elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 202012
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 145 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Second aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
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: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Automation Aircraft TA; Automation Aircraft RA; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We were cleared to descend from FL180 to FL050. We ran the descent checklist and approach checklist as necessary. During descent ATC advised of a VFR target approaching our descent path at our roughly ten to eleven o' clock position. We scanned visually for traffic as well as verified the target on TCAS. ATC then advised us to descend to a higher altitude of FL070 to avoid the traffic. We amended altitude; visually scanned as the target got closer in vertical and horizontal path. As we began to approach the TCAS advised with a 'traffic; traffic' alert. Our altitude to the best of my memory was roughly between 10;000 feet and 9;000 feet. We scanned for traffic appearing to be around the 12 o' clock position of the aircraft. ATC issued a vector turning northeast bound which we complied with; however the TCAS RA went off immediately with a 'climb; climb' resolution. I disconnected the autopilot; put the thrust levers into the maximum position and adjusted the aircraft pitch to the vertical speed resolution. I believe we were about 9;000-8;700 feet before completing the RA TCAS. The separation showed about 300 feet. We climbed until clear of conflict to 9;500 feet and continued the ATC vector. After the 'clear of conflict' we leveled the aircraft; advised ATC of the TCAS RA and returned back to new given ATC clearance. We continued the flight to land safely at ZZZ. This was a huge learning experience to maintain separation and situational awareness of other aircraft and ATC instructions.




Synopsis: Air Carrier First Officer reports multiple TCAS RAs during descent to airport.
Date: 201603
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Tower, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: DA42 Twin Star
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Initial Climb
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
Second aircraft: DA40 Diamond Star
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; Instructor
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Airport
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We were doing touch and go landings in the pattern and tower was in operation. We did a touch and go and turned a normal right crosswind and downwind. After we turned downwind we heard another aircraft report a near miss. We had not seen the other aircraft prior to following them in for landing. I did not see them when we were on upwind or crosswind and assumed that they were ahead of us; already on downwind.


Second narrative: During a routine training flight I was doing pattern work. We were flying right traffic for runway XY. While we were flying there was another aircraft that was behind us in the pattern. While we were on our crosswind leg our TIS (Traffic Information System) began calling out traffic at the same altitude. We were scanning for the traffic but it was giving us very random positions. I believe the other aircraft was close enough that it could not give an accurate position. As we turned on a right downwind I looked out the right window and saw the left side of Aircraft X as they were also in their turn to downwind inside of us. From what I could determine it seemed that the Aircraft X had turned and early crosswind and then we both turned downwind at the same time. After I saw the Aircraft X I took the controls from my student and made evasive action to avoid collision with the Aircraft X. As I turned out of the pattern I told the tower that I was exiting the pattern and had experienced a near miss. After I informed tower of the situation they asked the Aircraft X if they had me in sight and they said they did not.


Synopsis: Two instructor pilots reported perspectives on a near-mid-air-collision while operating in the traffic pattern of a busy tower controlled airport.
Date: 201705
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZDC.ARTCC, VA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 170/175 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZDC
ATC / advisory: Center ZDC
Second aircraft: B777 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Anomaly: Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Illness / Injury; 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 Took Evasive Action; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control; General Physical Injury / Incapacitation
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: [We were cruising] at FL350. The aircraft abruptly banked left 50-60 degrees with no warning. The autopilot was on and we were in VMC conditions and smooth air. Both the Captain and myself grabbed the controls and regained control of the aircraft; bringing the wings level. The autopilot was disconnected in this process. We notified ATC of the event and asked if we were behind any heavy aircraft. ATC informed us that we were 9 miles in trail of a B777. We lost roughly 1500 feet during the event but we were already cleared to descend to FL270 at our discretion to cross a fix at that altitude. We coordinated with ATC to continue our descent early and slow the aircraft to increase separation with the heavy B777 in front of us. A few minutes later we were passed to Approach Control. After we checked in with Approach Control the aircraft again abruptly banked to the left roughly 20-25 degrees. We informed ATC of this additional event and asked for an off course vector to get away from the B777 in front of us. The flight was then completed normally.Two passengers were injured in the cabin but refused treatment. FA1 was injured by a galley cart. The Captain coordinated with operations and asked for a customer service manager [and] paramedics to meet us at the gate. Paramedics cleared both passengers and the flight attendant was taken to the hospital for observation.Increase separation behind heavy aircraft to avoid wake turbulence.


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


Synopsis: EMB-175 flight crew reported two wake turbulence encounters inbound to IAD in trail of a B777 that resulted in 'abrupt' rolls and loss of altitude.
Date: 201807
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: DCA.Tower, DC
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Distraction
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We were on final approach flying the RNAV 19 when we received the 'CAUTION' 'OBSTACLE' alert. We had the TRUPS Arrival and RNAV 19 approach set in the FMS. The Captain and I verified all the points in the FMS matched the JEPPs arrival and approach. We also read and discussed all of the company pages regarding flying into DCA. This was a night approach. All appeared to be going well during the approach; we had LNAV/VNAV engaged and the Captain was completely configured (Flaps 40) and on speed prior to the recommended point of GREYS. The current altimeter setting was set. As the plane was descending over the river I heard a call from Tower but did not understand what he said because we got the 'CAUTION' 'OBSTACLE' call at the same time. I attempted to respond to the controller to repeat; but I inadvertently pressed the Auto Pilot Disconnect button instead of the Radio button on the yoke. I said to the Captain 'That was me; I disconnected your Auto Pilot; Your Airplane'. He began flying manually. We had the river in sight and then Tower repeated the call I missed earlier saying 'Low Altitude Alert'. The Captain made an immediate correction to begin a slight climb. We were visual of the river and surrounding buildings the entire time. I noticed the airspeed decelerating and I said 'Airspeed.'. The Captain immediately added power and corrected the airspeed. He then intercepted a visual descent and glide path and landed on Runway 19 at DCA. After completing the parking checklist the Captain called the Tower Controller on speaker phone and asked him the details of the 'low altitude' call. The DCA Tower Controller was not concerned and said when his screen flashes he has to make the call. He stated it was not anything 'crazy' and sounded if this was not uncommon. He said it was not a reportable event. In retrospect; I believe we failed to trap an error and descended too low on the RNAV approach. I am not exactly sure how or why considering we were LNAV/VNAV.




Synopsis: B737 flight crew reported receiving a low altitude alert from the tower on final approach.
Date: 201207
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: DPA.Airport, IL
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Helicopter
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class D DPA
ATC / advisory: Tower DPA
Second aircraft: Small Aircraft
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Time Pressure; Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Distraction; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I was departing my helicopter with a request for a northeast departure. I began my departure after the Tower gave me clearance to depart at my own risk with no restrictions. I began my liftoff from the ramp with initial departure into the wind to the southwest with a turn to the northeast. On initial climbout at about 100 FT; I just happened to look down out my door window and noticed a shadow of a small aircraft. I immediately dove the helicopter with a left turn and looked up to see the aircraft above me seemingly on final approach to Runway 28. I completed my left turn to see the aircraft continue it's flight to the west and I contacted the Tower and stated that I did not know of the aircraft landing on said runway. The Controller replied with 'roger' and 'continue flight to the northeast' with no other mention of the incident. On initial contact; the Controller made no mention to me to remain clear of any runway which is about 200 yards from my departure ramp. I also had no idea that runway was in use since the main Runway 20 was in use by other aircraft which was an training aircraft I believe. The Controller also made no mention of another aircraft landing on Runway 28 to me and I heard no mention of me taking off from the ramp. I have no doubt in my mind without seeing the shadow and taking evasive action I would have continued my assent into the landing airplane.




Synopsis: A helicopter departed a DPA ramp and had near miss with an aircraft landing on Runway 28 after ATC cleared him for takeoff 'at his own risk' but did not report the approaching traffic.
Date: 201408
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 20
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: PA-28 Cherokee/Archer/Dakota/Pillan/Warrior
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Training
Airspace: Class E ZZZ; Class G ZZZ
Aircraft component: Landing Gear
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Check Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Commercial
Second reporter function: Single Pilot; Pilot Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Person Other Person
When detected: Other Upon entering his home after the event
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: A homeowner from a house near our airport informed us that an object had fallen through the roof of their house. The person claimed that he was not home at the time but it had happened some time between XA:00am and XG:00pm EDT. The picture the home owner showed us was of a nose wheel shimmy dampener. I checked the aircraft I was flying earlier that day and discovered the shimmy dampener was missing. From approximately XD:15pm until XE:45pm; I was conducting a flight review for a pilot in one of the flight school aircraft. The aircraft was also flown from XX:00am-XB:00am that day. It is not clear to me if the part fell during my flight or the prior flight. The pilot I was flying with did the preflight of the aircraft. I think that it would be easy to overlook the missing part if it were not there during the preflight but I have no way of knowing if the part was on the aircraft when we took off or not.


Second narrative: [My check pilot] asked me if I had noticed anything irregular during the pre-flight. I told him that; as this was my first time flying this specific airplane; I spent a longer period of time looking over the gear and their present condition prior to flying. I informed him that I noted no anomalies; but I also couldn't recall if I had seen a shimmy damper where this piece had broken off. For some reason; all that I could specifically recall spending a good deal of time observing was the inner workings of the inside nose gear well; perhaps because I had to lay on the ground to see them. But; when performing the nose gear inspection; I did not notice anything out of place. I also informed the instructor that I was at a disadvantage because I had never seen this plane prior to that flight; so there was nothing to provide as a baseline beyond previous Arrow II's I had flown. I also never noticed any irregular vibration with the nose gear during the course of the flight; including with takeoff or landing.


Synopsis: When a homeowner near the airport found an aircraft shimmy dampener from a PA-28 had fallen through the roof of his home he was able to track down the aircraft via the part type and investigation of such equipped aircraft at the airport. The reports were submitted by the pilot undergoing a BFR and his check airman who had flown the offending aircraft during the time period in question.
Date: 201904
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Dawn
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Illness / Injury
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Physical Injury / Incapacitation
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: We were on a maintenance delay at the gate on [date] after we arrived [at ZZZ]. All 3 flight attendants were in the last rows of the aircraft. Without warning we started experiencing light-headedness; dizziness. We had trouble exiting the aircraft due to extreme heaviness in legs. Airport EMT's were called. All 3 flight attendants were taken to the ER in ambulances. We all received treatment. The A [Flight Attendant] and I received IV's. Doctor's diagnosis was an inhalation event of unknown origin. When we were discharged from the ER we were sent to the hotel. We were now at 7 hours; 30 min crew rest. Our board shows a 14 hour overnight in ZZZ. They used our block in time instead of factoring in all the other events. We felt pressured to continue on with our regularly scheduled day. We should have called in fatigue; [company] management makes any flight attendant who calls in fatigue attend a fact finding meeting. This is clearly to intimidate flight attendants to not ever use a fatigue call. No flight crew should ever be expected to fly their regular flights after such a stressful medical event. Punitive measures by management to discourage flight attendants from calling in fatigue should be immediately discontinued. Possibly if 1 or 2 people only from the [Operations Center] handling these crew medical events would help eliminate any misunderstanding about crew rest legalities.




Synopsis: B737-800 Flight Attendant reported health issues during maintenance delay resulting in entire Flight Attendant crew treated by medical doctor for inhalation of unknown fumes.
Date: 201310
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Aircraft: Embraer Phenom 100
Operator: Fractional
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach; Departure
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: An Embraer Phenom 100 was inbound to ZZZ at 8;000 feet. I meant to descend him to 6;000 feet but I incorrectly issued 4;000 feet putting him in conflict with a ZZZ1 departure. Recommendation; work on hearback/readback clearances.




Synopsis: TRACON Controller issued a descent to 4;000; thinking he was issuing 6;000. Missed the read back and lost separation.
Date: 201506
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: MMTJ.Airport, FO
Flight conditions: Mixed
Weather elements / visibility: Fog; 5
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Gulfstream II (G1159)
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Initial Approach
ATC / advisory: TRACON MMTJ
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying; Instructor
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Instructor; Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: I love Mexico. I don't like confusing approach to IFR approaches and the ATC system they have down there. Every flight has some confusing lost-in-the-void instructions that make little to no sense.On this day we were given a clearance over the TIJ VOR; CLEARED FOR THE VOR2 APPROACH RUNWAY 27.If we get such a clearance it is my understanding as Pilot in Command; since it is NOT a vector to the final nor to an IAF; as a pilot we can go to ANY IAF 'Instrument Approach Fix' we desire to commence the approach safely since we were not being vectored to final or being vectored to an IAF. Mind you TIJ VOR is NOT an IAF!So we began to fly to the missed approach point for safety to keep us in the most protected airspace and then commence the approach; via descend in the hold to the DME arc; then the TIJ approach control begins barking at us to intercept the 120 degree radial outbound from the TIJ VOR and then procedure turn back in onto the final we assumed! So if we are cleared for the approach with no vectors and expected to know this yet it is not given in a clearance NOR is it depicted as a lead track radial on the chart. We either get a vector OR we are cleared for an approach we fly ourselves. We cannot do both. Fortunately we were able to catch the 120 degree radial however these clearances are confusing at best if not unsafe since crews must make short notice changes that can destabilize the aircraft and the approach. Also a turn from the 120 degree radial is more than 30 degrees and is considered a NEXT GEN turn or approach thus we are unable to perform that through an FMS or any other means; there goes the procedure turn; which there is none until you get to an IAF.


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


Synopsis: Gulfstream II flight crew reported confusion with the approach clearance issued by a MMTJ ATC controller.