elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201605
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ATL.Airport, GA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: B737-700
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B ATL
ATC / advisory: TRACON A80
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Airport; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We were abeam the field at 10;000 feet; assigned 210 knots. The Captain asked the Approach Controller what our sequence was. He said something to the effect 'what does that mean; when you are in ATL you get down as fast as you can'. So; I extended the landing gear; and we hurried down. The Captain and I were discussing that his comment wasn't reasonable; because we don't want to commit with gear until we know where we are in the lineup. We turned base around five to seven miles. If we would not have changed our configuration (gear) it could have been 15-20 miles. Also; we had a former (other carrier) aircraft; and couldn't see very far below us on TCAS to build situational awareness. The frequency was not congested. During the descent; the Captain asked the Approach Controller for his phone number. We simply wanted to discuss how information (time permitting) helps us make decisions; which increases our efficiency. I believe we have a joint responsibility for safety and efficiency. The Controller was obviously annoyed and bullying. He gave us a base turn and failed to point out traffic on final that was around 1.5 miles away; and below us. We called the traffic and field in sight. He cleared us for the visual; maintain 180 knots to the marker; and contact Tower there. I turned toward the numbers; and was 2.7 miles behind another carrier. I told the Captain; 'I'm going to slow down a bit to stay behind the other aircraft.' The Approach Controller asked us if we were going 180 knots. We explained why we were unable. He said 'now you are going to talk to my supervisor!' At that moment; we were one to two miles outside the marker at 150 knots; and 2.5 miles behind the other aircraft. The aircraft cleared the runway when we were at 300 feet. I am fine with that margin; but the only reason it worked out was because of pilot judgment. We landed and taxied back uneventfully.


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


Synopsis: B737-700 flight crew reported the TRACON Controller was unhelpful when they queried about their sequence on approach. The flight crew did not comply with their speed assignment on final approach due to spacing issues.
Date: 201206
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: PNE.Airport, PA
Aircraft: PA-32 Cherokee Six/Lance/Saratoga/6X
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
ATC / advisory: Tower PNE
Second aircraft: Citationjet (C525/C526) - CJ I / II / III / IV
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Trainee; Local
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Developmental
Second reporter function: Local; Instructor
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Ground Conflict; Less Severe
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: A Citation Jet landed Runway 33 I told him to turn right on Runway 24 right on 'C' contact Ground point 7. I then told Ground to cross Runway 33 at C3. I then cleared a Saratoga for take off on Runway 33. Ground already gave the Citation the crossing; so when he saw the Saratoga taking off he asked Ground to confirm he can cross Runway 33; at the time he was holding short off Runway 33 on C3. The overhead air conditioner was loud at the time and Ground and my Instructor did not hear me give the clearance. Also if we can make intra-facility coordination on recorded line it would help that way we can confirm the crossings.


Second narrative: A Citation Jet landed Runway 33 and was told by my Trainee to turn right on Runway 24 and right on 'C' and contact Ground on point 7. Apparently my Trainee told Ground they could cross the Citation at 33/C3 which I didn't hear due to the extremely loud overhead air condition unit we have in the Tower Cab because the smaller one doesn't cool the Cab down on hot days. My Trainee then cleared a Saratoga for take off from Runway 33. The pilot for the Citation called back and asked Ground Control if he was cleared to cross because he saw the Saratoga on take off roll from Runway 33. The Citation from my observation did not cross the hold short lines of Runway 33 at 'C3'. I recommend that a line for intra-facility coordination be installed on the ETVS so that it brings more awareness to the crossings and holds people liable and prevents the 'he said; she said' that can happen in a situation like this.


Synopsis: PNE Controller in training described a crossing runway conflict event when coordination between Local and Ground was confused and/or incomplete; the reporter listing a loud air conditioner noise as a contributing factor.
Date: 202007
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Flying into sunset/dusk; 10
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; High Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Object
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Setting up a 1 mile final for an off-field landing on a gravel bar near my home; struck an unmarked/flagged power-line which crosses the river. Flying toward the sunset at dusk didn't help.Avoided the large; well-marked power-lines near a bridge crossing the [river]; (they had the orange basketballs mid-wire for markings). Descended to 100 ft. after avoiding those lines. Started walking the speed back and settling down to 60-70 ft. AGL about 2 miles out.Stable winds calm; stable airspeed and altitude; walk the speed back to approach speed [about] 70 mph; descend to 30ish ft.Perfectly lined up with the target gravel bar for a good landing. Descend to 20 ft. about 1/4 mile from intended touchdown.Suddenly the wire moves above the horizon and is backlit by dusky sky; but only seen maybe 1/4 second before impact.The single; unmarked power-line gets struck by my prop; mid-blade. The wire is cut without effecting the engine's RPM at all. The cut wire flies off to port; striking the front jury strut loose of the wing on top. A piece of the grounding wire from the power-line was balled up and flung at the left wing; embedding itself in the aluminum leading edge of the wing; further port from the left gas tank.Powered up; no feather; full rich; straight back to ZZZ. Landing was normal. Noticeable vibration from the slightly damaged prop on return flight; but nothing crazy.Quiet drive home that night. My girlfriend and I know how fortunate we are to come out of something like that unscathed. So very fortunate.That power-line is only a mile from my home; in my river; and I never knew it was there. 1) Scout your landings during the day more effectively2) Don't fly marginal altitudes at dusk3) Don't do practice landings at dusk4) Don't fly marginally safe with a passenger5) Tell your friends you love them more often.




Synopsis: Private Pilot reported an uneventful landing after a power line strike during final approach to landing.
Date: 202007
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: SAT.Tower, TX
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class C SAT
ATC / advisory: TRACON SAT
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Flight Crew
Result: Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Departed 13R; cleared for TO on the Alamo 3 depart; RWY heading to 5;000 ft. A few minutes later; climbing through 1;200 ft. I noticed an airplane on the nose. At first I thought it was a big airplane some distance away but quickly saw that it was a high wing Cessna on a reciprocal heading. I pointed the Cessna out to the First Officer and I started a left turn to avoid it around 1;500 ft. and we got an RA to level off below 2;000 ft. followed by a RA to descend. (We never got a 'traffic' alert or warning.) First Officer noticed minimum vertical separation of 300 ft. I estimate that our minimum horizontal clearance was less than a mile. This all happened as Tower switched us to departure - which was about the same time as I acquired the Cessna. First Officer radioed departure on 127.10 that we were deviating for the traffic and following a TCAS - RA. When clear of traffic we turned back to original heading and resumed climb to 5;000 ft. Departure control resumed vectors. We reported the near miss and controller agreed that they would be reporting it. Controller stated something about the Cessna doing survey work in patterns in that area. There were no NOTAMS or other notices that we were aware of or could find. Flight continued to destination without further incident.We were unaware of a Cessna transiting through our departure track.Departing Aircraft should be informed of airplanes transmitting their departure path.




Synopsis: Captain reported a NMAC while climbing on their departure.
Date: 201411
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: RNO.Airport, NV
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: A319
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class C RNO
ATC / advisory: TRACON NCT; Tower RNO
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Automation Aircraft Terrain Warning; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Airport; Human Factors
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: On the KENNO2 arrival into Reno; NorCal asked if we had the airport in sight at or near KLOCK. We called the airport and we were cleared for a visual approach to 16R. NorCal provided an MVA of 8700 feet which is what we continued our descent to with Terrain on ND activated. I advised the captain that I would continue on the downwind until just south of TAKLE where I would make a 90 degree turn to base and join the localizer outside of DICEY. Approaching the localizer course; I set the altitude to 6700 feet; reduced airspeed to 180; requested flaps 2; and extended speed brakes to capture the glideslope. As I began the turn to join the glideslope; I noticed the descent rate increasing momentarily to 2100 feet per minute as the IVSI indicator turned yellow. Simultaneously with the turn onto the localizer; a terrain warning was activated. Although I'm uncertain of the exact altitude at this time; I estimate it to have been near 7000 feet as 6700 feet was selected in the FCU. I initiated the escape maneuver immediately; and the warning ceased instantly. By the time we were wings level; we were on the localizer with the runway still in sight. I continued the approach and landed uneventfully. Having thought about the event since its occurrence; and having reviewed the charts over and over again; I suspect that the momentarily high rate of descent in the turn with flaps 2 and speedbrakes; along with a hill west of the localizer may have caused the terrain warning; such that at the time of the high rate of descent in the turn; the computer was sweeping ahead and as we briefly faced the hill west of the localizer; it issued the warning. In hindsight; regardless of the visibility; we should have asked for vectors to the localizer; and should have executed a go around after the escape maneuver with a return back to the localizer via vectors.




Synopsis: A319 First Officer experiences an EGPWS terrain warning during a night visual approach to Runway 16R at RNO. Evasive action is taken initially then the approach is continued to landing.
Date: 202008
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: PHX.Tower, AZ
Aircraft: PA-28 Cherokee/Archer/Dakota/Pillan/Warrior
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class B PHX
ATC / advisory: TRACON PHX
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Local
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert
Contributing factors: Procedure; Airspace Structure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: We continue to have safety events with the VRA approach into SDL. P50 does not do the proper point outs and when they do; controllers in the tower do not know what they are really approving. There have been several airspace violations and aircraft proximity events because of this procedure and lack of positive control. Aircraft X was never pointed out ot the tower and descended through the tower's airspace on the VRA approach into SDL. PHX management and P50 management know of the issue and have refused to address the safety concerns. This is an imminent safety risk and you can pretty much pull data every single day and see violations. Fix the approach into SDL so it does not impact PHX airspace; departures and go-arounds from PHX.




Synopsis: A PHX Tower Controller reported aircraft on approach to SDL are routinely not pointed out from TRACON to PHX Tower and violate their airspace.
Date: 201201
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: BOI.Airport, ID
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: A320
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class C BOI
ATC / advisory: TRACON BOI
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Distraction; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation - Speed All Types; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Automation Aircraft Terrain Warning; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: On the visual approach to 28R at night we got a 'caution terrain' warning. The warning occurred at 6;300 FT with a radar altitude of 1;850 FT. We climbed to 7;300 FT and in the process oversped the flaps by 10 knots. The Tower recleared us for a right downwind visual to 10L. After landing the overspeed was written up and Maintenance notified.




Synopsis: An A320 crew executed the escape maneuver after an EGPWS CAUTION; TERRAIN warning at 6;300 FT on a night visual to BOI Runway 28R ten miles from the airport near a 4;180 FT obstacle.
Date: 201508
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZZ.Airport, FO
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: A330
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground ZZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Procedure; Weather
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: On return to hard stand at [a European station] with APU on MEL; improper aux air conditioning was provided causing passenger discomfort. Maintenance fixed problem in one hour; but we sat unassisted for 35 more minutes waiting for pushback crew while temperatures were exceeding comfort levels in the cabin with 295 passengers on board. I almost resorted to emergency procedures just to maintain customer comfort. No one came to our assistance while we waited on hard stand for 35 minutes after numerous phone calls to Dispatch; operations radio and ground interphone contact causing high anxiety for entire flight and cabin crew.Improper planning for maintenance return to a hard stand with inoperative APU.We should have gone back to a gate (it was unavailable;) instead of the hard stand; with working aux power and air for proper passenger comfort.More responsive assistance when Captain was calling all resources for help! This almost climaxed with an emergency situation before we finally got a push crew to assist and start engines for cabin cooling after a long delay waiting for answers to the Captain's calls. Cabin reached very high temps while waiting; almost cancelled flight with 295 passengers on board; but it would have been even more difficult to deplane in those conditions and bus to gate. Never dispatch ETOPS aircraft with inoperative APU; and pressurization door MELS. Always a bad idea to operate ETOPS with multiple MELS due to conflicting operations. (Without proper assurance of good aux ground air conditioning!)




Synopsis: A330 Captain reported extreme passenger and crew discomfort related to high temperatures in the aircraft on the ground at a European airport. APU was on MEL and improper aux air conditioning was provided.
Date: 202111
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: IMC
Light: Dawn
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: FMS/FMC
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; 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 Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Aircraft; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: During pre-flight; Pilot Flying briefed the SID and STAR in accordance with recommended practice for flight routes where the termination point of the SID is the same as the start point for the STAR (in our case; way point ZZZZZ). When he saw the branch point on the STAR (ZZZZZ1) he loaded the Runway XXR approach to get the remaining STAR points in the FMC for the brief. Inflight ATIS showed Runway Y for landing; Runway XXR for departures. Pilot Flying briefed the Runway XY approach and the correct landing data; but we missed loading the Runway Y approach in the FMS (which would have loaded the correct branch points). The flight was so short (30 minutes) and since we had briefed it on the ground; we didn't think about checking the branch points again. At ZZZZZ1 the aircraft turned toward ZZZZZ2 for Runway XXR; and after a mile or so ATC queried our direction and the Pilot Flying recognized the error. ATC gave us vectors to Runway XY approach while Pilot Flying loaded the Runway XY ILS in the FMS.


Second narrative: Due to short flight; we briefed the expected arrival and runway transition on the ground in departure airport. Both Pilots task loaded during short flight. Runway change at destination required many items to be re-briefed. We missed loading FMC with the new runway and transition. ZZZ Approach contacted us less than a mile past branch point; we recognized the error and turned to corrected heading.


Synopsis: Air carrier flight crew reported miss-loading the FMS causing a course deviation on approach to destination airport. ATC provided headings and aircraft continued to land safely.
Date: 202104
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ROA.TRACON, VA
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class C ROA
ATC / advisory: TRACON ROA
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Automation Aircraft Terrain Warning
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: While operating into Roanoke; we received a GPWS alert to 'pull up - terrain'. We complied with the alert and climbed. We were at 3;000 feet; setting up for Runway 24 on a visual approach. It [was] VFR and [we] had the terrain in sight. Alert from GPWS. Altitude too low causing a GPWS alert due to terrain right of path. Complied and climbed to avoid terrain; which we had in sight. Fly a higher altitude till past the terrain.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported receiving a GPWS terrain alert on a visual approach to ROA.