elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201701
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Icing; Rain; 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Citationjet (C525/C526) - CJ I / II / III / IV
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Landing
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution
Contributing factors: Airport; Procedure; Weather
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: Pilot was cleared to land 'at pilots own risk' on runway XY. Runway XY was closed due to concern over braking action due to ice on runway. Landing was made with no issue as braking action was adequate.Pilot deemed Runway XY to be safest runway to land on because; airport is familiar; tower and ground crew were relaying conditions; freezing rain in the area would have to be flown through if attempting an alternate; and nearby airports' real time conditions were unknown.Pilot is unsure if any violation was committed.




Synopsis: C525 pilot elected to land 'at own risk' on an icy runway which ATC had closed for fear of poor braking action. The pilot experienced no problems; but would have flown through freezing rain to his alternate.
Date: 202011
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Other Non-Flight
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Distraction
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Other Non-flight
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Forgot to submit my COVID assessment prior to the first leg in the morning.  I did the assessment and became distracted through my preparation to begin my day and forgot to submit my COVID assessment.  I submitted my assessment once the first flight segment was completed.[Cause was being] distracted and not following personal reminding procedures.  Maybe there is a way that we can acknowledge that we have performed the COVID assessment in the same way we acknowledge that we are FIT for Duty.  This would make a normal part of the procedures we already have in place.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported forgetting to submit the COVID assessment form prior to the first leg.
Date: 202002
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: LAX.Airport, CA
Aircraft: B737-900
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B LAX
ATC / advisory: TRACON SCT
Second aircraft: Widebody Transport
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness; Time Pressure
Anomaly: Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Environment - Non Weather Related; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Downwind to base leg we encountered wake turbulence from an Aircraft Y; their position previously called by ATC. ATC traffic issued a traffic advisory; separate from the Aircraft Y that we were following. Due to our heading into the rising sun; we could not make eye contact with the second aircraft. ATC issued a clearance to descend to 3000 feet while we were presently leaving (approx) 7500 feet. ATC then queried if we had the airport in sight. F/O (First Officer) confirmed that it was. I began slowing the aircraft in anticipation of an approach clearance from ATC. We were issued a clearance to turn southbound (base leg). The landing gear was lowered; and flaps began to be positioned on flap speed schedule. I did not recall if we had in fact been given a clearance to proceed via a visual approach to Runway 24R. At this point; we queried ATC for that approach clearance. We were then issued a clearance for a visual approach to Runway 24R. I did not realize that I had overshot the final approach course; and corrected by turning to a more northerly heading to intercept the Runway 24R course. Proceeding visually; I had (what I thought) was 24R in sight. LAX Tower informed us that we were lined up for Runway 25R. We were re-cleared for a visual approach to Runway 24R; and I was able to proceed over to that runway in a stable landing configuration and land. My biggest takeaways from this event is to return to the most effective mode(s) of automation after an upset. I should have reengaged the autopilot. I also should have continued on the downwind leg until I had the aircraft configured in a less hurried manner.




Synopsis: B737-900 Captain reported lining up with the wrong runway after encountering wake turbulence from a preceding aircraft on a visual approach to LAX.
Date: 201302
Aircraft: No Aircraft
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Dispatcher
Reporter qualification: Dispatch Dispatcher
Human factors: Training / Qualification; Workload; Time Pressure; Human-Machine Interface; Fatigue
Anomaly: No Specific Anomaly Occurred All Types
Detector: Person Dispatch
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Company Policy; Human Factors; Staffing
Primary problem: Staffing

Narrative: We continually find ourselves understaffed. Desks continue to be split; trainers taken off training desks to cover sick calls/open desks without overtime list being run with people on the list wanting overtime. In effort to save money we are beating the dispatchers badly to fatigue. Anything deviating from a smooth day creates workload issues. Screen printer becomes a monster....some dispatchers don't even bring it up. Fellow dispatchers are unable or unwilling to help since they were pounded the day before and still exhausted. Podium usually unaware of workload; and often times not very helpful. A time or two AFTER ASKING them a weather question floater was brought in although it was a little late...and weather was forecast the day before. Lots of fatigue building up with dispatchers. Calling fatigued not an option during a shift...just compounds the problem on the floor. New dispatchers continue to be put on the floor well before they are fully trained. Seems as if they are pushed through training to avoid paying for overtime/open shifts. It used to be okay to learn a lot on the floor after signed off...does not work well these days and hasn't for a while. Weak dispatchers are now training improper or incorrect techniques. Increases workload when take over for new dispatchers (with already a year's experience) who miss alternates; etc....needing extra help from fellow dispatchers who are already busy on the floor.... Latest new dispatcher got a diversion and didn't know what to do. Most new dispatchers do not know how and when to update; unaware of a lot of ATC procedures; reroutes; amending releases when TAF changes; unaware of R/I R/F U/F entries on JR mask...how and when ATC strips sent to ATC; guess at alternate minimums.... taught to work as fast as they can to avoid being pummeled not checking winds/altitude minimums/NOTAMs. F shift turnovers difficult when everyone else is up to their eyeballs in work. As if we need a dispatcher on call for each shift.




Synopsis: A Dispatcher reported he is concerned about training; fatigue; and general work environment issues.
Date: 201902
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: Mixed
Weather elements / visibility: Rain; 3
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: PA-28 Cherokee/Archer/Dakota/Pillan/Warrior
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Instructor; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Inflight Event / Encounter VFR In IMC; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure; Weather
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: My student and I called Ground for taxi clearance and informed them we'd be closed traffic. Controller said there was rain heading towards the field and that we might only get one circuit in. I checked weather to the south and saw a small shower moving in and judged to be no safety factor. We were cleared to Runway XX. After run-up; we were cleared onto the active by a different Controller (Tower Controller) and upon taking the active; I saw a heavy shower a mile off of the departure end. I considered aborting but didn't because I was expected to take off and any changes always seemed to confound this particular Controller. I took off; turned left cross wind at 500 feet. (SOP at this field) and called Tower at midfield downwind for my landing clearance. I was told to exit the Class D into marginal and unknown weather without an IFR clearance or with the Controller having any knowledge of whether I was an instrument rated pilot or if the aircraft was instrument capable. I protested and said I could clearly see the runway to land; but was directed to exit the Class D while remaining north of the approach course to Runway XX. I had to scud run 30 nm away and plan an IFR return. While returning to ZZZ; I picked up a pop up clearance from Approach via radar vectors to ZZZZZ and thence; cleared for the RNAV XX approach into ZZZ by the Approach Controller. Established on the approach and several miles out; I was handed off to the same Tower Controller who again cleared us for the RNAV XX approach. I do not recall if I was ever actually given a clearance to land. I was still annoyed at the Controller for having risked our safety the way he did. This particular Controller has a history of callous disregard for the right of way general safety of small GA aircraft and has repeatedly issued unsafe instructions to small GA aircraft to clear the way for GA jet traffic. I should have 1. Not taken off or 2. Replied unable when directed to exit the class D into unsafe weather conditions.




Synopsis: PA-28 flight instructor reported the Tower Controller provided an unnecessary; unsafe clearance towards adverse weather conditions.
Date: 201404
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZBW.ARTCC, NH
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Widebody; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZBW
ATC / advisory: Center ZBW
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Trainee; Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Developmental
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Procedure; Company Policy
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Training on R-side; not very complicated traffic or high volume but as a new trainee with less than a month of radar experience I was a little behind and trainer was pushing me to get caught up. A widebody was an international arrival headed to PHL. I evaluated spacing with another PHL international arrival and flashed both aircraft to Sector 39. After R-39 accepted both handoffs; trainer instructed that as aircraft were on similar but different routes; one had DNY SLATT4; Aircraft X had DNY LVZ SPUDS2 (these may be reversed; see recommendations). Therefore I was not helping Sector 39 with spacing and needed to get the aircraft on the same route. D-side coordinated route changes post handoff. I issued 'Direct DNY' to the first aircraft. I then issued 'Direct DNY join the SLATT4 arrival' to Aircraft X. Aircraft X read back 'Direct DNY'. Read back was missed by all three controllers plugged in at the time. Both aircraft were switched to Sector 39 frequency.The error was caught by DNY Sector 24 when issuing descent clearance to Aircraft X. Aircraft X reported he did not have the crossing fix on his route. DNY informed supervisory personnel and additionally indicated they have had issues with this aircraft's ATC route not matching the route the pilots have the previous two days. Supervisory personnel informed me at end of work shift. Today the same flight flew through my airspace. I asked the aircraft his route and it was not the same as filed. He had DNY; a fix; LVZ; then the arrival. I issued DNY then the arrival. This makes four days in a row the aircraft's route has not matched the route in the EDST.The readback/hearback issue here is very simple. It's the controller's responsibility to obtain and listen to the readback and catch any errors. An additional issue identified by this event is this specific flight being on a different route from that which ATC indicates. Complicating this is both the SPUDS2 and SLATT4 arrivals are extremely similar in both route and fixes. It appears the only difference is the equipment requirements for the aircraft. Further investigation is warranted for this second point to determine where the route is getting messed up.




Synopsis: Reporter describes issue with flight plan pilot has as not being the same as ATC flight plan. Problem reported has been an issue for the last 4 days for this particular flight.
Date: 201511
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: SAN.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Large Transport
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class B SCT
ATC / advisory: TRACON SCT
Second aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict
Detector: Automation Aircraft RA; Automation Aircraft TA; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors; Aircraft; Airspace Structure; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Climbing out on  departure passing 13;000 feet I received a TCAS TA then a TCAS RA. TCAS RA began at approximately 14;000 feet and indicated descend. The threat aircraft disappeared from the Nav Display after showing a 400 feet above. I began the evasive maneuver; disconnecting the autopilot and descending; then I acquired the aircraft and skydivers visually. The threat aircraft was moving right to left and was dropping skydivers in front of our flight path. I then initiated a right turn; 30 degrees angle of bank; in order to deconflict with any skydivers that may have been left trailing behind the threat aircraft. We reported the event to TRACON and the controller assured us that the skydivers were not close to us. I disagree; however; as I could see two of the individuals and we had a 140 knot tailwind that would have contributed to the potential for an impact.




Synopsis: Aircraft climbing on departure responded to a TCAS/RA. Aircraft then sighted the traffic and skydivers which were jumping from the TCAS traffic aircraft. The Controller had not issued traffic. The Controller advised the departing traffic that the Controller did not think they were close.
Date: 201411
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: PSF.Airport, MA
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Cloudy; Snow; 0
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Beechcraft Twin Piston Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Final Approach
ATC / advisory: TRACON ALB
Aircraft component: Compass (HSI/ETC)
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: While turning onto the final approach course for RNAV/GPS Approach to RW26; my HSI (both Heading Indicator and CDI) began to fail; acting erratically.  While still outside of the FAF; the HSI began to spin wildly out of control; also causing my MFD to continually change its display and course information; both of which were quite distracting. I had just entered IMC in a snow squall.  While reported conditions at the airport were VFR; I was over the mountains to the east of PSF and in solid IMC.  I elected to discontinue the approach.  I turned 180 degrees first to the north and then to the east to return to good VFR conditions that I had just left.  I did this rather than risk continuing the approach; or remain in IMC to execute the published Missed Approach; not being able to fly an exact heading.  Radar services had been terminated by Albany approach; and when I was able to re-establish contract I informed them of the situation and asked for clearance to a higher altitude on a southeast heading; which they provided.  I did not declare an emergency which perhaps I should have as I did not conform to the Missed Approach Procedure.  There were no conflicts.




Synopsis: Beech B55 pilot reported HSI failure in IMC on approach to PSF.
Date: 201911
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: MKJK.ARTCC, FO
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Turbulence
Light: Night
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
ATC / advisory: Center MKJK
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General Physical Injury / Incapacitation
Contributing factors: Weather
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: At FL380 passing the north shore of Jamaica; aircraft experienced light to moderate turbulence for 10-15 seconds. The sky was clear; you could see all of Jamaica and most of Cuba. The radar was on; set -1; full gain; 160 mile scale. No weather was depicted. The same radar setting was used all flight and we circumnavigated many areas of weather over South America with light chop the worst ride of the night for small periods of time. We started to pick up some St Elmo's fire on the windscreen and a little green appeared on the right side of the radar within 5 miles of aircraft. We started a left turn and entered light turbulence with occasional moderate turbulence. It lasted 10-15 seconds. Rainfall could be heard on the airframe. Out the front of the aircraft all was clear. The turbulence ended and it was smooth air from there to Miami. The flight attendants reported the carts in the aft galley had all fallen over. Minor bruises and stiffness from bracing their positions so they wouldn't be tossed about by the turbulence was reported. The RPM turbulence part of WSI did not show any turbulence in the area.


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


Synopsis: Air carrier flight crew reported clear air turbulence that caused minor injuries to the flight attendants.
Date: 202104
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: BOI.Airport, ID
Weather elements / visibility: 12
Aircraft: Small Aircraft
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower BOI
Second aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 2 Eng; Retractable Gear
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Instructor; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; Flight Crew Rejected Takeoff
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Told to taxi into position and hold; after landing traffic. Aircraft Y was cleared for takeoff on a parallel runway. Aircraft cleared the runway ahead of us. There was an aircraft cleared to cross our runway at the nearest intersection approximately 1;500 ahead. Training pre-solo student and expectation bias; along with my inattentiveness were the causes. We started our takeoff roll; saw the crossing traffic; and stopped approximately 1;000 feet from the Piper Cherokee. Tower told us we were not cleared for takeoff.




Synopsis: GA flight instructor reported a ground conflict after they began their takeoff roll with an aircraft crossing their runway 1;500 feet ahead.