elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201903
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: A80.TRACON, GA
Aircraft: EC145
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Final Approach
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Developmental
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown; Human-Machine Interface
Second reporter function: Approach
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Aircraft X was cleared for a practice approach into 06A.  After Aircraft X departed and was identified; he notified me that they were putting yellow X's on the runway and that the airport appeared to be closing; at which point I notified Management. We were not aware of the NOTAM and the pilot also mentioned that he was not aware of a closure NOTAM at 06A.  While Management was looking into the situation; the FD Controller came over and told me ZTL FD had just called in an airport closure at 06A. Maybe the airport should call the facility directly when they're going to close an airport on short notice.


Second narrative: Aircraft X was cleared for a practice approach to 06A.  On missed approach; Aircraft X reported that there were yellow x's placed on the runway.  There was a NOTAM issued closing RWY 13/31.  The facility was not notified of the NOTAM.  Aircraft X did not land on the runway; but did execute a low approach.  Aircraft X also stated that they did not see a NOTAM closing the RWY prior to their initial departure.  Change how NOTAM's are issued for airports.  This is unacceptable.


Synopsis: Atlanta TRACON Controllers reported that a departing aircraft advised someone was putting yellow X's on the runway as they departed.
Date: 201602
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: CNO.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class D CNO
ATC / advisory: Tower CNO
Second aircraft: PA-28 Cherokee/Archer/Dakota/Pillan/Warrior
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Local
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Training / Qualification; Situational Awareness; Distraction; Confusion
Second reporter function: Ground
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Conflict Ground Conflict; Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Air Traffic Control Separated Traffic
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Airport; Human Factors
Primary problem: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings

Narrative: Aircraft X was cleared to land on the left runway. Aircraft Y was cleared to land on the right runway. My trainee and I were scanning out the window for the aircraft; very difficult due to the scratched and dirty shades and the filthy windows. Also the radar does not differentiate which runway aircraft are lined up for. We saw Aircraft X over the numbers for the right runway in landing configuration. We were forced to send Aircraft Y around; so that we would not lose runway separation. No loss of separation occurred.Get new window sun screens they are badly scratched and dirty. Clean the filthy windows. Align the radar so that we can tell which runway aircraft are landing on; or add a screen we can enlarge the picture on so we can tell which runway aircraft are lined up for.


Second narrative: I was working ground control. I had Aircraft Z holding short of the runway at the departure end. I scanned the radar for traffic and the final approach corridor and saw no traffic. I asked the local controller to cross the runways. He said cross runways. I told Aircraft Z to cross the runway. As I was doing this; I rescanned and saw an aircraft touching down. Since I had not unkeyed the frequency; I immediately cancelled the crossing and told the pilot to hold short of the runway. The pilot stopped north of the hold short bars; saving an incident.


Synopsis: A Controller had two aircraft cleared to land on parallel runways. One aircraft was lined up with the wrong runway. Later; the same Controller was working Ground Control and received approval for an aircraft to cross the runways.
Date: 202001
Location: VIDF.ARTCC, FO
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Human factors: Confusion; Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We departed. ATC first gave us a left turn to a waypoint which we understood as a different waypoint that is on the border. ATC corrected himself and said right turn to SURNAM which again we all heard as SULOM. As we maid our turn to the right and then proceeded LNAV to SULOM ATC asked where we were going. We phonetically replied SULOM. We were given new heading and clearance to SURNAM.




Synopsis: Air Carrier Captain reported a course deviation due mistaking similar sounding fix names SURNAM and SULOM.
Date: 201911
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: A300
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Hazardous Material Violation; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was in the ZZZ1 Ramp Office waiting to get checked in for a jumpseat back to ZZZ an hour and a half after our flight inbound. I over heard the ZZZ1 ramp agents discussing the fact that the door was not secured on the hazmat container; on the flight that we operated into ZZZ1 from ZZZ that morning. After the fact; I spoke with First Officer about the hazmat container inspection. First Officer told me that he checked the fire hose connection and left the cargo compartment to give me the hazmat paperwork; but he couldn't specifically recall the Agent replacing the hazmat container door. When First Officer went back to give the Ramp Agent the signed copy of the paperwork; he saw the Ramp Agent securing the cargo net and smoke barrier. Ramp Agent forgot to replace or secure the hazmat container door. We probably need to have a verification procedure the the hazmat container door.




Synopsis: A300 Captain reported hazmat container lid was not configured securely for air transport.
Date: 202106
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Aircraft: PA-24 Comanche
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Cruise
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Engine
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Single Pilot; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Private; Flight Crew Instrument
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: I was in communication with Center. Engine ran rough briefly then plane shook violently. Immediately assessed flight situation and started to run through checklist of potential issues.  Switched fuel to most full tank and started fuel pump. Pushed in mixture and prop to full. Looked for a place to land. By then we were directly over a private landing field.  I asked the Controller could we land there. He was not aware of that airfield and suggested [another airport] just north. By then I had lost about 1;000 ft in altitude. When I applied throttle; the plane shook.  By my engine monitor it appears that we lost cylinder 1 and cylinder 6 was not performing. As I turned to the north; the passenger door then popped open; most likely from extreme vibration.  This added to distraction and increase in ambient noise. I located the airport environment and made preparations for a 'normal' landing. When I began to slow plane down for gear extension; I began losing more altitude than normal.  I could not apply throttle to regain altitude.  I extended gear and then waited until I had airport made until I put in 10 degree of flap to slow us down to landing speed. Once on ground; I contacted Center and cancelled flight plan. Kudos to Controller who helped guide me to safe landing.




Synopsis: PA-24 pilot reported successfully diverting to an alternate airport after experiencing power loss and a rough running engine.
Date: 201809
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 170/175 ER/LR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was doing the RNAV Departure off of Runway XXR. I was the Pilot Flying [and] I thought the departure altitude was up to 10;000 feet force of habit. The departure altitude is now assigned by ATC and in this case it was 7;000 feet. On initial climb out; my Non-Flying Pilot called ATC and said we were leaving 2;000 [feet] for 10;000 [feet]. Departure [said] climb and maintain 7;000 [feet] so we read back climb to 7;000 [feet]. We were still climbing and was handed off to another frequency on ZZZ Departure. At this time; we [were] climbing from 6;000 to 7;000 feet. We leveled off at 7;000 [feet] and then was told to take down [phone] number for possible deviation. We looked at our charts [and] checked our route again and nothing was incorrect other than me thinking we were going to 10;000 feet which we never did without a clearance. We continued our flight with no issues. I called the number and the deviation was that we said were climbing to 10;000 [feet] instead of 7;000 [feet]; mind you; we never busted any altitudes. We misspoke but never deviated from our clearance.I asked ATC to pull the tapes and gave them my contact information. I haven't heard anything as of yet. If we deviated from our clearance; [then] sure; I'm responsible; but if you're cracking down on people misspeaking a clearance that's another story. Please be careful when flying and reading back ATC clearances.




Synopsis: EMB-175 Captain reported an incorrect read-back to ATC was identified and no deviation occurred.
Date: 201606
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: STP.Airport, MN
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Citation V/Ultra/Encore (C560)
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Ferry / Re-Positioning
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class E M98
ATC / advisory: TRACON M98
Aircraft component: Autopilot
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Aircraft
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: We were given a crossing restriction at BITLR of 6;000 ft MSL. We started out of FL200 roughly 50-60 nm out from BITLR. Prior to BITLR we requested direct to RULDE off the GPS Rwy 32 in STP. The controller came back and stated that he would clear us instead to BABCO off the ILS Rwy 32 in 10 miles. At 1000 ft prior to level off (6;000 ft). The altitude alert did chime and the light indicator came on and we also verified that the autopilot was armed to capture at 6;000 ft. During this time we got cleared to BABCO intersection for the visual Rwy. 32 into STP. The PM was then entering in the waypoint into the FMS and the PF was both flying and watching the PM entering the information into the FMS. So; around 800 ft below the altitude assigned; the PF reacted by disengaging the autopilot; applying power and pitch up to climb back 6000 ft Upon reaching 6000 ft; the autopilot was reengaged and no further issues. At no time did MSP approach say anything about our altitude. The crew did note that the altitude alert system did NOT alert them to being 200 ft low during this event.During the next flight; the crew noticed several times that the altitude select on the #2 autopilot was disarming and at no time were there any altitude deviations. Each time that there was a new altitude; the altitude alert functioned properly. Approximately 200 ft prior to level off; the attitude select would DISARM. The crew determined that the #2 autopilot is malfunctioning at which point #1 autopilot was used for the remainder of that flight. Once on the ground; the crew notified maintenance.


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


Synopsis: CE-560 flight crew reported overshooting an altitude restriction when the #2 autopilot malfunctioned.
Date: 202201
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: VABB.Airport, FO
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach
ATC / advisory: Tower VABB
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Automation Aircraft Terrain Warning
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: On arrival assigned POKON 2A arrival and then direct to EMROS. Time of day was civil twilight with smoke limiting visibility. We were then given 3;000 feet and read back 3;000 feet for radar vectors for Runway 27. ATC delayed our turn downwind to base to final. On base leg we saw terrain ahead and received a terrain warning from aircraft. Captain immediately turned right and climbed. ATC hesitated with assigning heading and simply advised we should climb to 3;800 feet. We asked for a heading to intercept approach course and clearance for approach. ATC seemed confused and believe he wasn't monitoring our approach. We had stable final approach and landing. After shutdown the Captain called the controllers to discuss approach. They said it was normal and not an issue. A lack of communication and language barrier may have been a factor in this event.




Synopsis: Air carrier First Officer reported receiving a terrain warning on approach to VABB airport; citing communication difficulties with ATC as contributing.
Date: 202201
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: PBI.Tower, FL
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class C PBI
ATC / advisory: Tower PBI
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: On our arrival to West Palm Beach; we were cleared to descend to 2;000 ft. and to expect the visual approach to [Runway] 10L. I told the First Officer I'd like to begin the visual approach at ZISUR which is the final approach fix and glide slope intercept for the ILS 10L. The approach controller gave us vectors inside of ZISUR. We turned as instructed and a little while later he asked us did we see the airport. We said we did and were cleared for the visual approach. As we were at 2;000 ft and inside ZISUR we were above the glide path.  I descended as necessary to be on glide path. We were in total VFR conditions. At this time the controller said he had an altitude alert. We continued with our approach and we were fully configured and stable at 1;000 ft as per our SOP. We landed as normal.




Synopsis: Pilot reported receiving a Low Altitude Alert from ATC.
Date: 201603
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B737-900
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Workload; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure; Company Policy
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Flight was a 737-900ER. After landing we received an ACARS message that due to center of gravity loading; 25 bags would have to be offloaded from the aft pit before we deplaned passengers. This was the first we heard of the issues; and it came at a very congested time in the cockpit when clearing the runway and trying to navigate taxi instructions. We had little time to coordinate with the flight attendants and passengers. However; the station/ramp did not follow the procedure. The ramp went immediately to the forward pit first to start unloading bags; and the Customer Service Representatives (CSR) immediately opened the jetway and wanted to offload passengers. My First Officer said the same experience had recently happened to him at [another airport]. The ACARS sends a confusing message about offloading bags from the aft pit before any passengers can get off the airplane. This confusing message comes at an extremely inconvenient time; and could potentially cause a taxi deviation or runway incursion. Likewise; the station seems to not know anything about this procedure; and the crew has to try and rush and intervene with ramp loaders and jetway drivers while trying to shut down the engines and secure the cockpit. We had flown for 5 and 1/2 hours with the load of passengers and bags determined; but didn't get this message until after landing. This procedure is not working. It is dangerous for the flight crew trying to taxi and park the aircraft; and the baggage handlers and gate agents are apparently not receiving the information at all.




Synopsis: B737-900 Captain reported receiving critical information regarding offloading procedures at the last minute taxiing into gate.
Date: 201410
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: DVT.Airport, AZ
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: PA-28 Cherokee/Archer/Dakota/Pillan/Warrior
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class D DVT
ATC / advisory: Tower DVT
Second aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Instructor
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Took off 7R at DVT for a practice DVT1 departure. About 400 ft AGL at the departure end of the runway I took controls for student to put hood on. ATC 'Left turn approved monitor tower 120.2' replied back 'Left turn approved monitor tower 120.2.' Then it took a moment before [the Radial] could be identified then we turned left. Just after turning left there was a red/grey aircraft which wings where bigger than the windshield. Immediately took evasive action pitching down. When clear of traffic contacted DVT Tower [and stated;] 'I was cleared left turn approved' Tower replied 'traffic had you in sight and thought you would turn after receiving clearance.'




Synopsis: PA28 Instrument Instructor reports a NMAC departing KDVT on an instrument training flight. After takeoff from Runway 7R; the plan was to intercept the PXR 336 Radial northbound and the South Tower issued a clearance to turn left on course and contact the North Tower. The turn is not initiated immediately and once completed results in a NMAC with an aircraft that had anticipated that the turn would commence immediately.