elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 202112
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Medium Transport; High Wing; 2 Turboprop Eng
Operator: Military
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Other Holding Pattern
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Second aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Aircraft component: Engine
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Military
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Distraction; Troubleshooting; Workload
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Procedure
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Our twin engine turboprop aircraft experienced an engine failure at 27;000 feet MSL. We [requested priority handling] with ZZZ Center to proceed to ZZZ for a field arrestment. At 3;000 feet MSL with ZZZ Tower; aircrew elected to hold overhead the field to wait for a landing signal officer to get on station to help ensure the aircrew would have a safe approach to an arrestment. While holding overhead aircraft; multiple commercial aircraft we cleared for takeoff out of ZZZ1 into the flight path of our aircraft. This was a distraction and added to the aircrew workload. Request ATC not [to] clear aircraft for takeoff with a [priority handling] aircraft in such close vicinity.




Synopsis: Pilot flying reported an engine failure and while holding for a safe approach; an adjacent airport allowed an aircraft to depart into the flight path of holding pattern.
Date: 201508
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: DCA.Tower, DC
Flight conditions: Marginal
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Initial Approach; Final Approach
Airspace: Class B DCA
ATC / advisory: Tower DCA
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Inflight Event / Encounter Unstabilized Approach
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors; Company Policy
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Weather at DCA was 1;100 feet Broken with good visibility (10SM) and light winds. ATC was using instrument approaches to Runway 19. DCA is Slam Dunking Aircraft in marginal VFR weather and clearing them for instrument approaches as if it we visual conditions.  Even if we had been able to use the RNP procedure we would have been outside the normal profile. DCA ATC is slam dunking flights from 5;000 feet; just outside of the 11 DME fix and clearing for the approach. We were cleared for this approach about 2 miles outside the final and almost 1;500 feet too high.  We were set up for the LDA Z and this is a dive and drive approach. We were high but correcting all the way down. I was very aggressive with descent control; Flaps 3 and gear down at 10.5 DME and we only caught the profile at about 1;200 feet. I got to full flaps ASAP and was still just outside the 1;000 foot profile. Upon landing I got the flight closeout report that showed a speed of 163 a 1;000 feet and a flap change at 935 feet.  DCA ATC treats marginal VFR /IFR as a visual procedure and this leads to unstable approaches. They are way too aggressive in scheduling landings and attempt to control all the parameters; ie. speed; heading and altitude and then clear you for an approach when you are just outside the fix and up 1;500 feet to high. ALL in all DCA is way too aggressive in cramming the metal in under instrument conditions.




Synopsis: The pilot reported that it is often difficult to achieve a stabilized approach profile at DCA as approach control is 'slam dunking' arrivals; clearing them for the approach while high and fast and close to the FAF.
Date: 202007
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: Turbulence; Rain; Hail
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Citation Excel (C560XL)
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Crossing Restriction Not Met; Deviation - Altitude Undershoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Weather; Human Factors
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: We were on arrival into ZZZ. We were given VOR direct ZZZZZ; cross ZZZZZ at/and maintain 11;000 ft. During this descent to ZZZZZ intersection; we encountered moderate turbulence and light to moderate rain between 13;000 ft. to 11;000 ft. We were asking Approach Control for vectors/ deviations to get us out of the weather. The Controller was working several other airplanes; also needing vectors; and was able to give us assistance before we got into heavy rain; possible hail; and severe turbulence. We experienced strong up drafts and some down drafts that kicked the Autopilot off and prevented us crossing ZZZZZ at 11;000 ft. We crossed ZZZZZ at approximately 11;300 ft. Once we passed ZZZZZ intersection we entered VFR conditions; reengaged the Autopilot. We were able to complete the Arrival; Approach and landed Runway XXL. During our Post Flight inspection we found the damaged to the Radome. Paint and Fiberglass was missing. Damage to Radome and the 'Severe Turbulence' was written up in the Maintenance Log and reported to Flight Control and Maintenance Control.Better communication WITH and better INFORMATION/GUIDANCE from ATC. The radar was helping up to this point; but did not give us the 'intensity' of the cell in which we flew through. WiFi was not working at the time of the cell encounter; so the NEXRAD was not available for some guidance.




Synopsis: 560Xl Captain reported severe turbulence on descent.
Date: 201504
Location: ROA.Airport, VA
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Medium Large Transport
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class C ROA
ATC / advisory: TRACON ROA
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Automation Aircraft Terrain Warning; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Aircraft
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: Unclear as to the cause of the warning; we believe we were clear of the terrain according to the lights we could see. The event took place at Roanoke airport at night on a visual approach to 24. The Approach Controller turned us towards Roanoke airport at 4;000 feet. The runway was in sight [and] we were cleared for a visual approach into 24. Upon descending out of 4;000 feet we received a 'terrain pull up' aural warning. We executed the EGPWS procedure adding full power and pitching up. The controller levelled us off at 5;000 feet and vectored us around for another approach.  We were given a descent to 4;000 feet; once level we were given vectors back to the airport. When we approached the same mountain range as before the 'terrain' aural warning sounded again. This time without the 'pull up'. As we were climbing to 5;000 feet; another aircraft was descending to 5;000 feet and given vectors away from us. They were never close enough for an 'Resolution Advisory' or 'Traffic Advisory'.  We were then vectored for an ILS 34 and landed.


Second narrative: [Report Narrative Contained No Additional Information].


Synopsis: Regional jet flight crew reported they got an EGPWS 'terrain' warning on a night visual approach to ROA. Crew stated they felt they were clear of terrain.
Date: 201809
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: Marginal
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 140 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Commercial
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Distraction; Human-Machine Interface; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Captain was Pilot Flying (PF) and I was Pilot Monitoring (PM). We were being vectored for RNAV XXL. The Captain flew through the final approach course two times. The third time around the RNAV XXL approach was completed successfully.First time around; PF did not activate his approach on his FMS. While on heading mode (heading 150 degrees); ATC instructed to intercept final approach course; PF selected NAV mode and the plane wanted to fly to the first outer fix.ATC then called back noticing that we had flown through the final approach course; ATC vectored us around for the approach again. I ask the PF to arm the approach in his FMS and not select NAV mode until the CDI was alive and two dots from intercepting the course. I also mentioned that if he selected the NAV mode and the plane began to do something else than what we wanted; I suggested him to deactivate the autopilot and hand fly.Once on approach the second time; being vectored to intercept NAV mode was selected again and the plane turned in the opposite direction than what we were instructed to fly. ATC canceled approach clearance and vectored us away from a third try.On the third try; I requested that we get cleared direct to the fix before the final approach fix that way the FMS would sequence properly.If not being cleared direct to a fix on a RNAV approach on the [type of aircraft we were flying]; ensure the approach is activated and be ready to hand fly if needed.




Synopsis: EMB-140 First Officer reported flying through final approach course due to non-activation approach mode. After third attempt; PF became re-oriented and executed approach.
Date: 201212
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Cessna 152
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Second aircraft: Skylane 182/RG Turbo Skylane/RG
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Local
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was working Local Control in the Tower. The weather was unrestricted VFR. C152 called 5 North of the airport inbound for landing Runway 6. I told him to continue inbound and that he was number 2 following a M020. He asked the location of the M020. I gave him a traffic call and he replied that he did not have the traffic insight. In the meantime a C182 was VFR on a practice ILS 6 approach. He called for a clearance. I cleared him to land number 2. I went back to C152 and told him to extend downwind and that he would now be following a C182 and called the traffic to him at 11 o'clock and three miles. He said roger and read it back exactly the same. I asked him if he had the traffic insight. He said no. At that time it appeared that he was starting to turn a left base. I told him 'Do not turn base.' He replied that he was landing. I asked him if he had the traffic insight and he said yes at his three o'clock. I went to the C182 and asked if he had traffic insight since he was about a 1/2 mile final. He said; 'Yes; is he cutting in front of us.' I said it looks that way and gave him a right turn and climb. I told C152 that he just turned in front of the traffic he was following. He just replied that he was landing. I asked him to call the TRACON Supervisor when he was out of the plane. The pilot in question is a foreign student pilot. One of the flight school's at the airport has a contract with a couple different countries that send people over to get trained. We have on occasion told the flight instructors that there is a language barrier problem with the students. This particular pilot clearly only understands a few key phrases of ATC phraseology. We have been working collaboratively on scheduling a meeting with the flight school owner; instructors and FSDO. This just happens to be one of many instances where language has been a problem and unsafe situations have come up. As stated above; a meeting with the flight school owner; instructors and FSDO is being put together. The instructors need to ensure that the students are proficient enough in speaking and understanding English and ATC phraseology before allowing them to be on their own or prior to being certified. This particular pilot just that night received his license.




Synopsis: Tower Controller described a sequencing event when a student pilot turned in front of a straight-in aircraft on a practice approach; the reporter identified a language barrier as a possible causal factor.
Date: 201302
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: Mixed
Weather elements / visibility: Snow; Icing; 10
Light: Night
Aircraft: Falcon 20FJF/20C/20D/20E/20F
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Turbine Engine
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Troubleshooting; Confusion; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Aircraft Equipment Problem Dissipated; Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; Flight Crew Inflight Shutdown; General Declared Emergency; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Departing we declared an emergency for failure of the Number 2 Engine. Upon completing the proper checklists and further troubleshooting we were able to restart the Number 2 Engine and decided to cancel the emergency and continue the flight. Upon reaching our destination we decided to ground the aircraft and have Maintenance further diagnose the problem.




Synopsis: A Falcon 20 engine failed during climb so an emergency was declared and the checklist completed. The crew then restarted the engine; undeclared the emergency and continued to their filed destination.
Date: 201604
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: IAH.Airport, TX
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Turbulence
Light: Night
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 145 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B IAH
ATC / advisory: TRACON I90
Second aircraft: A380
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter; Inflight Event / Encounter Loss Of Aircraft Control
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control
Contributing factors: Procedure; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: During arrival to IAH ATC informed us several times that we were in trail of a heavy Airbus A380 by roughly 12 miles. The wind was steady from left to right and overall the flight was smooth. At around 7000 the wind slowly shifted to a direct headwind and we encountered the Airbus's wake. The aircraft rolled smoothly but quickly to around 50 degrees; kicking off the auto pilot. It then quickly rolled the other direction and we lost a few hundred feet. The First Officer was flying; he recovered all control and I told him to take up a heading off the airway while I communicated with ATC. We requested vectors off the airway to arrival while still following the Airbus. The FO stayed half a dot high on the glide slope and the landing was uneventful.The wake turbulence was continuously broadcast by ATC and despite the warning we were still too close. Threats included loss of roll control; loss of altitude control and a heading deviation. It may be useful to separate the A380 from normal airways and altitudes or increase separation minimums from other traffic. Another option could be to have in trail aircraft fly above the A380 assigned altitude (7200) as well.

Callback: Reporter expressed additional concern that current spacing procedures behind super-jumbo aircraft are not sufficient.



Synopsis: EMB-145LR Captain reported his aircraft rolled 50 degrees after encountering wake turbulence in trail of an A380.
Date: 201908
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Aircraft: Robinson R44
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Helicopter Gearbox and Drive
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Captain; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: We had a rupture of the upper mast bearing in flight; which caused contamination and condemnation of the MGB (Main Gear Box) due to corrosion of this bearing and its parts that entered into the main gear box. The MGB chip light did not light and the flight was interrupted at the Captain's discretion without any accidents or casualties. There is no inspection or verification procedure for this bearing before overhaul (2;200 hours) and I consider this a very serious maintenance inspection failure. The manufacturer is checking with the technical industry for perhaps issuing inspection service bulletin of this bearing before overhaul.Our helicopter is only 1;040 hours totals; all the revisions and inspections were done and the try-rap of mast was in good condition; but this bearing was very corroded and we almost had a tragic consequence. If this bearing had been inspected more often this dangerous situation we had could have been avoided.I ask them to acknowledge and check the progress of the issuance of this service bulletin so that we have no possibility of accidents with the R44 of the world fleet.




Synopsis: R44 Captain reported a failure of the upper mast bearing that resulted in a diversion.
Date: 201702
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Windshear
Light: Night
Aircraft: Regional Jet 200 ER/LR (CRJ200)
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Other / Unknown; Human-Machine Interface; Distraction; Time Pressure; Confusion
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence; Inflight Event / Encounter Unstabilized Approach
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance; Flight Crew Regained Aircraft Control
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Weather; Human Factors; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Joining approach was fast due to anti-ice equipment on during descent. Received approach clearance with tight turn in. Got behind airplane; failed to 'HDG freq & NAV.' Disconnected autopilot to avoid overshoot. Hand flew approach. Got fully configured by FAF. Concerned I would over speed flaps I fixated and got tunnel vision. Airspeed and altitude fluctuating; wind shear in the area. Stick shaker activated. Powered up and lowered nose from subconscious muscle memory. Did not immediately comprehend that we were too slow. Approach was re-stable at this point. Continued approach. Stabilized and cleared to land at 500 feet. Got below glide slope on short final setting off EGPWS 'GLIDESLOPE.' Touchdown within Touch Down Zone smooth but long due to power up and level off in response to EGPWS. Got behind airplane. Having fully hand flown very few approaches in the jet led to poor performance. This approach was my first experience with wind shear and first approach into ZZZ. ATC mentioned wind shear for our runway then immediately stated no wind shear for our runway. When stick shaker activated immediately recovered but mentally froze up and memory lapsed on the need to go-around. Airport environment was in sight but fell victim to black hole effect and still thought we were high which lead to low glide slope warnings from EGPWS. Unfamiliar environment and low time in jets combined with weeks of breaks in between flights due to high numbers of reservists led to a lack of proficiency.I believe finding a way to fly reservist more so that large breaks in flying does not occur will lead to fewer errors due to lack of proficiency.




Synopsis: After a tight turn with wind shear in the area; a CRJ-200 First Officer reported that he experienced a stick shaker during approach.