. I was descending to 6;000 FT. My right-hand engine was having problems which required that engine to be shutdown. I had my hands full securing the right-hand engine. I did not want to declare an emergency; Approach asked twice. On my way to 6;000 FT I descended through 6;000 FT to 5;700 FT. I asked Approach if they could expedite my arrival into the airport which they did.This was my first time flying into this Class B area; the sun was setting and I was landing on Runway XX it was hard to see the airport but [I] was vectored for LOCXX got visual and landed. I did not want to declare an emergency; but I feel in a heavy workload situation I should have asked for a block altitude.




Synopsis: A BE-20 pilot shut an engine down on approach to a Class B airport but declined to declare an emergency.