elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 202101
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Night
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Confusion; Time Pressure
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: Three flights; three last minute gate changes; full on full off on through flight; weather delays; etc. Busy with pre-COVID like Ops tempo. We got a last minute gate change and when we got to our new aircraft we called for push; same callsign; from our old gate. Surprised Ground; but no conflicts noted.Ground Ops is struggling to keep up with changes and weather issues using COVID Manning and Procedures. Constant gate changes; especially on through flights; doesn't seem to be the best solution. Pilots need to be aware of post COVID procedures irregularities and adapt accordingly. This was a simple mistake but indicative of a larger issue.Called for push from wrong gate.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported using the wrong gate number when requesting push and cited last minute gate changes; weather delays; and time pressure as contributing factors.
Date: 201703
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: F11.TRACON, FL
Aircraft: Citation V/Ultra/Encore (C560)
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class B MCO
ATC / advisory: TRACON F11
Second aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Departure
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Aircraft X was handed off to me and switched heading 300 level at 4000. On initial contact with me; I climbed to 16000 with an expedite thru 13000 for traffic. Pilot came back shortly thereafter and stated that he almost hit an aircraft when he was climbing thru 4500. I did not observe any primary or secondary targets in his proximity and I confirmed that my filter settings were 4000 to 18000 on both associated and unassociated tracks. I reviewed the Falcon replay with my supervisor and no target primary or secondary was observed when Aircraft X was climbing through 4500.To provide another measure of protection for this aircraft; I suggest that turbojet aircraft departing ISM are vectored to stay within the closest Class Bravo shelf so we can climb them up into the Class Bravo in an expeditious manner. For example; this scenario placed the aircraft under the 6000 to 10000 Class Bravo shelf before departure west climbed. Had we kept the turbojet within close proximity to ISM; the aircraft would have been in the 4000 to 10000 Class Bravo shelf prior to his climb.




Synopsis: F11 TRACON Controller reported that a pilot reported almost hitting another aircraft on climbout. Controller never observed other target on radar.
Date: 202006
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operating under: Part 135
Mission: Training
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Distraction; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Various agencies (FAA and NTSB) are ignoring the consequences of and some dangers of face coverings. Face coverings (medical masks) are dangerous in the cockpit of pressurized airplanes due to the extra time it takes to remove them (in addition to glasses and headsets) in the event of a depressurization event in flight. The masks also reduce the amount of oxygen intake due to rebreathing one's own breath. These effects can be magnified at altitude; just as smoking does. Fortunately my full time company has left the decision to wear masks in the cockpit up to individual crews. Any mask that I may be wearing comes off in the airplane.Wearing a face covering in the classroom during recurrent training is an unneeded distraction that makes any learning that much more difficult. If I had to go through an initial course for a new airplane I would probably turn down that opportunity as long as masks are required in classroom. The training provider my company uses required masks not only in the classroom but in the simulator also. I had to ignore that requirement in the sim because my glasses would fog up to the point that I had difficulty seeing. NTSB has been surprisingly quiet during all these virus issues. What ever happened to 'train as you do; do as you train'? The FAA administrator is correct in not getting involved in mandating mask use; just surprised the NTSB has not commented on this issue and the safety of flight issues mask usage by crews creates.




Synopsis: Captain reported various issues with having to wear a mask during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Date: 201908
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZDC.ARTCC, VA
Light: Dawn
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Flight plan: IFR
Airspace: Class A ZDC
ATC / advisory: Center ZDC
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Workload
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Separated Traffic
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Staffing; Weather
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: I was working all of Bay 5 combined at Sector 60 (Montebello). There was weather in my airspace as well as in ZID Sectors 96 and 86 airspace. All of the I86/I96 eastbound traffic was deviating into my airspace. There was no en-trail on any of the aircraft entering my airspace coming from ZID. All of the traffic was deviating without any real tie downs as far distance off course or trying to keep the aircraft on fixes that would keep them clear of weather so aircraft were deviating all over the place. In addition; the CLT flow was being destroyed by bad releases off the ground underneath other arrivals; and then was being t-boned by arrivals coming from the northwest that we usually do not see. Once again there was no en-trail or anything done to alleviate the complexity of the sector. There was no spacing of any traffic entering the sector from PCT or other ZDC sectors. No manager on the overnight shift ever came down to monitor the amount of traffic being worked by the Sector or the complexity of the situation. There were no restrictions issued by TMU (Traffic Management) to keep the sector from being becoming overloaded by airplanes. I was in a situation where it was too busy to try and call a manager to page back someone for help because they were at the watch desk. I had little to no time to answer land line calls. When the day shift person came in to relieve me; it was almost too busy to give up the sector and that controller also found himself in a position where he was too busy to split out the sectors.I think when there is weather; the overnight Supervisor should at least walk down to the areas and make sure that traffic is running smoothly and none of the areas are struggling to keep up. TMU needs to be more effective at monitoring situations and issuing routes and en-trail that will prevent the overnight Controllers from being overloaded by airplanes. It is unsafe to be that busy with no help. Even when there is no weather; traffic starts to increase prior to when the day shift Controllers arrive so there needs to be plans in place to manage the traffic flow better until the day shift Controllers can arrive and open up sectors. It seems to be getting to the point where we might benefit from starting the day shift [earlier].




Synopsis: ZDC Center Controller reported being inundated with traffic at the end of a mid-shift due to weather and no help from anyone.
Date: 201212
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Weather elements / visibility: Icing
Light: Night
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Taxi
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical
Detector: Person Ground Personnel
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors; Weather
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: While taxiing into gate for a tow in; on centerline; the taxi director gave the stop signal. We then noticed a tug with 5 cans in tow approaching the left side of the aircraft ahead of the wing at a 45 degree angle. The tug served and missed the aircraft by 15 feet. The tug driver did a 180 and drove off. Taxi director; ramp tower or aircrew could not get an asset number. Slow down during night inclement weather and pay attention to aircraft moving.


Second narrative: Our aircraft was assigned an arrival gate; which required a tow-in. While taxiing in the courtyard at a normal slow rate of speed; I noticed the marshallers lighted wands go from the all clear position to an emergency stop position. I immediately stopped the aircraft; and then noticed a tug driver with carts in tow trying to avoid contact with our aircraft's forward left side. Fortunately he was able to maneuver to keep clear and not strike the aircraft. Prior to this; the taxi in area was all clear and I had just turned off the aircraft's taxi light so as to not blind our Marshaller as we approached the gate. All flight deck crew members were vigilant during the taxi in and only noticed the tug driver after our aircraft was stopped. This indicates the tug driver was apparently moving at a good rate of speed and never saw our aircraft until the last minute.


Synopsis: Air Carrier flight crew reports near collision with a tug pulling carts during taxi in under Marshaller's direction.
Date: 202105
Location: FLL.Airport, FL
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; High Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class B MIA; Class C FLL
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Private; Other Former ATC controller
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Troubleshooting
Anomaly: No Specific Anomaly Occurred All Types
Detector: Person Flight Crew
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Airspace Structure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Airspace Structure

Narrative: This report does not involve a specific incident but is submitted as a suggestion to improve safety for aircraft operating in the area of FLL Class C airspace. I am recommending a change to the MIA Class B airspace to include a new section of protected airspace to provide a sterile section of airspace for arriving aircraft on the FLL 10L and 10R instrument approaches. Arriving aircraft into FLL typically are crossing PIONN at or above 2;500 feet descending to cross NOVEA at 1;800 feet on the ILS 10L and RNAV Z 10L approaches; as low as 2;200 feet on the RNAV Y approach from ZIRLA to SIYOL (which could be raised to 2;500 feet to coincide with the minimum altitudes on the ILS 10L and RNAV 10L Z approaches). Aircraft arriving on the ILS 10R and RNAV 10R approaches are crossing BLAIM at or above 3;000 descending to cross the FAF LORII at 1;800 feet. If a new wedge of class B airspace from 2;000 feet to 7;000 feet where added where currently there are no restrictions to inbound and outbound traffic utilizing HWO and OPF safety would be greatly enhanced. FLL has extensive inbound traffic and operations at HWO and OPF are significant. Air carrier passengers deserve the added protection and as a general aviation pilot the changes would have minimal impact.




Synopsis: Private Pilot suggesting a change to FLL and MIA high traffic airspace to increase safety.
Date: 201905
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: VNY.Airport, CA
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Aircraft: Medium Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class D VNY
ATC / advisory: TRACON SCT
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Distraction; Human-Machine Interface; Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Automation Aircraft Terrain Warning; Automation Aircraft TA
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: On departure; leveled off at 1;700 feet as required by the SID till 2.2 DME then continued climb to 4;000. Started turn; GPWS (Ground Proximity Warning System) gave a terrain warning; followed by a traffic alert triggered by a helicopter in front of us down low. Second guessed our initial heading of 113 and quickly consulted chart saw a turn to 313 depicted and started the turn. ATC controller saw us turning and issued an immediate turn back to 110. Then further right to 360 to join the departure. No conflict noted by TCAS or Controller just turning when he did not expect us to. After climb out to flight levels debriefed the occurrence and discovered the heading of 313 depicted on chart was for in case of loss of radio.


Second narrative: On departure; level off at 1;700 feet as required by SID till 2.2 DME then continued climb to 4;000 feet. Started turn; GPWS TERRAIN WARNING; followed by TCAS from helicopter in front of us down low. Flying pilot looked down at chart and turned to lost comm heading.Controller issued turn to correct mistake.


Synopsis: Medium Transport aircraft flight crew reported turning to an incorrect heading on departure from VNY airport resulting in an airborne conflict with a Helicopter.
Date: 201207
Local time of day: 1201-1800
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: Ramp
Anomaly: Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Other / Unknown; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Ground Personnel
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Contributing factors: Equipment / Tooling
Primary problem: Equipment / Tooling

Narrative: I met the flight at the gate as per standard [ramp procedures]. After the aircraft door had been opened and passengers had started deplaning; the [passenger loading bridge] floor rose up to the lower edge of the aircraft door. I immediately called Zone Control to report the incident. I then stopped passengers deplaning; raised the canopy and autoleveler and lowered the [loading bridge] approximately 8-10 inches. After repositioning the autoleveler I allowed passengers to resume deplaning. A Maintenance Supervisor arrived to examine the aircraft.




Synopsis: A Ground Service employee reported that during passenger deplaning the loading bridge rose without being commanded until it came in contact with the bottom of the aircraft door. The deplaning was suspended until the loading bridge was repositioned. Maintenance was contacted to check the aircraft for possible damage.
Date: 201708
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ORD.Airport, IL
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Airbus Industrie Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground ORD
Second aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Pushed back and ground issued taxi instructions. This requires a tight left turn out of the gate followed by a right turn; but oncoming traffic is not visible until completing the turn off the gate. As I headed for hotel I observed Aircraft Y approaching rapidly from the left. I was able to stop short of the non-movement area lines. The Aircraft Y continued rapidly by and their winglet passed just a few feet in front of our nose. As I first observed the Aircraft Y I asked ground if [aircraft] was stopping; to which the controller responded 'negative'. No prior mention of instructions regarding that aircraft had been issued. Aircraft Y appeared to have maintenance personnel at the controls.This is at least the fourth similar incident I have had regarding receiving taxi instructions and then having other aircraft continue ahead of me.




Synopsis: Airbus Captain reported a ground conflict while taxiing from a gate at KORD. The encroaching aircraft was moving at a high rate of speed; and did not attempt to give way.
Date: 201306
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: A320
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground ZZZ
Aircraft component: Hydraulic Main System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Troubleshooting
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Inflight Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: After uneventful flight; landed on 22L and exited on high speed and turned north on Taxiway P. Noticed the plane veer left on taxi and was unable to control airplane with nose wheel steering. Had ECAM HYD G LO PRESS and loss of nose wheel steering. Stopped airplane with brakes before exiting the taxiway. Coordinated with Ground and Maintenance to have a tug tug us to the gate. Handled the ECAM and shutdown the engines. Coordinated with the flight attendants that we were OK and would be towed in. Airport personnel said they saw hydraulic fluid leaking. Uneventful tow in to gate.


Second narrative: [Reports adds no additional information]


Synopsis: An A320 ECAM alerted HYD G LO PR on landing and with the resultant loss of nose wheel steering the aircraft veered left and was uncontrollable.
Date: 201902
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: MIA.TRACON, FL
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Falcon 50
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class B MIA
ATC / advisory: TRACON MIA
Second aircraft: Beechcraft Single Piston Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Automation Aircraft RA
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We were on an IFR flight plan. After departure; we were given vectors for left turn and assigned a 290 degree heading with clearance to climb to 9000' MSL while still in Class B airspace of MIA northwest of KOPF airport.As we were climbing through approximately 6300' at a climb rate of approximately 2000' per minute; we were issues a Traffic alert (TA) from out TCAS. I shallowed out the climb and scaled our Multi-function Display (MFD) to get a better look at the yellow TA traffic. As we were climbing through 6900' we were issued a Resolution Advisory (RA) from the TCAS to descend. I immediately matched the 1000 feet per minute down indication of the RA on the VSI and took the radio and made a 'TCAS Descent' call to ATC; at which time they gave us a reply of 'make an immediate right turn to 360 degrees; traffic 2 o'clock'.In the process of maneuvering from a climb to a descent we had rounded out and were beginning the descent from about 7300' and we spotted the Beech Bonanza go immediately over the top of us at the same time we were initiating the right turn to 360 heading.ATC said nothing to us about contacting anyone and nothing further came from them except the hand off to MIA Center for the continuation of our IFR flight.




Synopsis: Falcon 50 Captain reported a near mid-air collision with a light aircraft after departing OPF.