elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201206
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Gulfstream IV / G350 / G450
Operator: Fractional
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Turbine Engine
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Fractional
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Diverted; General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: While en route at FL400 we received a red CAS message 'Engine Exceedance' and observed the left engine TGT spiking two or three times between 910-990 degrees (left throttle was retarded during that period); which is beyond engine limitations. We consulted the aircrafts QRH and AFM manuals for 'Engine Exceedance.' Per checklist procedure we retarded the throttle to idle and the engine TGT returned to normal operating limits. We were unable to maintain FL400 with the left engine at idle. An emergency was declared and a descent was initiated. We requested and were given divert to the nearest suitable airport. Brief holding was required to achieve landing weight and the eventual landing was uneventful.




Synopsis: A Gulfstream IV with spiking TGT in the left engine diverted to a nearby airport with the engine at idle.
Date: 201405
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Cheetah; Tiger; Traveler AA5 Series
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Final Approach; Landing
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Trainee; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Inflight Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach; Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control
Contributing factors: Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: While flying as pilot in command; closed traffic with a CFI. I was cleared for touch-and-go and warned of rotor wash. At the same time ATC cleared a helicopter to land on the taxiway right next to us. We got hit by the rotor wash. It threw us at the ground in a hard left 45 degree bank. It took the CFI and me both to recover without hitting the ground; a building; and the helicopter. I had the helicopter in sight at the time of the incident. It was parallel to us only a few feet lower. Left wing (my side) missed the ground by about 10 feet. We managed to recover; but it took both of us fighting the yoke to level the wings. I put full throttle; the CFI lowered the nose. We just missed the helicopter. I put the flaps in and we cleared the two story building by just a few feet and climbed out reporting the go-around to ATC. The situation was caused by ATC landing the helicopter on a taxiway about 20 feet from the runway center line where we were less than 50 feet AGL in the same location. We had no warning of the taxiway landing as helicopters [use a different Tower frequency].




Synopsis: AA5 pilot with instructor reports momentary loss of control at 50 feet AGL caused by rotor wash from a helicopter landing on the parallel taxiway. The helicopter and a building are narrowly avoided as control is regained and a go-around is initiated.
Date: 201405
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.TRACON, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B737-700
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: Pressurization Control System
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: It was first flight for aircraft after maintenance was performed. On climbout and passing through 10;000 FT; received auditory warning for cabin pressurization. Looked at pressurization readout and saw cabin altitude was 10;000 FT. Performed immediate action items: donned oxygen masks: On 100% and crew communications: Established. Ran through the checklist and saw switch was in manual. Manually closed outflow and closed outflow valve to get cabin altitude below 10;000 FT and then switched to auto. Cabin pressurized normally and continued flight. We momentarily leveled off at 10;000 FT while running checklist and pressurizing cabin. After checklist complete and pressurization complete climbed to cruise altitude. Better checklist adherence and confirmation of items during checklist challenge and response.




Synopsis: On the first flight for aircraft after maintenance was performed; a B737-700 First Officer experiences a cabin altitude warning horn passing through 10;000 FT. The aircraft is leveled and the pressurization control switch is found in the manual position. After restoring pressurization and switching to auto; the flight continues to destination.
Date: 201809
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ORD.Airport, IL
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: Regional Jet 200 ER/LR (CRJ200)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
Second aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Taxiing clockwise on taxiway A; we were directed to hold short of A7 for traffic to cross in front of us. Captain (PF [Pilot Flying]) stopped short of the taxiway with greater than adequate room for a CRJ-200 to cross in front of us. Both PF and PM (Pilot Monitoring) saw and confirmed the aircraft that was crossing in front of us. We were both assuming the aircraft would turn and join A in the same clockwise direction we were facing. Instead; the aircraft turned toward us in attempt to get to a nearby gate abeam our wing. The aircraft turned abruptly approximately 20 feet in front of us. We both considered it a near miss. There was no communication from the aircraft or ground about the intentions of the aircraft; where he was going; or if he saw us.Negative communication from ATC or the aircraft about the intentions of the aircraft going to a nearby gate.When an aircraft is instructed to hold short of a taxiway for another aircraft; the first crew should be made aware of the other aircraft's intentions by ATC. This would have allowed us to plan properly to give more room the secondary aircraft for them to get to their gate with adequate aircraft proximity.




Synopsis: CRJ-200 Captain reported a near collision on the ramp at ORD when another aircraft turned abruptly in front of them.
Date: 201504
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: FSM.TRACON, AR
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Medium Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class D FSM
ATC / advisory: TRACON FSM
Second aircraft: Military Transport
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Contributing factors: Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Aircraft X was short final to runway 25; the active runway; on a visual approach clearance.  Aircraft Y was on the VOR/DME approx 4 mile final runway 7 circling to runway 25. I believe this manner of air traffic control in this situation was good clean ATC with no loss of separation. However; do to the national Opposite Direction Operation (ODO) procedures the sequence of events were not used in an appropriate manner. For my 15 years of experience; this is how I have always controlled ODO/circling.  Military aircraft need the circling procedures for practice as part of there training. When facilities like FSM can accommodate this they come and increase our traffic count. Due to recent historical events ODO have became harder to achieve because of the 10NM mandates.I have no recommendations for my actions other than trying to follow the ODO procedures.




Synopsis: FSM Controller reports of an Opposite Direction Operation (ODO) that isn't described well; but sounds like it wasn't done in accordance with the SOP.
Date: 201810
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: DEN.Airport, CO
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Rain
Aircraft: A319
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class B D01
ATC / advisory: TRACON D01
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Other / Unknown; Confusion
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Inflight Event / Encounter Fuel Issue; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Denver TRACON is now using procedures to radar vector arriving aircraft to BFREE or south of it to intercept final for 34R when triple ILS approaches are in use. We had a 30 mile turn to final at 170 kias. This caused us to have extended time in icing conditions; added fuel burn of 1000-1400 lbs and we had a TCAS traffic from Centennial 700 feet below us and climbing which might have produced a RA event had we not turned base leg. Having talked to a TRACON supervisor I was told it is the procedure to have 34R aircraft at 10;000 feet turn onto final this far south. At the time it was VFR and we saw the runway [around] 24 miles. We had 6 miles of separation with the [traffic] in front of us and he cleared the runway when we were at 1000 AGL. I feel all 3 of these issues are a safety concern.




Synopsis: A319 Captain reported concerns with approach spacing procedures into DEN.
Date: 202008
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: S46.TRACON, WA
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class B SEA
ATC / advisory: TRACON S46
Second aircraft: UAV - Unpiloted Aerial Vehicle
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Human factors: Distraction
Anomaly: Conflict Airborne Conflict
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: An object; suspected to be a drone; flew passed us at 3800 feet on final approach. We were on the localizer at roughly 10 miles. The object flew over out left wing as we were descending. We advised ATC of a possible drone on final. No evasive maneuvering was necessary. On the ground no defects or damage was found.




Synopsis: Air carrier pilot reported encountering a drone while on the final approach course.
Date: 201409
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: PDX.Airport, OR
Flight conditions: IMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: A321
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class E P80
ATC / advisory: TRACON P80
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach
Contributing factors: Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: We were cleared via the HHOOD2 arrival into PDX. At some point prior to SHAFR we were given a vector off the arrival direct HANAH and a descent clearance to 5300 feet. We had just begun leveling off at 5300 feet when we got a GPWS warning and Aural Terrain Terrain Pull Up Pull Up. The first officer called for TOGA and went full aft stick. The aircraft went from a nose low to a 25 degree nose up attitude and rapidly climbed through 8800 feet. Passing 6800 feet I alerted ATC that we were responding to a ground proximity warning and were in a climb. ATC responded with 'the MVA in that area is 5300 feet. Would you like vectors to descend and re intercept the arrival?' After getting vectors for the descent we were cleared for the ILS and landed uneventfully. Once parked at the gate I spoke with the passengers regarding the 'go around' and went to the hotel.  The following day I phoned the Portland approach facility and spoke to the manager on duty about the prior night's excitement. He explained that there is a hill 1.7 miles south west of SHAFR that peaks at 4300 feet. He spoke of the challenges of getting the arrival aircraft down in a timely fashion while still having to maintain the required terrain clearance and that holding us up until past the obstruction resulted in complaints that the aircraft were too high.  It is my feeling that in our case it was the early vector off the arrival that brought our path closer to the obstruction and the subsequent descent clearance at a high rate of speed (220-240) that set us up for the GPWS warning. Once triggered we had no option but to respond. My concern is that given the point in time where this event is likely to happen the flight attendants could conceivably still be doing their final preparations for landing and would be at risk of being injured during the pull up. Not to mention the discomfort the passengers would be subject to. I would like to see PDX approach refrain from vectoring aircraft off the HHOOD2 at night and in IMC conditions to minimize the chances of an unnecessary GPWS event.




Synopsis: A321 Captain reported receiving a GPWS warning on HHOOD2 arrival into PDX. He expressed concern with ATC procedures that could have led to this incident and may lead to similar future events.
Date: 202011
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
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: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Workload; Time Pressure; Situational Awareness; Confusion
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: Taxi
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: Captain did not conduct pre-flight briefings per Standard Operating Procedures.  Even after advising of the threat that [are] due to COVID; I have not flown regularly at all; and may need a little bit more time or to be watched closely; Captain still skipped virtually all briefing elements. I missed that we did not login to CPDLC and get our departure clearance; which I absolutely would have caught with a proper briefing.  When contacting Ground Control; ATC stated it didn't look like we had our clearance.  I logged into CPDLC and received our clearance and verified all the elements before departure.




Synopsis: Air Carrier First Officer reported not obtaining an ATC departure clearance prior to pushback; and cited a nonstandard pre-flight briefing given by the Captain and lack of flying as contributing factors.
Date: 202109
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: SEA.Tower, WA
Aircraft: B737-800
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Climb; Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class B SEA
ATC / advisory: Tower SEA
Second aircraft: A321
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; 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
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Encountered significant wake turbulence immediately after rotation behind A321.   Wake turbulence was constant so we informed Tower we would require offset from departure course (34R.Bangor9).  Reported A321 in sight and offset appx. 0.2mi left of course.   We were cleared for takeoff while the A321 was rotating and my first thought was to delay a bit.  I wish I had as I have never encountered wake turbulence so close to the ground nor do I wish to try it again.It is worth noting this is the second time recently I have encountered wake turbulence behind an Airbus 321 in Seattle and my First Officer was recently cleared for takeoff behind a Boeing 757 without standard separation in Seattle.  In the future; I will not accept a clearance to takeoff so close to another aircraft and I believe it would be wise to follow up with Seattle Tower to ensure standard departure separation is being used and they are not getting rushed with the high amount of departures they work these days.The Seattle Controllers do a remarkable job handling the heavy traffic load we have seen this summer but perhaps there is a trend here and they are getting a bit rushed.  As a pilot; I will ask for a bit of time before taking off behind another aircraft next time.




Synopsis: B737-800 Captain reported encountering wake turbulence departing SEA in trail of an A321; commenting that spacing appeared insufficient.
Date: 201602
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ILM.Airport, NC
Flight conditions: Marginal
Weather elements / visibility: Turbulence
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Regional Jet 200 ER/LR (CRJ200)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class D ILM
ATC / advisory: Tower ILM
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Unstabilized Approach; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach
Contributing factors: Weather
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: The First Officer was originally the PF (Pilot Flying) but controls were transferred to the Captain 10 miles from the airport due to the nature of the winds reported on the field. Winds were reported with a gust factor of 10 knots but blowing constant state. The approach continued normally until we reached about 400 ft AGL when we received a wind shear warning so we initiated a go around. At about 800 ft AGL the warning went away so we reconfigured the aircraft and were vectored to enter a left downwind to attempt another visual approach. Once again we encountered wind shear around 300 ft so we bugged out to [a secondary alternate airport. The primary alternate was not] selected as a diversion point because [one RNAV arrival] was temporarily shut down.Dispatch was consulted prior to departure to voice my doubts about a successful completion of the flight to ILM due to the winds/weather. Maybe I should have listened to my inner voice and talked to a supervisor about my concerns.




Synopsis: CRJ-900 Captain reported diverting to an alternate after receiving two windshear warnings on approach to ILM.
Date: 201501
Aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Operator: Air Carrier
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Aircraft component: Oxygen System/General
Component problem: Design
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Technician
Human factors: Troubleshooting; Training / Qualification; Situational Awareness; Physiological - Other; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Maintenance
When detected: Routine Inspection
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Company Policy; Environment - Non Weather Related; Equipment / Tooling
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: [Our] Flight Training Center utilizes three DEL-MONOX compressed air purification systems to supply breathable air to the oxygen masks in six flight simulators. Pilots breathe this air during flight training events. During routine inspection a technician noticed bright yellow coloring of the media inside the towers of the air purifiers. On each of the three air purifiers there is a placard that states; 'DANGER! Yellow color inside towers indicates unsafe breathing air. Do not use purifier if any yellow color is visible.'   Upon discovery of the significant yellow color in the towers and after reading the DANGER placard I shut down all three air supply systems; entered a discrepancy report for each affected simulator; and notified all maintenance supervisors as well as the manager. On my next return to work day I was informed that a contractor had tested the air and that it was perfect and that some yellowing is fine. The air systems were placed back in service and the discrepancy reports were closed. The next day I was informed that the air contractor had returned and replaced the yellow media in one of the systems because of an alert in one of the quality safety-check systems. My supervisors stated that they knew of no plans to change the media in the other two supply systems. Of greatest concern is the fact that the manufacturer's DANGER placards have now been removed (peeled off) all three supply systems. My supervisors informed me that the contractor is the expert and therefore qualified to assess the air quality and remove the manufacturer's DANGER placards.




Synopsis: When the reporter; a simulator Maintenance Technician; noted the presence of yellow contamination in the media of the three compressed air purification systems distributing breathing air to the simulator oxygen masks he disabled them in compliance with an adjacent 'Danger' sticker advising such a yellow contamination indicates an unsafe condition. The next day he noted all three purifiers back in operation; the yellow contamination still present in two of them but the 'Danger' stickers removed. He was advised by his managers that the purification system contractor was the expert and deemed the status of all three systems acceptable and was qualified to remove the 'Danger' stickers.