elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201305
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: SVMC.Airport, FO
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Landing
ATC / advisory: Tower SVMC
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer
Human factors: Time Pressure; Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness; Confusion
Second reporter function: Captain
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Landing Without Clearance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Chart Or Publication; Human Factors; ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Procedure
Primary problem: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings

Narrative: On arrival into Maracaibo our descent was delayed due to traffic. We had planned on the ARC transition to the ILS to Runway 3L but Approach Control cleared us direct to the MAR VOR for the approach. During the procedure turn the airplane deviated from the magenta line after passing D9.4 point and I went to heading select to return to course and intercept the localizer. Approach was late handing us off SVMC Tower. When they did; we were unable to raise either Tower or Ground on the frequencies on the approach plate nor were we able to contact Approach on either of the published frequencies on either radio. I exercised emergency authority and landed the airplane safely without a landing clearance. We were met by operations personnel and discussed what had happened. It appears SVMC Tower is using a non published Frequency; 118.9; and this discrepancy has created problems before.The company needs to publish a bulletin to flight crews advising of the unpublished; [not] NOTAMed Tower frequency in use at Maracaibo.

Callback: The reporter advised he has not returned to SVMC since the event.The reporter has flown regularly to South America and; although this specific event was unique; he was very familiar with the well documented periodic communications and flight path management issues common.He stressed that his decision to continue the approach and landing was influenced by the immediate nature of the destination and his reasonable belief that he may have been in a NORDO situation in which case continuing to landing would have been an appropriate response. He felt that going around with questionable access to ATC and no traffic information was inherently more hazardous than completing the balance of the; by then imminent;  final approach and landing within a few minutes.

Second narrative: {Narrative had no additional information].


Synopsis: An air carrier flight crew utilized Captain emergency authority to complete the approach and landed without a clearance at SVMC when the Tower did not respond on the published frequency. After landing he learned that they have been using an unpublished and not NOTAMed Frequency 118.9.
Date: 202009
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Skyhawk 172/Cutlass 172
Operator: FBO
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Second aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Single Pilot
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Private
Anomaly: Conflict NMAC; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Automation Aircraft Terrain Warning; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Returning from an IFR cross country. I was cleared for the visual approach at a busy class Delta airport. After contacting Tower I was given vectors to join traffic pattern. Tower told me I was following traffic off my left wing and I was second to land RWY XX. I followed what I thought was my traffic a cessna off my left wing. I followed them from base to final. On final; I saw an airplane pop up in front and then I envaded to the right and executed a go around to avoid the traffic. What caused this incident was I identified different traffic then Tower was communicating. There was only one controller working Tower and Ground frequencies. Having an additional controller would help relieve some of the workload that Tower was experiencing.




Synopsis: C-172S pilot reported an NMAC event on final approach caused by an unknown 'pop up' aircraft.
Date: 201903
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
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Diverted; Flight Crew Landed As Precaution
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Flight attendants said they all smelled something burning in the aft galley. ZZZ was the closest airport and we diverted there.




Synopsis: B737-700 First Officer reported flight attendants informed flight crew of burning smell in aft galley.
Date: 201303
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: IWA.Airport, AZ
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Small Aircraft; Low Wing; 1 Eng; Fixed Gear
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class E P50
ATC / advisory: Tower IWA
Reporter organization: FBO
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Airspace Violation All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict
Detector: Automation Aircraft RA
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: We were operating our aircraft tracking toward the IWA VOR on the 123 Radial at 4;000 feet MSL in Class E airspace and a departing aircraft from IWA was encountered and both pilots needed to make evasive maneuver to avoid collision. I don't believe that either the departing aircraft or we were in the wrong because of the airspace we were operating in at the time. However to avoid that situation I believe that we could have been on an ATC frequency (maybe IWA or PHX approach) so that they could have provided separation services. When I received the 'possible pilot deviation' I was informed that I may have been operating in the IWA Class D airspace. However; all indications from my flight instruments and navigational aids would suggest otherwise. In the future I will make contact with the nearby ATC facility so that they may provide me with traffic separation services and by doing so may mitigate any future conflicts.




Synopsis: After taking evasive at 4;000 feet from an aircraft departing IWA; an Instructor was told he may have violated the IWA Class D airspace.
Date: 201310
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZTL.ARTCC, GA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: A321
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZTL
ATC / advisory: Center ZTL
Aircraft component: FMS/FMC
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation - Altitude Crossing Restriction Not Met; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Procedure; Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: IVANE arrival to ILS 36R was changed to RNAV 36R. The correct altitude was put into window and engaged the managed option. The MSTRD altitude dropped out and it started to descend. Crossed MSTRD at approx FL240 to FL250. From the beginning of this arrival to the end has 13 points to cross. I believe; along with other pilots; that this arrival is a very poorly written arrival; with 20 to 30 altitude deviations a month; it is very apparent that something is not right with this arrival.




Synopsis: A321 First Officer reports descending early on the IVANE 2 RNAV arrival to CLT; crossing MSTRD below FL260; after an approach procedure change.
Date: 202108
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ORD.Airport, IL
Aircraft: Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Air/Ground Communication
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural MEL / CDL; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Other pushback
Result: General Maintenance Action; General Release Refused / Aircraft Not Accepted
Contributing factors: MEL; Aircraft; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: At push-back time realized Captain headset transmit jack (not part of headset; but jack in sidewall) was INOP. Airplane had overnighted and previous crew had written up 'Captain headset microphone jack is loose and intermittent operation'. Upon arrival to aircraft; I noticed Maintenance was working on the flight deck in the headset jack area. I called Dispatch and Maintenance Control to report the INOP sidewall transmit jack. I expressed my concern that I thought Maintenance would attempt to MEL defective jack under MEL XX-XXX; and that I felt that that MEL was applicable to the headset not the jack; and that it would not be a legal MEL. Dispatcher agreed. Maintenance Control stated that line Maintenance would be coming out to plane to address the issue. I called Dispatch back when line Maintenance arrived and Dispatch stated that he (Dispatcher) and Maintenance Control agreed that it not being fixed was a no go item. I called Dispatcher and he conferenced in Duty Pilot. I explained that I thought line Maintenance would still try to MEL it under XX-XXX; and that I felt that was not a legal MEL and if they did do it that way I would not accept the airplane. In fact; Line Maintenance did MEL It under XX-XXX. I called Dispatch and Duty Pilot back; made mention of Line Maintenance applying that MEL; that I would not accept an illegal MEL (one that doesn't apply). Dispatcher agreed. Duty pilot said OK. Line Maintenance failure; especially on an overnight airplane; to properly fix [an] item. More disturbing is [the] Line Maintenance applying the MEL item; that I and Dispatcher and Maintenance Control; felt clearly was not an appropriate MEL. Unacceptable. Maintenance should have fixed the problem when initially reported and not stretch an MEL to get an airplane out. Unacceptable; illegal; unsafe.




Synopsis: A321 Captain reported incorrect MEL applied by maintenance resulted in corrective action and aircraft refusal.
Date: 202201
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Night
Aircraft: A139 All Series
Operator: Government
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: None
Mission: Training
Flight phase: Landing
Airspace: Class G ZZZ
ATC / advisory: CTAF ZZZ
Second aircraft: PA-32 Cherokee Six/Lance/Saratoga/6X
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown; Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Equipment / Tooling; Human Factors
Primary problem: Equipment / Tooling

Narrative: On this date; I was conducting a landing on Runway XX at ZZZ while using Night Vision Goggles. We made a radio call while on a 2.5 mile final and 1 mile final with no response from any aircraft at the airport. I was conducting a shallow approach with a run-on landing. Our helicopter touched down about 1/2 down the runway and came to a stop. After we had landed; an aircraft identified themselves as a saratoga stated in effect that they had been holding on the XX numbers; and our helicopter had overflown their plane. We asked why they had not made any radio calls while we were on final; and their response was; 'does that make it OK to over-fly me.' We advised him that we had not seen him nor heard any calls to advise of his location on the runway. Both the SIC (Second in Command) and I had not noticed the aircraft. There were also no TCAS warnings observed or targets detected on our iPad. I observed the threshold of the runway during my initial scan and did not notice any aircraft. I then became focused on performing a run-on landing further down the runway. I believe that the aircraft's lights blended in with runway lights. Additionally; with NVG goggles on; the color contrast of the aircraft lights and the runway lights all looked the same; perhaps contributing to my failure to notice the aircraft. During the duration of our approach; the aircraft's position on the runway never changed; which also made it harder to identify.




Synopsis: Helicopter pilot reported that during landing at night they flew over an aircraft that was holding on the runway numbers and did not realize it until the aircraft pilot advised them. Reporter stated the aircraft had been not visible and there were no TCAS warnings observed during approach.
Date: 202106
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: SCT.TRACON, CA
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb; Initial Climb
Airspace: Class C ONT
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Departure; Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Altitude Crossing Restriction Not Met; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Departed [Runway] 26R ONT on the RAJEE3. Controller was extremely busy. Leveled at 7;000 [feet]. Approaching ELLBO wondering if we were going to get 8;000 [feet] or the restriction. Made several radio calls but were ignored. Finally got cleared to 8;000 [feet]. I don't remember the exact distance past ELLBO; but we were left at 8;000 [feet] until what appeared to be within 30 to 40 KM of significantly rising terrain based on GPWS display. The Controller kept telling everyone to not call. We finally tried to call a few times to no avail. I was seriously considering my options if I couldn't get a hold of the Controller regarding terrain clearance. We finally got a hurried call to expedite to 13;000 [feet] call; which we did. I don't want to make a huge deal about this but it felt like we were on the edge of things getting very interesting regarding terrain clearance. Controller busy with planes on approaches and putting off other traffic. I certainly don't know but I might have heard a voice change so possibly training in progress. I know it gets hectic but ATC should at least acknowledge you're there when leaving you low or at an abnormal altitude.




Synopsis: Airline captain reported congested ATC frequency and resulting difficulty obtaining climb clearance to avoid rising terrain on departure procedure.
Date: 201411
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: Air Conditioning and Pressurization Pack
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Troubleshooting; Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural MEL / CDL; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Company Policy; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: During taxi out the left pack light illuminated. Called tower and got out of line; set brakes and worked the problem. Read and did QRH selected warmer temp and trip reset switch pushed. the left pack light remained illuminated QRH says Isolation valve switch close pack switch off. I called dispatch for a conference call with [Maintenance Control]. We walked thru [the associated procedure]. Push master caution light and observed that the aircond; master caution; and pack lights extinguished. We determined with dispatch; maintenance; capt and fo that we were good to takeoff. Arrived at [our destination] and recieved acars message from dispatch saying a safety report will be completed concerning the flight. Safety is my number one priority.


Second narrative: On a related note; during my annual recurrent training the week prior; I was asked a hypothetical question about a similar situation. I was asked; if during master caution recall; you get a caution light; but you are able to clear it during reset; what do you have to do. I was told by the Standards Captain that this is a fault in a redundant system and that you should not run a QRH checklist and proceed to your destination and write it up there...it seemed to me that maintenance was understanding what was happening and that they were telling the Capt. to write it up [at our destination]. This confirmed what I was recently told in training. In my mind we were good to go; the pack was operating normally on the back up system; so there was nothing to defer.After further researching this today; I have not been able to find anywhere in my manuals that says to proceed to your destination with redundant system faults as I was told. Also; there appears to be an MEL for the situation we had. I don't know how maintenance missed that.


Synopsis: Despite the conjoined efforts of the B737 flight crew; Dispatch and Maintenance Control the procedure utilized to correct a left pack off light was apparently deemed inappropriate after the fact and the decision to fly the trip technically a violation.
Date: 202201
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Tower, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: Haze / Smoke; 7
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: SA-227 AC Metro III
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Ferry / Re-Positioning
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Aircraft component: AC Generator/Alternator
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Commercial; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Troubleshooting
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; Flight Crew Landed in Emergency Condition; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: During climbout; at 15;000 feet we stopped our climb due to electrical malfunctions. We made the decision to turn back towards ZZZ after suspecting a dual generator failure. The Captain's instruments were intermittently working after the failure (left side powered by inverters; right side powered by vacuum) but conditions were visual. [Priority was requested] by the flight crew after realizing that the flaps and gear would not come down. Manual extension of the gear was performed successfully and the landing was made with zero flaps. No damage was done to the airplane; and we never had a complete electrical failure. Great CRM was used; Captain was flying visually and me (First Officer) was trimming the airplane (Captain's trim was inop after the electrical malfunction); on comms and running checklists. After touching down; all of our systems came back on (flaps; Captain's instruments and his trim; etc). The cause of this is still being determined; we believe possible a loose connection or short of some sort.




Synopsis: First Officer reported electrical failure on take off. The Flight Crew performed an air turn back and precautionary landing at the departure airport.
Date: 201712
Location: SEA.Airport, WA
Aircraft: B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Navigation Database
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Confusion
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Chart Or Publication; Aircraft
Primary problem: Chart Or Publication

Narrative: During the route verification process it was noted that the SEA6 in the CDU (Control Display Unit) data did not match the SEA6 in JeppFD-Pro. The CDU reflects a simple vector whereas the JeppFD-Pro depicts a heading to a radial intercept. It was decided that the best course of action was to utilize heading select and VOR/LOC in lieu of LNAV.




Synopsis: B737 Captain reported a discrepancy between the CDU Data on the aircraft and the Jeppesen plate for the SEATTLE SIX departure.