elihoole/asrs-aviation-reports huggingface dataset:
Date: 201707
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: S46.TRACON, WA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Light Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Fractional
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class E S46
ATC / advisory: TRACON S46
Second aircraft: Small Aircraft
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Distraction; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Conflict Airborne Conflict
Detector: Automation Aircraft RA; Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure
Primary problem: Airspace Structure

Narrative: Working Boeing sector stand-alone due to Flight Check aircraft maneuvering in the airspace. VFR; high volume and complexity. Aircraft X; landing BFI on the localizer for runway 13R at BFI. As I cleared Aircraft X for the visual approach; I called traffic on a VFR tag; Aircraft Y; at 2100 ft heading NE towards the final approach course for 13R. Aircraft X subsequently reported traffic in sight; but still encountered a TCAS-RA with respect to the VFR. The supervisor was immediately made aware of the TCAS-RA and Aircraft X continued on the visual approach without further incident.This is another report of a continued problem within our airspace. The VFR traffic crossed approximately 1 NM NW of ISOGE from the SW to the NE; directly through the final approach course 100 ft below; and then climbing through; our required crossing altitude at ISOGE on the ILS. A review of the FALCON replay indicated that before the VFR and Aircraft Y crossed paths; the separation was .71NM laterally and 600 ft vertically. Fortunately; Aircraft Y only climbed 100 ft in response to the TCAS-RA; because had the aircraft elected to execute a complete go-around it would have been much worse. The Seattle final was busy; there were aircraft on the downwind in the vicinity of Aircraft X; and a Flight Check aircraft doing arcs across the Seattle finals at 1900 ft in the Class Bravo airspace.Something needs to change. The VFR aircraft are transiting a very narrow; busy corridor of airspace and are doing so without any communication with ATC. It is simply unsafe. The VFR aircraft in this area at the very least need to be in communication with ATC so that we can assign; as necessary; altitude restrictions ensuring the safety of all the aircraft involved. The solution(s) are not hard and while they are potentially more restrictive to VFR aircraft the bottom line is that what happens day in and day out in that airspace as it exists and operates now will eventually result in a very bad accident.




Synopsis: S46 TRACON Controller reported a VFR aircraft caused an airborne conflict north of the BFI area. This is a recurring issue.
Date: 201303
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Gulfstream IV / G350 / G450
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Pressurization System
Component problem: Failed
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Flight Instructor
Human factors: Human-Machine Interface; Training / Qualification
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Returned To Clearance; General Declared Emergency; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: As we were climbing through FL350; the cabin altitude started to climb. I put on my oxygen mask; contacted ATC and told them I needed to descend immediately. I was cleared to FL240. As the cabin altitude rapidly climbed through 14;000 FT I initiated an emergency descent; declared an emergency and requested a lower altitude. I was re-cleared to 11;000 FT. As a result of my rapid rate of descent; I descended 300 FT below my assigned altitude as I leveled off but immediately climbed back up to 11;000 where we were given a heading while we assessed the situation. None of the passengers or crew was injured. We cancelled the emergency and continued to our destination at a lower altitude. Closer to our destination we diverted to another airfield for maintenance. In the future I would try to start arresting my descent rate earlier in order not to descend below my assigned altitude. Today I realized the importance of the use of oxygen masks at high altitude and the training that we receive regarding emergency descents. I am very thankful for both. Without oxygen this situation could have ended up much worse.




Synopsis: While making an emergency descent due to a loss of pressurization at FL350 the flight crew of a G-IV descended 300 FT below their cleared altitude of 11;000 MSL before recovering.
Date: 201501
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZLC.ARTCC, UT
Weather elements / visibility: Snow
Light: Night
Aircraft: Light Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Fractional
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Final Approach; Landing
Airspace: Class E ZLC
ATC / advisory: Center ZLC
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I was the radar controller working an average session on sector 16; the Jackson Hole sector.  Aircraft X was arriving to JAC; everything was a standard flight.  At XX00 I cleared him for an RNAV Z approach for runway 19 into Jackson Hole. At XX+03 I terminated his radar and told him to contact tower at 118.07.  He read that back correct.  At XX+13 he came onto my frequency and said he just broke out 300 feet from surface and can see the airport. I was surprised to be talking to him; so I asked if that was Aircraft X.  He said it was; I again told him to contact tower.  I called tower about a minute later to inquire.  They said they had never talked to him until he came over at XX+13 basically on the ground.  Come to find out there was a snowplow on the runway and Aircraft X apparently came to a stop within 15 feet of the snowplow.  I finished the session; and told management what happened. They reviewed the tape; and I did indeed tell him to contact tower on the correct frequency; and the pilot had a correct read back.  I don't know what happened; whether the pilot forgot to contact tower; or tower couldn't hear him; who knows.  But it could have been bad.Pilot should switch frequencies when told.  Tower could advise center when snow plows are out; and maybe be more concerned if they haven't heard from an aircraft they know is landing soon.




Synopsis: ZLC Controller reports of switching an aircraft over to Tower; then at 300 feet the aircraft reports to the Center Controller that he just broke out and can see the runway.  Pilot did not switch to Tower frequency and landed on a runway with a snowplow on it.
Date: 201812
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: PHL.Airport, PA
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ramp PHL
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Ground Incursion Taxiway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance
Contributing factors: Airport; Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: We were taxiing in at PHL on taxiway E. We were told to enter the ramp at E5 we called ramp on 130.575 and asked for clearance in. The controller said to call the other ramp on 129.75 at spot 12. So we taxied to spot 12 and called the ramp. The controller on 129.75 said we were in the wrong spot and that we shouldn't have been in that spot. We were cleared into park and no issues arose from this. No traffic was near us on the ramp and the flight was completed successfully. The Ramp Controller informed us of our mistake and we accepted it. Confusing ATC instructions are what caused me to go to the spot without clearance. The PHL ramp controllers didn't make very clear instructions to us and I am new to PHL so I was unfamiliar. It does not seem like the ramp controllers talk to one another and it seemed like one controller cleared me into another ramp that they did not control. It was very confusing but again no issues arose from this and the flight was completed without any further issues.




Synopsis: Air carrier Captain reported receiving conflicting and confusing taxi clearances from Ground Control and Ramp Control after landing at PHL.
Date: 201410
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZMP.ARTCC, MN
Aircraft: B737-700
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZMP
ATC / advisory: Center ZMP
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Dispatcher
Reporter qualification: Dispatch Dispatcher
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Fuel Issue
Detector: Person Dispatch
Contributing factors: Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: ATC issued reroutes from ZDV to BDL. It was my third straight day on this desk and that reroute had been out for all 3 days.  I missed it on (flight#) resulting in a 4.4 arrival fuel. I told the crew once they entered ZMP center to request direct YYB. After Consulting with the Chief Dispatcher and ATC coordinator I advised the crew then to ask DCT NIPPY which ATC granted.  Mistakes were made on both ends. The communication with Dispatch and Crew is one of the most important safety features we have. It broke down. Once the Crew asked me for the winds at FAR YQT YYB that was when I noticed I had them filed on the standard route. At that point I got the Chief and atc coordinators involved and asked the crew to request a dct routing to NIPPY resulting in about a 5.2 landing fuel.




Synopsis: B737-700 Dispatcher reports not noting a NOTAMed airspace closure and files the standard route. This results in a reroute by ATC and landing with less than planned fuel.
Date: 202012
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: EMB ERJ 170/175 ER/LR
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class E ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Aircraft component: GPWS
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Automation Aircraft RA; Automation Aircraft Terrain Warning
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: After being cleared for the visual approach and landing into ZZZ on Runway XX; we continued to configure the aircraft for landing. We proceeded to descend below 3;000 just inside the ZZZZZ fix. As we turned final around 2;600 feet MSL around 1;300 AGL we received a 'Obstacle' GWPS warning which we were given an RA to pull up. I immediately complied with the command until it confirmed and we visually confirmed that we were clear and continued the approach to land without incident. During the incident we did not observe nor did Tower observe any obstacles that we were in close proximity to. We maintained proper clearance of at least 1;000 feet AGL from all of the published towers that were on the approach plate.Cause - There were no noted obstacles that were within 1;000 feet AGL clearance and can only come to the conclusion that it was an anomaly with the GWPS system.  At 2;800 feet we had turned inside the Tower that was 1;740 feet and turned well before the Tower at 1;809 maintain safe and legal separation from structures.Suggestions - Continue to follow protocol and respect a Resolution Advisory.




Synopsis: EMB-175 Captain reported receiving an Obstacle GWPS warning followed by a 'Pull up' RA command during a visual approach; which was followed by the crew.  The Captain stated it was most likely a GPWS anomaly that triggered the warnings as no problem obstacles were noted.
Date: 201212
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.ARTCC, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: B727-200
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class A ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ
Aircraft component: Pneumatic Ducting
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Landed As Precaution; Flight Crew Returned To Departure Airport; General Declared Emergency
Contributing factors: Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: On climbout during acceleration passing 4;000 FT; Engineer informed the rest of the crew that we had a Lower Aft Body Overheat light illuminated. I continued to fly while he and the Captain ran the QRH. We leveled at 13;000 FT and when it was determined that the light was not going to go out; we turned back for the [departure airport]. Captain declared emergency. Landing was uneventful; fire crew checked the airplane with IR sensors and we terminated to emergency and taxied in. The light finally extinguished when ALL engines were shut down.




Synopsis: B727 First Officer reported receiving a Lower Aft Body Overheat warning on initial climb. Flight crew ran the procedure; declared an emergency; and returned to departure airport.
Date: 201205
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Aircraft: B777 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Ferry / Re-Positioning
Flight phase: Final Approach
Airspace: Class D ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Inflight Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors
Primary problem: Ambiguous

Narrative: ATC vectors kept us high (4;200 MSL) until approximately 7 miles from the runway. We were cleared to 2;000 MSL; and then cleared for a visual approach. Upon descent from 2;000 MSL; ATC advised that he had a low altitude alert. We climbed slightly and continued the approach. Upon turning final at about a two mile final; we were on the visual glide path as shown by the P-VASIs. No EGPWS alerts were encountered; terrain was not a factor. In our opinion; we were intercepting a normal descent profile for landing after having been kept high until very close to the runway.


Second narrative: [We were] cleared visual approach. [We] descended to remain clear of clouds. Approach gave callout 'too low terrain' over radio. Acknowledged the call and clarified cleared for the visual approach. They confirmed clearance and a few moments later again the same callout. We again told them we are VMC and continued our approach. The call confused the aircrew at what ATC wanted the crew to do. Both myself and the pilot flying did not understand what ATC wanted us to do. The landing was accomplished uneventfully.


Synopsis: A B777 flight crew was advised of a low altitude alert by ATC on approach; causing some confusion in the cockpit.
Date: 201710
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Weather elements / visibility: 20
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Bonanza 36
Operator: Personal
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Personal
Flight phase: Landing; Taxi
Airspace: Class C ZZZ
ATC / advisory: Tower ZZZ
Second aircraft: Piper Twin Piston Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Personal
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Private
Second reporter function: Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical; Ground Incursion Runway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action
Contributing factors: Airport; Procedure
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: I was acting as pilot (PIC) of my bonanza BE36; with my neighbor as co-pilot; on an IFR. My co-pilot was handling radio transmissions and requested and cleared for the ILS approach by Approach. We were then instructed to contact tower. When the co-pilot contacted tower; we were on a 5 - 6 mile final on the ILS approach. Tower informed us that we were number 2 following a Skyhawk and cleared us to land runway 14. The co-pilot then read back our landing instructions which included our call sign. The landing roll took us past taxiway D and I was slowing the aircraft to decide which taxiway to exit for [FBO]. By now; I was approaching runway 4 and the co-pilot turned to the right in time to see a Twin Piper on take-off roll. Since there are no brakes on the right; the co-pilot told me to STOP!! STOP!! STOP!! When I stopped; the aircraft was inside of the runway 04 edge line. I immediately turned to my right; and saw the Twin Piper on take-off roll. Coinciding with the above; the tower instructed the Twin Piper to abort the take-off. The pilot of the Twin aircraft did not abort the take-off; did not acknowledge the towers instruction to abort the take-off and became airborne. The twin passed us with approximately three feet of altitude and within fifteen feet of the nose of our Bonanza. By the time the abort take-off was issued by the tower; a collision with the Twin Piper would have been inevitable had we not stopped. Both the speed of the Twin and his lack of altitude when passing in front of us; only reaffirms my opinion that a collision would have been unavoidable. We were then given runway exit instructions by the tower to initially turn right onto runway 04. This was then amended to continue to taxiway Bravo; right turn. Ground control then cleared us to taxi to [FBO] via Taxiway Alpha; hold short Runway 04 - 22. We were then given clearance to cross runway 4; and proceed to [FBO].The tower should never have issued a take-off clearance to an aircraft departing a crossing runway without issuing and receiving confirmation of a land and hold short instruction of that crossing runway to landing aircraft.


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


Synopsis: Bonanza 36 pilots reported that after landing; they had to make a sudden stop due to an aircraft taking off on a crossing runway.
Date: 202107
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground ZZZ
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Ground
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Vehicle
Result: Aircraft Aircraft Damaged
Contributing factors: Airport; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: I was working Ground Control 1 when Aircraft X notified me that an airlines [ground vehicle] came into contact with their right scimitar winglet. The incident happened while Aircraft X was taxiing eastbound on taxiway 1 just east of taxiway 5. I reached out to city operations; who typically monitor the frequency. I was not able to reach city operations; and neither was the Controller in Charge. I noticed Aircraft Rescue and Fire Fighting (ARFF) vehicles in the area so I reached out on the emergency frequency and got hold of ARFF-2 and send them to investigate. A few minutes later; city operations came on frequency and I advised them what happened. While moving traffic around the incident; I noticed that planes were not departing. I asked Traffic Management Unit (TMU) about it; as they had not informed me of their intentions. He said that departures were stopped. I asked why had I not been informed and he stated 'you should have known.'It seems like there are more issues with [ground vehicle] than there should be. A more rigorous training program may be in order.Also; TMU needs to be more active in the communication of their positions and advise everybody of their intentions.




Synopsis: Ground Controller reported aircraft report of contact by vehicle; and lack of communication with city operations and the TMU.
Date: 201906
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZJX.ARTCC, FL
Flight conditions: Marginal
Weather elements / visibility: Thunderstorm
Aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Flight phase: Climb; Cruise; Descent
Airspace: Class A ZJX
ATC / advisory: Center ZJX
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Workload; Situational Awareness; Time Pressure
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Other / Unknown; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Separated Traffic; Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Company Policy; Airspace Structure; Weather
Primary problem: Weather

Narrative: I was working with weather coming in from the west moving east. Military airspace was active up to FL500. There were aircraft coming from the west deviating towards the active military airspace. The traffic load was heavy and made traffic complexity high because there was more than normal traffic coming from the west at even altitudes that were tied up with southbound traffic at even altitudes trying to go through the same 15 mile hole in between the weather and active military airspace. When weather is pushing toward the active military airspace we need to slow traffic down for deviations and have a plan to go-around the airspace and weather.




Synopsis: ZJX Center Controller reported a complex traffic workload due to weather deviations and insufficient traffic flow management through their airspace.