elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201811
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: LAX.Airport, CA
Weather elements / visibility: 2
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B787 Dreamliner Undifferentiated or Other Model
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: UAV - Unpiloted Aerial Vehicle
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Second reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Procedure
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: A large drone (approximately 2 feet high) passed the right wing during approach to LAX at glideslope intercept. Distance estimated to be about 100 meters. Reported to ATC.


Second narrative: A large drone passed the right wing during approach at glideslope intercept. Reported to ATC. The drone was a barrel shape; cylinder-looking type; black cylinder 2 to 3 ft height. Red light and some rotors at the top. It appeared to be as close as 100 meters from the wing of the aircraft. Seemed stationary and did not appear to react to the aircraft approaching. It appeared to be hovering.


Synopsis: Air Carrier flight crew reported an NMAC with a drone while on final approach to LAX.
Date: 202007
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Reporter qualification: Flight Attendant Current
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Passenger Misconduct
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: In-flight; Taxi
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors; Company Policy
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Passenger was asked several times to wear the face mask that was hanging around his neck.  He then showed me the back of his ears that were irritated by the elastic from the mask.  I then asked him if he had a scarf.  He said; 'No.'  I asked him if he had a shield.  He said; 'No.'  I then told him that I would get him a mask that would not irritate the back of his ears.  I brought him the N95/type mask and explained how to wear it.  He still would not wear it.   Two other crew members then went up to him and demonstrated how to wear the N95/type mask.  He still would not wear it.  He had a different story for any and everyone who asked him to wear the mask.  He then puts on the original mask as he deplanes.




Synopsis: Flight attendant reported a passenger had to be continuously reminded to wear a mask.
Date: 201503
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: DFW.Airport, TX
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: A319
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground DFW
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: Distraction
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Ground Incursion Taxiway
Detector: Person Observer
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We were taxiing northbound on G taxiway and already in the right turn on to Y taxiway. The jumpseater sitting behind my seat started tapping me on my left shoulder and shouting Sir; Sir; Sir and stop; stop; stop! When I looked to my left; while braking very hard; a single engine prop plane was approaching from the left at a very high rate of speed. He was told to give way to us by ATC Ground Control.He was taxiing so fast; that I never saw him when I cleared left before my right turn. Fortunately I was only going about 9 knots when I began my right turn. There was only one pilot and no pax as far as we could see in his aircraft. He never deviated to his left to avoid us and my next concern was his wing hitting our nose. Fortunately; it missed. Had it not been for the jumpseater seeing him and alerting me; this would have been a much more serious outcome. The sun was to our right (clear skies) and he was to our left. I don't know how he couldn't have seen us; since the Airbus 319 is 'large' compared to the aircraft he was in.I think that the pilot operating that aircraft needs to taxi considerably slower than he was. He was taxiing in excess of 30 knots. I also think he was not aware of our presence due to him not even attempting to miss us. A discussion with him by the FAA should take place at a minimum.




Synopsis: An A319 air crew; while taxiing for departure; was alerted by their cockpit jumpseater of an imminent collision hazard with a single engine prop aircraft. The aircraft had been instructed to give way to the A319 and was taxiing at a very high rate of speed. Hard braking by the A319 crew prevented a probable collision.
Date: 201904
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: AMA.Airport, TX
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Night
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 145 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class C AMA
ATC / advisory: TRACON AMA
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Amarillo Approach advised the Tower that he had a low altitude warning and advised the Tower to instruct us to climb while preparing for an approach to RWY 13 AMA.During the approach phase; Approach advised we could expect an approach to RWY 22 AMA; but we requested 13 due to wind and previously setting up for that runway. The request for 13 was approved and we were given direct WEGES.While in level flight at 7;000 feet; approach instructed us to 'Cross WEGES at or above 5;100 feet; cleared for the RNAV 13 approach; contact tower on 118.85'. I read back the clearance; changed the frequency; set 5;100 feet; and we started down. At that point; I was looking for the runway. As we continued the descent; I was pointing out the numerous lighted towers in the area. I noticed the towers looked like they were higher than what I would expect. The FO (First Officer) and I talked about that when I told him to climb. I temporarily took control of the airplane and used the TCS button to establish a climb.After initiating a climb; we were climbing through 5;500 feet when the tower advised the minimum altitude was 6;100 feet.After landing; I spoke to the Approach Controller working the flight. He said that he might have issued a descent clearance to 5;100 feet because he was working military traffic on another runway; and he was descending them to 5;100 feet. He also stated that he could have missed the read back.I should have double checked the minimum altitude on the approach plate when the clearance was given; and questioned the Controller; or refused a clearance that would take us below a minimum altitude; even in VMC.


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


Synopsis: EMB-145 flight crew reported CFTT on approach to AMA.
Date: 201204
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: OGG.Airport, HI
Aircraft: Medium Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class C OGG
ATC / advisory: TRACON HCF
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach; Departure
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Air Carrier X was going to OGG from the southeast. He was at 8;000 descending; number one to the field; with the field in sight. The second aircraft was on a right downwind; level at 4;000. I was vectoring Air Carrier X to take him west and get lateral separation for him to get below the aircraft on downwind. When Air Carrier X was around 5;000 FT; I cleared him to fly heading 330 to join the localizer. The pilot read back the instruction; and then I said; 'Reaching 3;000 cleared visual approach Runway 2.' The pilot read this back as well. Air Carrier X flew right through the localizer. Since there are mountains west of the localizer; I issued a visual approach without questioning the pilot's actions. I just wanted to have him turn away from the mountains. He was at about 3;700 FT and 1 mile west of the localizer when I cleared him for a visual approach. When I switched Air Carrier X to OGG Tower; the pilot informed me that my heading 'had almost sent him into the mountains.' I told the pilot that his clearance had been to fly a 330 heading to join the localizer; then reaching 3;000; he was cleared visual approach. I think the clearance he had taken was heading 330; and then reaching 3;000; cleared for a visual. He had not intended or understood to join the localizer. The pilot should have listened better to my instructions. If he had a question; he should have asked me. I will try to be sure that my clearances are clear and not too complicated. I may have confused the pilot.




Synopsis: HCF Controller described a below MVA event apparently a result of confusion with regard to specifics issued during a visual approach.
Date: 201606
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ICT.Airport, KS
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class C ICT
ATC / advisory: Tower ICT
Second aircraft: Helicopter
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict NMAC
Detector: Automation Aircraft RA; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: ATC failed to notify us of a potential conflict until it was too late. The [conflicting] helicopter failed to maintain adequate visual separation.We departed Wichita (ICT). Tower cleared us for takeoff. We completed our before takeoff check and set takeoff thrust. Somewhere between V1 and 400ft AGL; tower called us and said '[Aircraft X]; do not respond; aircraft off your left has you in sight'. Almost immediately we received a Resolution Advisory (RA) to climb at 3;500 fpm. The other aircraft was within 500'; same altitude; and on a direct intercept course. We followed the RA. I could not see how close we came. The Captain stated that he had the helicopter in sight (I did not). It came very close. [It] appeared [we] were too low to make any kind of maneuver other than climb to avoid hitting the helicopter. At no point prior to departure were we warned of the helicopter's presence. The departure end appeared clear when we took the runway. Only after V1 were we issued a traffic advisory. It was far too late. We complied with the RA.




Synopsis: Air Carrier First Officer reported a NMAC with a helicopter during their initial climb on departure from ICT.
Date: 201909
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Light: Night
Aircraft: B737-700
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: PFD
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: During routine scheduled flight from ZZZ to ZZZ1 the Captain's outboard DU [Display Unit] failed. At the same time there was an acidic smell in the cockpit. The pilots donned their oxygen masks; informed the flight attendants; [notified ATC] and diverted to ZZZ2. Upon landing; the aircraft was taxied clear and inspected by Fire Personnel. The Fire Personnel found no signs of fire and the aircraft was taxied to the gate.


Second narrative: Aircraft was enroute to ZZZ at 36;000 feet when we noticed the Captain's outboard DU had failed. We ran the QRH for this situation and then noticed an acrid smell in the cockpit that we thought could be electrical in nature. We then donned our oxygen; ran the QRC and then the QRH. We informed the flight attendants; and requested a divert. The divert was uneventful and weather gave us no problems. Upon landing; we taxied clear and had the Fire Personnel inspect the outside of the aircraft for any signs of smoke or fire. When they gave us the 'all clear' we taxied to the gate and turned the aircraft over to Maintenance Personnel.


Synopsis: B737-700 flight crew reported acrid smell after Captain's DU (Display Unit) failure. Flight crew executed an uneventful divert.
Date: 201201
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-700
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
Aircraft component: Pneumatic Valve/Bleed Valve
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer
Human factors: Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Manuals
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: During cruise at FL390; the number one engine's Bleed Trip Off light illuminated. We followed the QRH and turned off the left pack; as it would not reset. The Captain contacted Dispatch; reported the problem; and asked for icing conditions enroute. Our concern was that we may enter icing conditions; which the QRH cautions to avoid with a Bleed Trip Off light. The weather at destination was reported as two broken cloud layers at 10;000 FT and 20;000 FT; and no reports of icing. Dispatch asked us to attempt an arrival; and gave us a divert alternate if we couldn't avoid icing conditions. Our engine anti-ice was operating normally for both engines and we assumed that the FOM 'icing conditions' of less than one mile visibility and less than ten degrees Celsius was to be applied to the engines; and visible structural ice would be applied to any wing anti-icing limitations. During the descent; we asked each Controller of any reported icing conditions. They reported none; so we continued the arrival maintaining VMC. I think more detail in the QRH about what anti-icing systems are available; and what to do if it is impossible to avoid icing conditions would be a great help.




Synopsis: B737-700 First Officer reports a left engine bleed trip at FL390 that cannot be reset. Flight is able to continue to destination; avoiding icing conditions per the QRH.
Date: 201203
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Light: Night
Aircraft: Regional Jet 200 ER/LR (CRJ200)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: APU Fire/Overheat Warning
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Confusion; Human-Machine Interface; Training / Qualification; Workload
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Automation Aircraft Other Automation; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; General Declared Emergency; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Received C overtemp message. While running QRH that message went out and received APU fire message. Started running IAI and fire message went out and got APU fire fail message. I was now not sure there was no fire and was not confident in the APU fire warning system; so I ran the IAI; pressed APU fire switch and discharged the APU fire bottle.




Synopsis: A CRJ200's APU FIRE/OVERHEAT warning system malfunctioned first indicating an OVERTEMP; followed by a FIRE warning and then an APU FIRE FAIL alert. The APU fire bottle was fired; and an emergency declared.
Date: 201205
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZME.ARTCC, TN
Aircraft: No Aircraft
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Restricted Area R-ABCD had been active for over an hour and a half; from the surface to FL300; without my knowledge! R-ABCD went active at XA00Z; and I took over the sector shortly after that time; around XB05Z. I recalled no mention of the Restricted Area status in the position relief briefing; nor was the restricted area depicted on my scope. It is normally not used much on the weekends; so I did not question it. About an hour and a half later (around XC45Z); another controller asked me if the restricted area was hot. My reply was; 'No.' He said the ESIS (Enhanced Status Information System) is showing that it went hot at XA00Z. I immediately asked my supervisor and Approach Control if R-ABCD was hot; and they said 'Yes.'Restricted Area was being used for artillery fire from the surface to 30;000 FT. My sector owns from the surface to 23;000 FT. This is a big safety issue. Imagine what could've happened during that hour and a half that it was active without my knowing it. The only way our sector gets notified of the Restricted Area's status is from a screen on the wall called the ESIS. It can be written in different formats; the information can be placed in different locations on the screen... It is not the best 'attention-getter' for such a crucial piece of information. Sometimes the supervisor will verbally announce that 'There are Restricted Area times posted.' And even then; that may be hours in advance; leaving plenty of chances for the error chain to develop. There needs to be a better system for notifying the affected sectors of the Restricted Area's status. Maybe a required call from Approach to Center at the time it goes active; to make sure we're on the same page; or a required reminder from the supervisor or TMC coordinator when it goes active (A check and balance system). An even better automated solution would be to have the Restricted Area; MOA; etc automatically display on your scope when it goes active (or maybe 5 minutes prior). This would require a lot of automation; and would depend on accurate time input on someone's part; but in this day and age; there should be a better system.




Synopsis: ZME Controller reported a restricted area within his sector was hot for 90 minutes without his knowledge. Reporter suggests an automation solution.
Date: 202202
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Aircraft: Regional Jet 700 ER/LR (CRJ700)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Second aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Procedure; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: Enroute at cruise altitude. We were in smooth air; VMC; and ATC had no reports of clear air turbulence. I believe we were at 290 knots and FL230. Captain had turned off seat belt sign and made required announcement to keep seat belt on when seated. With no traffic notification from ATC; or close traffic on TCAS; we received several seconds or less of wake turbulence. The right wing dipped slightly and it was what I would label as moderate turbulence. There was no indication from the cabin crew that there was any injury. We elected to stay at that flight level.




Synopsis: CRJ-700 First Officer reported encountering wake turbulence in cruise flight at FL230.
Date: 202010
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: 9PA8.Airport, PA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Helicopter
Flight phase: Final Approach
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Rotorcraft
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Airport; Human Factors
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: Unable to locate Jefferson Hospital heliport; orbited multiple times; eventually located roof top pad and landed.Landing pad markings are faded; weathered; and need to be repainted. The pad itself is located in a high density of other buildings and structures not easily identifiable. Possible high intensity strobes could be added; such as the runway-end identifier type.




Synopsis: Helicopter pilot reported being unable to locate the Jefferson Hospital heliport due to faded pad markings.