elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201912
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: EWR.Airport, NJ
Aircraft: Embraer Jet Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B EWR
ATC / advisory: TRACON N90
Second aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Workload
Anomaly: Conflict Airborne Conflict
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: We were off the PHILBO arrival on a heading from approach and descending from 6;000 to 3;000. We had just been told to switch runways from 22L to 11 so we began to set up for the ILS to Runway 11. As we were approaching level off around 3;600 feet; we received a traffic alert on our TCAS for traffic below us. We spotted it right as we were starting to level off. The traffic was 500 below us. We received a corrective RA as we were leveling at 3;000 for ADJUST VERTICAL SPEED ADJUST. I disengaged the Autopilot and pitched the nose slight to the green arc keeping our altitude at around 3;150 feet and kept our eye on the traffic. We heard clear of conflict right as ATC was advising us of traffic. We continued our descent to 3;000; re-engaged the Autopilot and continued with the flight. The aircraft was VFR and most likely at an altitude 500 feet below us. We were only descending at 1;000 FPM to avoid setting off the TCAS. ATC had advised us off the traffic well after the initial traffic alert. I didn't think it would go off considering we still had 500 feet of clearance. The VFR traffic was probably slightly higher than they were supposed to be which was what set off the ADJUST VERTICAL SPEED MESSAGE ADJUST as we were beginning to level off. We didn't have much of a chance to inform ATC since we didn't get a climb or descend instruction and we pretty much just stopped our descent slight above our assigned altitude as the traffic passed slowly from left to right. We maintained visual contact with the traffic throughout. We continued the flight without informing ATC of the RA because it didn't really require us to drastically change altitude and the were extremely busy.




Synopsis: Embraer jet Captain reported receiving a TCAS resolution advisory during arrival to EWR following a runway change.
Date: 201912
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: HNL.TRACON, HI
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B HNL
ATC / advisory: TRACON HCF
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Workload; Time Pressure; Distraction; Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Unstabilized Approach
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: We were on downwind descending from 8;000 ft. to 3;000 ft. at 250 kts. Just above 3;000 ft. ATC turned us on a right base at which point I started slowing to 210 kts. As we rolled out; I saw this was going to be a very tight base to final turn. We were given an additional vector and cleared to intercept the localizer. We intercepted the localizer at 3;000 ft. and 210 kts. and accepted the Visual Approach. We were on localizer and above glide slope. I called for gear down and continued to configure for landing. I spun the altitude window away from 3;000 ft. and used vertical speed down 1;500 ft. to capture glide slope. At 1;000 ft. I saw us on glide slope and configured for landing and called stable. I turned off the autopilot and shallowed our descent rate. Unfortunately; I did not realize I had never selected approach mode and as I attempted to fly the Visual Approach the auto thrust continued in idle as it was expecting a 1;500 fpm descent. The First Officer called speed as we were below ref trending lower. The First Officer correctly analyzed the situation and turned off the flight directors restoring the auto thrust input to command for ref speed. At this point I turned off the autopilot and continued the approach and landing. I think we may have gone a bit below then a bit above glide slope from 900 ft. to 400 ft. We should have executed a go around shortly after the 1;000 ft. call instead of going into problem solving mode. Unfortunately; I fell into the trap of being in VFR conditions on a Visual Approach trying to go from high and fast to fully configured and stable with an error on my part for never having selected approach mode. We may or may not have technically been unstable; but a go around would have been the wiser course of action.


Second narrative: Second narrative contains no new information.


Synopsis: Air Carrier First Officer reported an unstabilized approach.
Date: 202102
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: MCO.Airport, FL
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class E ZJX
ATC / advisory: TRACON F11
Second aircraft: UAV: Unpiloted Aerial Vehicle
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Airspace Violation All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: On approach into MCO; the Captain identified a drone off our port side as we were landing [Runway] 18R. I was the pilot flying; had no visual on the drone; but was advised of it.




Synopsis: Air carrier First Officer reported an airborne conflict with a drone during approach to MCO airport.
Date: 202112
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: IMC
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Second aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Confusion; Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict NMAC
Detector: Automation Aircraft TA; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Weather; Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I DO NOT KNOW IF THIS WAS A CLOSE CALL. We never received an RA. We were on final to ZZZ Runway XXL. Weather was below CATIII mins. We were established on the LOC; I believe level at 3;000 feet or 4;000 feet. A white traffic symbol popped up showing 3 to 4 hundred feet. below us under the tip of the triangle for our own ship display. As it passed to our left; we broke out of the clouds and saw it was an air carrier crossing over to the ZZZ ILS XX. We never received an RA nor were we ever given any traffic calls from approach.




Synopsis: Air Carrier Captain reported an NMAC with another air carrier crossing underneath them on final approach. The reporter stated they did not receive a TCAS/RA or traffic advisory from ATC.
Date: 201908
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Taxi
Aircraft component: Main Gear
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Instructor; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Ground Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: After completing a training flight to ZZZ with my part 141 instrument student a normal landing was made on Runway XX after completing an instrument approach. After a normal landing and rollout; we slowed to our normal taxi speed and began to exit Runway XX on Taxiway XX when the left main gear collapsed. I executed an emergency shutdown procedure as the aircraft skidded a short distance before coming to a stop on Taxiway XX. We exited and secured the aircraft. There were no injuries.




Synopsis: C172 flight instructor reported main gear collapse after landing.
Date: 202101
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Second aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach; Departure
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: It was toward [the] end of the rush; I was working the low side and had all of my aircraft slowing to 170 kts. Controller Y plugged in for a relief briefing after working as the main arrival coordinator. As I was going through the position relief checklist Controller Y noticed something was off. At first I thought Controller Y was looking at the spacing on final; which was perfect. But then I saw Aircraft X on a 180 heading racing towards the Runway XL final. My first reaction was to turn Aircraft X right to a 330 heading but then Controller Y suggested a left turn to continue eastbound away from final. I issued a left turn 090 and then a climb to 050 to get above the traffic on final approach.It was clear that Aircraft X took the left turn to 180. Aircraft Y had turn to a 180 heading at his appropriate time.If it wasn't for the fast acting from Controller Y the issue could have worsen.In this new world of 'COVID Traffic' pilots need to do a better job of listening to control instructions especially when the volume is high.




Synopsis: TRACON Controller reported clearance communication issues with an aircraft resulted in a conflict which was saved by another attentive Controller who offered a different heading to avoid further separation issues.
Date: 201212
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Citation II S2/Bravo (C550)
Operator: Fractional
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Other / Unknown
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: During my two minute overlap having been relieved from Local; I observed a sweeper vehicle going onto Runway 15 at Taxiway B immediately after hearing my relief clear an aircraft for takeoff. Local noticed the same thing and immediately cancelled the aircraft's takeoff clearance. The vehicle was then instructed to report off of the runway. This was a fairly new Ground Controller working snow removal operations for one of the first times. He was certified on the position in a time where snow removal wasn't happening. There may or may not be any refresher training conducted on snow removal operations here and the CPCs that have been around a while can manage; but new people have no actual training on the operation; depending on when they were training. This should be looked at and corrected. Recommend at a minimum; a training class with current CPC be a requirement before working Ground Control for anyone not trained in the actual operation.




Synopsis: Tower Controller cancelled a takeoff clearance after observing a sweeper entering the runway; the reporter noting the Ground Controller was inexperienced working snow removal operations and failing to coordinate with Local.
Date: 202104
Local time of day: 1801-2400
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 Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Distraction
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Fuel Issue
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was the Captain on Aircraft X from ZZZ to ZZZ1. We were boarding the flight and all activities by my First Officer and I were finished. We accomplished the release briefing; departure review; and the appropriate checklists. Our flight was originally planned with a Ramp Fuel of 6300 [pounds]. We had 6600 pounds on board as Gate did not have any ground power or ground air available. I found out that through personal sources that ZZZ1 was going ATC - Zero due to COVID cleaning. This information was not on our release and had me concerned. I called our Dispatcher and he stated he was unaware of this situation. My Dispatcher did some checking and found the closure announcement. We determined an alternate of ZZZ2 and enough holding fuel for 48 minutes would be enough. This put the Ramp Fuel at 10;000 pounds. I accepted Release X and ended the call.The flight took off and we proceeded to ZZZ1 via the STAR arrival. We were initially given a hold assignment at the ZZZZZ Intersection. Just as I had put that hold into the FMS; that clearance was cancelled and we were sent directly to ZZZZZ1 to hold as published. This hold was on the final approach course of Runway XXR. We held for about 15 to 20 minutes before being cleared for the approach. Had I not checked my personal sources; there is a good chance the flight would have had to declare a fuel emergency. However; the flight was done safely and arrived only a few minutes late.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported finding out a FAA facility was going to close via personal sources rather than through the flight release information.
Date: 202110
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Citation X (C750)
Operator: Air Taxi
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Rudder Control System
Component problem: Improperly Operated; Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Taxi
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Confusion
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Inflight Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Weather
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: We picked up Aircraft X in ZZZ1 for an empty reposition flight to ZZZ. Aircraft X had recently been worked on for a write up concerning 'no nose-wheel steering.' This write up had been cleared by Maintenance and the aircraft had been returned to service. While taxiing out at ZZZ1; I made sure to test all functionality of the nose-wheel steering components (rudders and tiller operation) as well the NWS disconnect function on the yoke. Everything seemed to be working fine so we departed ZZZ1 for ZZZ. We made a visual approach backed up by the RNAV XX to Runway XX. Winds were gusting 80 degrees from the right at around 15-18 kts. We made an uneventful; crosswind landing on Runway XX and after lowering the nose to the ground I deployed the thrust reversers and began braking shortly after. Because of the right crosswind; I was still holding in right aileron control when I noticed the aircraft was staring to drift left across the runway centerline. I tried putting in right rudder to counteract the drift and received no response from the airplane. At this point we had slowed down to about 80 kts. and I grabbed the tiller and tried to put in right tiller to steer the aircraft back to centerline and found I had no steering control using the tiller either. I began modulating the brake pedals and used differential braking to steer the aircraft back onto centerline while we continued to slow down. Once I knew we had the aircraft at a taxi speed and we were nearing the end of the runway; I elected to use the brakes to steer the aircraft slowly off the runway and onto the taxi way at the intersection of Runway XX and Taxiway XX. The ramp is right there on Taxiway XX so I steered straight ahead and slowly worked the airplane onto the ramp and clear of the taxiway as to not be an obstacle for other aircraft operations. We set the brake and shut the aircraft down once we knew we were out of the way and in a safe position. No damage to aircraft/persons/property occurred.




Synopsis: Light transport pilot reported that during landing rollout the aircraft began to drift off centerline and did not respond to rudder inputs. The pilot used differential braking to steer the aircraft back onto centerline and exit the runway safely.
Date: 201504
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: CMY.Airport, IL
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 1 Eng; Retractable Gear
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class D CMY; Class E ZAU
ATC / advisory: Center ZAU
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Chart Or Publication; Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Aircraft X was inbound to CMY.  I asked him to advise when he had the weather and NOTAMs for CMY and what type of approach he wanted.  He said he had the weather and NOTAMs for CMY and wanted the visual approach to Runway 29.  I told him to report the airport in sight for the visual approach.  When Aircraft X was approximately 10 miles from the airport he reported he had the airport in sight.  I cleared him for the visual approach to CMY.  He acknowledged the clearance and canceled IFR.  I acknowledged his cancellation.  A few minutes later; I heard 'Chicago center; Aircraft X.'  He had a flight plan filed from CMY to BMI and I assumed he had departed CMY VFR and wanted to pick up his IFR flight plan so I put in a departure message on the new flight plan; and told him to go ahead.  Aircraft X asked if there were any NOTAMs stating runway closures at CMY.  I looked up the NOTAMs and there were 2:  RWY 1/19 CLSD; and RWY 11/29 CLSD.  I advised him of this and he said; Ok; thank you; and was off frequency before I could ask him any further questions about his intentions.  I called ZMP sector 05 to see if they had talked to him since there was a VFR target going from CMY to LSE.  I assume that was Aircraft X but have no way of knowing for sure.  In the end; I removed strips on the departed flight plan from CMY to BMI.I have no recommendations.  The NOTAMs stating the runway closures were 5 days old and I verified that the pilot had all of the NOTAMs for CMY airport.  He should have been aware of the runway closures.




Synopsis: A Chicago Center (ZAU) Controller reports that he issued a visual approach clearance to an aircraft and the pilot canceling IFR a few minutes later. The pilot then returned to the frequency and asked the Controller if he knew of any NOTAMS for the airport. The Controller read him two NOTAMS; both of which were for the two closed runways at the airport. The pilot then left the frequency before the Controller could ask his intentions.